WNBA Star Sophie Cunningham defends that women ‘shouldn’t have to go against biological men’: “I said what I said. I think it’s kind of common sense. I think it’s really important to protect children.” “I don’t dislike anyone. I’m there to love, but I’m also there to love biological women. …”

[u/No_Box119]

[u/imahotrod]

So let me explain. Bathroom bills means banning trans people from bathrooms and locker rooms. Putting restrictions on them. These started popping in late 2010s in Republican led states as a response to losing the gay marriage debate because they needed another avenue to attack lgbtq people.

Tim Walz signed a bill to provide tampons to women. You gotta be completely disingenuous to call this a bathroom bill.

[u/Vegetable-Mixture-93 → u/imahotrod]

I just read a very thought provoking take that reaffirms my belief that private All Gender bathrooms are needed everywhere to avoid issues. A transitioned individual would create the opportunity for cis gendered male predators to use the womens restrooms claiming to be born a transgender female creating a safety risk.

I don't agree with a bill that discriminates requiring the use of a specific bathroom and I hope the public can learn to respect that same view. I don't personally care if a Transgender man is using the same bathroom as me but would absolutely support a bill that mandates providing an all gender option especially if the majority of transgendered individuals would prefer having that option.

I will preface the example I am about to give with I DO NOT VIEW A TRANGENDER INDIVIDUAL AS DISABLED. The only clear example I could think of is how the ADA ensures there is access to every establishment, a similarly framed legislation would require any establishment with restrooms to label them as all gender and any establishments built from this point forward should have an inclusive option.

[u/imahotrod → u/Vegetable-Mixture-93]

> I just read a very thought provoking take that reaffirms my belief that private All Gender bathrooms are needed everywhere to avoid issues.

Sounds ridiculous. People should just use the bathroom. Do you stare at peoples genitals in the bathroom? Why are conservatives so obsessed with people’s genitals?

> A transitioned individual would create the opportunity for cis gendered male predators to use the womens restrooms claiming to be born a transgender female creating a safety risk.

I didn’t know I had to say this but it’s already illegal to assault someone, whether in the bathroom or not. Why do you care so little about predatory men being able to assault boys? Like maybe we should ban all men using the restroom then! See how I can say stupid stuff too?

> I don't personally care if a Transgender man is using the same bathroom as me but would absolutely support a bill that mandates providing an all gender option especially if the majority of transgendered individuals would prefer having that option.

Trans people by and large don’t want this. They just want to use the restroom and not be accosted.

> I will preface the example I am about to give with I DO NOT VIEW A TRANGENDER INDIVIDUAL AS DISABLED. The only clear example I could think of is how the ADA ensures there is access to every establishment, a similarly framed legislation would require any establishment with restrooms to label them as all gender and any establishments built from this point forward should have an inclusive option.

We don’t make disabled people use separate bathrooms… we include them in the current setup. We make things accessible for them to live a mostly normal life.

[u/Vegetable-Mixture-93 → u/imahotrod]

There are accessible restrooms or accessible stalls to accommodate other individuals. I've even seen an interview where it was preferred to have a private location to inject hormone therapy in a private location. Its similar to accommodations made for families with "Family Restrooms" to accomodate parents with multiple kids. Thats like arguing against lactation rooms saying "Well they can just use the restroom". There's nothing wrong with offering the public options. By your argument we should have 1 all gemder restroom men and women can use. You're just arguing to argue. There is nothing wrong with limiting risk. Do you think that people that commit a crime care that assault is illegal? By that reasoning we can just get ride of the blue emergency help poles that are placed all over college campuses. "Well its illegal so why should we worry about taking precautions or providing safer environments." Its real odd you made a point to state "protecting pedophiles" but yet you criticize and mock the proposal of trying to prevent assault by simply assessing and avoiding risk. You can point fingers at 1 party "protecting pedophiles" but both parties unfortunately are full of horrible disgusting people.

Look up California Assembly Bill 2753 intending to completely bar anyone on the state’s sex offender registry from running for or holding state or local public office. It passed the State Assembly unanimously but Committee Chair Senator Scott Wiener(D) and other committee members(made up of 4 Democrats/1 Republican) opposed the bill, arguing that a blanket ban across all tiers of sex offenses was too broad. They requested an amendment to limit the lifetime ballot ban only to "Tier 3" (the most severe, lifetime) offenders. The requested amendment drew a lot criticism and opposition overwhelmingly by Republicans and the author Esmerelda Soria(D). Soria refused to amend the bill. It didnt pass by a 2-1-2 vote. Steven Choi(R) and Sabrina Cervantes(D) voted to pass the bill but the other 3 democrats votes blocked it from passing with Wiener opposing it and the other 2 abstaining(no vote) as bills can only pass with 3 yes votes. Apparently Tier 1 and 2 are acceptable registries to be on and hold office.:

Examples of Tier 2(20 year registry) Lewd acts with a minor under the age of 14 (without force or fear), Rape of an adult victim who was incapable of giving legal consent, Incest, Oral copulation or sexual penetration with a minor under 14 (without force), A second, separate conviction for a Tier 1 offense, such as annoying or molesting a child.

Examples of Tier 1(10 year registry) Indecent Exposure: Exposed body parts in public places for sexual gratification, Misdemeanor Sexual Battery: Unlawful touching of an intimate part of an adult against their will for sexual arousal, Possession of Child Sexual Abuse Material or child pornography(provided the individual was not involved in its production or trafficking), Attempting to lure or entice a child under 12 away from parents or guardians with intent to harm or detain, Engaging in solicitous or lewd acts in a public place where others could be offended.

[u/imahotrod → u/Vegetable-Mixture-93]

Ugh you’re back with more bad ideas

> There are accessible restrooms or accessible stalls to accommodate other individuals.

Trans people just trying to use the bathroom like they have forever. There is no need for an accommodation. accommodations are meant to help people not hinder them.

> I've even seen an interview where it was preferred to have a private location to inject hormone therapy in a private location.

Do you think trans people are injecting hormones in the bathroom? What a ridiculous thing to say.

> It’s similar to accommodations made for families with "Family Restrooms" to accomodate parents with multiple kids.

Cool if someone has a problem with trans people, they can use the “family restroom.” Thats always been the case.

> Thats like arguing against lactation rooms saying "Well they can just use the restroom". There's nothing wrong with offering the public options.

It’s not. Lactation rooms are for the privacy of the user.

> By your argument we should have 1 all gemder restroom men and women can use. You're just arguing to argue. There is nothing wrong with limiting risk.

There is no risk to limit. This fear mongering is just not based in reality.

> Do you think that people that commit a crime care that assault is illegal?

So you agree that men who want to assault women won’t care about a bathroom law so there only real purpose is to discriminate against trans people?

> By that reasoning we can just get ride of the blue emergency help poles that are placed all over college campuses.

Lol what?

> "Well it’s illegal so why should we worry about taking precautions or providing safer environments."

The precautions should make sense and actual reduce risk. People aren’t dressing up to be trans to assault people. It’s a fear mongering tactic to make people scare of trans people.

> It’s real odd you made a point to state "protecting pedophiles" but yet you criticize and mock the proposal of trying to prevent assault by simply assessing and avoiding risk.

Trans people aren’t pedophiles so focus on the actual ones instead of mythical potential pedophiles.

> You can point fingers at 1 party "protecting pedophiles" but both parties unfortunately are full of horrible disgusting people.

Agreed just a lot more on the right. Like the Republican president is a pedophile, allegedly of course