The ongoing issue is the need for Transsexual's to use the restroom of there real gender without bias or pursecution. The DSM-IV requires it. This means that a bunch of people a whole lot smarter than me, got together and figured it out and that is what they came up with. Is it law, not to my knowledge. Should it be MADE law, that is up for debate.
I am arguing that this be allowed. The argument that inspector made is a generalized one, based on the acts of the few, to screw over the many. It's not fair, but there it is. You agree with arguement, and that is your right. However, it's an assumption, as neither you nor I can say what ALL other trans people have in mind when going in the restroom. I know from my PERSONAL experience, that when going to the restroom, i go to relieve myself. I can only guess, that when I start using the womens room, that will be the same goal I have.
I do not have anything more "general" to propose. I do not have the answers here. I do know that it's not right to be prosecuted for using the bathroom.
"It doesn't offend me, it's just kind of pointless to point your arguments toward one particular person or formulation when there's next to no chance of getting that person to respond. If you think he made an error in principle and you have an argument against that, then point out the principle you think he's using and refute it, using your own experience as a base. That way you can get some constructive discussion from people other than the original person."
I am sorry. Apparently you feel strongly about this. My points are valid. I am not actually expecting a response from that particular individual. I am writing what I write for all to see. If someone agrees with Inspectors point of view then what I write is directed at them.
Plus isn't it MY time to waste in replying to someone that might never reply back?
Hopefully this will put an end to the nonsence of "why" i am posting and get us back on the subject of the thread. Bottom line, my personal reasons for posting are mine alone.
