Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: TontoKowalski

How would prevent a voyeur from hanging out in the ladies room, dressing room, locker room, etc., when he replies with, “it’s OK, I’m transsexual.”?

How has it worked since the beginning of time? People who cross dressed and convincingly looked like the opposite sex were discrete and got away with it without causing a ruckus. It fell into the arena of what you don’t know won’t hurt you.

With the new round of transsexual rights assertions, the historical limits have been removed. The societal pressure to be discrete is forcibly suppressed. That is what the NC law was reacting to.


234 posted on 04/22/2016 11:14:18 AM PDT by SampleMan (Feral Humans are the refuse of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 215 | View Replies ]


To: SampleMan
Your response sounds logical. Thanks.

As I said, I'm certainly not in favor of perverts wearing a dress so they can spy on women in the bathroom.

So, the NC state law was a response to a city ordinance essentially saying "no holds barred?" I guess I understand now.

I still think the state law, while no doubt well intended, opens up a whole new can of worms. No pun intended.

236 posted on 04/22/2016 11:30:49 AM PDT by TontoKowalski (You can call me "Dick.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 234 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson