The Swamp

So NBA pulls the all star game
New York won't let state schools travel to NC for sports (Albany had to cancel a game against Duke)

Hope this gets resolved quickly as the economic impact is going to hit lots of people who could care less what bathroom people pee in.

Best part of this is moving the ASG to the same city the Hornets moved to.

wlu_lax6 wrote:So NBA pulls the all star game
New York won't let state schools travel to NC for sports (Albany had to cancel a game against Duke)

Hope this gets resolved quickly as the economic impact is going to hit lots of people who could care less what bathroom people pee in.

Fuck North Carolina. They can fix it tomorrow by revoking the law.

brian wrote:

wlu_lax6 wrote:So NBA pulls the all star game
New York won't let state schools travel to NC for sports (Albany had to cancel a game against Duke)

Hope this gets resolved quickly as the economic impact is going to hit lots of people who could care less what bathroom people pee in.

Fuck North Carolina. They can fix it tomorrow by revoking the law.

Exactly. Got to think that the critical mass is content with the way things stand.

The businesses that it will affect are mainly in Charlotte. Charlotte had passed a law for gender neutral bathrooms, but the state law trumps municipal law in this case. Sure the state loses out on some easy tourism income from the ASG, but to most of the slack-jawed yokels, they don't care. Plus it keeps them round ball playing Negroes out of the city. Gotta protect their white women.

You're right, but the majority of people in North Carolina now live in urban areas that are more likely to be affected by boycotts than rural areas are. They can vote for state legislators in November who will overturn the ban or convey their dismal to their elected officials who might support it. Our nation's history is filled with examples of civil disobedience, boycotts and agitation to bring about social change.

brian wrote: Fuck North Carolina. They can fix it tomorrow by revoking the law.

Even worse, the law was only written to negate the law in Charlotte granting rights. Interesting point that Charlotte is getting screwed much worse than the rest of the state.

How long before someone sues the state of New York for violating their Rights as a Christian?

In reaction, Hornets' co-owner Felix Sabates wrote a hysterical email. Oh, the humanity! Oh, the children!

The Sybian wrote:Even worse, the law was only written to negate the law in Charlotte granting rights.

That's a key point. Apologists have noted that other states have similar laws, but, as North Carolina state Rep. Graig Meyer said in a counter point:

Graig Meyer wrote:House Bill 2 actively repealed existing protections for LGBT people. Those other states have never put the protection in place. This bill repealed any local protections for those people. and it’s the first time since the Civil Rights Era that I can think of where a state has taken away public accommodations and protections for any group of people.
“This was an actively discriminatory bill. This is not the same as states that haven’t added that protection yet.”

sancarlos wrote:In reaction, Hornets' co-owner Felix Sabates wrote a hysterical email. Oh, the humanity! Oh, the children!

It is a shame that less then one tenth of our country is forcing the league to have such a knee jerk reaction and to deprive the citizen on our great state of having a great showcase even as the NBA All Star Game.

Leaving aside the complete misuse of the term "knee jerk," this is grade 5 level writing.

While I agree with you, 99 percent of everything written is 5th grade level.

Couldn't be prouder.

Our idiot governor is not backing down either. Yet.

While I have no problem with the LGB community, I have never been able to wrap my head around the T. Doesn't make sense to me. But, that's just me. I feel, overall, a law to require people to use bathrooms and locker rooms associated with their birth sex seems reasonable, at least until they have completed the surgical and physical change to the other sex. There are certainly other parts of this particular law that go beyond that, and I disagree there.

Professional sports leagues need to be careful which baskets they put their eggs in. The NBA pulls the ASG over this, which pleases many and is a PR gold mine, yet allows pre season games in China, where human rights violations abound at much worse rates and consequences than who uses what bathroom. People die. Very easy to call this inconsistent, at best, a money grab at worst on the NBA.

SportsDoc wrote:I feel, overall, a law to require people to use bathrooms and locker rooms associated with their birth sex seems reasonable, at least until they have completed the surgical and physical change to the other sex.

My wife teaches (taught?) a student going through a sex change. He started law school (and life, I suppose) as a woman. A year or two later, he wore men's clothing, had no breasts, and had a beard. Still biologically a woman. Birth certificate still says woman. Is this bearded, flannel-wearing man who the conservatives want forced to use the women's room?

When I traveled in Europe for work a few months back, on multiple occasions, I was using the men's room and a female janitor walked right in and started cleaning. This happened in both Germany and Hungary. Nobody blinked an eye (well, except me at first). Is this really such a big deal that we not only have to pass laws protecting against it, but we have pass laws that prevent municipalities from thinking otherwise?

I thought a key conservative principle was that local governments should have more say over how people live their lives.

And I get the point that the NBA and many of the companies who are shunning North Carolina now are at the same time doing business in places like China. But holding anyone to that level of ideological purity is akin to saying that you can never take any stand if it's not always 100% consistent in all cases. If that were the standard, we wouldn't be able to do business in most of the world. And a lot of places in western Europe wouldn't do business with us.

Taking a stand against brand new laws right here in the US seems vastly different - and much more likely to be fruitful - than trying to change communist China.

SportsDoc wrote:While I have no problem with the LGB community, I have never been able to wrap my head around the T. Doesn't make sense to me.

The key is taking the "I don't understand it" aspect and simply accepting you don't understand it and letting people who do handle the decisions. Not understanding something and deciding you need to reject/fight it is where the issues start.

SportsDoc wrote:I feel, overall, a law to require people to use bathrooms and locker rooms associated with their birth sex seems reasonable, at least until they have completed the surgical and physical change to the other sex.

I don't believe we need a law requiring anyone to use any bathroom. Apparently we have been doing without these laws for decades, and things seem to be okay. Social pressure or whatever seem to do a good enough job of directing men to the men's room, and women to the women's room. If someone believes that she is a woman, even if she was born a boy, I don't think it is the job of any government at any level to tell her what bathroom to use.

Is there a documented problem associated with people using the "wrong" bathroom? I'm not aware of any.

So as I see it, we have a law that does not solve any problems. But it causes major problems, both in the message the bill's enactment sends to transgendered folks (we hate you), and in the practical hardships it could cause them if they were to actually follow its mandate.

Bold solution: Educate your kids that different people have different parts and that the bathroom isn't the place to discuss those things. Why is this a thing? If you're that worried about your kid figuring out people have different parts, then maybe you ought to be in the bathroom with them until they're old enough to go by themselves.

Where was this outrage when Zack Morris and Screech Powers were infiltrating the women's locker rooms of Bayside High on a regular basis?

Steve of phpBB wrote:

SportsDoc wrote:I feel, overall, a law to require people to use bathrooms and locker rooms associated with their birth sex seems reasonable, at least until they have completed the surgical and physical change to the other sex.

I don't believe we need a law requiring anyone to use any bathroom. Apparently we have been doing without these laws for decades, and things seem to be okay. Social pressure or whatever seem to do a good enough job of directing men to the men's room, and women to the women's room. If someone believes that she is a woman, even if she was born a boy, I don't think it is the job of any government at any level to tell her what bathroom to use.

Is there a documented problem associated with people using the "wrong" bathroom? I'm not aware of any.

So as I see it, we have a law that does not solve any problems. But it causes major problems, both in the message the bill's enactment sends to transgendered folks (we hate you), and in the practical hardships it could cause them if they were to actually follow its mandate.

At the college where I teach, there are signs in every bathroom (at least in the mens' rooms) with pictures of all types of people. Message is, if you see someone in the washroom and aren't sure if they belong, don't worry, they've chosen already. (Paraphrase).

My only issue is that the aromas that come out of me in the crapper are kind of embarrassing. But I'm not planning on dating any students of any gender any time soon, so what the hell.

People get so fucking worked up over this stuff. I mean who goes into a mens' room and shows off his parts and is potentially vulnerable? On the other side, how many straight men are going to go into a womens' washroom to get his kicks? As for vulnerability (as discussed in Houston during that city's wonderful by-election) aren't women just as vulnerable in elevators, parking garages etc.?

I'd love to see a study (done by reputable researchers) showing the number of transgendered people who would use a washroom of a gender that they don't appear to belong to.

I would bet that the numbers are ridiculously small in relation to the prominence that this issue is given.

mister d wrote:

SportsDoc wrote:While I have no problem with the LGB community, I have never been able to wrap my head around the T. Doesn't make sense to me.

The key is taking the "I don't understand it" aspect and simply accepting you don't understand it and letting people who do handle the decisions. Not understanding something and deciding you need to reject/fight it is where the issues start.

Yes. I could do that. I guess I just worry about how it might affect my grandchildren. If the reality is that it won't, then I'm fine. You know, I'm 63 and this is all new territory for me.

I trust the core group here, because I've been here a long time. I'm not trying to create a curfufle, just stating my concerns, while also putting forward that the NBA is very suspect the in this whole issue.

I'm not trying to create a huge debate, just stating my feelings and concerns.

SportsDoc wrote:I'm not trying to create a curfufle, just stating my concerns, while also putting forward that the NBA is very suspect the in this whole issue.

I'm not trying to create a huge debate, just stating my feelings and concerns.

And I am glad you did, and I hope that the tone of my response did not make you think you should not have done that. Your point of view is certainly logical and understandable; I disagree, but I do understand it and know that it is made in good faith. And anyone here should feel comfortable speaking their mind on these kinds of things. I'd hate for this place to become an echo chamber.

Steve of phpBB wrote:

SportsDoc wrote:I'm not trying to create a curfufle, just stating my concerns, while also putting forward that the NBA is very suspect the in this whole issue.

I'm not trying to create a huge debate, just stating my feelings and concerns.

And I am glad you did, and I hope that the tone of my response did not make you think you should not have done that. Your point of view is certainly logical and understandable; I disagree, but I do understand it and know that it is made in good faith. And anyone here should feel comfortable speaking their mind on these kinds of things. I'd hate for this place to become an echo chamber.

Steve, I never felt I was off kilter by my thoughts. Surprisingly, in this forum, I feel comfortable giving my feelings, even when different from the majority. Probably because I feel strongly that those who have been here for a while, know I am genuine in my responses. I include you in that. Your responses are genuine, and as such I appreciate them. Even when they don't match mine. Never worry that you offend me, as long as you state your true feelings. I hope I can always do the same.

Why don't you two get a room?

Steve of phpBB wrote:And anyone here should feel comfortable speaking their mind on these kinds of things.

As long as you don't vote third party. (i keed, i keed)

I've been thinking a lot lately about how much I, and society has changed since I was growing up. I'm 39, and many things that were ingrained back in the late 80's and early 90's just aren't that commonplace anymore. I'm too tired to list them all, but equality has really come a long way. That's not to say we are at a place where everyone is equal, just that we seem to be moving in the right direction in most instances, even though social media would have you believe otherwise.

I think the thing that really got me thinking about this was the Black Lives Matter movement, and the wider realization about just how horrible it is that parents have to have "The Talk". For whatever reason it seems like this summer has made it more and more evident that this is a major problem, whereas in years past it would have been swept under the rug more easily.

Perhaps I'm being Pollyannaish, or just hoping for the best, but I really don't see Trump and the surrounding insanity and injustice winning out.

howard wrote:Why don't you two get a room?

Steve of phpBB wrote:And anyone here should feel comfortable speaking their mind on these kinds of things.

As long as you don't vote third party. (i keed, i keed)

Howard, Howard, Howard. I just wish we lived in the same town, we would be best friends. You are a classic. Even though you don't understand college hockey like Brian and I do!

Shirley wrote:

SportsDoc wrote:I feel, overall, a law to require people to use bathrooms and locker rooms associated with their birth sex seems reasonable, at least until they have completed the surgical and physical change to the other sex.

My wife teaches (taught?) a student going through a sex change. He started law school (and life, I suppose) as a woman. A year or two later, he wore men's clothing, had no breasts, and had a beard. Still biologically a woman. Birth certificate still says woman. Is this bearded, flannel-wearing man who the conservatives want forced to use the women's room?

When I traveled in Europe for work a few months back, on multiple occasions, I was using the men's room and a female janitor walked right in and started cleaning. This happened in both Germany and Hungary. Nobody blinked an eye (well, except me at first). Is this really such a big deal that we not only have to pass laws protecting against it, but we have pass laws that prevent municipalities from thinking otherwise?

I thought a key conservative principle was that local governments should have more say over how people live their lives.

And I get the point that the NBA and many of the companies who are shunning North Carolina now are at the same time doing business in places like China. But holding anyone to that level of ideological purity is akin to saying that you can never take any stand if it's not always 100% consistent in all cases. If that were the standard, we wouldn't be able to do business in most of the world. And a lot of places in western Europe wouldn't do business with us.

Taking a stand against brand new laws right here in the US seems vastly different - and much more likely to be fruitful - than trying to change communist China.

That seems like a total cop out. You maybe can't change communist China, but you don't have to do business with them either. Take a stand, if that's what you believe in. Human rights violations where people die, for heavens sake vs. who uses which bathrooms? No comparison, to me, and yet this is where the NBA draws there line in the sand? Awful. To me, anyway.

SportsDoc wrote:Human rights violations where people die, for heavens sake vs. who uses which bathrooms?

40% of all transgender Americans attempt suicide.

Pruitt wrote:I would bet that the numbers are ridiculously small in relation to the prominence that this issue is given.

Probably because the "issue" as it has been presented to us is pretty much fabricated.

SportsDoc wrote: That seems like a total cop out. You maybe can't change communist China, but you don't have to do business with them either. Take a stand, if that's what you believe in. Human rights violations where people die, for heavens sake vs. who uses which bathrooms? No comparison, to me, and yet this is where the NBA draws there line in the sand? Awful. To me, anyway.

But there is a hell of a lot more money to be made in China than lost from anyone who might stop watching the NBA over this political stand. Can't really disagree with your argument that the NBA is picking and choosing it's time to play the morality card. OTOH, I think it's much easier to dismiss human rights violations on the other side of the world versus political issues at home.

SportsDoc wrote:Yes. I could do that. I guess I just worry about how it might affect my grandchildren. If the reality is that it won't, then I'm fine. You know, I'm 63 and this is all new territory for me

I totally respect this. In my opinion, the only way this might affect your grandchildren is if they happen to be transgendered, and the acceptance of transgendereds becomes the norm, they won't have to endure the internal confusion, fear, shame and other emotions leading to so many suicides. They would be better educated of what they are feeling, more likely to know 1000s of other people are going through the same thing, and be able to come out as who they are without as much fear. 30 years ago, I don't think the majority of Americans understood or accepted homosexuality. I don't mean to diminish the turmoil gay kids go through before coming out, but they are infinitely more likely to understand that they aren't alone, and are much more likely to be accepted when they do come out.

SportsDoc wrote:I have never been able to wrap my head around the T. Doesn't make sense to me. But, that's just me. I feel, overall, a law to require people to use bathrooms and locker rooms associated with their birth sex seems reasonable, at least until they have completed the surgical and physical change to the other sex. There are certainly other parts of this particular law that go beyond that, and I disagree there.

That's reasonable. I don't know that anyone who isn't T can totally understand. I took a course in college called Human Sexuality. There was a section on transgenderism (I don't think gender dysmorphia was a thing yet), and there was scientific evidence that some babies were born with male or female chromosomes and genitalia, but had hormone levels consistent with the opposite sex, and that impacted brain development. That was 20 years ago, so the scientific consensus may have changed, and certainly evolved. Many babies are born with undefined sexual organs, and doctors decided which gender to assign, and surgically repaired the anatomy. There was one case study of a child raised female, who had more stereotypical male behavior, was only interested in playing with boys. When the child grew up, he told his parents that he always believed he was a boy. The parents told him when he was born, he had partially formed genitals, so the doctors decided surgically shape them into female genitals and declared the baby a girl. Maybe DNA testing takes that out of the way.

I get that people are uncomfortable letting people they can't understand use the "wrong" bathroom. Where I get upset is when people and politicians create a fake scare that men are going to transition into women to go into bathrooms and rape your daughters. Hell, if they wanted to, they wouldn't transition into a woman to do that, they would just hide in a bathroom. I hate the implication that transgendered and gay people are child predators. This is so completely baseless. I also hated Huckabee flippantly saying if he was in high school, he would call himself a girl to go into the girls locker room, then call himself a boy again.

The Sybian wrote: Where I get upset is when people and politicians create a fake scare that men are going to transition into women to go into bathrooms and rape your daughters. Hell, if they wanted to, they wouldn't transition into a woman to do that, they would just hide in a bathroom.

That's the rub right there, innit? If a dude wants to get surgery to invert his P, it's not because he's attracted to women and has a grand scheme to get into bathrooms to convince them to scissor. In most cases, he's getting the surgery because he's attracted to men. This simple logic seems to elude these right-wing blowhards. (Although I say we give them what they're asking for. Let's have the trannies and pre-ops sharing restrooms with them, and then see how they change their tune.)

P.D.X. wrote:

The Sybian wrote: Where I get upset is when people and politicians create a fake scare that men are going to transition into women to go into bathrooms and rape your daughters. Hell, if they wanted to, they wouldn't transition into a woman to do that, they would just hide in a bathroom.

That's the rub right there, innit? If a dude wants to get surgery to invert his P, it's not because he's attracted to women and has a grand scheme to get into bathrooms to convince them to scissor. In most cases, he's getting the surgery because he's attracted to men. This simple logic seems to elude these right-wing blowhards. (Although I say we give them what they're asking for. Let's have the trannies and pre-ops sharing restrooms with them, and then see how they change their tune.)

Yep, what is this person (Johnnie?) supposed to do:





Or you get situations like this:

The Sybian wrote:Yep, what is this person (Johnnie?) supposed to do

(J.J. What?)

P.D.X. wrote:

Pruitt wrote:I would bet that the numbers are ridiculously small in relation to the prominence that this issue is given.

Probably because the "issue" as it has been presented to us is pretty much fabricated.

The voice of reason.

You know, so many people - especially when they travel in packs - are like dogs. They hear certain words, or words said (or yelled) in a certain way and they just go nuts. Amazing how you can inflame these people into connecting a room where people shit in booths to sexual activity.

It's all the same people who live in obsessed terror over dick size.

Pruitt wrote:
Amazing how you can inflame these people into connecting a room where people shit in booths to sexual activity.

They are called Germans, and I think the word you are looking for is engorge.

This kinda fits, right?

NCAA to move all championship events from the state of North Carolina for the 2016-17 academic year. Most notably the NCAA men's first and second round from Greensboro.

God damn it.

Well if anything will get It changed that is probably it.

On the bright side, they've gotta be in pretty sweet shape to land some competitive helicopter parenting events