16 April 2016


The present debate about bathrooms is because of cowardice.

There's nobody brave enough to say that the division on the rooms is based on the user's plumbing and if you have an outie instead of an innie use Door A.

This boldly skips the entire gender identification debate and sidesteps the trap/quagmire of it.

Why does it take courage to actually say this?

Because the present trend from LGBT is to be raving fuckball punitive lunatics when they don't get their way.

We can also take it to it's "logical" conclusion... There was a person at gaming at ISU whom was a sexual offender because he took a piss in the woods and someone saw his penis.  He'd be a child sex offender if the reporting mother had managed to get her daughter to say she'd seen it too.

Fine, girls with male plumbing; you wanna use the women's room, then you're subject to the above if someone sees your junk.  Didn't think of that, did you?

Of course, you could help (for a change) and try to get that asinine set of laws changed.  Seeing a penis taking a piss is not a sexual display by the pisser.  Speaking of, ever notice that there never seems to be a man who's offended that a woman has to use impromptu facilities?  We might as well declare beverages a sexual display because if someone drinks, they're going to be urinating.

I am fully aware that gender identity is a tough row to hoe.

The fights being picked by the LGBT community aren't opening doors, they're closing minds.  It's petty shit and there will be a backlash.

In all of this tiresome debate something else stands out: Why are there two bathrooms in the first place?  There must have been a reason.  Even if it was a stupid reason, there once was one.  I ask this because it's not mentioned.  If the reason for dividing the bathrooms is no longer valid or appropriate, then why not address THAT?

Is it because bullies can't think rationally?  I think so.

1 comment:

  1. Part of the problem is that the LGBTQ movement is in the thrall of a bunch of people who are, even if not fully consciously, out to GET everybody who didn't jump up and down and cheer when they announced what they were. They screamed and screamed for "marriage," we gave them "marriage" even though there were and are workable workarounds that could have been used...and then they started having anguished butthurt-fits because some venues and bakeries didn't want to host their "weddings," running howling back to the overindulgent courts to get what they wanted. Then they adopted the "transgenders," and started screaming that thinking you're a woman, even with 100% XY chromosomes and male anatomy all through (there are a lot of differences other than genitalia between men and women; "sexing" a skeleton, as long as the pelvis is present, is fairly easy) makes you a woman, instead of a candidate for lifetime residency at Arkham Asylum...and the courts seem poised to grant this new request, even though most people are screaming "NO!"

    This is going to breed a backlash, you mark my words. Most people, these days, don't care what "gays" do in their own bedrooms, but they do draw the line at being forced to applaud...and even more so at "transgender" antics. My own take is that the surgeons who performed the first "gender reassignment" surgery should have been up on charges of malpractice and had their licenses stripped.


Try to remember you are a guest here when you comment. Inappropriate comments will be deleted without mention. Amnesty period is expired.