About Letters
We want to hear from you! Send your letters and commentary to letters@mountainx.com

Before you comment

The comments section is here to provide a platform for civil dialogue on the issues we face together as a local community. Xpress is committed to offering this platform for all voices, but when the tone of the discussion gets nasty or strays off topic, we believe many people choose not to participate. Xpress editors are determined to moderate comments to ensure a constructive interchange is maintained. All comments judged not to be in keeping with the spirit of civil discourse will be removed and repeat violators will be banned. See here for our terms of service. Thank you for being part of this effort to promote respectful discussion.

15 thoughts on “Letter writer: Where’s sensibility in locker-room scenario?

  1. boatrocker

    Maybe theocratic Republican restrooms are a ‘swingin’ happening place and the rest of us rubes have merely used them to pee or poopy in all these years?

    “Wait, where’s that awful music coming from (boom boom boom techno)? Why is there glitter all over the urinals in here? Oh my GOD, even the the soap is pink! Ahhhh!”

  2. The Real World

    Aaaannd….the media continues to own peoples’ brains. (Not surprised)

    Is it a matter of IQ or willful ignorance that way too many people don’t seem to grasp that the law would allow ANYONE into ANY bathroom. So, no, Margot it’s not specifically the trans person swinging a body part (amongst other behaviors) that concerns some, it’s that any male, for example, whether he be: hetero, asexual, gay, trans and there’s a few more I’m not familiar with — that could spend time in the female locker/restroom and claim they have a right to be there because they identify as female that day.

    What can the authorities do if the law allows it? Again, is it IQ or willful ignorance that too many don’t grasp that?

    • Peter Robbins

      I’m not in the genius ranks myself, but I bet smart judges can think of a way distinguish “gender identity” from “gender whim,” “gender conceit” and “gender pretext.” Your lady-for-the-day scenario is fantasy. Imagine how it would play in Judge Judy’s court.

      • Peter Robbins

        From Charlotte’s official explanation of its nondiscrimination ordinance:

        “What if a person tries to use the law to disguise inappropriate or unlawful activity?

        The ordinance does not permit inappropriate or unlawful activity. The ordinance protects legitimate use of facilities for transgender persons; it is not an excuse to misuse the law for criminal purposes or even for reasons of convenience.

        A business may object to a non-transgender person seeking to use a restroom or changing facility for a false reason. A business may require that persons who do not have the protected characteristics of gender identity or gender expression must use the appropriate restroom. A business may also report or remove persons who are engaging in criminal activity.

        A business concerned that a non-transgender person is using an inappropriate restroom or changing facility may ask that person to use the appropriate facility. If the person does not comply, the business may contact [the police] to file a trespassing complaint. Such enforcement is not deemed to be discrimination under the ordinance.

        Additionally, the North Carolina indecent exposure laws remain valid in restrooms and locker rooms within the City of Charlotte. If a violation of the indecent exposure laws occurs, please contact [the police].”

      • Peter Robbins

        “It is one of the surest indexes of a mature and developed jurisprudence not to make a fortress out of the dictionary, but to remember that statutes always have some purpose or object to accomplish, whose sympathetic and imaginative discovery is the surest guide to their meaning.” – Judge Learned Hand (who I hear ranked pretty high in the intelligence department)

    • Lisa Watters

      So did we actually have a problem where males who don’t identify as transgendered were going into female lockers/restrooms?

      • Peter Robbins

        To my knowledge, the only “problems” that have occurred in other jurisdictions have been where right-wingers tried to pose as “women” in hopes of proving they could get away with it.

      • The Real World

        Lisa – how old are you? If you’re 20-something or younger I could understand the naivete. Over 30, you’d have to have lived in a monastery to not know that we have world full of lewdness.

        http://nypost.com/2014/08/03/peep-cam-found-in-ladies-room-at-new-york-design-center-suit/

        http://www.thedailytimes.com/news/alleged-voyeur-arrested-over-cameras-in-ladies-restrooms/article_8b7c865a-5f12-5680-89fa-8d72adf04340.html

        https://www.theblot.com/border-patrol-agent-caught-peeping-in-womens-restroom-7737996

        There are many, many more stories of hidden cameras installed in female restrooms by males.

        • Lisa Watters

          “We’ve become a nation of unintelligent bullies,” you say in your comment below, and yet you start your reply to my comment with, “Lisa – how old are you?” You do know that trying to shame someone is the same thing as bullying. I’m 51 for the record.

          • The Real World

            No, it was incredulousness. And I was polite enough to ask, which few do on here before they go assigned other people their viewpoints.

            At 51, it is all the more surprising that you don’t realize what goes on in this world. Examples of nasty, sick behaviors abound, daily. You asked so I looked it up for you. You’re welcome.

        • luther blissett

          “There are many, many more stories of hidden cameras installed in female restrooms by males.”

          Given that you’re obsessed with what happens in female restrooms, I wouldn’t be surprised if you’ve installed one yourself. Are cisgender women so weak and feeble that they need manly men as bathroom monitors? Dear me.

      • The Real World

        I guess including 3 internet links gets a comment held in moderation. A comment in reply to Lisa will show up tomorrow, once reviewed. It includes several stories of hidden cameras placed in women’s restrooms.

        Let’s see if this comment, with 2 links, makes it through……about indecent exposure (you can find plenty more online):
        Here’s a lovely one: http://www.ajc.com/news/news/local/cross-dressing-man-arrested-for-exposure-at-walmar/nQddG/ Excerpt – A 51-year-old man wearing women’s clothing was arrested for allegedly undressing in front of children at Walmart.
        Police say Norwood Smith Burnes, 51, of Rome, has a long record of indecent exposure and was on probation for public indecency when the latest incident occurred in the women’s bathroom at Walmart in Calhoun, the Rome News-Tribune reported.
        Burnes was in “stages of undress while on the stone floor and would do this in the presence of several young children,” witnesses told police. When police arrived, they found Burnes wearing a short skirt and jacket, black leather coat, high heels, red nail polish, green eye shadow and jewelry.

        http://www.criminaldefendant.com/bug-searcher-arrested-for-indecent-exposure-in-ladies-restroom/

        • Peter Robbins

          The links you cited have nothing to do with jurisdictions that allow people to use restrooms in accordance with the gender with which they identify. They involved indecent exposure in jurisdictions where indecent exposure is illegal, and the perpetrators were arrested. But I think you know that. Show me one where the perpetrator got away with the crime because he told the judge he felt like a woman that day. If you can.

          • The Real World

            Peter – I don’t know why you insist upon contorting what is put forth to suit your desired outcome. In my view, this is one of the primary problems with this issue. The outright refusal of the media and a large bunch of people to consider ALL of the factors and ALL of the people affected. When that tactic is chosen, you’ve decided to be part of the problem rather than part of the solution.

            If you will re-read the original letter, my first comment, Lisa’s comment/question and my response comments you will grasp (I hope) that the info provided were specifically answering her question.

            Thanks for the info above about Charlotte’s ordinance. As you can see they are aware there may be attempts to abuse the policy. A business concerned that a non-transgender person is using an inappropriate restroom or changing facility may ask that person to use the appropriate facility. If the person does not comply, the business may contact [the police] to file a trespassing complaint. Such enforcement is not deemed to be discrimination under the ordinance. Now, let’s play this out in the real world: this creates a real dilemma for a small business. They’re not going to call the police, you understand? Because as legitimate as their call might be the media will happily go wild with the story, the facts of the situation be damned. Proof of that is how they’ve presented this issue from the beginning; from a completely slanted angle. So, the business has to juggle what to do about this trespasser, customers who may be intimidated (and who have cellphone cameras), the police and the media. What a bad position to be shoved into.

            For the record, I don’t have a dog in this hunt. I can handle most anything I encounter. But, as a concerned and incredulous citizen, I find the lack of consideration for ALL people affected and the lack of critical thinking applied (see original letter and most of the comments) to be absurd and counter-productive to finding adequate solutions.

            We’ve become a nation of unintelligent bullies.

  3. Tracy Rose

    This letter writer was referencing the word used in the original letter.

Leave a Reply

To leave a reply you may Login with your Mountain Xpress account, connect socially or enter your name and e-mail. Your e-mail address will not be published. All fields are required.