Washington Post Has A Solution To The Bathroom Wars (Which Will Be Unacceptable To TGs)

By William Teach May 15, 2016 – 7:42 am

Out of the mouths of babes, in this case, D.C. high school student Elishe Wittes, comes a Solution

One bathroom for all: Install gender-free, single-user restrooms

I am a young trans man, and I think I can make common cause with social conservatives on bathrooms.

To be sure, first there’s going to be litigation. There’s going to be a lot of yelling and screaming. Indeed, for the past several months, transgender activists and social conservatives have been engaged in a public spat about which bathrooms those of various gender identities should be allowed to use. But after North Carolina and the Justice Department are done duking it out, there will still be lots of people — including social conservatives and me — who are afraid to use public bathrooms.

I have a solution to this problem: gender-neutral, single-user bathrooms.

We really could have stopped at the headline. Installing single user gender neutral bathrooms would be a good idea in schools and public buildings for those who are gender confused, and, let’s face it, when it comes to kids who think they are the opposite sex of their biological plumbing, they are confused. Regardless, it would be a wise decision.

Ah, but this is an accommodation, a compromise, which is utterly unacceptable to the TG activists, their lawyers, and their interest groups. The do not want a compromise. They DEMAND that everyone be brought into their lifestyles, exposing little girls who are actually female to little boys who one or more parents who should be prosecuted for putting these insane ideas in the little boys’ head that they are actually a little girl.

Nor does this cover having the gender confused in the changing rooms and showers of the opposite biological sex, which the gender confused (and their lawyers and interest groups) demand to use.

Of course, Elishe has to yammer on about being scared. He/she is in fear of going into the bathroom that corresponds to his/her gender belief, and how dangerous it is

To be sure, my fear is justified, while conservative fears of trans people assaulting others in bathrooms are not. Nobody in this entire debate has produced a single documented instance of a trans person initiating any kind of violence or sexual harassment in a bathroom. But fear is not always rational. I take it as a basic principle that, if possible, we should make people comfortable (maybe then they’ll leave us alone). So let’s take conservative fears on this issue seriously.

But, the fear is mostly that predators and people with ill-intent will use these TG requirements to prey on people, mostly women and girls. There is also outrage that boys who crazily think they are girls will be exposing themselves to girls who are actually girls. Furthermore, conservatives are tired of people forcing them to comport to crazy beliefs. They do not take kindly to these in your face campaigns, which include lawsuits, threats, and the hatred and anger emanating from the TG activists and their supporters, simply because Conservatives and others refuse to buy into this mental illness. You want to believe you’re the opposite sex? That’s on you. Stop trying to make everyone else be involved in your lifestyle.

So, to all you state legislators working so busily to keep trans people out of bathrooms, we’ll see you in court. But no matter who wins, remember that we have something in common: both a problem and a solution. Remember as well to add a provision mandating single-user bathrooms the next time you’re writing some discriminatory bill. That, at least, we should be able to agree on.

And boom, there it is, the threat of lawsuits. Let’s say the North Carolina general assembly modifies HB2 a bit, and adds that schools and public buildings must offer a gender neutral single stall bathroom: who wants to bet that the accommodation, the compromise, will be rejected by the vast majority of the gender confused (and their lawyers and interest groups)?

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Washington Post Has A Solution To The Bathroom Wars (Which Will Be Unacceptable To TGs) »

Posted in Barking Moonbats, Current Affairs | 29 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach May 14, 2016 – 1:00 pm

…are evil fossil fueled vehicles causing everything bad that happens in the world, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The First Street Journal, with a post on Economics 101 and automation.

And thus ends Country Girl week. Ideas for next week?

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

Bummer: Ancient Civilizations Were Destroyed By Climate Change

By William Teach May 14, 2016 – 11:28 am

Mother Nature Network’s Catie Leary is utterly vexed by the loss of 5 ancient civilizations that should have watched their carbon pollution output, which led to their destruction

As we grapple with climate change, it’s important to remember that this isn’t the first time climate change has threatened grand, seemingly unstoppable civilizations.

The Ancestral Puebloans, also known as the “Anasazi” by the Navajo, are one of the most famous examples of an ancient civilization that collapsed due to climate change. Once dominant across the Colorado Plateau in places like Chaco Canyon and Mesa Verde (pictured), the Ancestral Puebloans abandoned their distinctive homes sometime in the 12th and 13th centuries, and it’s not completely understood why they left. There’s evidence of warfare, human sacrifice and cannibalism, but many scientists speculate that devastating environmental changes caused by climate change are largely to blame.

According to NOAA’s Paleoclimatology branch, the decline in the Mesa Verde and Chaco Canyon villages “coincided with a prolonged drought in the San Juan Basin between 1130 and 1180. Lack of rainfall combined with an overtaxed environment may have led to food shortages. Even the clever irrigation methods of the Chacoans could not overcome prolonged drought. Under these pressures Chaco and the outliers may have experienced a slow social disintegration. The people began to drift away.”

There are four others

  • Khmer Empire of ancient Cambodia, which “by the 15th century, the marvelous city had been laid to waste by ecological overexploitation and a devastating water crisis caused by severe climatic fluctuations.”
  • Norse Viking settlers of Greenland, which she surprisingly mentions was killed off by the Little Ice Age, but still had to add “though the overarching catalyst was likely the result of climate change.”
  • Indus Valley civilization of ancient Pakistan, where she notes “What led to their ruinous state? Two centuries of relentless drought.” This was during, you guessed it, a period of cooling, which also effected Greece and Egypt at the same time.
  • Maya civilization of ancient Mexico, in which “The leading theory, however, is that sudden climate change brought about an extremely severe “megadrought” that lasted 200 years.” Time period? 8th and 9th centuries.

What do all of these have in common? A Holocene cool period. During the preceding warm periods, these cultures flourished. Warm periods which were actually warmer than today, and they didn’t have anything like air conditioning and other technology. Isn’t it wonderful how members of the Cult of Climastrology attempt to scare us about the current warm period using examples of destruction during cool periods? What they’re counting on is that people are too stupid to know that they were cool periods.

Read: Bummer: Ancient Civilizations Were Destroyed By Climate Change »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming | 8 Comments | Trackback URL

Team Trump Looks At Blacklist Against #NeverTrump

By William Teach May 14, 2016 – 7:36 am

There are a couple media attacks on Donald Trump occurring. One is about him acting as his own spokesman. Really? Is this really like a grade A scandal? Let’s compare it to Hillary using an unsecured email server in contradiction of the law, exposing national security information to any who cared to hack it. They’re also upset about Trump refusing to release his taxes. That’s a line that they should be concerned about, as should Team Hillary, because it will get people wondering why Hillary won’t release her Goldman-Sachs and other speech transcripts.

What is concerning, though, is this

(Politico) Donald Trump’s campaign is considering hitting his Republican enemies where it hurts: Their wallets.

As Trump moves to work in closer concert with the Republican National Committee apparatus, some campaign aides and allies are pushing him to block lucrative party contracts from consultants who worked to keep him from winning the nomination, according to four sources familiar with the discussions.

“The Never Trump vendors and supporters shouldn’t be in striking distance of the RNC, any of its committees or anyone working on behalf of Donald Trump,” said a Trump campaign official.

The blacklist talk — which sources say mostly targets operatives who worked for Never Trump groups, but also some who worked for Trump’s GOP presidential rivals or their supportive super PACs — strikes against a Republican consulting class that Trump has assailed as a pillar of a corrupt political establishment. It’s a sweet bit of turnabout for Trump aides and consultants who in recent months were warned that their work for the anti-establishment billionaire real estate showman could diminish their own career prospects.

It should concern Republicans that, even before Trump is the official GOP presidential nominee, he is already showing authoritarian convictions, looking to punish his “enemies”. This is shades of Obama, who talked of punishing enemies and rewarding friends. Who has used his bully pulpit, and the power of the federal government, to punish his enemies….well, domestic ones, not enemies of the United States…and reward his friends. Is this where Donald wants to take the GOP? Punishing the actual Conservative base, along with some Libertarians and plain old Republicans, simply because they refuse to get on-board the Trump Train.

Many Republican voters are concerned about Trump’s big government, domineering, authoritative stances. This blacklist talk certainly givers credence to their concerns, and sure won’t help in bringing them around to vote for him. But, then, Trump doesn’t seem interested in Conservatives of any stripe, including those who revere the Constitution. He’s more interested in wooing Democrats and Bernie Sanders supporters. Maybe there’s a reason for #NeverTrump.

Read: Team Trump Looks At Blacklist Against #NeverTrump »

Posted in Donald Trump | 8 Comments | Trackback URL

Gender Is More Than Biological Plumbing Or Something

By William Teach May 14, 2016 – 7:18 am

Over at the NY Times, you can of course expect them to run pro-TG bathroom opinion pieces. Today we’re serenaded by Gillian Thomas, who, unsurprisingly, is an attorney for the ACLU, as part of the Women’s Rights Project, but seems to utterly contradict her end point. The headline reads Gender Is More Than Anatomy, and the final paragraph ends thusly

North Carolina’s supporters don’t get that sex is about more than just anatomy. It also includes family roles, romantic desires, cultural expectations and ideas of masculinity and femininity. The courts get that. In its fight with North Carolina, the Justice Department asks for something quite simple: that Title VII be allowed to mean what it says.

But, here’s what she was arguing throughout the missive

THE showdown between the Justice Department and North Carolina officials over a new state law restricting bathroom access for transgender people has brought a question into sharp relief: Does Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which bars discrimination because of sex, also prohibit discrimination because of gender identity?

The Obama administration thinks so, as do several district and circuit courts. But North Carolina officials call that a “baseless and blatant overreach” and a “radical reinterpretation” of Title VII. They argue that the authors of the law did not have transgender people in mind when they wrote it.

But that position not only misunderstands how legislative interpretation works, it also fails to grasp the historic complexities of Title VII’s sex provision. The provision has always been contested. Since we don’t know much about why Congress enacted it, we have to look at how courts have interpreted it over the years — and they have constantly expanded its meaning.

How have they done this?

Over the years, the courts deepened and broadened their interpretation of sex discrimination. In the Supreme Court’s first Title VII case, in 1971, the justices unanimously ruled against a defense contractor that refused to hire mothers of small children, but not fathers, because it considered them less committed to the job. In 1977, it rejected Alabama’s height and weight requirements for prison guard applicants, a policy that screened out most women.

The next year, the court ruled against the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, which required female workers to pay nearly 15 percent more of their paychecks into an employee-funded pension plan, because women, as a group, outlived men. That ruling has been cited again and again by other courts: Title VII was “intended to strike at the entire spectrum of disparate treatment of men and women resulting from sex stereotypes.”

Other court rulings have recognized myriad forms of sex discrimination that would likely blow Representative Smith’s mind. A gas company that erased women’s seniority while they were on maternity leave, while keeping other leave-takers’ credit intact, was ruled in 1977 to have discriminated because of sex. A few years later, the Supreme Court found an employer’s health plan that provided less extensive care for the wives of male employees than for female employees to be discriminatory.

Have you noticed something? These and other issues cited by Ms. Thomas show discrimination per court ruling against, get this, actual biological women. Not pretend women. Not gender confused women. Not even “women” who have thought long and hard that they really do not like being a male and have had surgery to turn them into “women.” No, this was discrimination against actual women. So, gender is really about anatomy. These “family roles, romantic desires, cultural expectations and ideas of masculinity and femininity” are all about actual biological women. Not fake ones. Perhaps liberal yammerers should consider protecting women and girls for a change.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Gender Is More Than Biological Plumbing Or Something »

Posted in Current Affairs | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

Good News: We Could Have A New Tipping Point In Just Four Weeks!

By William Teach May 13, 2016 – 1:37 pm

And then we’re completely doomed, unlike all the other tipping points. This one matters, you guys!

(9News) 6.6.16 is almost the devil’s number, but it might be much more than that if a leading scientist’s prediction on climate change is correct.

CSIRO fellow Dr Paul Fraser has earmarked June 6 (“plus or minus a week”) as the day when carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere will hit the point of no return, 400 parts per million (ppm).

The atmospheric measuring station at Cape Grim in Tasmania has recorded the current C02 levels in the atmosphere at 399.9ppm.

Dr Fraser said the difference between 399 and 400ppm was trivial, but when it does hit 400ppm mark it would be a “psychological tipping point”. (snip)

When 400ppm becomes the norm in country air, the cities will feel the pain a whole lot more.

Read: Good News: We Could Have A New Tipping Point In Just Four Weeks! »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming | 29 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach May 13, 2016 – 1:00 pm

…is a parched, barren world from too much carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Climate Scepticism, with a post on climate hype in a terrifying doom spiral.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | Comments Off on If All You See… | Trackback URL

Good News: Warmists Plan Lots Of Civil Disobedience To Protest Affordable Energy Sources

By William Teach May 13, 2016 – 7:17 am

It’s apparently the only way left to fight, per Kara Moses at the UK Guardian

Civil disobedience is the only way left to fight climate change

Right now, thousands of people are taking direct action as part of a global wave of protests against the biggest fossil fuel infrastructure projects across the world. We kicked off earlier this month by shutting down the UK’s largest opencast coal mine in south Wales.

Last Sunday, around 1,000 people closed the world’s largest coal-exporting port in Newcastle, Australia and other bold actions are happening at power stations, oil refineries, pipelines and mines everywhere from the Philippines, Brazil and the US, to Nigeria, Germany and India.

This is just the start of the promised escalation after the Paris agreement, and the largest ever act of civil disobedience in the history of the environmental movement. World governments may have agreed to keep warming to 1.5C, but it’s up to us to keep fossil fuels in the ground.

The funniest part of all this is the notion that quite a few of these protesters are using fossil fueled vehicles to go to the protests.

It is unjust that corporations and governments can commit crimes against the planet and society without retribution, while those fighting to prevent such crimes are punished, murdered and incarcerated. But the number of people willing to challenge this is growing. And if we really want climate justice, ;protest in the pursuit of this must be normalised; we must support rather than denounce those willing to put themselves on the line, since we all benefit from their actions. Not everyone is in a position to take civil disobedience, but we can all get behind it.

Essentially, Kara is arguing to normalize violence and destruction of property in order to fight Hotcoldwetdry. And, as Stephen points out in the Guardian comments

How about developing cost efficient renewables rather than asking people to pay 3-4* the price vs. fossi fuels?

When renewables become price effective they will soar. This paper regularly tells us how most of the country struggles to put food on their table… and yet you’re asking us all to pay huge increases in our energy bills, travel costs etc. Can’t both be right.

Look to get more funding into R&D, more tax cuts for the STEM industry, govt. subsidies, more kids into science, campaign for universities to stop closing their science courses etc.

Na…. rioting is more fun.

Well, really, you can’t expect Warmists to give up their own big carbon footprint lifestyles, can you? And when it comes to Progressivism, to quote Monty Python’s Holy Grail “Come and see the violence inherent in the system.”

Read: Good News: Warmists Plan Lots Of Civil Disobedience To Protest Affordable Energy Sources »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

Obama Directs Schools To Put The “Rights” Of Boys Who Think They’re Girls Over Real Biological Girls

By William Teach May 13, 2016 – 6:55 am

Obama is once again imposing his hardcore leftist vision on America, to the detriment of females who are actually biologically female. Once again, I’ll note this from Todd Starnes

Fox Business anchor Trish Regan asked a profound question on her show this week regarding the transgender bathroom controversy that has gripped the nation.

“What about the civil rights of women who don’t want men in their bathrooms,” she asked. “Do their rights matter at all?”

I’m afraid the answer to that question is no – the rights of women do not matter.

And any woman or young girl who complains about sharing locker rooms or shower stalls or bathrooms with a biological male — risks being labeled a transphobic bigot.

To Obama, the rights of women do not matter in this Progressive World

(NY Times) The Obama administration is planning to issue a sweeping directive telling every public school district in the country to allow transgender students to use the bathrooms that match their gender identity.

A letter to school districts will go out Friday, adding to a highly charged debate over transgender rights in the middle of the administration’s legal fight with North Carolina over the issue. The declaration — signed by Justice and Education department officials — will describe what schools should do to ensure that none of their students are discriminated against.

What about the discrimination against those women who do not want boys in their bathrooms, locker rooms, and showers?

It does not have the force of law, but it contains an implicit threat: Schools that do not abide by the Obama administration’s interpretation of the law could face lawsuits or a loss of federal aid.

So school systems that do not want the gender confused peeing, changing, and showering with those with the correct biological plumbing could see Dear Leader withhold the money that was forcibly taken out of their paychecks. Sorry, ladies, the big Obama bus has formally run you over.

“No student should ever have to go through the experience of feeling unwelcome at school or on a college campus,” John B. King Jr., the secretary of the Department of Education, said in a statement. “We must ensure that our young people know that whoever they are or wherever they come from, they have the opportunity to get a great education in an environment free from discrimination, harassment and violence.”

Perhaps the DOE should worry more about the violence that occurs within the school systems in Democratic Party run schools, such as Chicago.

“A school may not require transgender students to use facilities inconsistent with their gender identity or to use individual-user facilities when other students are not required to do so,” according to the letter, a copy of which was provided to The New York Times.

The latter would be the proper method, instead of having little girls exposed to little boys in the changing rooms. The DOE has a 25 page advisory on “best practices” for dealing with the gender confused, which fails to encompass the notion of respecting the privacy of women, because schools won’t be allowed to ask if the biological men are really gender confused. No one would ever take advantage of this policy, right?

Team Obama doesn’t care about your opinion. They don’t care about going through the proper Constitutional channels. They don’t care about the beliefs of parents who want to protect their children. They do not care about the civil rights of biological women. All they care about is force applied for a tiny interest group.

Seriously, who thought this would become such a huge issue, all because a few idiots in Charlotte, NC passed a TG ordinance, one which they were warned about prior?

WTVD has a copy of the letter.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Obama Directs Schools To Put The “Rights” Of Boys Who Think They’re Girls Over Real Biological Girls »

Posted in Barry Obama, Current Affairs | 19 Comments | Trackback URL

Target CEO Says You’re Totally Missing The Point Of Letting Fake Men Into The Women’s Room

By William Teach May 12, 2016 – 4:26 pm

Come on, people, you need to get it!

(Yahoo) Chairman and CEO Brian Cornell said Wednesday its bathroom policy fits the retailer’s long history of “embracing diversity and inclusion.”

Cornell told CNBC’s “ Squawk Box ” he wants everyone to feel welcome at his stores but stressed that safety is also very important.

Hey, there’s nothing safer than opening the floodgates for people who are taking advantage of the policies to go into the women’s room and spy on ladies and girls.

The group wants Target to have separate facilities for men and women, but also have a single occupancy unisex bathroom option for the transgender community and for those who like using the bathroom alone.

What’s missing in the debate, Cornell said, is Target already has those options in most stores. He said it’s a priority to make sure all stores have a family bathroom option in a addition to a men’s and women’s room.

Of course, the problem here is that the TG crew and their backers do not want to use the family bathroom. They are DEMANDING to use the bathroom of their choice. They refuse to compromise. It’s their way or….well, there is not other way in their world. You will be forced to comply.

How’s Target’s policy working?

That tough feedback includes a consumer boycott that now has 1.2 million supporters, much damage to the company’s brand, and a massive sell-off on Wall Street that has chopped the company’s share price from almost $84 on April 19 to $75.70 on May 11.

That’s a loss of $8.30 per share, or 10 percent, or almost $5 billion since April 19. Of course, some part of that loss is due to President Barack Obama’s weak economy — but no company is helped by many management decisions that anger so many customers.

Come one, gender confused supporters, you have to buck up Target!

Read: Target CEO Says You’re Totally Missing The Point Of Letting Fake Men Into The Women’s Room »

Posted in Current Affairs | 9 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove