Nebraska governor signs order narrowly defining sex as that assigned at birth

[RileyG]

So where does she go? You think that it's safe that in some places a good looking woman is forced to use the men's? She's out with her girlfriends but she has to go into the men's toilet?

Seriously?

Again, not a woman, he's a man. Just use the men's.

 

[rjs330]

I don't think it matters what they look like. There are multiple biological factors that determine someone's sex. A bone that's been buried for 3000 years, can be determined to have belonged to a man or woman.

I understand that. However in the bathroom case we are all going by appearances. Sure you can say that you must use the bathroom if your biological sex. However, since we all seem to agree that no one is going to be posted at the bathroom entrance to check genitals, or other biological factors of biological sex, we are left with appearances. I don't know any other way around it. No one is going to pursue an investigation unless someone looks like the opposite sex. People really aren't that observant by and large. That's why this law is fine with me because contrary to all the hand wringing and screaming at the sky, no one is going to report a mother taking their young son into the lady's room and no one is going to report anybody that looks like a woman. That's really my point. Women are more reasonable than that.

 

[RileyG]

Again, not a woman, he's a man. Just use the men's.

Again, I think no one is going to report a trans "woman." Still doesn't make it ok.

 

[RileyG]

I understand that. However in the bathroom case we are all going by appearances. Sure you can say that you must use the bathroom if your biological sex. However, since we all seem to agree that no one is going to be posted at the bathroom entrance to check genitals, or other biological factors of biological sex, we are left with appearances. I don't know any other way around it. No one is going to pursue an investigation unless someone looks like the opposite sex. People really aren't that observant by and large. That's why this law is fine with me because contrary to all the hand wringing and screaming at the sky, no one is going to report a mother taking their young son into the lady's room and no one is going to report anybody that looks like a woman. That's really my point. Women are more reasonable than that.

exactly!

 

[ozso]

I understand that. However in the bathroom case we are all going by appearances. Sure you can say that you must use the bathroom if your biological sex. However, since we all seem to agree that no one is going to be posted at the bathroom entrance to check genitals, or other biological factors of biological sex, we are left with appearances. I don't know any other way around it. No one is going to pursue an investigation unless someone looks like the opposite sex. People really aren't that observant by and large. That's why this law is fine with me because contrary to all the hand wringing and screaming at the sky, no one is going to report a mother taking their young son into the lady's room and no one is going to report anybody that looks like a woman. That's really my point. Women are more reasonable than that.

The way I'm seeing it is it's a law that's been in place for decades anyways. This just prevents some guy who looks like a guy from going into women's spaces, like Lia Thomas for example.

 

[ozso]

We're still waiting to hear how you determine that someone was born male. Whether it was you or not I'm not sure but someone said 'hey, your sex will be on your DL'. So is that it? Think it through and tell us.

Why am I supposed to explain what some other person said? The point of the law is to keep obvious males, like Lia Thomas, from having a free pass to go into women's only spaces.

 

[ozso]

 

[YorkieGal]

This whole thing is so demonic and lowers the IQ of the general population by at least 50 points. I'm actually exhausted by seeing, discussing and/or humoring this deviant behavior and people trying to make it make sense or condone it are equally demonic. And, I believe they all know what they are spouting is nonsense but derive pleasure in gaslighting. So, I pray for our world to heal, daily. I know we are being put through a trial, as Christians and humans, so I stay optimistic that we will correct our path and go back to God as a society. I have faith.

 

[Bradskii]

Why am I supposed to explain what some other person said? The point of the law is to keep obvious males, like Lia Thomas, from having a free pass to go into women's only spaces.

No it is not. It is to keep out any transgender woman who was born a biological male. Pillen specifically says this. From the very first post:

'It orders state agencies to define “female” and “male” as a person’s sex assigned at birth.'

See that? '...sex assigned at birth'. It says nothing about stopping people who are 'obvious males'. So how do you suggest we determine that? I'm still waiting for a sensible response. Without a means of doing so, this monstrously ridiculous proposal is worthless.

 

[ozso]

No it is not. It is to keep out any transgender woman who was born a biological male. Pillen specifically says this. From the very first post:

'It orders state agencies to define “female” and “male” as a person’s sex assigned at birth.'

See that? '...sex assigned at birth'. It says nothing about stopping people who are 'obvious males'. So how do you suggest we determine that? I'm still waiting for a sensible response. Without a means of doing so, this monstrously ridiculous proposal is worthless.

It seems that you're saying that unless every offender can be stopped dead in their tracks from breaking a law, that law is useless. Such as unless every single trespasser can be kept from trespassing, or unless every trespasser is caught, trespassing laws are worthless.

 

[Bradskii]

It seems that you're saying that unless every offender can be stopped dead in their tracks from breaking a law, that law is useless. Such as unless every single trespasser can be kept from trespassing, or unless every trespasser is caught, trespassing laws are worthless.

No, it's a simple question. I'm not seeming to do anything. Other than ask how you tell if a woman was born male. It's a requirement for the proposal that Pillen has made. All we've had is some facetious suggestion to do cheek swabs. So make a serious contribution. Give us an answer.

If you don't want to (and we'll know why) then say so. If you can't, then say so. Otherwise let us all know and we'll see where it leads.

 

[RileyG]

The way I'm seeing it is it's a law that's been in place for decades anyways. This just prevents some guy who looks like a guy from going into women's spaces, like Lia Thomas for example.

Lia Thomas is a man. He has no business competing in women's sports or being in women-only areas. He has no idea what it's like to be a woman.

 

[RileyG]

This whole thing is so demonic and lowers the IQ of the general population by at least 50 points. I'm actually exhausted by seeing, discussing and/or humoring this deviant behavior and people trying to make it make sense or condone it are equally demonic. And, I believe they all know what they are spouting is nonsense but derive pleasure in gaslighting. So, I pray for our world to heal, daily. I know we are being put through a trial, as Christians and humans, so I stay optimistic that we will correct our path and go back to God as a society. I have faith.

Amen.

 

[ozso]

No, it's a simple question. I'm not seeming to do anything. Other than ask how you tell if a woman was born male. It's a requirement for the proposal that Pillen has made. All we've had is some facetious suggestion to do cheek swabs. So make a serious contribution. Give us an answer.

If you don't want to (and we'll know why) then say so. If you can't, then say so. Otherwise let us all know and we'll see where it leads.

The way you know is if you ask for ID or similar. But the woman would only be asked to show ID or in some other way prove she's a biological woman, if someone was so sure she wasn't a biological woman, they report her. In other words, as is in the case with many crimes, the perpetrator has to be caught breaking the law, the crime has to be reported, and then law enforcement has to catch, detain and investigate the suspect.

Your idea that all women must be verified as biological women before entering women's only spaces is an absurd strawman because no one supporting Pillen's proposal is suggesting that. It would be handled in the manner I (and others have) described above.

If you want to maintain that that makes Pillen's proposal worthless, that's fine, everyone is entitled to their opinion.

 

[Bradskii]

The way you know is if you ask or ask for ID or similar. But the woman would only be asked to show ID or in some other way prove she's a biological woman, if someone was so sure she wasn't a biological woman, they report her. In other words, as is in the case with many crimes, the perpetrator has to be caught breaking the law...

Wrong yet again.

It's not the case that any given woman has broken the law by being in there. She has broken the law if you can show she was born male. If she wasn't then she wont have broken it. So, how do you do that? It really is the simplest of questions. Let's have an answer and see where it takes us.

 

[ozso]

Wrong yet again.

It's not the case that any given woman has broken the law by being in there. She has broken the law if you can show she was born male. If she wasn't then she wont have broken it. So, how do you do that? It really is the simplest of questions. Let's have an answer and see where it takes us.

The question has been answered. But I'm guessing you have your own formulated answer and unless someone guesses what it is, they are wrong and you keep asking. Either that or it's no answer is acceptable and therefore wrong, so you keep asking. Fun game.

 

[Bradskii]

The question has been answered. But I'm guessing you have your own formulated answer and unless someone guesses what it is, they are wrong and you keep asking. Fun game.

So it is showing ID. So let's go with that.

If this farcical proposal is enacted then every woman in Alaska will need to have ID that indicates their sex with them when they go out. Because if for some reason they have used the restroom and are asked for it and cannot or will not produce it, they will be arrested.

If arrested, they will be cuffed and taken to the lock up. The female lock up. Where she will be allowed to use the female toilet, the one she couldn't use in the bar where she was arrested.

Driving licenses indicate your sex. Except that any transgender woman will have changed hers to 'female.' All states allow that. So any transgender woman will be fine. You can bet your last dollar that she'll have it with her. But one of her friends who has forgotten hers? She's spending the night in the lock up.

So how do you think it's working out so far?

 

[ozso]

So it is showing ID. So let's go with that.

If this farcical proposal is enacted then every woman in Alaska

Nebraska.

will need to have ID that indicates their sex with them when they go out. Because if for some reason they have used the restroom and are asked for it and cannot or will not produce it, they will be arrested.

Only if the individual is reported as a male, and the police detain and investigate the individual and have establish a crime has been committed.

If arrested, they will be cuffed and taken to the lock up. The female lock up. Where she will be allowed to use the female toilet, the one she couldn't use in the bar where she was arrested.

Nope the individual would be booked and further investigated first - you clearly do not know how the US legal system works.

Driving licenses indicate your sex. Except that any transgender woman will have changed hers to 'female.' All states allow that. So any transgender woman will be fine. You can bet your last dollar that she'll have it with her. But one of her friends who has forgotten hers? She's spending the night in the lock up.

So how do you think it's working out so far?

I think that you don't understand how the legal system works in the US and thus you've created a fictional strawman scenario, which you're going to hold onto no matter what. And you'll keep taking me in circles over it like you've been doing the past couple of days. The fact that you don't even know the difference between Alaska and Nebraska makes it abundantly clear that you know very little about the US. And that you prefer to stick to fiction created by ignorance, than listen to people who actually know a lot about the US and the US legal system. Like I said, fun game.

 

[Bradskii]

Nebraska.

Thanks for pointing out the typo.

Only if the individual is reported as a male, and the police detain and investigate the individual and have establish a crime has been committed.

Good grief...they could only establish if a crime has been committed (being in the woman's restroom if the woman was born a male) IF they can confirm that the woman was born a male. That will be the crime. That's it. Being a woman and being in the rest room if you were born a male. There's nothing else she could be charged for - assuming she's not wrecking the joint and swinging punches, in which case the transgender business is moot.

So just do your best to picture the scene. The police have been called because someone has said that a man is in the women's restroom. They attend. A woman is pointed out. Now the only thing she can be charged with if she was in that restroom and she was born male.

So she shows them her driving license. Which will say female. That's it. There's nowhere else to go. Else she is a woman who doesn't have a license in which case...do they arrest her on suspicion of being a man? Let me know if you actually think that should happen. And if she is arrested then tell me which lock up she's held in. Male or female. You think the police are going to risk putting a woman in a lock up with a few low lifes they've been picking up the last 24 hours?

You simply haven't thought any of this through. Not at any time have you indicated that you've considered what the consequences of this would be. This is knee jerk politics with no concern for the implications. None at all.

 

[RileyG]

Males are men and females are women. Only men belong in men-only areas, and women belong in women-only, areas. What's the big deal? IMHO?