This damn bathroom thing

"Would you want your daughter going into a bathroom with a pervert who is allowed in because he 'identifies as a woman'?"

No.

Tell me what I have to do to not let this happen. I'll stockpile guns, give up my civil liberties, put the Japanese into internment camps, vote for Ralph Nader, eat 100 metric tons of swiss cheese, bathe in spiders, et cetera. Anything. Just tell me what I have to do to stop the LGBTQJEOSUAM#DODLCKAIEJDIEJDHFOAPEIF menace from butt-fucking my daughter right in the butt-hole! Oh, there's nothing I can do? Well, thanks for nothing! The Progressives sold our kids out again!

You should probably stop reading this now, before I break down why that's totally insane and stupid. We're dealing with a particular type of argument that appeals to our sense of emotion. In politics, fear is the easiest glob of shit to get to stick, and it's the weapon of choice for every successful politician. For example, Hitl- wait, no, that's a bad example. For example, let's say you have a sitting senator who's been in office for a decade. Then, an up-and-comer tries to run against the incumbent senator. The incumbent will say, "I have experience. My opponent doesn't have the experience needed to take this office during this difficult time." and this is an appeal to emotion. You're supposed to be slightly afraid that the challenger won't be able to successfully represent you during that 'difficult time'. The problem with an emotional argument is that it is a very weak kind of argument, because it's like saying, "I just feel in my heart that Hillary Clinton is a good person." While it's okay to feel things and believe in things, it should be backed up by sound reasoning. When you deal with facts, feelings don't usually change, but arguments will either stand up, or crumble apart.

I don't expect people to feel better about transgender people using restrooms. The fact is, though, Republicans in the North Carolina senate took a lot of heat for passing a bill to ban transgender people from public bathrooms, and now are in damage-control mode. The question is being begged to try and justify the bill in the face of public scrutiny, and the question is basically a hypothetical scenario involving a 'pervert' using the restroom with 'your wife or daughters'. Because fear works, people thought about this, and figured that was a good point. I don't think people are "idiots" for thinking this. It's human nature to protect family and friends, and to identify danger.

Here's where the rhetoric falls apart:

- If I had a 'biggest gripe', it would be this: Why is it okay for perverts to be in the boys' bathroom? Why is no one talking about that? Because the bill is garbage. It doesn't protect anyone. In fact, it punishes innocent people. If a little girl needs to use the bathroom, her Daddy can't go in with her, or take her into the men's room, like he'd normally be able to do.

- If a pervert wants to commit a crime, they will still do it, but guess what? It's against the law to sexually harass people, so if a pervert went into either bathroom before the bill passed, he would STILL get arrested. The law to protect women and children was already in place. I read one news story last year that was completely disgusting. A man went into the boys' bathroom and started harassing a 10-year-old boy, but guess what? The cops went after him. He was in the correct restroom, but he broke the law.

- The new law doesn't stop transgender people from using restrooms, it just makes them afraid for their own well-being, especially now that people have come out publicly saying that they will physically harm transgender people who use the womens' restroom. My question is: how would they even know? A really 'feminine' trans person with male parts might slip past door-guarding vigilantes easily, but would a manly-looking woman? She would have to face the humiliation of being arrested and then being inspected, all for not looking womanly enough.

- The rhetoric assumes that transgender-incited sexual assault is a rampant problem, which it's not. The rhetoric also assumes that a male could use a lack of anti-transgender laws to say "I identify as a woman" to get into the womens' restroom and get away with crimes, when in fact, this is total bullshit; sexual assault and sexual harassment are still illegal.

- Women can sexually abuse boys. This is less prevalent (or reported) than male-on-female sexual assault, but no one talks about this. No one talks about a male pervert going into the boys' restroom. All of the political rhetoric rests on "Think of the poor defenseless women who are getting their pics taken in public stalls by MEN!". I mean, damn, NC Republicans sound almost like third-wave feminists right now with this shit.

In conclusion, I hate writing conclusions, the end.