I would hope that you might come to realize how idiotic that statement actually sounds.
I am a 55-year-old professional woman who is divorced and has been living single for nearly 15 years. I sometimes travel for work, I’ve even traveled outside of the US for work, I often go shopping alone, I’ve traveled out of state to visit friends and relatives all by myself; I sometimes have to use public rest rooms.
Are you proposing that I should not be allowed to travel alone, perhaps that I should be accompanied when leaving home, for my own protection of course, say by an adult male relative such as something similar to and under Sharia Law in places like Saudi Arabia?
Are you suggesting that I must have a “bathroom buddy” otherwise it’s my own fault if some male pervert, a man who decides their “gender identity” on that particular day says he “identifies” as female, comes into the lady’s room and does something bad to me?
Perhaps the next time I’m at a business conference or seminar and have to go pee, I should raise my hand and beg someone to accompany me to the lady’s room?
Far to many sickies in the world but who would have been at the door to monitor that young man or in the case of a transgender to verify equipment. People act as if one more la will make it better. We don't control everything and law or not, we have to protect ourselves and others. There are so many laws already that are not enforced. A law about this will be no panaceas unless there is someone at that door to enforce it.
Again you are missing the point and that of the NC law.
Originally known as House Bill 2, the law came in response to a Charlotte City Council ordinance mandatingthat all public facilities should allow people to use the bathroom or locker room corresponding to their gender identity. The North Carolina statute overturned the rule, stating that public accommodation policy can only be established at the state level. It also said usage of bathrooms and other vulnerable areas in public schools and government buildings must be done according to the sex on a person’s birth certificate. It made no demands of businesses and allows them to adopt their own policies.
http://www.wnd.com/2016/04/trump-scolded-on-n-c-bathroom-bill-you-got-key-fact-wrong/#gLJjuLq4p1cZ6Jvv.99
Again, “My point was and is that if anyone of any gender can use the bathroom of his/her/shims/its choice, the prosecution of any sexual assaults becomes more difficult to prove. If a man being in a women’s rest room is not on its self at all suspicious or out of the ordinary. It removes the “motive” out of the equation.”
“What this perv did to my great niece was a crime and would be a crime with or without laws – federal laws, state laws and with or without any store policies like Target’s regarding whether a person of the opposite biological gender has to use the men’s or lady’s room or the rest room of their biological birth or can use the one of their “choosing”.”
“HOWEVER - and I think this is the VERY IMPORTANT PART - in the police report and the charging documents it was noted that “a 17-year old “male” entered the women’s restroom, where he did not belong and with obvious bad intent.””
“If a biological male decides he wants to use the Lady’s Room because he’s using the bathroom he “feels is appropriate”; and who is to say otherwise if that’s how he/she/ it “feels” on any given day or moment, or as this perv’s mother claimed, “HE’S GENDER CONFUSED!”, then the fact of him being in the woman’s room in the first place would not be something that would support in the police report and charging documents as having “bad intent”. And the only thing to support the charges against him would be the word of a 7 and 8-year-old as to what happened as there were no adult witnesses. And we know how that works out some times.”
“If a biological male can use whatever restroom that he wants to use at the time based on how he “identifies” at any given time, then no one could really question why he was there in the first place.”
Thanks for calling my opinion idiotic. I love speaking with people who demean me-—not.
Laws about bathrooms will only PREVENT a crime IF there is a monitor to keep the person out. Otherwise we already have laws that make rape or sexual contact with a child a crime in any location.
As a resident of NC I am familiar with the situation, have and will vote for McCrory, but a law must have a means to enforce to be effective. Again who will monitor and if harm is done laws are already on the books.
Again thanks for the insult, typical though I guess.