The Refuge of the Toads

[AndrewV69]

I am seriously conflicted here about discovering how oppressed I am by women who refuse to share the facilities with me all because they do not want me looking at their tits ... and their other lady bits.

Why? Why do they hate all men?

[Shatterface]

I am sorry but if I can protect my daughters simply by splitting bathrooms, which most already are anyway, then I am all for it.

Yes children should have a safe space.

How adorably paternalistic.

Ok, confirmed: you're being a cunt.

'Paternalism' is just acting like a father.

[Shatterface]

Just watched Superman v Batman.

Loved it. But then I am a 300 and Sucker Punch fan too.

Pathetic guy in front had to check his SMS's to fill the time between CGI sequences. Meh.

You can quietly stop them checking their texts with a length of cheese wire.

[Shatterface]

On the men at home without a urinal thing - seat up or down when you leave? I admit to having no idea how men feel about the urinal thing. I did once go out with a guy who spent ages in the public loos, and he explained it was because he hated using urinals so he often had to wait for a stall and men's loos don't get as many stalls as the women's do.

I leave them up now but when I was together with the wife I would put it back down. My oldest son has a problem aiming and will just piss on the seat. Thus I have suggested that everyone leave the seats up because try as he might he can't remember to lift the seat.

If I every buy a home I am installing a urinal. Or just pissing out the back door.

If you need the seat up, leave it up. If you need it down, leave it down. That way, on average, the person with the weakest bladder will find the seat in the position they want more often.

Of course, toilets are based on outmoded prejudice regarding digestion.

As skeptics we should move beyond such biological processes and adopt photosynthesis.

Either that or just hold it in till we get home.

[rayshul]

I've never lived in a house where the seat is left up and once a male friend came over and left the seat up and I was so confused by the situation I just stared at the toilet seat for like a minute going how did that happen what is with the world how is this real

[Soapy Stevens]

I leave them up now but when I was together with the wife I would put it back down. My oldest son has a problem aiming and will just piss on the seat. Thus I have suggested that everyone leave the seats up because try as he might he can't remember to lift the seat.

If there is a woman in the house, there is only one correct configuration: the seat will be down. No other state is acceptable. Why? Educate yourself.

[feathers]

The last gym shower I used looked like this.

https://dancpharmd.files.wordpress.com/ ... shower.jpg

I'd avoid that, as I don't like mixing with other naked people of any sex. I take segregation to the individual level. I want my own private shower.

[Tribble]

I see a lot of Sanders supporters trying to convince themselves that Sanders is Obama, and he's going to pull through and beat Hillary. Its perplexing to me, because the similarities between this year's election and 2008 are only superficial. Clinton has led Sanders the entire election, and he's never been that close to catching her. Sanders doesn't have Obama's appeal across demographics either - he wins caucuses and states that have a high percentages of white people and working class people.

What Sanders supporters share with obama 2008 supporters is, both sets believe in The Messiah.

No. It's probably more along the lines of 'He is not Hillary Clinton.'

[Brive1987]

Thinking about Mykeru and his copyright problems. I ran up the proof of concept below. It would help if she wouldn't smile in all her photos.

Com - do you reckon an approach like this would do the trick?

[youtube]RP0iZwo6mC4[/youtube]

[HunnyBunny]

Greenparty feminists support women by eradicating them. Well done. Because apparently it is fundamentally wrong to leave out non-binary folk and men in dresses, and removing women as a class is much more inclusive. :roll:

You would never guess that Greenparty 'feminists' are headed up by exmen like the blockbot's former blocker @AuntySarah.

[Tribble]

I wrote a post about 10 months ago responding to a comment in which Steersman compared Islam to Nazism. I tried to compare the number of terroristic murders committed by Muslims in the US to similar <b>crimes committed by Neo Nazis, and then compare them to the size of the groups. </b>I found a lot fewer Muslims as a percentage committing violence than Nazis. If you are interested in reading that, then you can find it here (.viewtopic.php?f=31&t=429&start=46947).

Your train of logic failed right there. Muslim is a broad, expansive category. Neo-Nazi's are a small, self-selected group and are classified as a Christian Identity Hate Group just as Muslim terrorists/supporters are small, self-selected sub-group of Muslims. So you should have used Christians vs Muslims. Or Neo-Nazi's vs Al Queyda. But not Muslims vs Neo-Nazis.

[Hunt]

The last gym shower I used looked like this.

https://dancpharmd.files.wordpress.com/ ... shower.jpg

I'd avoid that, as I don't like mixing with other naked people of any sex. I take segregation to the individual level. I want my own private shower.

That looks exactly like the shower at a community college I used to attend. I would start getting uncomfortable if there were even a single other person using it with me. I've always secretly envied men who can disrobe, casually saunter into places like that, dick swinging back and forth, without giving it a second thought. I entirely commiserate with any gender unfortable with public nudity. Where I draw the line is with public defecation/stall-less toilets, or the short wall toilet stall. I will never defecate in a place viewable by others. I will explode by internal compression before doing it.

[HunnyBunny]

Just to reiterate the greenparty position. If you are a woman, calling you a woman is discriminating against men who dont feel like men, so we should stop using the word woman to refer to women and call then non-men instead. If you are a man who feels like a woman, calling you a woman is inclusive.

[Shatterface]

So we're do transmen fit into the non-men spectrum?

[Shatterface]

The last gym shower I used looked like this.

https://dancpharmd.files.wordpress.com/ ... shower.jpg

I'd avoid that, as I don't like mixing with other naked people of any sex. I take segregation to the individual level. I want my own private shower.

That looks exactly like the shower at a community college I used to attend. I would start getting uncomfortable if there were even a single other person using it with me. I've always secretly envied men who can disrobe, casually saunter into places like that, dick swinging back and forth, without giving it a second thought. I entirely commiserate with any gender unfortable with public nudity. Where I draw the line is with public defecation/stall-less toilets, or the short wall toilet stall. I will never defecate in a place viewable by others. I will explode by internal compression before doing it.

Dim the lighting and add a few chains and hooks and it looks like where the cenobites live in Hellraiser

[johnself]

If you live in the US interesting possibilities are opening up. From http://freethoughtblogs.com/carrier/arc ... 17#respond

"I am moving to Columbus, Ohio, for good and all this May (2016). And I’m taking a moving truck and towing my car all the way across country from my current and soon past home in Stockton, California, with the assist of some of my girlfriends as relief drivers on different legs of the trip"

How, you might wonder, can you be a part of this?

So anyone who lives in or near those three places and wants to see me make an appearance on the respective date, I’d appreciate any help you can offer to make something happen. (...) For Indianapolis, maybe the best plan would be if there is already a large enough gathering of interested atheists for a Memorial Day party (at least thirty or so!), I could just show up and join you all.

Sounds straight-forward, if there is a gathering Carrier would not mind an invitation. Anything else?

As long as I can publicly announce the location, sell books at it, and there’s any alcohol

That sounds reasonable. Any dietary requirements?

other than beer,

What else?

All the better if you have a place my girlfriend and I can crash for the night (not a requirement, just a hope).

...the van is after all quite roomy and she says she is used to sleep in trucks.

For Denver, I can make anything along the I-25 that’s en route to KC (...). Surely some group out there wants to be in on this historic(ity) event!

I don't live in Denver, but surely if we only need to find 30 people, a place where books can be sold and some alcohol different than beer then---

If you want me to deliver a lecture, my only charge is $200

But there is also a free option:

If it’s a party, and I don’t have to work, it’s free (see Indianapolis above for requirements).

Imagine that! Carrier can come to your party FOR FREE

And I am also looking for anyone with a guest room for my girlfriend and I to stay that night.

Unclear what alcohol should be served.

[d4m10n]

The last gym shower I used looked like this.

https://dancpharmd.files.wordpress.com/ ... shower.jpg

I'd avoid that, as I don't like mixing with other naked people of any sex. I take segregation to the individual level. I want my own private shower.

I went to a military academy long ago, where everyone was expected to shower together in a rectangular open bay every day. The freshmen took awhile to adjust, but the seniors didn't think anything of it. When they finally installed partitions and curtains, only the underclassmen used them at first. Which is all to say that people are nothing like robots, we can acclimate to different levels of privacy over time. Which isn't to say that the coed open showers of Starship Troopers or BSG are likely to be implemented anytime soon.

I think the open showers/changing room question is the hardest one here, especially compared to partitioned toilets. For each one of these separate issues (showers, locker rooms, toilets, classrooms, lecture halls) I'd like to see an argument for adult sex-segregation that goes beyond mere subjective discomfort with the presence of the opposite sex.

The notion that women are delicate flowers that must be kept safe and apart from males makes sense from a Victorian Englishman or an Wahhabist Imam, but I don't think we should design and build it into the modern world without some explicit rational basis.

[Guestus Aurelius]

I think the open showers/changing room question is the hardest one here, especially compared to partitioned toilets. For each one of these separate issues (showers, locker rooms, toilets, classrooms, lecture halls) I'd like to see an argument for adult sex-segregation that goes beyond mere subjective discomfort with the presence of the opposite sex.

Isn't "subjective discomfort" the main reason that showers, locker rooms, and toilets have been sex-segregated this whole time?

Honestly not sure where I come down on the trans*/bathroom issue. What bothers me is the line that SJWs have been successfully pushing, that there's nothing to debate.

That controversial North Carolina law seems pretty shitty from what I've read, but at least it was made by a democratically elected body. There was a case a few months back where some unelected SJW schmucks at the Office for Civil Rights decided that a high school in Chicago had violated a trans* student's rights (Title IX) by trying to accommodate her without discomforting the other girls. Failure to comply with the OCR's judgment could have meant losing $6 million in federal funding: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/mor ... cker-room/

This is lunacy. The creeping authoritarianism worries me much more than a bad state law does. Bad laws can be fixed or repealed.

[Shatterface]

I went to a military academy long ago, where everyone was expected to shower together in a rectangular open bay every day. The freshmen took awhile to adjust, but the seniors didn't think anything of it. When they finally installed partitions and curtains, only the underclassmen used them at first. Which is all to say that people are nothing like robots, we can acclimate to different levels of privacy over time. Which isn't to say that the coed open showers of Starship Troopers or BSG are likely to be implemented anytime soon.

I think the open showers/changing room question is the hardest one here, especially compared to partitioned toilets. For each one of these separate issues (showers, locker rooms, toilets, classrooms, lecture halls) I'd like to see an argument for adult sex-segregation that goes beyond mere subjective discomfort with the presence of the opposite sex.

The notion that women are delicate flowers that must be kept safe and apart from males makes sense from a Victorian Englishman or an Wahhabist Imam, but I don't think we should design and build it into the modern world without some explicit rational basis.

Fuck off with the retarded 'parallels' with Wahabism.

Wahabism is a genuinely mysogynistic creed which segregates men and women to enforce uniqual power relationships.

It confines women to the domestic sphere and excludes them from public places.

The term segregation is entirely applicable to social policies which discriminate against women.

I'm still waiting for someone to explain why seperate toilets for men and women disadvantages women - or men, for that matter.

As to 'subjective feelings' can you explain why we should dismiss the wishes of the overwhelming majority of men and women as irrelevant? If we abolish seperate toilets because 'subjective feelings' are irrelevant why not abolish cubicles too?

What 'function' do they perform? Why don't we just shit in open rows?

And are you really holding Starship Troopers up as a model for society?

[John D]

While we are on the subject of toilets I will bore youall with a story.

I was backpacking with my brothers and a few friends at Mt. Rainier. It had been raining for over 24 hours and everything we had was soaked. The prior nights rain was so strong that water rose over the sides of my tent and I slept in standing water. Our packs where super heavy cause of the water and we hiked many miles taking on altitude. We were disgusted, hot, and wet. Eventually, the weather became perfect and as we rose up the trail we could see the tip of the mountain and a glacier came into view next to us. The sun started to dry us off and we could watch the rocks dropping out of the glacier into the crevasse. A hiker passed us going down hill and asked if we were staying in the next camp. We said yes so he told us that it has the BEST TOILET ON EARTH. We all laughed not knowing how there can be a great toilet.

So we unpacked in camp. We warmed in the sun and our gear was laid out to dry. A perfect moment. A glacier, nice dry sun, Mt. Rainier. I was the first to use the toilet.... and the other hiker was correct. The toilet was a simple pot and seat with no walls. The waste was contained by a special tank because there was no way to even dig a hole. It was placed six feet from the edge of the cliff. There was no one in view since it was a distance from camp or trail. As you sat to do your work, you had a full view of the glacier in front of you. The glacier rose above you across the crevasse. It was light blue with water and rock falling off it. To your left was the snow capped top of Mt. Rainier. It was the best toilet on earth... and... it was unisex. No one could complain. the BEST TOILET ON EARTH.

[feathers]

Dim the lighting and add a few chains and hooks and it looks like where the cenobites live in Hellraiser

*cough*auschwitz*cough*

[Service Dog]

Shared Parenting bill vetoed in Florida, after National Organization of Women lobby against equality:

[Matt Cavanaugh]

And men don't want to lose the convenience of peeing at a urinal.

Hell, I want the trough back.

Would you gladly share it with Zinnia?

Of course. Zinnia is a man.

[Aneris]

Facebook has closed accounts of some atheists.

Anyhow, JT Eberhard, myself, and Seth all admin The Thinking Atheist Facebook Page, which is literally one of the most easy going atheist pages on Facebook. This is the only social media page where the three of us overlap. At the same time this morning, about 10:30am Central, all three of us had our personal accounts disabled and The Thinking Atheist FB page was taken down, as was my Public Profile FB page. Oddly enough, the only FB page I had shared from by that time this morning was Removing the Fig Leaf, which is still up and all of my mods there are unscathed. Considering THAT is an atheist sex blog, you'd think it would be the first one to...um... go down. Ahem.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/wwjtd/2016 ... -disabled/


It happened to Jerry Coyne twice as well, Facebook's Double Standard
The two incidents.

• https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.co ... d-my-page/
• https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.co ... ook-again/

[piginthecity]

If you live in the US interesting possibilities are opening up. From http://freethoughtblogs.com/carrier/arc ... 17#respond

... with the assist of some of my girlfriends as relief drivers on different legs of the trip"

All the better if you have a place my girlfriend and I can crash for the night (not a requirement, just a hope).

So he's taking plural girlfriends with him on the trip, but only needs space for one of them to crash. Hmmm ....

[Matt Cavanaugh]

If you live in the US interesting possibilities are opening up. From http://freethoughtblogs.com/carrier/arc ... 17#respond

... with the assist of some of my girlfriends as relief drivers on different legs of the trip"

All the better if you have a place my girlfriend and I can crash for the night (not a requirement, just a hope).

So he's taking plural girlfriends with him on the trip, but only needs space for one of them to crash. Hmmm ....

Sounds like he's staying with one "girlfriend" at a time, on each leg of the trip. He can't reasonably stay overnight in the motels where they usually meet, as those rent by the hour.

Stockton, CA is a hellhole. I wish Dickie good luck in Ohio.

[d4m10n]

Wahabism is a genuinely mysogynistic creed which segregates men and women to enforce uniqual power relationships.

And to keep men from lusting after women, or acting on that lust. And to preserve an ideal of feminine modesty. And to constantly reinforce the the idea that men and women have distinct social roles. All of these rationales have been used in the western context in service of sexual segregation, among others.

The term segregation is entirely applicable to social policies which discriminate against women.

When women are socially forbidden from entering certain rooms, that is a form of discrimination. Possibly justifiable in terms of immutable human nature, but discrimination nonetheless.

I'm still waiting for someone to explain why separate toilets for men and women disadvantages women - or men, for that matter.

You've never yet encountered a situation where this sexual division lead to uncomfortable queueing due to a lopsided shortage of necessary facilities? Where people queue up for one-holers which are arbitrarily restricted to one sex even when the other one is open? Where butch women and effeminate men are mistreated for failing to socially present in a way which makes their biological sex obvious to a casual observer?

As to 'subjective feelings' can you explain why we should dismiss the wishes of the overwhelming majority of men and women as irrelevant?

Because taking them into account would mean we'd have to cater to every irrational prejudice, not just the ones we happen to be comfortable with at the moment.

If we abolish seperate toilets because 'subjective feelings' are irrelevant why not abolish cubicles too?

Unlike segregation by race or sex, individual cubicles do not promote the idea that humanity can be neatly divided into two groups, one of which has historically been treated as servile to the other.

And are you really holding Starship Troopers up as a model for society?

Not in all respects.

[Ericb]

If you live in the US interesting possibilities are opening up. From http://freethoughtblogs.com/carrier/arc ... 17#respond

... with the assist of some of my girlfriends as relief drivers on different legs of the trip"

All the better if you have a place my girlfriend and I can crash for the night (not a requirement, just a hope).

So he's taking plural girlfriends with him on the trip, but only needs space for one of them to crash. Hmmm ....

I looks like he has just one for each leg of the trip. It's a serial harem.

[welch]

$15 - $20 a month.

Also, everyone is on some form of budget. If you are talking about poor people, say "poor people cannot easily afford that". "Most people are on a budget." Yes. You have just described everyone in a place where money is used. Care to narrow it down a bit, a few billion is a bit overlarge of a set.

Oh, just fuck off.

Poor people can't afford shit like that by fucking definition.

If you are going to Steersbot my fucking choice of words you are going on fucking ignore.

I can't fucking stand that shit.

Because the phrase "on a budget" has no fucking meaning unless you give some kind of range? I'm on a budget, but my budget and the budget of someone making $35K a year in NYC are very different things. As is the difference between my budget and someone making $200K in Seattle.

If you're going to say "on a budget" then provide SOME kind of meaning so we can all be talking about the same thing. Do you mean retirees on welfare/pensions? Families on welfare? Familes with two people working minimum wage jobs? Someone making $50-60K a year?

Even if we stay outside of the upper end of the income range, say, below $250K, that's a wide range, and in that range, $15 a month is going simultaneously be impossible, annoying, not a big deal, and chump change.

Even "poor people" isn't static because the kind of salary that keeps you poor and barely able to afford food, clothing and shelter in SF/NYC would let you live really fucking awesome in Tallahassee.

Which is a problem with terms like "poor" and "on a budget" when no context is given. They move past "imprecise" into "kind of useless".

[Clarence]

I went to a military academy long ago, where everyone was expected to shower together in a rectangular open bay every day. The freshmen took awhile to adjust, but the seniors didn't think anything of it. When they finally installed partitions and curtains, only the underclassmen used them at first. Which is all to say that people are nothing like robots, we can acclimate to different levels of privacy over time. Which isn't to say that the coed open showers of Starship Troopers or BSG are likely to be implemented anytime soon.

I think the open showers/changing room question is the hardest one here, especially compared to partitioned toilets. For each one of these separate issues (showers, locker rooms, toilets, classrooms, lecture halls) I'd like to see an argument for adult sex-segregation that goes beyond mere subjective discomfort with the presence of the opposite sex.

The notion that women are delicate flowers that must be kept safe and apart from males makes sense from a Victorian Englishman or an Wahhabist Imam, but I don't think we should design and build it into the modern world without some explicit rational basis.

Fuck off with the retarded 'parallels' with Wahabism.

Wahabism is a genuinely mysogynistic creed which segregates men and women to enforce uniqual power relationships.

It confines women to the domestic sphere and excludes them from public places.

The term segregation is entirely applicable to social policies which discriminate against women.

I'm still waiting for someone to explain why seperate toilets for men and women disadvantages women - or men, for that matter.

As to 'subjective feelings' can you explain why we should dismiss the wishes of the overwhelming majority of men and women as irrelevant? If we abolish seperate toilets because 'subjective feelings' are irrelevant why not abolish cubicles too?

What 'function' do they perform? Why don't we just shit in open rows?

And are you really holding Starship Troopers up as a model for society?

Ok, this is just retarded.

Sometimes, per exigent circumstances or culture men and women really DO shit in open rows.
The world does not end.
While I'm perfectly fine with keeping mens and womens bathrooms (or having a unisex one with totally closed stalls) because of comfort, expressed preference etc, this constant refrain of its weird or unnatural or dangerous for men & women to use facilities together (short of wife and husband I would assume?!) is just obnoxious and stupid. It's done all the time in Europe and most women/men in the USA don't seem to have an issue if a person from the other sex has to make an emergency exception even now. So whether men and women share a bathroom (or hell, would be REQUIRED TO by some tyrannical law) isn't as important an issue to me as showers and locker rooms. With appropriate accomodations privacy can be preserved and 99 percent of everyone is going to behave themselves and 99.9 percent of everyone isn't a pedo for the fathers or mothers on here who are going to be guarding their kids.

As for Whabbism if they really give women power in the "Domestic Sphere" that's still an important (arguably in some ways THE most important sphere for those married or with kids)sphere of influence. Denying that is how the US has gotten our 50 percent divorce rate, our blatantly Kangaroo "Family Courts", our ever expanding rape and domestic violence laws and as a a partial consequence to that and our totally unregulated capital flow a divided and almost totally broken national culture.

Of course if they don't even give women real power there, then yeah.... oppression.

[welch]

Just a few more thoughts for what it is worth. Welch and Damion can fuck themselves and I would not ask them to babysit my kid. And just so you don't misunderstand... I have a gay nephew who I asked to babysit my kids regularly. He was great with them... and I am smart enough to know that gays are not the same as pedophiles. But.... someone who thinks a little girl should see a strange man's junk is just fucked up. It is not age appropriate and is way off the scale of normal social rules. If I have to explain this to you then... well... all I can say is that you need to get your head out of your pseudo-intellectual ass.

Awww, look at you arguing a point no one was making. Neither Damion or I said little girls should see strange people's junk. And, as Com indicated, if you're a father out with your very young daughter alone, and she has to go, you've got a bit of a choice to make. Send her in alone with a stranger, or bring her into the men's room.

Have you ever chose the latter? If so, why do you think a little girl should see a strange man's junk John? Maybe you should direct that "Fuck you" at yourself if you've ever done that.

Dumbass.

[welch]

Turns out that I have several kids.

Some of them are even mentioned on the world wide web, oddly enough.

Now Damion, you know as well as I that having kids does't count unless you agree with all the other parents.

[Clarence]

I must be coming up with a fever.
I'm agreeing with welch on "The Great Bathroom Issue", at least a bit more than I agree with John D or Hunnybunny.
And Damion is being one of the more respectful people on this thread.

Did Opposite Day sneak up on me?

[Aneris]

It's really a matter of attitude, and setting whether being nude is sexualized. It wouldn't work with segregated places where then suddenly transpeople seemingly from the opposite sex waltz in. You need to treat everyone equally, so that the place is completely mixed at all times and awkward situations do not arise.

The GDR was also famous for it's "FKK" ("free body culture")
http://i.imgur.com/01mScLF.jpg

[welch]

Just watched Superman v Batman.

Loved it. But then I am a 300 and Sucker Punch fan too.

Pathetic guy in front had to check his SMS's to fill the time between CGI sequences. Meh.

I like both those films too but I don't think Synder can tell a story to save his life and he doesn't understand Superman at all. In a fair world he was be one of the best director of photography ever and leave the story development and director to someone who can do it.

That said glad you enjoyed it and I am also glad you waited a couple of weeks to see it.

I kind of dig some of the stuff he's doing. Like dispensing with the myth that somehow, heat vision is stopped by drywall. the bit with the dueling heat vision beams slicing buildings into rubble was cool. I think what he's done, more than anyone else is shown the consequences of Superman fighting enemies like other kryptonians, doomsday, Darkseid, mongol, etc.

What happens to a building when you fling superman into it at well over Mach 1? Right, that thing is fucked. I agree it shits all over the image of superman somehow having these battles and no one getting as much as a broken nail over it, but Snyder's post-battle metropolis is a much more internally consistent place than Donner's was.

I also really dug Holly Hunter's senator, as contrary to the idiocy the previews showed, she was trying, very hard, to figure out just how the hell a government deals with an entity like superman? If you support his actions, what does that mean? If you oppose them, what does that require. Given his popularity, everything he does becomes a political act, so what do his choices mean? When he saves this person instead of that one? Like the bomb in the hearing room, did he truly not see it, or was he not looking because if he isn't careful, he can see and hear everything and even for superman, that's a bit much to cope with.

Jeremy Irons as Alfred was great, and I really do think Affleck is the best movie Batman to date.

[d4m10n]

The GDR was also famous for it's "FKK" ("free body culture")
http://i.imgur.com/01mScLF.jpg

It's difficult for me not to see this as superior to the approach we take here, in almost every significant way.

[welch]

It's really a matter of attitude, and setting whether being nude is sexualized. It wouldn't work with segregated places where then suddenly transpeople seemingly from the opposite sex waltz in. You need to treat everyone equally, so that the place is completely mixed at all times and awkward situations do not arise.

The GDR was also famous for it's "FKK" ("free body culture")
http://i.imgur.com/01mScLF.jpg

Funny how american opposition to "seeing strange men's junk" (Never a problem with strange women's junk, just men's) on a beach or in a park is seen even by many americans as "so puritanical" but OMG IN A BATHROOM! MEN ARE ALL PREVERRRRRTS!

I've yet to see, beyond social tradition, which can be a valid reason, any specific argument that isn't really talking about age, not gender, and isn't sexist as fuck.

Now, what I think would be a great solution, and one that is being implemented more and more are bathrooms designed for the needs of people with small children. You'll note "family" bathrooms are gender-neutral. Funny that.

They're expensive, so the rollout is slow, but I think those are actually *solutions* to the real *problem*, namely, taking a young child into a bathroom for adults is a pain in the ass. They're not designed for such things, at best you get the sop of one urinal that's lower than the rest. But the overall design is just pants for someone with a newly toilet-trained kid.

I'd like to see more of them, because again, actual functional solution, and also because peeing next to a young child is a gamble in getting sprayed on.

[debaser71]

Shared Parenting bill vetoed in Florida, after National Organization of Women lobby against equality:

Thanks for posting this. I would have never of known. Media is silent. At least the shit I look at.

[welch]

I am seriously conflicted here about discovering how oppressed I am by women who refuse to share the facilities with me all because they do not want me looking at their tits ... and their other lady bits.

Why? Why do they hate all men?

You could always try not staring at women just because they're naked. Oddly, the way to learn this is to hang out at topless or nude beaches more often. After a while, the "mystery" is gone, and you can manage to not stare slack-jawed at hooters. It is possible, you can get help.

[comhcinc]

Thinking about Mykeru and his copyright problems. I ran up the proof of concept below. It would help if she wouldn't smile in all her photos.

Com - do you reckon an approach like this would do the trick?

[youtube]RP0iZwo6mC4[/youtube]

I am glad I waited until I got up to watch that. Creepy as fuck.

[welch]

You know, for a group of people regularly mocking the SJW lot's "FUCK YOUR FACTS, IT'S ALL ABOUT MY PWECIOUS FEE-FEES" schtick, it is highly, highly amusing to see them calling Damion and I trolls/cunts and what have you for NOT RESPECTING THEIR PWECIOUS FEE-FEES ABOUT EEEEVIL PENIS-BEARERS AROUND THEIR PWECIOUS WIDDLE GIRLS.

I didn't realize that gender-segregated bathrooms were your safe spaces.




lolz

[welch]

I see a lot of Sanders supporters trying to convince themselves that Sanders is Obama, and he's going to pull through and beat Hillary. Its perplexing to me, because the similarities between this year's election and 2008 are only superficial. Clinton has led Sanders the entire election, and he's never been that close to catching her. Sanders doesn't have Obama's appeal across demographics either - he wins caucuses and states that have a high percentages of white people and working class people.

What Sanders supporters share with obama 2008 supporters is, both sets believe in The Messiah.

No. It's probably more along the lines of 'He is not Hillary Clinton.'

Yeah. That's kind of where I am. Clinton spends a lot of time disavowing a LOT of earlier positions, I doubt she has anyone making less than a mil a year in her "inner circle" and she fangirled over goddamned Kissinger.

[Old_ones]

I wrote a post about 10 months ago responding to a comment in which Steersman compared Islam to Nazism. I tried to compare the number of terroristic murders committed by Muslims in the US to similar <b>crimes committed by Neo Nazis, and then compare them to the size of the groups. </b>I found a lot fewer Muslims as a percentage committing violence than Nazis. If you are interested in reading that, then you can find it here (.viewtopic.php?f=31&t=429&start=46947).

Your train of logic failed right there. Muslim is a broad, expansive category. Neo-Nazi's are a small, self-selected group and are classified as a Christian Identity Hate Group just as Muslim terrorists/supporters are small, self-selected sub-group of Muslims. So you should have used Christians vs Muslims. Or Neo-Nazi's vs Al Queyda. But not Muslims vs Neo-Nazis.

My biggest logic fail was probably bringing the post up without adequately explaining the context or what I was talking about. I assumed that Jim whatshisface would click the link, and everyone else would ignore it. The comparison didn't start with me, it started with Steersman quoting what I take to be hyperbolic rhetoric from Ayaan Hirsi Ali and trying to advance an argument that Islam is the new Nazism.

It is, I believe, a phrase from his The God Delusion where he's throwing a stone or two at, I think, agnostics or "accommodationists" who bend over backwards, generally in trying to win a point by conceding one at the outset, so far as to fall flat on their asses. In any case, the relevance there is that I think that your "weird beliefs and hangups" is kind of sweeping a lot of crap under a very small rug. While one might have a few quibbles about Ayaan Hirsi Ali's politics, I think this bit from the Wikipedia article on her seems to succinctly delineate that rather problematic "crap":

...In a 2007 interview in the London Evening Standard,[18] Hirsi Ali characterised Islam as "the new fascism":

"Just like Nazism started with Hitler's vision, the Islamic vision is a caliphate — a society ruled by Sharia law – in which women who have sex before marriage are stoned to death, homosexuals are beaten, and apostates like me are killed. Sharia law is as inimical to liberal democracy as Nazism." In this interview, she said, "Violence is inherent in Islam – it's a destructive, nihilistic cult of death. It legitimates murder."

And if that - "the new fascism" - is a reasonably accurate description of the religion then I wonder what you think should have been the appropriate response to Nazism then, and to Islam in Western societies now...

So yes, you have identified a problem with the comparison, but I didn't compare Christianity to Islam, because Steersman was not arguing that Islam is the new Christianity, he was arguing that it's the new Fascism.

Steersman and Ali's comparison of Islam and Fascism sounds scary because it implies that all the Muslims in the world share some kind of violent anti-democratic politics, and are all prone to radicalizing. This spectre is why Steersman continually advocates for Muslims to be deported if they won't piss on the Koran. But the scariness of the argument goes away if you understand that large swaths of Muslims are nothing like "the new Fascists" and start comparing like to like. Yes Al Queda has caused more destruction than the Hammerskins, but I'm not afraid of either organization. A really comical comparison could be made between Nazi Germany and ISIS, since ISIS claims to be a caliphate and wants to put as much of the globe under their version of Islamic rule as possible. It's comical because everyone understands that ISIS is a bunch of marginal goatfuckers with rotting soviet era small arms. They are getting their clocks cleaned militarily and I don't think either the US or Russia have deployed large numbers of ground troops. Most of the people kicking ISIS ass are regional forces.

So yeah, I agree. Islam isn't Nazism. Muslims aren't Nazis. That's pretty close to what my point has been this entire time.

[welch]

The last gym shower I used looked like this.

https://dancpharmd.files.wordpress.com/ ... shower.jpg

I'd avoid that, as I don't like mixing with other naked people of any sex. I take segregation to the individual level. I want my own private shower.

I went to a military academy long ago, where everyone was expected to shower together in a rectangular open bay every day. The freshmen took awhile to adjust, but the seniors didn't think anything of it. When they finally installed partitions and curtains, only the underclassmen used them at first. Which is all to say that people are nothing like robots, we can acclimate to different levels of privacy over time. Which isn't to say that the coed open showers of Starship Troopers or BSG are likely to be implemented anytime soon.

I think the open showers/changing room question is the hardest one here, especially compared to partitioned toilets. For each one of these separate issues (showers, locker rooms, toilets, classrooms, lecture halls) I'd like to see an argument for adult sex-segregation that goes beyond mere subjective discomfort with the presence of the opposite sex.

The notion that women are delicate flowers that must be kept safe and apart from males makes sense from a Victorian Englishman or an Wahhabist Imam, but I don't think we should design and build it into the modern world without some explicit rational basis.

Your lack of support for JohnD's feelings and safe spaces proves you to be the ultimate shitlord.

OF SHITTERS!

[Oglebart]

You lot need to check your western toilet privilege. Some people have to share with more than just humans!

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3093/265 ... c6d10e.jpg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pig_toilet

[Shatterface]

Wahabism is a genuinely mysogynistic creed which segregates men and women to enforce uniqual power relationships.

And to keep men from lusting after women, or acting on that lust. And to preserve an ideal of feminine modesty. And to constantly reinforce the the idea that men and women have distinct social roles. All of these rationales have been used in the western context in service of sexual segregation, among others.

Whatever fucking pretext Whahabists give for segregation the fact is that men and women aren't segregated under Wahabism because of 'modesty'', they are segregated to preserve patterns of domination. That isn't the fucking case where seperate bathrooms are concerned.

Banning women from education, or certain forms of work, or politics, or whatever, has fuck all to do with modesty.

The term segregation is entirely applicable to social policies which discriminate against women.

When women are socially forbidden from entering certain rooms, that is a form of discrimination. Possibly justifiable in terms of immutable human nature, but discrimination nonetheless.

You are playing SJW games of equivocation on the word 'discriminate', which, in this context, simply means 'telling things apart': ie men and women.

It does not mean putting one party at a disadvantage since neither men nor women are disadvantaged here.

I'm still waiting for someone to explain why separate toilets for men and women disadvantages women - or men, for that matter.

You've never yet encountered a situation where this sexual division lead to uncomfortable queueing due to a lopsided shortage of necessary facilities? Where people queue up for one-holers which are arbitrarily restricted to one sex even when the other one is open? Where butch women and effeminate men are mistreated for failing to socially present in a way which makes their biological sex obvious to a casual observer?

I haven't seen any evidence that making toilets unisex, which would mean the removal of urinals, would speed up the process of toilet use.

Do you really think a single cue of men and women lining up to use cubicles is going to move faster than two cues, one of which will allow more people to urinate in seconds?

If so, you should present some evidence since the onus is on those who want to make the change to present it.

As to 'subjective feelings' can you explain why we should dismiss the wishes of the overwhelming majority of men and women as irrelevant?

Because taking them into account would mean we'd have to cater to every irrational prejudice, not just the ones we happen to be comfortable with at the moment.

So now you are falling back on the slippery slope fallacy - if we allow this, what next?

Is that what has actually happened over the last century or so - that 'segregated' toilets have lead to the increasing marginalisation of women?

If we abolish seperate toilets because 'subjective feelings' are irrelevant why not abolish cubicles too?

Unlike segregation by race or sex, individual cubicles do not promote the idea that humanity can be neatly divided into two groups, one of which has historically been treated as servile to the other.

Most people can be divided into two groups, and we have words like 'men' and 'women' for that purpose.

The existence of that division isn't negated by a 'history of servility' or the existence of a tiny minority who feel they don't fit that binary, but who's subjectivity you are happy to accept while dismissing the feelings of others.

And are you really holding Starship Troopers up as a model for society?

Not in all respects.

Which parts of the fascist dystopia appeal to you most?

[feathers]

You could always try not staring at women just because they're naked. Oddly, the way to learn this is to hang out at topless or nude beaches more often. After a while, the "mystery" is gone, and you can manage to not stare slack-jawed at hooters. It is possible, you can get help.

Interestingly, the sex industry is very much concerned with designing coverings that have the purpose to stimulate our senses more than pure nakedness will do- with success it seems. We're weird creatures.

[welch]

I must be coming up with a fever.
I'm agreeing with welch on "The Great Bathroom Issue", at least a bit more than I agree with John D or Hunnybunny.
And Damion is being one of the more respectful people on this thread.

Did Opposite Day sneak up on me?

People are not constants. Even you have moments where I think "Clarence actually made a good point" and if I haven't said so then, I apologize for that.

three years ago, if you asked, Damion was a cunt's cunt. An inception of insincere bullshit. Lately, he's made some good points, and so, if I am to live up to the standards I would like other people to aspire to, I am obligated to change how I interact with him, at least on those issues.

The entire concept of "you showed me better facts, so I changed my opinion" is nothing but a stupid trope if one doesn't actually do that, and it is often quite hard, and regularly jarring. Which is why I say were PZ to stop being such a raging shitcock, apologize to like, everyone, even if it's an en masse apology and actually change his behavior, my opinion of him would change.

I'm not real worried about PZ mind you, but I leave that door ajar. I agree with JohnD when I think he's right, and when I think he's deep into blathering about Fee-Fees and safe spaces, I'm going to say that. Neither opinion is carved in stone.

[d4m10n]

Thinking about Mykeru and his copyright problems. I ran up the proof of concept below. It would help if she wouldn't smile in all her photos.

Com - do you reckon an approach like this would do the trick?

[youtube]RP0iZwo6mC4[/youtube]

I am glad I waited until I got up to watch that. Creepy as fuck.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/M ... htmareFuel

[welch]

The GDR was also famous for it's "FKK" ("free body culture")
http://i.imgur.com/01mScLF.jpg

It's difficult for me not to see this as superior to the approach we take here, in almost every significant way.

When South Beach went topless, the amount of actual problems caused by that was remarkably low, and mostly women forgetting to put their tops back on when they left the Official Topless Area. Same thing with tits in central park and on subways.

With stuff like that, the problems we imagine are far greater in number and severity than the actual problems caused.

[MarcusAu]

Just took a piss in a public toilet beside a (male) with bright red dyed hair (at least in parts). He was literally standing beside me at the urinal with his dick in one hand (presumably) and his phone in the other attempting to text. (And they say men can't multitask).

I'm wondering what would happen in a unisex public facility if someone was taking their young son or daughter in, and they encountered another adult, with what amounts to a camera in their hand.

It's hard to come to any solution in these matters, when people give no thought how other people may feel, and don't see any issues of (potential) breach of privacy in any case.

Any organisation is opening itself up to being sued unless they set and police a policy for these situations.

[welch]

You could always try not staring at women just because they're naked. Oddly, the way to learn this is to hang out at topless or nude beaches more often. After a while, the "mystery" is gone, and you can manage to not stare slack-jawed at hooters. It is possible, you can get help.

Interestingly, the sex industry is very much concerned with designing coverings that have the purpose to stimulate our senses more than pure nakedness will do- with success it seems. We're weird creatures.

Mystery makes things cool. My dad effectively destroyed the joys of underage drinking by letting me drink in the house under his or my mom's supervision. a few years later, the thrill of hammering back bud in the woods from the illicit keg was gone because I could pretty much drink whenever I want.

When I realized what he'd done, I called him an evil old bastard, and he just laaaaaaughed and laughed.

[John D]

You know, for a group of people regularly mocking the SJW lot's "FUCK YOUR FACTS, IT'S ALL ABOUT MY PWECIOUS FEE-FEES" schtick, it is highly, highly amusing to see them calling Damion and I trolls/cunts and what have you for NOT RESPECTING THEIR PWECIOUS FEE-FEES ABOUT EEEEVIL PENIS-BEARERS AROUND THEIR PWECIOUS WIDDLE GIRLS.

I didn't realize that gender-segregated bathrooms were your safe spaces.




lolz

Children require more protection than adults to grow up healthy. If you don't think this is true then this explains why I think you are often a total ass-hole.

As an example: PITA always likes to claim that meat eating is wrong because you would never take your 8 year old to a slaughter house.... and... blah..blah...blah. No PITA.... I would not take my 8 year old to a slaughter house because it is not age appropriate. They would not be able to understand or make moral judgement about what is happening.

Same goes for private parts and privacy. I am no prude, but kids should be exposed to nudity and sexual content when they are ready for it.

It is perfectly reasonable to expect my little girl can go in the ladies room without seeing Muscato in there.

Now... I can't say I can come up with some fancy piece of logic to justify everything that is and isn't age appropriate. Honestly... I am just not that smart (which I am sure you will confirm). It depends on the kid and it depends on the society. Our society is not accustomed to little girls sharing space with half naked grown men. It is just something we don't do. If society were different then I would raise my child differently.

There are social rules. They are normally pretty consistent (which is why most people can follow them). They are not always easy to justify. BUT... there is often no reason to change them.

[welch]

Just took a piss in a public toilet beside a (male) with bright red dyed hair (at least in parts). He was literally standing beside me at the urinal with his dick in one hand (presumably) and his phone in the other attempting to text. (And they say men can't multitask).

I'm wondering what would happen in a unisex public facility if someone was taking their young son or daughter in, and they encountered another adult, with what amounts to a camera in their hand.

It's hard to come to any solution in these matters, when people give no thought how other people may feel, and don't see any issues of (potential) breach of privacy in any case.

Any organisation is opening itself up to being sued unless they set and police a policy for these situations.

Then why haven't we banned smartphones in public bathrooms?

[welch]

You know, for a group of people regularly mocking the SJW lot's "FUCK YOUR FACTS, IT'S ALL ABOUT MY PWECIOUS FEE-FEES" schtick, it is highly, highly amusing to see them calling Damion and I trolls/cunts and what have you for NOT RESPECTING THEIR PWECIOUS FEE-FEES ABOUT EEEEVIL PENIS-BEARERS AROUND THEIR PWECIOUS WIDDLE GIRLS.

I didn't realize that gender-segregated bathrooms were your safe spaces.




lolz

Children require more protection than adults to grow up healthy. If you don't think this is true then this explains why I think you are often a total ass-hole.

When your daughters were very young and you were out with them sans their mother or other trusted female, and they had to go to the bathroom and you were too far from home for waiting to be an option, did you bring them into a stall in the men's room so they could go or did you always, 100% of the time, ask a stranger to escort them into the women's room?

[MarcusAu]

Just took a piss in a public toilet beside a (male) with bright red dyed hair (at least in parts). He was literally standing beside me at the urinal with his dick in one hand (presumably) and his phone in the other attempting to text. (And they say men can't multitask).

I'm wondering what would happen in a unisex public facility if someone was taking their young son or daughter in, and they encountered another adult, with what amounts to a camera in their hand.

It's hard to come to any solution in these matters, when people give no thought how other people may feel, and don't see any issues of (potential) breach of privacy in any case.

Any organisation is opening itself up to being sued unless they set and police a policy for these situations.

Then why haven't we banned smartphones in public bathrooms?

In America at least, I imagine it's just a matter of time before a precedent is set.

[dog puke]

Well, I knew it would come to this.

I told you a year or two ago when I invited you all - hell, I begged you - to join me in the free-pissing™ and free-shitting™ movement.

Problem would have been solved, and think of the savings in not having to build any of these dainty facilities.

Also, Damion is still a tool.

[welch]

Just took a piss in a public toilet beside a (male) with bright red dyed hair (at least in parts). He was literally standing beside me at the urinal with his dick in one hand (presumably) and his phone in the other attempting to text. (And they say men can't multitask).

I'm wondering what would happen in a unisex public facility if someone was taking their young son or daughter in, and they encountered another adult, with what amounts to a camera in their hand.

It's hard to come to any solution in these matters, when people give no thought how other people may feel, and don't see any issues of (potential) breach of privacy in any case.

Any organisation is opening itself up to being sued unless they set and police a policy for these situations.

Then why haven't we banned smartphones in public bathrooms?

In America at least, I imagine it's just a matter of time before a precedent is set.

Or, could it be that the potential problem and the actual problem are really quite far apart? The fact that someone actually taking pictures in a bathroom is notable for two reasons: one, it's a huge violation of cultural/social norms, and two, it's quite rare.

The potential for someone to decide FUCK STREETS, IMA DRIVE ON THE SIDEWALK MOTHERFUCKERS! YOLO! is huge. How many cars do we have in the US?

Yet, in spite of that, and the real risk of death and major injury such an act carries, we have yet to build meter-plus tall reinforced concrete barriers on every street. Why? Because the reality of that problem is small as fuck. By your example, we should expect the largest infrastructure program the country has ever seen to be started at any minute.

Ain't gonna happen unless the reality of the problem changes by a large factor.

[blitzem]

The GDR was also famous for it's "FKK" ("free body culture")
http://i.imgur.com/01mScLF.jpg

It's difficult for me not to see this as superior to the approach we take here, in almost every significant way.

When South Beach went topless, the amount of actual problems caused by that was remarkably low, and mostly women forgetting to put their tops back on when they left the Official Topless Area. Same thing with tits in central park and on subways.

With stuff like that, the problems we imagine are far greater in number and severity than the actual problems caused.

In Canuckistan, at least in Ontario, It's legal for teh womynz to go topless (except in designated areas like restaurants, etc.) but most don't bother. I asked a few of my female friends why, and they said it was because it was more fun to do it when it was illegal.

[d4m10n]

It is perfectly reasonable to expect my little girl can go in the ladies room without seeing Muscato in there.

Are you okay with her seeing Zinnia in there? For you, is this really about appearance (passing as a woman in a space designated for women) or is it about policing unseen genitals, as in North Carolina?

Is anyone remotely concerned about young boys using the toilet around passable transmen? Strange that this never comes up.

To be honest, I don't like sending either of my young kids into a multi-stall restroom by themselves, not so much because I distrust strangers (which I do, probably to an irrational extent) but because they cannot be fully trusted to get all the steps right on their own. This conundrum hardly ever comes up (except at Target) since most public places we visit have at least one family-style restroom or else they use a one-room arrangement where I'm not concerned about the sign on the door.

As a point of curiosity, has anyone been to nightclubs with a relaxed attitude towards sexing their restrooms?