Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
How will "Bathroom Bills" impact college sports?
Author Message
10thMountain Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,560
Joined: Jan 2008
Reputation: 255
I Root For: A&M, TCU
Location:
Post: #81
RE: How will "Bathroom Bills" impact college sports?
I love Cali Hypocrisy

"Follow our state laws or else we'll boycott you....but openly flaunting and defying national immigration laws WE don't like is noble and just!"

Everyone's the hero in their own minds
(This post was last modified: 03-14-2018 03:19 PM by 10thMountain.)
03-14-2018 03:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
IWokeUpLikeThis Online
1st String
*

Posts: 2,060
Joined: Jul 2014
Reputation: 69
I Root For: NIU, Chicago St
Location: South Side
Post: #82
RE: How will "Bathroom Bills" impact college sports?
(03-14-2018 01:31 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Guys, some of these bills authorize the denial of HEALTH care to someone because they are Trans or in a same sex marriage. Pretty much all of them authorize the denial of a meal in a restaurant, a hotel room, a job, entry into a facility, SOLELY because of the persons status as LGBT.

Mississippi's bill actually mandates that female to male Trans persons (e.g, post surgery, with facial hair etc) to use the WOMEN'S restroom at Mississippi State's football games. Do you really want someone to test the law, simply by complying with it (say at about the 2 minutes to halftime mark by just lining up in the womens restroom line) and seeing how that goes? Sounds like a trap for your schools. Anything happens to him (including nasty comments) and there will be REAL ban on playing there and the NCAA would have to get involved. And it wouldn't be in Mississippi States favor. All hell will break loose if you guys attempt to have some sort of meeting to decide what is an 'acceptable' solution without the participation of the LGBT community. About 10 states would institute bans on travel and playing and they would be like NY's ban (which doesn't authorize as many work arounds as California's does).

And to be honest, its really a no loss situation for the LGBT community. We don't have any real participation in collegiate athletics. Our concerns have been completely ignored. And as a result, we don't really care what happens to institutions that exclude us.

One of my favorite things about college football and hoops is the rare instances I see LGBT people in the stands. Sports are for everyone!
03-14-2018 06:13 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
billybobby777 Offline
Fighting the cartel 5
*

Posts: 9,455
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 349
I Root For: ECU, Army
Location: Houston dont sleepon
Post: #83
RE: How will "Bathroom Bills" impact college sports?
I hope California gets its bluff called by doing this!
Cal: Hey Alabama, change your laws or we won't play you!
Alabama: Y'all play football?
03-14-2018 07:13 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
58-56 Offline
Blazer Revolutionary
*

Posts: 11,698
Joined: Mar 2006
Reputation: 507
I Root For: Fire Ray Watts
Location: CathedraloftheDragon

BlazerTalk Award
Post: #84
RE: How will "Bathroom Bills" impact college sports?
(03-14-2018 07:13 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  I hope California gets its bluff called by doing this!
Cal: Hey Alabama, change your laws or we won't play you!
Alabama: Y'all play football?

Alabama's version, entered by the exquisitely moronic Phil Williams (who backstabbed #FreeUAB), did not pass. One whisper of "maht hurt fooobaw" and the Legislature would paint themselves in rainbow stripes, guzzle mai-tais and binge-watch Sex In The City.

There is no higher priority in this state - be it guns, God or gays - than assuring Nick Saban's next pay increase.
03-14-2018 07:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Jjoey52 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,372
Joined: Feb 2017
Reputation: 87
I Root For: ISU
Location:
Post: #85
How will "Bathroom Bills" impact college sports?
(03-13-2018 05:16 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  
(03-13-2018 03:06 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  
(03-13-2018 01:15 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Understand that the lack of consensus and respect for a certain community is precisely how we got here. And why this might get worse moving forward.

The ability of LGBT persons to participate in college athletics might not be important to you, or to the people who largely run collegiate athletics....but it is important to a sizeable portion of the owners of some of these programs (the taxpayers). This is what happens when straight/cis people 'decide' what is acceptable for LGBT people , without the input of the targeted minority (e.g., LGBT people). None of the bathroom bills (or the Mississippi HB 1523, which authorizes wholescale discrimination in healthcare and public accommodations) took into account any concerns of the LGBT community.

So the LGBT community is going to use the levers open to them. They could care less about where CSUB plays basketball, or if they play basketball at all. Or where or if SDSU plays football. And that's the problem of those programs too. The only interaction the LGBT community has with those programs is usually at the receiving end of a big fat bill to pay for programs that largely (or completely) exclude them. The smart move would be for programs to ramp up LGBT inclusion (most have 0% inclusion and have never had any inclusion).

I didn't say it was unimportant. What I said is these "you must ban them from the bathrooms" and "you must let them in the bathroom of their choice" and if you don't agree with me we are at war things are flat out stupid.

The numbers are VERY SMALL. Maybe 1 or 2 kids in a typical HS of 2000 or so kids, and those participating in sports even smaller.

Forcing a decision on any issue without broad consensus is flat out stupid. I think bathroom inclusion and bathroom ban bills are stupid. We have not figured out as a culture how we want to deal with it. So we should leave a lot of space to allow innovation and various alternatives to figure this out.

Look it would be best if we did not sexualize breasts so much, and the bathroom in general. Japan prior to American and Western cultural pressure, basically had public baths (which were also bathrooms) with mixed genders without the sexual interaction. So that showed it was possible to have culture that did not have sex associated with the bathroom. Of course that is dead in Japan for a couple generations.

And the trend line worldwide, especially with Muslim pressure (Europe and Australia) is toward stronger gender separation. It's hard not to notice that in the UK or France (topless sunbathing is basically gone and the fight is over whether to allow Burkinis or not while there is growing pressure to gender segregate grows). The US will be very much alone in a couple decades.

I mostly think it's much about nothing on both sides. It's ideological rather than practical. Rigid rules for bathrooms make no sense, either for inclusion or exclusion. Morals change all the time.

It's like the issue in the military. I think it's fine to not accept transgender, because the cost of surgery is very high, and the out of action time very long. It makes no sense in a typical 4 year contract. And it has no impact on recruiting. I laughed at the protests in San Francisco, and asked the organizers a simple question (including two I am friends with in the media), "how many of the Bay Area transgender went to the recruiting office to sign up for the military" ... the answer was zero, "it's the principle." No it's not, politics is about the practical, not the esoteric. Religion and philosophy are for the esoteric.

My basic point is such bills both "inclusive" and "exclusive" are not meant to have a conversation, they are meant to be a club to beat your opponents over the head with. They are fascist. I say that about both the California and Texas bills. Both are fascist clubs.

These bathroom bills commonly allow for wholesale discrimination against LGBT persons. Not just a bathroom. Hotel rooms, hospital rooms, restaurants, etc. Mississippi just passed a bill authorizing hospitals to refuse to treat Trans or married Gays. The states of California and New York shouldn't export LGBT persons to discriminatory states so they can be subjected to discrimination. I'd argue that it is actually DANGEROUS to send a LGBT person to Mississippi, because the state legislature has just affirmed turning away LGBT persons from medical care.

Again, the college athletics group hasn't seen it to be a problem that there has been only 1 person in the history of FBS to ever play a down in college football as an openly Gay player. There's never been an openly Gay football operations employee - ever. There's been exactly 2 high ranking athletic department employees - ever. I wouldn't expect them to care very much about our concerns. They aren't facing the discrimination. And quite frankly, there doesn't seem to be any participation by LGBT persons in those decisions anyway.

All we get from this is a big fat bill for the substantial expense of these programs. Now they want us to be humiliated to attend away games of the programs were paying significant amounts for.

Either discrimination is okay, or its not. But know that no matter how much people who don't face discrimination think that the very real discrimination we face is irrelevant, that we feel it to be very relevant. And we will use any lever we can to fight that discrimination. And if it causes some splatter on a group that has ignored our concerns and has either deliberately or negligently discriminated against us for decades, then why should we care?


You were born, except in very rare cases, male or female, go to the bathroom of the gender born with. Case closed, issue resolved.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
03-14-2018 09:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
domer1978 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,552
Joined: Sep 2012
Reputation: 101
I Root For: Notre Dame
Location: Tennessee
Post: #86
RE: How will "Bathroom Bills" impact college sports?
(03-14-2018 09:36 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  
(03-13-2018 05:16 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  
(03-13-2018 03:06 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  
(03-13-2018 01:15 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Understand that the lack of consensus and respect for a certain community is precisely how we got here. And why this might get worse moving forward.

The ability of LGBT persons to participate in college athletics might not be important to you, or to the people who largely run collegiate athletics....but it is important to a sizeable portion of the owners of some of these programs (the taxpayers). This is what happens when straight/cis people 'decide' what is acceptable for LGBT people , without the input of the targeted minority (e.g., LGBT people). None of the bathroom bills (or the Mississippi HB 1523, which authorizes wholescale discrimination in healthcare and public accommodations) took into account any concerns of the LGBT community.

So the LGBT community is going to use the levers open to them. They could care less about where CSUB plays basketball, or if they play basketball at all. Or where or if SDSU plays football. And that's the problem of those programs too. The only interaction the LGBT community has with those programs is usually at the receiving end of a big fat bill to pay for programs that largely (or completely) exclude them. The smart move would be for programs to ramp up LGBT inclusion (most have 0% inclusion and have never had any inclusion).

I didn't say it was unimportant. What I said is these "you must ban them from the bathrooms" and "you must let them in the bathroom of their choice" and if you don't agree with me we are at war things are flat out stupid.

The numbers are VERY SMALL. Maybe 1 or 2 kids in a typical HS of 2000 or so kids, and those participating in sports even smaller.

Forcing a decision on any issue without broad consensus is flat out stupid. I think bathroom inclusion and bathroom ban bills are stupid. We have not figured out as a culture how we want to deal with it. So we should leave a lot of space to allow innovation and various alternatives to figure this out.

Look it would be best if we did not sexualize breasts so much, and the bathroom in general. Japan prior to American and Western cultural pressure, basically had public baths (which were also bathrooms) with mixed genders without the sexual interaction. So that showed it was possible to have culture that did not have sex associated with the bathroom. Of course that is dead in Japan for a couple generations.

And the trend line worldwide, especially with Muslim pressure (Europe and Australia) is toward stronger gender separation. It's hard not to notice that in the UK or France (topless sunbathing is basically gone and the fight is over whether to allow Burkinis or not while there is growing pressure to gender segregate grows). The US will be very much alone in a couple decades.

I mostly think it's much about nothing on both sides. It's ideological rather than practical. Rigid rules for bathrooms make no sense, either for inclusion or exclusion. Morals change all the time.

It's like the issue in the military. I think it's fine to not accept transgender, because the cost of surgery is very high, and the out of action time very long. It makes no sense in a typical 4 year contract. And it has no impact on recruiting. I laughed at the protests in San Francisco, and asked the organizers a simple question (including two I am friends with in the media), "how many of the Bay Area transgender went to the recruiting office to sign up for the military" ... the answer was zero, "it's the principle." No it's not, politics is about the practical, not the esoteric. Religion and philosophy are for the esoteric.

My basic point is such bills both "inclusive" and "exclusive" are not meant to have a conversation, they are meant to be a club to beat your opponents over the head with. They are fascist. I say that about both the California and Texas bills. Both are fascist clubs.

These bathroom bills commonly allow for wholesale discrimination against LGBT persons. Not just a bathroom. Hotel rooms, hospital rooms, restaurants, etc. Mississippi just passed a bill authorizing hospitals to refuse to treat Trans or married Gays. The states of California and New York shouldn't export LGBT persons to discriminatory states so they can be subjected to discrimination. I'd argue that it is actually DANGEROUS to send a LGBT person to Mississippi, because the state legislature has just affirmed turning away LGBT persons from medical care.

Again, the college athletics group hasn't seen it to be a problem that there has been only 1 person in the history of FBS to ever play a down in college football as an openly Gay player. There's never been an openly Gay football operations employee - ever. There's been exactly 2 high ranking athletic department employees - ever. I wouldn't expect them to care very much about our concerns. They aren't facing the discrimination. And quite frankly, there doesn't seem to be any participation by LGBT persons in those decisions anyway.

All we get from this is a big fat bill for the substantial expense of these programs. Now they want us to be humiliated to attend away games of the programs were paying significant amounts for.

Either discrimination is okay, or its not. But know that no matter how much people who don't face discrimination think that the very real discrimination we face is irrelevant, that we feel it to be very relevant. And we will use any lever we can to fight that discrimination. And if it causes some splatter on a group that has ignored our concerns and has either deliberately or negligently discriminated against us for decades, then why should we care?


You were born, except in very rare cases, male or female, go to the bathroom of the gender born with. Case closed, issue resolved.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Too complicated....COGS
03-14-2018 09:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 16,141
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 868
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #87
RE: How will "Bathroom Bills" impact college sports?
(02-06-2017 07:31 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  First, please don't debate whether so-called "bathroom bills" are right or wrong, or if California is right/wrong on prohibiting travel to these states. I don't want this thread to end up in the Spin Room. I want to discuss how this affects college sports.


California has banned any "STATE-FUNDED AND STATE-SPONSORED TRAVEL" to states with transgender bathroom bills. I have confirmed that this includes any travel by any university representative that will be reimbursed by any source affiliated with the university (including the endowment or other private donors arranged through the school). To my knowledge, this includes the sports team of any state-sponsored university.

As of now, the list of banned states is Tennessee, Kansas, Mississippi, and North Carolina. Also, a dozen more states (including Washington and Wyoming) have introduced "bathroom bills" to their legislatures this year.

If Washington or Wyoming pass their bathroom bills, this means that conference games will have to be canceled for Cal & UCLA or for San Diego State, Fresno State, and San Jose State. Could this cause more conference reallignment? Or will the state schools in Washington/Wyoming (or whoever else passes a bathroom bill) abandon their right to home conference games?

I hope everyone keeps it civil.

Bathroom Bills always create tons of needless paper work because the urge of the moment circumvents common sense leaving all of us with more crap to deal with. It's time that government got out of the bathrooms altogether and let proprietors decide what is or is not a seemly usage of their facilities. Then consumers could patronize the facilities that they find appropriate.
03-14-2018 10:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 16,141
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 868
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #88
RE: How will "Bathroom Bills" impact college sports?
(03-14-2018 09:54 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  
(03-14-2018 09:36 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  
(03-13-2018 05:16 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  
(03-13-2018 03:06 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  
(03-13-2018 01:15 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Understand that the lack of consensus and respect for a certain community is precisely how we got here. And why this might get worse moving forward.

The ability of LGBT persons to participate in college athletics might not be important to you, or to the people who largely run collegiate athletics....but it is important to a sizeable portion of the owners of some of these programs (the taxpayers). This is what happens when straight/cis people 'decide' what is acceptable for LGBT people , without the input of the targeted minority (e.g., LGBT people). None of the bathroom bills (or the Mississippi HB 1523, which authorizes wholescale discrimination in healthcare and public accommodations) took into account any concerns of the LGBT community.

So the LGBT community is going to use the levers open to them. They could care less about where CSUB plays basketball, or if they play basketball at all. Or where or if SDSU plays football. And that's the problem of those programs too. The only interaction the LGBT community has with those programs is usually at the receiving end of a big fat bill to pay for programs that largely (or completely) exclude them. The smart move would be for programs to ramp up LGBT inclusion (most have 0% inclusion and have never had any inclusion).

I didn't say it was unimportant. What I said is these "you must ban them from the bathrooms" and "you must let them in the bathroom of their choice" and if you don't agree with me we are at war things are flat out stupid.

The numbers are VERY SMALL. Maybe 1 or 2 kids in a typical HS of 2000 or so kids, and those participating in sports even smaller.

Forcing a decision on any issue without broad consensus is flat out stupid. I think bathroom inclusion and bathroom ban bills are stupid. We have not figured out as a culture how we want to deal with it. So we should leave a lot of space to allow innovation and various alternatives to figure this out.

Look it would be best if we did not sexualize breasts so much, and the bathroom in general. Japan prior to American and Western cultural pressure, basically had public baths (which were also bathrooms) with mixed genders without the sexual interaction. So that showed it was possible to have culture that did not have sex associated with the bathroom. Of course that is dead in Japan for a couple generations.

And the trend line worldwide, especially with Muslim pressure (Europe and Australia) is toward stronger gender separation. It's hard not to notice that in the UK or France (topless sunbathing is basically gone and the fight is over whether to allow Burkinis or not while there is growing pressure to gender segregate grows). The US will be very much alone in a couple decades.

I mostly think it's much about nothing on both sides. It's ideological rather than practical. Rigid rules for bathrooms make no sense, either for inclusion or exclusion. Morals change all the time.

It's like the issue in the military. I think it's fine to not accept transgender, because the cost of surgery is very high, and the out of action time very long. It makes no sense in a typical 4 year contract. And it has no impact on recruiting. I laughed at the protests in San Francisco, and asked the organizers a simple question (including two I am friends with in the media), "how many of the Bay Area transgender went to the recruiting office to sign up for the military" ... the answer was zero, "it's the principle." No it's not, politics is about the practical, not the esoteric. Religion and philosophy are for the esoteric.

My basic point is such bills both "inclusive" and "exclusive" are not meant to have a conversation, they are meant to be a club to beat your opponents over the head with. They are fascist. I say that about both the California and Texas bills. Both are fascist clubs.

These bathroom bills commonly allow for wholesale discrimination against LGBT persons. Not just a bathroom. Hotel rooms, hospital rooms, restaurants, etc. Mississippi just passed a bill authorizing hospitals to refuse to treat Trans or married Gays. The states of California and New York shouldn't export LGBT persons to discriminatory states so they can be subjected to discrimination. I'd argue that it is actually DANGEROUS to send a LGBT person to Mississippi, because the state legislature has just affirmed turning away LGBT persons from medical care.

Again, the college athletics group hasn't seen it to be a problem that there has been only 1 person in the history of FBS to ever play a down in college football as an openly Gay player. There's never been an openly Gay football operations employee - ever. There's been exactly 2 high ranking athletic department employees - ever. I wouldn't expect them to care very much about our concerns. They aren't facing the discrimination. And quite frankly, there doesn't seem to be any participation by LGBT persons in those decisions anyway.

All we get from this is a big fat bill for the substantial expense of these programs. Now they want us to be humiliated to attend away games of the programs were paying significant amounts for.

Either discrimination is okay, or its not. But know that no matter how much people who don't face discrimination think that the very real discrimination we face is irrelevant, that we feel it to be very relevant. And we will use any lever we can to fight that discrimination. And if it causes some splatter on a group that has ignored our concerns and has either deliberately or negligently discriminated against us for decades, then why should we care?


You were born, except in very rare cases, male or female, go to the bathroom of the gender born with. Case closed, issue resolved.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Too complicated....COGS

By the way, the simplest solution is to build unisex bathrooms only and have a changing room with facilities for mother's or father's with small children. Both would be lockable from the inside and it wouldn't matter who followed whom into the unisex facility.
(This post was last modified: 03-14-2018 10:14 PM by JRsec.)
03-14-2018 10:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
billybobby777 Offline
Fighting the cartel 5
*

Posts: 9,455
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 349
I Root For: ECU, Army
Location: Houston dont sleepon
Post: #89
RE: How will "Bathroom Bills" impact college sports?
(03-14-2018 10:12 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(03-14-2018 09:54 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  
(03-14-2018 09:36 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  
(03-13-2018 05:16 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  
(03-13-2018 03:06 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  I didn't say it was unimportant. What I said is these "you must ban them from the bathrooms" and "you must let them in the bathroom of their choice" and if you don't agree with me we are at war things are flat out stupid.

The numbers are VERY SMALL. Maybe 1 or 2 kids in a typical HS of 2000 or so kids, and those participating in sports even smaller.

Forcing a decision on any issue without broad consensus is flat out stupid. I think bathroom inclusion and bathroom ban bills are stupid. We have not figured out as a culture how we want to deal with it. So we should leave a lot of space to allow innovation and various alternatives to figure this out.

Look it would be best if we did not sexualize breasts so much, and the bathroom in general. Japan prior to American and Western cultural pressure, basically had public baths (which were also bathrooms) with mixed genders without the sexual interaction. So that showed it was possible to have culture that did not have sex associated with the bathroom. Of course that is dead in Japan for a couple generations.

And the trend line worldwide, especially with Muslim pressure (Europe and Australia) is toward stronger gender separation. It's hard not to notice that in the UK or France (topless sunbathing is basically gone and the fight is over whether to allow Burkinis or not while there is growing pressure to gender segregate grows). The US will be very much alone in a couple decades.

I mostly think it's much about nothing on both sides. It's ideological rather than practical. Rigid rules for bathrooms make no sense, either for inclusion or exclusion. Morals change all the time.

It's like the issue in the military. I think it's fine to not accept transgender, because the cost of surgery is very high, and the out of action time very long. It makes no sense in a typical 4 year contract. And it has no impact on recruiting. I laughed at the protests in San Francisco, and asked the organizers a simple question (including two I am friends with in the media), "how many of the Bay Area transgender went to the recruiting office to sign up for the military" ... the answer was zero, "it's the principle." No it's not, politics is about the practical, not the esoteric. Religion and philosophy are for the esoteric.

My basic point is such bills both "inclusive" and "exclusive" are not meant to have a conversation, they are meant to be a club to beat your opponents over the head with. They are fascist. I say that about both the California and Texas bills. Both are fascist clubs.

These bathroom bills commonly allow for wholesale discrimination against LGBT persons. Not just a bathroom. Hotel rooms, hospital rooms, restaurants, etc. Mississippi just passed a bill authorizing hospitals to refuse to treat Trans or married Gays. The states of California and New York shouldn't export LGBT persons to discriminatory states so they can be subjected to discrimination. I'd argue that it is actually DANGEROUS to send a LGBT person to Mississippi, because the state legislature has just affirmed turning away LGBT persons from medical care.

Again, the college athletics group hasn't seen it to be a problem that there has been only 1 person in the history of FBS to ever play a down in college football as an openly Gay player. There's never been an openly Gay football operations employee - ever. There's been exactly 2 high ranking athletic department employees - ever. I wouldn't expect them to care very much about our concerns. They aren't facing the discrimination. And quite frankly, there doesn't seem to be any participation by LGBT persons in those decisions anyway.

All we get from this is a big fat bill for the substantial expense of these programs. Now they want us to be humiliated to attend away games of the programs were paying significant amounts for.

Either discrimination is okay, or its not. But know that no matter how much people who don't face discrimination think that the very real discrimination we face is irrelevant, that we feel it to be very relevant. And we will use any lever we can to fight that discrimination. And if it causes some splatter on a group that has ignored our concerns and has either deliberately or negligently discriminated against us for decades, then why should we care?


You were born, except in very rare cases, male or female, go to the bathroom of the gender born with. Case closed, issue resolved.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Too complicated....COGS

By the way, the simplest solution is to build unisex bathrooms only and have a changing room with facilities for mother's or father's with small children. Both would be lockable from the inside and it wouldn't matter who followed whom into the unisex facility.

Yeah, but could politicians still get mad, shout, cause a problem where one wasn’t had, and raise money with your solution Sir?
03-14-2018 11:33 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 16,141
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 868
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #90
RE: How will "Bathroom Bills" impact college sports?
(03-14-2018 11:33 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  
(03-14-2018 10:12 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(03-14-2018 09:54 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  
(03-14-2018 09:36 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  
(03-13-2018 05:16 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  These bathroom bills commonly allow for wholesale discrimination against LGBT persons. Not just a bathroom. Hotel rooms, hospital rooms, restaurants, etc. Mississippi just passed a bill authorizing hospitals to refuse to treat Trans or married Gays. The states of California and New York shouldn't export LGBT persons to discriminatory states so they can be subjected to discrimination. I'd argue that it is actually DANGEROUS to send a LGBT person to Mississippi, because the state legislature has just affirmed turning away LGBT persons from medical care.

Again, the college athletics group hasn't seen it to be a problem that there has been only 1 person in the history of FBS to ever play a down in college football as an openly Gay player. There's never been an openly Gay football operations employee - ever. There's been exactly 2 high ranking athletic department employees - ever. I wouldn't expect them to care very much about our concerns. They aren't facing the discrimination. And quite frankly, there doesn't seem to be any participation by LGBT persons in those decisions anyway.

All we get from this is a big fat bill for the substantial expense of these programs. Now they want us to be humiliated to attend away games of the programs were paying significant amounts for.

Either discrimination is okay, or its not. But know that no matter how much people who don't face discrimination think that the very real discrimination we face is irrelevant, that we feel it to be very relevant. And we will use any lever we can to fight that discrimination. And if it causes some splatter on a group that has ignored our concerns and has either deliberately or negligently discriminated against us for decades, then why should we care?


You were born, except in very rare cases, male or female, go to the bathroom of the gender born with. Case closed, issue resolved.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Too complicated....COGS

By the way, the simplest solution is to build unisex bathrooms only and have a changing room with facilities for mother's or father's with small children. Both would be lockable from the inside and it wouldn't matter who followed whom into the unisex facility.

Yeah, but could politicians still get mad, shout, cause a problem where one wasn’t had, and raise money with your solution Sir?

Well, LGBT is one thing, but nobody wants to share a bathroom with a member of Congress. The very term means they want to screw you.
03-15-2018 01:28 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Ixiah Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 30
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 6
I Root For: WSU
Location:
Post: #91
RE: How will "Bathroom Bills" impact college sports?
San Diego State was sent to Wichita Kansas for the NCAA tournament. They just had to use some accounting tricks to pay for the team to travel.

http://www.kansas.com/sports/college/art...68254.html
03-15-2018 02:16 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
XLance Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,627
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 193
I Root For: Carolina
Location:
Post: #92
RE: How will "Bathroom Bills" impact college sports?
(03-14-2018 10:12 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(03-14-2018 09:54 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  
(03-14-2018 09:36 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  
(03-13-2018 05:16 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  
(03-13-2018 03:06 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  I didn't say it was unimportant. What I said is these "you must ban them from the bathrooms" and "you must let them in the bathroom of their choice" and if you don't agree with me we are at war things are flat out stupid.

The numbers are VERY SMALL. Maybe 1 or 2 kids in a typical HS of 2000 or so kids, and those participating in sports even smaller.

Forcing a decision on any issue without broad consensus is flat out stupid. I think bathroom inclusion and bathroom ban bills are stupid. We have not figured out as a culture how we want to deal with it. So we should leave a lot of space to allow innovation and various alternatives to figure this out.

Look it would be best if we did not sexualize breasts so much, and the bathroom in general. Japan prior to American and Western cultural pressure, basically had public baths (which were also bathrooms) with mixed genders without the sexual interaction. So that showed it was possible to have culture that did not have sex associated with the bathroom. Of course that is dead in Japan for a couple generations.

And the trend line worldwide, especially with Muslim pressure (Europe and Australia) is toward stronger gender separation. It's hard not to notice that in the UK or France (topless sunbathing is basically gone and the fight is over whether to allow Burkinis or not while there is growing pressure to gender segregate grows). The US will be very much alone in a couple decades.

I mostly think it's much about nothing on both sides. It's ideological rather than practical. Rigid rules for bathrooms make no sense, either for inclusion or exclusion. Morals change all the time.

It's like the issue in the military. I think it's fine to not accept transgender, because the cost of surgery is very high, and the out of action time very long. It makes no sense in a typical 4 year contract. And it has no impact on recruiting. I laughed at the protests in San Francisco, and asked the organizers a simple question (including two I am friends with in the media), "how many of the Bay Area transgender went to the recruiting office to sign up for the military" ... the answer was zero, "it's the principle." No it's not, politics is about the practical, not the esoteric. Religion and philosophy are for the esoteric.

My basic point is such bills both "inclusive" and "exclusive" are not meant to have a conversation, they are meant to be a club to beat your opponents over the head with. They are fascist. I say that about both the California and Texas bills. Both are fascist clubs.

These bathroom bills commonly allow for wholesale discrimination against LGBT persons. Not just a bathroom. Hotel rooms, hospital rooms, restaurants, etc. Mississippi just passed a bill authorizing hospitals to refuse to treat Trans or married Gays. The states of California and New York shouldn't export LGBT persons to discriminatory states so they can be subjected to discrimination. I'd argue that it is actually DANGEROUS to send a LGBT person to Mississippi, because the state legislature has just affirmed turning away LGBT persons from medical care.

Again, the college athletics group hasn't seen it to be a problem that there has been only 1 person in the history of FBS to ever play a down in college football as an openly Gay player. There's never been an openly Gay football operations employee - ever. There's been exactly 2 high ranking athletic department employees - ever. I wouldn't expect them to care very much about our concerns. They aren't facing the discrimination. And quite frankly, there doesn't seem to be any participation by LGBT persons in those decisions anyway.

All we get from this is a big fat bill for the substantial expense of these programs. Now they want us to be humiliated to attend away games of the programs were paying significant amounts for.

Either discrimination is okay, or its not. But know that no matter how much people who don't face discrimination think that the very real discrimination we face is irrelevant, that we feel it to be very relevant. And we will use any lever we can to fight that discrimination. And if it causes some splatter on a group that has ignored our concerns and has either deliberately or negligently discriminated against us for decades, then why should we care?


You were born, except in very rare cases, male or female, go to the bathroom of the gender born with. Case closed, issue resolved.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Too complicated....COGS

By the way, the simplest solution is to build unisex bathrooms only and have a changing room with facilities for mother's or father's with small children. Both would be lockable from the inside and it wouldn't matter who followed whom into the unisex facility.

Great solution.....but too costly. Can you imagine the cost of retrofitting existing buildings/adding a third bathroom.
03-15-2018 07:14 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
58-56 Offline
Blazer Revolutionary
*

Posts: 11,698
Joined: Mar 2006
Reputation: 507
I Root For: Fire Ray Watts
Location: CathedraloftheDragon

BlazerTalk Award
Post: #93
RE: How will "Bathroom Bills" impact college sports?
(03-15-2018 01:28 AM)JRsec Wrote:  Well, LGBT is one thing, but nobody wants to share a bathroom with a member of Congress. The very term means they want to screw you.

He just had a wide stance!

Alabama's not on the list for snooping on who poops where, but for allowing adoption agencies to refuse gay parents.
03-15-2018 07:36 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Jjoey52 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,372
Joined: Feb 2017
Reputation: 87
I Root For: ISU
Location:
Post: #94
How will "Bathroom Bills" impact college sports?
(03-15-2018 07:36 AM)58-56 Wrote:  
(03-15-2018 01:28 AM)JRsec Wrote:  Well, LGBT is one thing, but nobody wants to share a bathroom with a member of Congress. The very term means they want to screw you.

He just had a wide stance!

Alabama's not on the list for snooping on who poops where, but for allowing adoption agencies to refuse gay parents.


https://youtu.be/cV1BGh6XYUU


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
03-15-2018 11:33 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 16,141
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 868
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #95
RE: How will "Bathroom Bills" impact college sports?
(03-15-2018 07:14 AM)XLance Wrote:  
(03-14-2018 10:12 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(03-14-2018 09:54 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  
(03-14-2018 09:36 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  
(03-13-2018 05:16 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  These bathroom bills commonly allow for wholesale discrimination against LGBT persons. Not just a bathroom. Hotel rooms, hospital rooms, restaurants, etc. Mississippi just passed a bill authorizing hospitals to refuse to treat Trans or married Gays. The states of California and New York shouldn't export LGBT persons to discriminatory states so they can be subjected to discrimination. I'd argue that it is actually DANGEROUS to send a LGBT person to Mississippi, because the state legislature has just affirmed turning away LGBT persons from medical care.

Again, the college athletics group hasn't seen it to be a problem that there has been only 1 person in the history of FBS to ever play a down in college football as an openly Gay player. There's never been an openly Gay football operations employee - ever. There's been exactly 2 high ranking athletic department employees - ever. I wouldn't expect them to care very much about our concerns. They aren't facing the discrimination. And quite frankly, there doesn't seem to be any participation by LGBT persons in those decisions anyway.

All we get from this is a big fat bill for the substantial expense of these programs. Now they want us to be humiliated to attend away games of the programs were paying significant amounts for.

Either discrimination is okay, or its not. But know that no matter how much people who don't face discrimination think that the very real discrimination we face is irrelevant, that we feel it to be very relevant. And we will use any lever we can to fight that discrimination. And if it causes some splatter on a group that has ignored our concerns and has either deliberately or negligently discriminated against us for decades, then why should we care?


You were born, except in very rare cases, male or female, go to the bathroom of the gender born with. Case closed, issue resolved.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Too complicated....COGS

By the way, the simplest solution is to build unisex bathrooms only and have a changing room with facilities for mother's or father's with small children. Both would be lockable from the inside and it wouldn't matter who followed whom into the unisex facility.

Great solution.....but too costly. Can you imagine the cost of retrofitting existing buildings/adding a third bathroom.

You wouldn't need to. There would be a unisex bathroom and a family room.
03-15-2018 12:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Tom in Lazybrook Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 21,166
Joined: Jul 2011
Reputation: 437
I Root For: So Alabama, GWU
Location: Houston
Post: #96
RE: How will "Bathroom Bills" impact college sports?
(03-14-2018 07:36 PM)58-56 Wrote:  
(03-14-2018 07:13 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  I hope California gets its bluff called by doing this!
Cal: Hey Alabama, change your laws or we won't play you!
Alabama: Y'all play football?

Alabama's version, entered by the exquisitely moronic Phil Williams (who backstabbed #FreeUAB), did not pass. One whisper of "maht hurt fooobaw" and the Legislature would paint themselves in rainbow stripes, guzzle mai-tais and binge-watch Sex In The City.

There is no higher priority in this state - be it guns, God or gays - than assuring Nick Saban's next pay increase.

And that's precisely why the LGBT community would be wise to use that lever. It costs them nothing to use, and is apparently a lot more effective than anything else in stopping these bills.
03-15-2018 01:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Lord Stanley Offline
L'Étoile du Nord
*

Posts: 17,707
Joined: Feb 2005
Reputation: 874
I Root For: NIU
Location: Cold. So cold......
Post: #97
RE: How will "Bathroom Bills" impact college sports?
(02-06-2017 07:31 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  First, please don't debate whether so-called "bathroom bills" are right or wrong, or if California is right/wrong on prohibiting travel to these states. I don't want this thread to end up in the Spin Room. I want to discuss how this affects college sports.

Welcome to the Spin Room! 03-lmfao
03-15-2018 02:55 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2018 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2018 MyBB Group.