Potty Politics and Biased Books

On March 13, 2010, in Hurts, Politics, by Dyssonance

Hi all.  Still being lazy and avoiding the domestic things as best I can — which is to say not very well at all.

Gonna talk to you about Potty Politics, here.

The story: http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/03/11/nurse-beaten-in-midtown-bar/

This guy is indeed a complete psycho.  Pissed because he was turned down.  Followed her down stairs and into the women’s room, where he barged in at one the most vulnerable moments of a person’s life.  Where upon he did what I consider attempted murder, possibly, and wouldn’t be surprised if, given the degree of violence involved here, he was charged with such.

It is an *exact* example of what those who talk about the “bathroom bills” say will happen *if those bills are passed*.

Funny, it happens when those bills are not passed, too — I believe GENDA is still waiting in the NY Senate, and NYC doesn’t have any ordinances that I am aware of (and I may be wrong there) that apply to general public establishments.

So it happens, anyways.

Of late, some have taken to saying I’m too abstract.  Well, when I talk about the abstract concept of the opposition saying that men are evil — and pointing out they don’t make exceptions in this — this is what I’m talking about.

They know such things as this exist, that they happen, and they will use things like this to say this is why such laws shouldn’t be passed.

Note that this person was not crossdressed. They were not “pretending”.  And there were a lot of other men there that night who weren’t even considering doing such a thing.

But the potty politics argument is based on the *threat* of men.  As if men are, by their very nature (and, inevitably, by their possession of a penis, since that’s how so many of them describe men) dangerous.  That is, having a penis makes you a threat, in and of itself, and therefore you should not be allowed near women.

one guy, out of at the least dozens in the bar. A whole bunch of men who were not threats, who did not go out and beat the shit outta some woman who turned them down.

A pediatric nurse, no less.

Personally, I hope this asshole is caught and accidentally falls down a few dozen flights of stairs — being wheeled into court a paraplegic doesn’t seem all that unfair to me given what he did.

But the opposition is putting all men on trial by using the argument of potty politics.  And, apparently, they haven’t been out to many clubs, given the trend of multiple occupancy unisex bathrooms (which, to be fair, freaks me out a little).

Also, the State of Texas just up and decided to erase Thomas Jefferson.

Yes, really.  It seems the elected members of the school board there decided that new textbooks for the school should de-emphasize him because several members of the school board do not believe in the separation of Church and State, and so he’s been de-emphasized.  The guy who wrote the Declaration.

I know some of you are native Texans and love your state, but that article shows that in another 15 years, the kids of Texas will be among the most poorly educated in the United States.

Me, I’m waiting for the AZ state Legislature to do the same thing.

Popularity: 1% [?]


Unique visitors to post: 1

 

3 Responses to “Potty Politics and Biased Books”

  1. Emelye WaldherrNo Gravatar says:

    NYC has an inclusive nondiscrimination law, as does Albany, Rochester, Buffalo and some of the smaller cities in New York state. The point that the self appointed toilet police will ignore is that the nondiscrimination law will not shield the criminal from prosecution, something they claim inclusive nondiscrimination laws “could” do. It will be our task to remind people of that fact, since the wingnuts certainly won’t.

    With TVC and their fellow travelers using bathroom scare tactics against ENDA I’ve been waiting to see how much we will hear from the GLB community regarding their recent efforts. I’ve seen a little bit, but not enough from the GLB media on that subject. I certainly hope the groundswell increases.

  2. AbbyNo Gravatar says:

    Actually, NYC does have a nondiscrimination ordinance that includes gender identity and covers access to public accommodations, like bars & restaurants. In fact, it was that ordinance that, during the 2007 debate over the exclusion of gender identity from ENDA, was used to sue a restaurant in Greenwich Village that threw out a lesbian woman (and her friends) because she looked too masculine and went into the women’s restroom, even after she showed the bouncer her ID clearly designating her as female. The bar eventually settled, of course. That incident showed the lie to Barney Frank’s argument at the time that gays and lesbians had no need for protections based on gender identity.

  3. RT @tonidorsay: Potty Politics and Biased Books: http://bit.ly/a3BINp #trans #lgbt

Leave a Reply

This site is using OpenAvatar based on