Cruz, of course, was misgendering trans women and playing into the thoroughly discredited notion that they somehow present a danger to women and girls, or that people would pretend to be transgender in order to gain access to these facilities. “Men should not be going to the bathroom with little girls,” he further noted. “That is a perfectly reasonable determination for the people to make.”

There has been much backlash against the North Carolina law, which bars transgender people from using the restrooms, locker rooms, and other sex-segregated facilities (in government-owned buildings, including public schools) that comport with their gender identity. The law, passed in March, also repealed LGBT-inclusive municipal nondiscrimination ordinances throughout the state and prevented cities or counties from enacting new ones. It came in reaction to an ordinance adopted in Charlotte.

Cruz claimed that the backlash was based in “political correctness,” and he blamed the Obama administration, which has held that federal laws banning sex discrimination apply to discrimination based on gender identity.

“Listen, the Obama Education Department is going against a junior high insisting that the junior high must allow a teenage boy to shower with teenage girls,” the Texas senator told Todd, perhaps referring to a case involving a high school in Illinois and ignoring the fact that privacy measures are in place. “Now, that’s just nuts. I mean, that’s not a reasonable decision. That’s crazy!”

Cruz declined to comment on an executive order signed by North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory this week to clarify the law and to protect employees of state government from discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. The candidate said he wasn’t familiar with the details.
--
http://www.advocate.com/transgender/2016/4/14/ted-cruz-men-should-not-be-going-bathroom-little-girls

Don't forget to post a link to an article. But besides that, in my opinion Cruz does have somewhat of a valid point. A person could pretend to be trans gendered simply for the sake of being a peeping tom.

>>2
The link's on the bottom bud.
It's either pro-trans or anti-trans and no middle ground.
Anyway I don't even get why "protesting" involves cutting off all access and extorting a city when both cis (still hate that term) and trans residents will suffer gets you praises from people.
Americans are weird.

>>2
In that case, why wouldn't they just dress up as a Woman? You don't need an ID to get into a Bathroom.
/sage

>>4
This. It's pretty easy to tell the difference between someone who's legitimately trans and someone who's just pretending to be for a day so they can peep on people.

Actually, since judges are stupid and the laws are blind, suspects can just say "I'm queer, I have a right to be here" and get away with it.
Best solution: chop off any kind of genitals from every human. Or ,ake it so they don't have to go to toilets.

We're just taking the bathroom signs too seriously. The only reason this is an issue is because some homophobe feels like trans people will be checking them out instead of going to the bathroom to take a dump like everybody else.

P.S. Less segregation pls.

I see that Cruz has common sense. My faith in humanity has been slightly restored.

Also, why is it so hard for a bathroom made specifically for transgender people to be built? Is that really so hard? That seems like the common sense solution, unlike allowing men and women to mix in matters that deal with basic privacy.

>>9
Remember, trans people are men and women too. So if you're gonna make bathrooms for them, you're gonna have to make two.
Also, do you really think every school/company would make a new bathroom for just one of their students/workers?

>>9
It's expensive for one. Plus transgender people are only 1% of the population. While it's a lot. It's nowhere near the 49% or so the other genders have. It's a much easier solution to just let transgender individuals use the restroom with the gender they identify with

But the problem is that this opens the door for cis perverts to peep on people. Trans individuals might be 1% of the population and pose no threat, but perverts do pose a very real threat and many will see this as an opportunity to simply say they identify with a certain gender and then peep on people. It opens the door right up for them and this is a very real danger. To jeopardize peoples safety in restrooms from sexual predators in favor of not hurting a trans persons feelings is total crap. Until there are contingencies in place to prevent perverts from using opposite sex bathrooms while keeping them open to nonthreatening trans people, I'm going to have to side with North Carolina and Ted Cruz.

>>15 I totally agree with you. We have to focus on keeping everyone safe first. until we find a way to remove that threat. I feel like we did the right thing so far.

>>15 >>16
Just remember that these 'threats' are blatant exaggeration.
The main point is the discomfort.

>>15>>16 There really isn't anything stopping people from dressing up as the opposite gender, going into a public bathroom and "perving" on people now, so this seems like a bit of a flimsy justification to me. Besides, if we're talking about public bathrooms, it'd be pretty obvious if someone was trying to spy on you or whatever if you're in a closed cubicle. It's not like people routinely undress in public bathrooms. I mean, if there are showers and stuff, then maybe it's a different issue, but even so if a person's willing to get naked and bathe in a public place they probably shouldn't get overly conscious about who sees them.

I'd imagine Neko is right, most people are just uncomfortable with the idea, so this'll be a hard viewpoint to change. Pretty much like how a lot of people were and are uncomfortable with the idea of gay people getting married. The supposed "threat" here just seems like a non-issue to me, and the suggestion itself comes off like an accusation that transexuals are generally perverted or sexually deviant.

Also, if a trans person physically looks like a woman and uses the mens bathroom because that's whats on her birth certificate, I'd imagine that causing more problems than if they'd just used the women's bathroom. And what if that was a trans -male using the women's bathroom? How does that idea not make people uncomfortable?

In any case, who'd notice? Do people routinely check out the other people who are using the public bathroom with them? Don't most people just avoid eye contact completely?

>>18 I'm not suggesting transsexuals are perverted. I meant it as, for example, a guy dresses up as a girl and says he's a transsexual. Than he can get free rain to peek and stare.
But you do bring forth a good point in your forth paragraph. I mean I don't know what to do at that point. maybe a Transsexual bathroom or something. Idk at that point.
thank you for bringing up such a good point. ^^

While we're on the subject, trans people are really aware of how they look and if they really cause discomfort to other people.
If someone with a beard walks to the ladies toilet, I can only assume that person's either an American/European with over-swelled pride or a pervert.
That being said, there are some blockheads (who may or may not be a permanent trans) that just waltz into whichever toilet without looking around.

>>19 I'm not saying that you specifically are accusing trans people of anything, I'm just saying that this whole situation kinda has that accusatory feel to it. My problem with your argument is that I don't think it'd be too difficult for any person who could pass for someone of the opposite sex to do this now.

I fully agree with the statement in the title

I don't believe that America as a whole is ready to handle such an issue. Giving trans people a separate bathroom is segregation, and letting them go to whatever bathroom that they alogn temselves with causes discomfort for people who aren't trans. At this time, transgendered people are a minority in American society. I'm not saying that they don't deserve this right, but I think that because no decision can truly benefit all members, we should reach a decision that benefits the majority. Maybe sometime in the future, such a thing could be possible.