Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

bruce springsteen cancelled ....

Options
24

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Pedro K
    Registered Users Posts: 1,197 ✭✭✭Pedro K


    It's a bit crap for all the fans with tickets who'll be disappointed... Maybe he could have opposed it some other way.


  • Options
    #33
    Birneybau
    Registered Users Posts: 10,254 ✭✭✭✭Birneybau


    rsh118 wrote: »
    Fair play, Bruce. Stands up for what he believes in and does something about it.

    As for the loos? Go omni, sure! No problem with me. We had them at uni and it caused zero problems :)

    As a man that occasionally drinks Guinness, I wouldn't fancy having a unisex toilet in work.

    Would completely ruin you in the eyes of the opposite sex.


  • Options
    #34
    ongarite
    Registered Users Posts: 8,223 ✭✭✭ongarite


    While all the headlines are on the toilet issues, this law is really about discriminating against gay/LGBT peoples at a state level. Its the main reason why the Springsteen concert was cancelled.
    What’s in the law?

    It bans transgender people from using the bathroom of the gender they identify with. Everyone has to go to the bathroom of the gender on their birth certificate. And it bans cities and counties from loosening that restriction.

    But that’s not all. It also nullified local ordinances around the state that would have protected gay or transgender people from being fired simply for their sexual preference or identify. It also clears the way for businesses to refuse to serve gay or transgender patrons.

    The state has always had laws on workplace discrimination, public accommodation, minimum wage and other business issues. This law makes it unlawful for cities to expand upon those laws, like Charlotte and more than a dozen others had done.

    Now the state’s recognized classes for discrimination are limited to “race, religion, color, national origin, age, biological sex or handicap.”

    http://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/politics-columns-blogs/under-the-dome/article68334522.html


  • Options
    #35
    tritium
    Registered Users Posts: 7,437 ✭✭✭tritium


    Jan Laco wrote: »
    Have they used your toilet at the same time? It's not just for hygiene, but a pervert/rapist can just dress as woman and hang around the toilets and he can't be kicked out.

    Yeah, labelling the toilets is a foolproof deterrent....

    My only issue with unisex toilets is how long the queue for the ladies always is on any night out. Seriously, what the hell do ladies do in there that causes a traffic jam?!?!


  • Options
    #36
    muddypaws
    Registered Users Posts: 3,607 ✭✭✭muddypaws


    tritium wrote: »
    Yeah, labelling the toilets is a foolproof deterrent....

    My only issue with unisex toilets is how long the queue for the ladies always is on any night out. Seriously, what the hell do ladies do in there that causes a traffic jam?!?!

    The same as men without urinals apparently
    ahnowbrowncow wrote: »
    Unisex toilets in busy public places are a pain, I want urianls. I had urgent need of a lavatory/urinal recently but the gents only had cubicles, because of this there was a large queue and I had to wait 15 minutes just to take a piss.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    tritium
    Registered Users Posts: 7,437 ✭✭✭tritium


    Birneybau wrote: »
    As a man that occasionally drinks Guinness, I wouldn't fancy having a unisex toilet in work.

    Would completely ruin you in the eyes of the opposite sex.

    When I was younger I had a job that required me to clean the ladies toilets after closing time

    Believe me guys are not the only mucky feckers when it comes to toilets...


  • Options
    #38
    tritium
    Registered Users Posts: 7,437 ✭✭✭tritium


    muddypaws wrote: »
    The same as men without urinals apparently

    Its funny but I've never seen the same queueing for the gents even when there were cubicles in both. Other have seen different, who would have guessed. Probably good that I couched it as my own observation as opposed to scientific fact so.....

    I vaguely remember one of the right on mayors of new York looking to pass a law requiring 50% more women's toilets than men's in any new establishment, not sure if that ever went anywhere.....


  • Options
    #39
    muddypaws
    Registered Users Posts: 3,607 ✭✭✭muddypaws


    tritium wrote: »
    Its funny but I've never seen the same queueing for the gents even when there were cubicles in both. Other have seen different, who would have guessed. Probably good that I couched it as my own observation as opposed to scientific fact so.....

    I vaguely remember one of the right on mayors of new York looking to pass a law requiring 50% more women's toilets than men's in any new establishment, not sure if that ever went anywhere.....

    I used to follow Spurs home and away, and sports grounds are generally where the women's toilets are easier to use than the mens. We were at a small lower league club for one match (can't remember where), not many toilets for away fans and the queue for the mens was very long, I went into the women's toilets to find men urinating in the sinks in there.


  • Options
    #40
    Sonics2k
    Registered Users Posts: 8,239 ✭✭✭Sonics2k


    The Randy Riverbeast wrote: »
    What's stopping a man from pretending to be a woman to man transgender and then doing his sexual assault in the woman's toilets? They didn't really think that through did they but what do you expect from republicans.

    I doubt the law would stop someone either way from sexually assaulting another.

    And what's stopping an man from going into a bathroom and sexually assaulting another man in the mens toilets.

    The whole argument against it is ridiculous. It's a damn bathroom, let people pee dammit!


  • Options
    #41
    Donald Trump
    Registered Users Posts: 19,214 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump


    tritium wrote: »
    When I was younger I had a job that required me to clean the ladies toilets after closing time

    Believe me guys are not the only mucky feckers when it comes to toilets...


    Two things in particular piss me off (pun half-intended). I am not talking here about pubs/clubs where people might have drink taken but toilet facilities at workplaces/restaurants/public facilities during the day

    1) The urinals that hold liquid and you have to press a button/handle to empty or flush them when finished. Some fellas like to leave it filled there as a nice gift for the next person to flush before he uses it.
    2) Fellas who come into the place, walk by empty urinals, and then proceed to walk into the cubicle, stay standing up and piss all over the seat.

    As a male, I don't want to have a situation where there are no urinals. Two reaons: The first is speed and efficient use of space which means less queues. Also, when I want to go for a quick piss, I do not want to have to deal with a piss-covered toilet seat.
    Ladies, do you really want a situation where there's a high probability that the person who last used the facilities before you, pissed all over the seat?

    I also don't think that anyone talking about the risk of perverts etc is necessarily being <X>-phobic (Although maybe deep down they have an agenda) . They are not saying that the <X> are perverts. They are saying that the rules put in place for the benefit of <X> might be abused by non-<X> for nefarious purposes. I'm not saying that I agree with those people, I'm just saying that their belief/fear should be defeated with logic, not just be dismissed as <X>-phobic.


    (I'm just using <X> as a generic term that you can replace with whatever you want.... I don't want to pick any specific <X> for example purposes in case people twist it that I'm being <X>-phobic. I've gotten the impression that this might be a location inhabited by some ultra-hyper-sensitive individuals)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Buona Fortuna
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,507 ✭✭✭Buona Fortuna


    I live in the sticks. A public toilet is a bush or tree.


  • Options
    #43
    Donald Trump
    Registered Users Posts: 19,214 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump


    Sonics2k wrote: »
    And what's stopping an man from going into a bathroom and sexually assaulting another man in the mens toilets.

    The whole argument against it is ridiculous. It's a damn bathroom, let people pee dammit!


    I don't think it is ridiculous. I'm not saying it is entirely correct but it's not ridiculous.

    An analogy might be if you are a responsible 18 year old out for a night with your 18 year old friends and one of your friends drinks too much and wanders off lost. If that friend is a female you might worry about some scumbag (male) trying to take advantage and molest them in some manner. If that friend is a male, you probably wouldn't have that same concern to the same extent. I'm sure it could happen but I think that anyone who would say that their concern would be equal in both cases is lying.


    Lets go the whole hog and have only mixed-gender open-plan changing rooms for all sports/swimming pools etc. Using your logic, females should be fine with that because fellas have them and there is nothing to stop males from being offensive to other males in their changing rooms so it'd be grand.


  • Options
    #44
    The Raptor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,433 ✭✭✭The Raptor


    Does anyone else think its stupid for a concert to get cancelled over this? Many people bought tickets, accommodation booked, time off work for a concert. I'm sure these people don't give a rat's ass about what toilet to use.


  • Options
    #45
    muddypaws
    Registered Users Posts: 3,607 ✭✭✭muddypaws


    Donald Trump wrote: »
    I don't think it is ridiculous. I'm not saying it is entirely correct but it's not ridiculous.

    An analogy might be if you are a responsible 18 year old out for a night with your 18 year old friends and one of your friends drinks too much and wanders off lost. If that friend is a female you might worry about some scumbag (male) trying to take advantage and molest them in some manner. If that friend is a male, you probably wouldn't have that same concern to the same extent. I'm sure it could happen but I think that anyone who would say that their concern would be equal in both cases is lying.


    Lets go the whole hog and have only mixed-gender open-plan changing rooms for all sports/swimming pools etc. Using your logic, females should be fine with that because fellas have them and there is nothing to stop males from being offensive to other males in their changing rooms so it'd be grand.

    Fair points but, another point of view - When my son got too old to take him into the women's toilets with me if we were out and about, I would be standing outside the men's while he was in there, worried in case there was someone in there that could hurt him. I'm sure that men have the same worry with their daughter (because its not just men that molest children). If there were unisex toilets, the parent could stand inside near the sinks while the child was in the cubicle.


  • Options
    #46
    newacc2015
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,379 ✭✭✭newacc2015


    Buona Fortuna wrote: »
    I live in the sticks. A public toilet is a bush or tree.

    Ironically it is the same in Dublin. DCC dont have any public toilets AFAIK other than their ones in city hall. I know with the serious heroin issue in 1980s/1990s, they closed some of them (I know there is still a heroin problem in Dublin, but it is not as bad as the 1990s).


  • Options
    #47
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 41,034 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    Jan Laco wrote: »
    Have they used your toilet at the same time? It's not just for hygiene, but a pervert/rapist can just dress as woman and hang around the toilets and he can't be kicked out.

    Yep. He can do that anyway regardless of trans women using the toilets.

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Options
    #48
    Minderbinder
    Registered Users Posts: 2,030 ✭✭✭Minderbinder


    What about non-transgender peoples' rights? Do they matter? I don't want a woman dressed as a man sharing the men's room and I'm sure there's a good proportion of women who don't want men dressed as women sharing the ladies'.

    I don't believe that people were born into the wrong body.


  • Options
    #49
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 41,034 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    The Randy Riverbeast wrote: »
    What's stopping a man from pretending to be a woman to man transgender and then doing his sexual assault in the woman's toilets?

    What's stopping a man from pretending to be female and sexually assaulting someone in the toilets. Nothing. It's a transphobic slur that letting trans women use women's toilets will increase sexual assault.

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Options
    #50
    Eugene Norman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,191 ✭✭✭Eugene Norman


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    What's stopping a man from pretending to be female and sexually assaulting someone in the toilets. Nothing. It's a transphobic slur that letting trans women use women's toilets will increase sexual assault.

    I suppose it's transphobic to see trans women as men dressed up as women.

    and isn't gender fluidity the new thing? If so there can be no real talk of men dressed up as women. It's just a change of gender self identity.


  • Options
    #51
    Calhoun
    Registered Users Posts: 7,447 ✭✭✭Calhoun


    As i have asked on another thread, how the hell do you police something like this, stupidest law ever. Do we all gotta start dropping trousers and show to the private part inspector before we go in.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    FunLover18
    Registered Users Posts: 6,793 ✭✭✭FunLover18


    Minderbinder wrote: »
    What about non-transgender peoples' rights? Do they matter? I don't want a woman dressed as a man sharing the men's room and I'm sure there's a good proportion of women who don't want men dressed as women sharing the ladies'.

    I don't believe that people were born into the wrong body.

    How does sharing a bathroom with a transgender person affect your rights?


  • Options
    #53
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 41,034 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    Eugene Norman wrote: »
    I suppose it's transphobic to see trans women as men dressed up as women.

    Yes

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Options
    #54
    Minderbinder
    Registered Users Posts: 2,030 ✭✭✭Minderbinder


    FunLover18 wrote: »
    How does sharing a bathroom with a transgender person affect your rights?

    I wouldn't feel comfortable sharing public toilets with someone of the opposite sex. I think that's why we have separate toilets for men and women in the first place.


  • Options
    #55
    FunLover18
    Registered Users Posts: 6,793 ✭✭✭FunLover18


    Minderbinder wrote: »
    I wouldn't feel comfortable sharing public toilets with someone of the opposite sex. I think that's why we have separate toilets for men and women in the first place.

    Why? How is sharing a bathroom with people of the opposite sex different from sharing with people of the same sex?


  • Options
    #56
    Eugene Norman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,191 ✭✭✭Eugene Norman


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    Yes

    How do we work out the difference between a man dressed as a woman and a trans woman?


  • Options
    #57
    Eugene Norman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,191 ✭✭✭Eugene Norman


    FunLover18 wrote: »
    Why? How is sharing a bathroom with people of the opposite sex different from sharing with people of the same sex?

    Less convienient. More danger for women. More men with their lads in their hands in front of urinals as women do their make up. Etc etc etc.


  • Options
    #58
    Minderbinder
    Registered Users Posts: 2,030 ✭✭✭Minderbinder


    FunLover18 wrote: »
    Why? How is sharing a bathroom with people of the opposite sex different from sharing with people of the same sex?

    I just wouldn't feel comfortable. I'm not saying it'd be a massive inconvenience but it would be awkward. In airports and places with enough space it's fine. But most pubs and restaurants don't have the space to make that sort of a set-up comfortable or practical. Why do you think segregated toilets have been universally used until now? Could you explain that to me?


  • Options
    #59
    FunLover18
    Registered Users Posts: 6,793 ✭✭✭FunLover18


    Minderbinder wrote: »
    I just wouldn't feel comfortable. I'm not saying it'd be a massive inconvenience but it would be awkward. In airports and places with enough space it's fine. But most pubs and restaurants don't have the space to make that sort of a set-up comfortable or practical. Why do you think segregated toilets have been universally used until now? Could you explain that to me?

    But why would you feel uncomfortable?

    How do mean practical? Pubs and restaurants won't have to make any changes, they won't even have to change the signs.

    Segregated toilets are just tradition, probably driving from more conservative or prudish times (I'm not accusing you of either), I certainly don't think there's an practical reason, at least I can't think of any.


  • Options
    #60
    Eugene Norman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,191 ✭✭✭Eugene Norman


    FunLover18 wrote: »
    But why would you feel uncomfortable?

    How do mean practical? Pubs and restaurants won't have to make any changes, they won't even have to change the signs.

    Segregated toilets are just tradition, probably driving from more conservative or prudish times (I'm not accusing you of either), I certainly don't think there's an practical reason, at least I can't think of any.

    Plenty of practical reasons have been mentioned already.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    FunLover18
    Registered Users Posts: 6,793 ✭✭✭FunLover18


    Eugene Norman wrote: »
    Plenty of practical reasons have been mentioned already.

    I've seen a discussion about queues and urinals, if that's what you're referring to I don't see how this will be affected. We're talking about allowing trnasgenders to use bathrooms of the gender they associate with, so it will probably balance out.


Advertisement