(05-18-2016 01:37 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(05-18-2016 01:34 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(05-18-2016 01:04 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

(05-18-2016 12:46 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(05-18-2016 11:32 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Congratulations Conservatives. You created this.

Link

Yep..its going to be open season on any person that doesn't look purely gender binary.

The loaded language you continue to utilize is ridiculous.

And so is the notion that pervs everywhere are suddenly going to start dressing like transgendered people to try and catch a glimpse of some chick taking a dump.

The loaded language you continue to utilize is ridiculous.

Let's be honest here. People on both sides of the issue are over exaggerating. In the end, it's not going to make much of a difference.

I'm sure you and I have both urinated next to a trans gendered person before and never even noticed.

(05-18-2016 01:39 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(05-18-2016 01:37 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(05-18-2016 01:34 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(05-18-2016 01:04 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

(05-18-2016 12:46 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Yep..its going to be open season on any person that doesn't look purely gender binary.

The loaded language you continue to utilize is ridiculous.

And so is the notion that pervs everywhere are suddenly going to start dressing like transgendered people to try and catch a glimpse of some chick taking a dump.

The loaded language you continue to utilize is ridiculous.

Let's be honest here. People on both sides of the issue are over exaggerating. In the end, it's not going to make much of a difference.

I'm sure you and I have both urinated next to a trans gendered person before and never even noticed.

Given the fact that 0.15% of the population are transgendered males it's actually not a "for sure" thing... Though like Homosexuality the media and culture wants to overrepresnt it..

(05-18-2016 01:04 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

(05-18-2016 12:46 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(05-18-2016 11:32 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Congratulations Conservatives. You created this.

Link

Yep..its going to be open season on any person that doesn't look purely gender binary.

The loaded language you continue to utilize is ridiculous.

I stand by my comments. Lots of people are running around making violent threats about what they'd do if they found a 'man' in the ladies room. Its only a matter of time before someone gets hurt.

So what should be the penalty if someone gets it wrong? Of course no man who assaults a woman is going to see jail time if that person looks trans.

(05-18-2016 01:44 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(05-18-2016 01:39 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(05-18-2016 01:37 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(05-18-2016 01:34 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(05-18-2016 01:04 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  The loaded language you continue to utilize is ridiculous.

And so is the notion that pervs everywhere are suddenly going to start dressing like transgendered people to try and catch a glimpse of some chick taking a dump.

The loaded language you continue to utilize is ridiculous.

Let's be honest here. People on both sides of the issue are over exaggerating. In the end, it's not going to make much of a difference.

I'm sure you and I have both urinated next to a trans gendered person before and never even noticed.

Given the fact that 0.15% of the population are transgendered males it's actually not a "for sure" thing... Though like Homosexuality the media and culture wants to overrepresnt it..

That is in no way a "fact".

Knowing full well we've heard a few, um, embellishments in your posts how do you know they aren't facts. Are you a transgender on your spare time? And that's why you keep up with all this?

Figured this to be a lie when I saw it yesterday. Could be true though. Wait and see.

And we already have laws. If someone screwed up and assaulted a women mistakenly or not, charge them. What's the problem.

(05-18-2016 01:45 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  I stand by my comments.

Then your comments will carry less and less weight here, everyday.

(05-18-2016 01:45 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Lots of people are running around making violent threats about what they'd do if they found a 'man' in the ladies room. Its only a matter of time before someone gets hurt.

Since that is ALWAYS possible, not probable but possible, why don’t we just throw entire legal system out the window, disband police force and let the Army patrol our streets?

(05-18-2016 01:45 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Of course no man who assaults a woman is going to see jail time if that person looks trans.

Again, with the hyperbole.

(05-18-2016 01:44 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(05-18-2016 01:39 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(05-18-2016 01:37 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(05-18-2016 01:34 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(05-18-2016 01:04 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  The loaded language you continue to utilize is ridiculous.

And so is the notion that pervs everywhere are suddenly going to start dressing like transgendered people to try and catch a glimpse of some chick taking a dump.

The loaded language you continue to utilize is ridiculous.

Let's be honest here. People on both sides of the issue are over exaggerating. In the end, it's not going to make much of a difference.

I'm sure you and I have both urinated next to a trans gendered person before and never even noticed.

Given the fact that 0.15% of the population are transgendered males it's actually not a "for sure" thing... Though like Homosexuality the media and culture wants to overrepresnt it..

Do you have a link for that?

Your google not work?

(05-18-2016 02:43 PM)Paul M Wrote:  Your google not work?

I don't need to even google it to know that it's false.

(05-18-2016 01:53 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-18-2016 01:44 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(05-18-2016 01:39 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(05-18-2016 01:37 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(05-18-2016 01:34 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  And so is the notion that pervs everywhere are suddenly going to start dressing like transgendered people to try and catch a glimpse of some chick taking a dump.

The loaded language you continue to utilize is ridiculous.

Let's be honest here. People on both sides of the issue are over exaggerating. In the end, it's not going to make much of a difference.

I'm sure you and I have both urinated next to a trans gendered person before and never even noticed.

Given the fact that 0.15% of the population are transgendered males it's actually not a "for sure" thing... Though like Homosexuality the media and culture wants to overrepresnt it..

That is in no way a "fact".

You're right, it's probably even less than that based on this US census study.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=...Sg&cad=rja

Quote:This paper presents a novel method for identifying likely transgender individuals in federal administrative files and learning about some of their basic characteristics. When transgender individuals file a claim to legally change their first names, their sex-coding, or both with the SSA, a record of that transaction is created. By sorting through hundreds of millions of claim records from 1936 to 2010, I am able to identify individuals who changed their names from strongly feminine to strongly masculine names(or vice versa) and also changed their sex-coding in the same direction. I am able to identify 135,367 individuals who are likely to be transgender. Of these, 89,667 were alive during the 2010 Census. Probability record linkage techniques allow the persons in the SSA Numident to be linked to their responses to questions on race, Hispanic origin, age, sex, and residential location in the Census."

Say half of the ~90,000 are "males."
45,000 / 300,000,000 = 0.015%

(05-18-2016 02:48 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  

(05-18-2016 01:53 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-18-2016 01:44 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(05-18-2016 01:39 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(05-18-2016 01:37 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  The loaded language you continue to utilize is ridiculous.

Let's be honest here. People on both sides of the issue are over exaggerating. In the end, it's not going to make much of a difference.

I'm sure you and I have both urinated next to a trans gendered person before and never even noticed.

Given the fact that 0.15% of the population are transgendered males it's actually not a "for sure" thing... Though like Homosexuality the media and culture wants to overrepresnt it..

That is in no way a "fact".

You're right, it's probably even less than that based on this US census study.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=...Sg&cad=rja

Quote:This paper presents a novel method for identifying likely transgender individuals in federal administrative files and learning about some of their basic characteristics. When transgender individuals file a claim to legally change their first names, their sex-coding, or both with the SSA, a record of that transaction is created. By sorting through hundreds of millions of claim records from 1936 to 2010, I am able to identify individuals who changed their names from strongly feminine to strongly masculine names(or vice versa) and also changed their sex-coding in the same direction. I am able to identify 135,367 individuals who are likely to be transgender. Of these, 89,667 were alive during the 2010 Census. Probability record linkage techniques allow the persons in the SSA Numident to be linked to their responses to questions on race, Hispanic origin, age, sex, and residential location in the Census."

Say half of the ~90,000 are "males."
45,000 / 300,000,000 = 0.015%

Did you even read the Title of the "study":lmfao:

(05-18-2016 02:45 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(05-18-2016 02:43 PM)Paul M Wrote:  Your google not work?

I don't need to even google it to know that it's false.

You got a link for that.

Lyin' Tranny!!!

(05-18-2016 02:55 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(05-18-2016 02:48 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  

(05-18-2016 01:53 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-18-2016 01:44 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(05-18-2016 01:39 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Let's be honest here. People on both sides of the issue are over exaggerating. In the end, it's not going to make much of a difference.

I'm sure you and I have both urinated next to a trans gendered person before and never even noticed.

Given the fact that 0.15% of the population are transgendered males it's actually not a "for sure" thing... Though like Homosexuality the media and culture wants to overrepresnt it..

That is in no way a "fact".

You're right, it's probably even less than that based on this US census study.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=...Sg&cad=rja

Quote:This paper presents a novel method for identifying likely transgender individuals in federal administrative files and learning about some of their basic characteristics. When transgender individuals file a claim to legally change their first names, their sex-coding, or both with the SSA, a record of that transaction is created. By sorting through hundreds of millions of claim records from 1936 to 2010, I am able to identify individuals who changed their names from strongly feminine to strongly masculine names(or vice versa) and also changed their sex-coding in the same direction. I am able to identify 135,367 individuals who are likely to be transgender. Of these, 89,667 were alive during the 2010 Census. Probability record linkage techniques allow the persons in the SSA Numident to be linked to their responses to questions on race, Hispanic origin, age, sex, and residential location in the Census."

Say half of the ~90,000 are "males."
45,000 / 300,000,000 = 0.015%

Did you even read the Title of the "study":lmfao:

Sure did. Did you read anything else?

(05-18-2016 03:02 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  

(05-18-2016 02:55 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(05-18-2016 02:48 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  

(05-18-2016 01:53 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-18-2016 01:44 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  Given the fact that 0.15% of the population are transgendered males it's actually not a "for sure" thing... Though like Homosexuality the media and culture wants to overrepresnt it..

That is in no way a "fact".

You're right, it's probably even less than that based on this US census study.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=...Sg&cad=rja

Quote:This paper presents a novel method for identifying likely transgender individuals in federal administrative files and learning about some of their basic characteristics. When transgender individuals file a claim to legally change their first names, their sex-coding, or both with the SSA, a record of that transaction is created. By sorting through hundreds of millions of claim records from 1936 to 2010, I am able to identify individuals who changed their names from strongly feminine to strongly masculine names(or vice versa) and also changed their sex-coding in the same direction. I am able to identify 135,367 individuals who are likely to be transgender. Of these, 89,667 were alive during the 2010 Census. Probability record linkage techniques allow the persons in the SSA Numident to be linked to their responses to questions on race, Hispanic origin, age, sex, and residential location in the Census."

Say half of the ~90,000 are "males."
45,000 / 300,000,000 = 0.015%

Did you even read the Title of the "study":lmfao:

Sure did. Did you read anything else?

I sure did. Did you? And if so, you still think this is an accurate estimate?

Thanks for verifying what others have implied.

Dude, the study looked at whether names were changed to names that sounded either masculine or feminine. Hardly evidence of anything...not to mention extremely subjective.

(05-18-2016 03:18 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Dude, the study looked at whether names were changed to names that sounded either masculine or feminine. Hardly evidence of anything...not to mention extremely subjective.

Not according to Him/Her

(05-18-2016 03:18 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Dude, the study looked at whether names were changed to names that sounded either masculine or feminine. Hardly evidence of anything...not to mention extremely subjective.

Name, sex coding or both. I challenge you to find better #'s. Either way, it will be microscopic.