OT: Curt Schilling sacked by ESPN

[burrrton]

Yeah, if you think I have any sympathy for "feminist" groups, such as they are in 2016, you're mistaken.

[HumanCockroach]

I didn't. Just find it odd. Something that always seems weird to me. "We don't need men until we do" kind of thing...

[RiverDog]

How about we meet at Twigs (I'll buy drinks), and you have your wife go into the men's room and drop trow in the stall. I'll walk in and if I can tell you the color of her undies, you make my next house payment.

Of course I'm being a bit facetious (I would never disrespect your wife like that), but I'm confident I'd win that bet (and I will buy drinks if you ever want to meet up).

You know, I've often wondered why we've never hooked up being that we live in the same town, especially considering that you're one of my favorite posters (never mind the disagreement in this thread).

The wife and I seldom go out. We went to Famous Dave's last week on one of those coupon deals offered in the TCH, and before that, it was 3 months. I work pretty odd hours, currently have Thursdays and Fridays off, so finding a common time might be problematic. Let me think about it and I'll shoot you a PM.

[obiken]

Riv, do you still live in the Tri-Cities?

[RiverDog]

Riv, do you still live in the Tri-Cities?

Yes, I do, about a half mile outside the city limits of south Richland.

[obiken]

Thats just too cool! I miss Columbia Center. I haven't been there in 13 years.

[burrrton]

Hate bumping old threads unless they're moving some nut's thread down the page, but here's the solution (alluded to by others and here as expressed in some blog post I found):

If a company or public facility truly feels that they must jump into this entire “degendering” fiasco, then in addition to traditional facilities for each gender, simply add on a third, gender neutral bathroom or other facility. Then anyone going in can be informed that there is no gender requirement for occupancy and, likewise, the owner/management offers no guarantee as to the gender of the other patrons you may encounter in there. Alternately, when new facilities are constructed, put in multiple, single user facilities and just label them as “shower” or “bathroom” or “changing room.”

It's not cheap, but it has the advantage of not being comically asinine.

You want to be 'forward thinking', Target? Put *your* money where your mouth is (something the modern left is almost 100% unwilling to do these days) and quit telling me my daughter should be OK showering next to some dude with daddy issues.

[monkey]

Hate bumping old threads unless they're moving some nut's thread down the page, but: the solution, alluded to here by many, expressed in some blog post as excerpted here but also by others:

If a company or public facility truly feels that they must jump into this entire “degendering” fiasco, then in addition to traditional facilities for each gender, simply add on a third, gender neutral bathroom or other facility. Then anyone going in can be informed that there is no gender requirement for occupancy and, likewise, the owner/management offers no guarantee as to the gender of the other patrons you may encounter in there. Alternately, when new facilities are constructed, put in multiple, single user facilities and just label them as “shower” or “bathroom” or “changing room.”

It's not cheap, but it has the advantage of not being comically asinine.

You want to be 'forward thinking', Target? Put *your* money where your mouth is (something the modern left is almost 100% unwilling to do these days).

Yep, that's been the solution I've advocated to everyone who will listen. But see, the problem is, there are people who are leading this charge who really don't WANT a solution, what they want is the continued controversy. It's how they make money.
It's no different than all the race baiters out there whose very income is reliant on NOT solving the racism problem. They are actively looking for things to complain about, so that they make money.

[monkey]

Hate bumping old threads unless they're moving some nut's thread down the page, but: the solution, alluded to here by many, expressed in some blog post as excerpted here but also by others:

If a company or public facility truly feels that they must jump into this entire “degendering” fiasco, then in addition to traditional facilities for each gender, simply add on a third, gender neutral bathroom or other facility. Then anyone going in can be informed that there is no gender requirement for occupancy and, likewise, the owner/management offers no guarantee as to the gender of the other patrons you may encounter in there. Alternately, when new facilities are constructed, put in multiple, single user facilities and just label them as “shower” or “bathroom” or “changing room.”

It's not cheap, but it has the advantage of not being comically asinine.

You want to be 'forward thinking', Target? Put *your* money where your mouth is (something the modern left is almost 100% unwilling to do these days).

Yep, that's been the solution I've advocated to everyone who will listen. But see, the problem is, there are people who are leading this charge who really don't WANT a solution, what they want is the continued controversy. It's how they make money.
It's no different than all the race baiters out there whose very income is reliant on NOT solving the racism problem. They are actively looking for things to complain about, so that they make money.

[burrrton]

But see, the problem is, there are people who are leading this charge who really don't WANT a solution, what they want is the continued controversy. It's how they make money.
It's no different than all the race baiters out there whose very income is reliant on NOT solving the racism problem. They are actively looking for things to complain about, so that they make money.

No disagreement. A mutually agreeable resolution ends the controversy without sticking it to the "bad" people, which is unacceptable judging by previous decisions.

Honestly, if you were an LGBT activist in search of an easy solution, how would you *not* think to just advocate for separate bathrooms (in which no assumption of privacy would be expected) instead of the ridiculous "pretend men are women" nonsense?

[RiverDog]

Yep, that's been the solution I've advocated to everyone who will listen. But see, the problem is, there are people who are leading this charge who really don't WANT a solution, what they want is the continued controversy. It's how they make money.
It's no different than all the race baiters out there whose very income is reliant on NOT solving the racism problem. They are actively looking for things to complain about, so that they make money.

IMO that's a factor in a number of cases, that politicians really don't want a true solution as they would lose a campaign issue that they see as a winner for them. Gun control is widely seen as such an issue.