“Nothing would prevent a sexual predator from pretending he is confused about his sex in order to gain access to vulnerable women and children in public rest rooms…”
My question to Mr. Mineau or anyone who wishes to defend his line of logic is this; what is the transgender association to predators and why would predators stay out of restrooms if transgenders weren’t allowed to use the right one?
Please share widely!
transgender people are already going into the bathrooms. If a female-to-male transgender person went into the women’s bathroom, that may just cause the ‘panic’ Mineau seeks to avoid (or should we say incite?) – and vice versa. The far greater danger — to the people involved, anyway – is to force them into bathrooms for which they don’t identify.
<
p>Sexual predators come in all shapes and sizes and can’t be predicted based on sexual orientation or identity. We have laws to protect us from it and to catch predators, as well as great deals of resources spent in that purpose, facts that will not change as a result of this bill.
I’d say that Mineau lost the argument because he couldn’t make any articulations past his predetermined talking points. He’s say he was for the safety of women and children but doesn’t quite make listeners understand how denying transgender equality accomplishes that protection.
<
p>I’ve heard of no case where a sexual predator was discouraged from following his victim into a bathroom because the law said he/she couldn’t do so legally. That just doesn’t make any sense to me, can anyone defend Mineau on this? I’m really at a loss.
<
p>This is an interesting issue for me because for a change I am on equal ground with the opposition. I have no friends who are transgender and have had next to no exposure to the culture, so I have nothing to gain or lose on this issue. To me it’s simply a matter of right or wrong.
<
p>I’m reminded of what Robert Kennedy once said:
<
p>
<
p>I have yet to hear a convincing argument that tells me why we shouldn’t error on the side of liberty for our fellow transgender citizens. If they change their sex, or are at least living as a certain sex, then they should be allowed accommodations befitting that sex.
When I was in Italy very often public restrooms were unisex anyway. The “lobby” area which included the sinks was open to all, but the individual stalls had real doors as opposed to what we think of as stall doors.
Check it out.
I assumed that would address such things as the material and width of pipes. From the article it appears to be one bureaucrat’s interpretation, which isn’t necessarily the obvious one. As for the women who complained, do they not have families that include men? I’ve never understood the fixation women have with leaving the seat up. Men sometimes need it down too and if I encounter one left up I lower it, but I don’t make a federal case out of it. I guess the concept of “banned in Boston” is alive and well!
And by tape, I really mean an online server.
I checked the audio records on WBZ and there was nothing for this particular night. Perhaps if you requested it from them?
just thought it would be fun to listen to. thank you for checking.
Use your imagination and you can pretty much conclude the banter that was Mineau’s positions on the matter.