Page 4 of 5

Re: c/o 2019 LGBTQ Applicants (2015-2016)

Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2016 11:56 pm
by monceau
Navyhornguy wrote:
Olliedemars wrote:
monceau wrote:Hi LGBT+ friends, I'm in kind of an odd predicament. In my apps, I checked the box saying I'm LGBT and wrote about it somewhat in my PS. For those of you who made your LGBT identity apparent in your applications, has it ever been brought up on a school tour? I'm visiting four schools with both parents, one of whom I'm out to and the other I'm not. Thanks!


This happened to me at Wellesley (undergrad, obviously); I asked about LGBT student orgs during an interview, then the interviewer walked me out to the lobby where my mom was waiting. My interviewer brought up the topic again, and I cut her off, er--twice? Very awkward. Very dinged.

Now that I'm a nearly-married old lady and my mom likes my fiancee more than she likes me, I can laugh about it. Anyway, no, won't happen at law schools. I've been on two visits, and no one rushed up to me to slap a rainbow sticker on me.


Aww shoot, I was hoping to get slapped with a rainbow sticker at UVA's open house tomorrow. :(


haha i totally would want one too if i didn't have my parents in tow

Re: c/o 2019 LGBTQ Applicants (2015-2016)

Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2016 7:30 pm
by Draconem
Anyone else really glad they aren't going to any North Carolina schools right now? Really disappointed in the legislation that just passed.

Re: c/o 2019 LGBTQ Applicants (2015-2016)

Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2016 7:35 pm
by counttoten
Draconem wrote:Anyone else really glad they aren't going to any North Carolina schools right now? Really disappointed in the legislation that just passed.


Yes. Honestly frightening.

Re: c/o 2019 LGBTQ Applicants (2015-2016)

Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2016 7:36 pm
by OtterLaw
Draconem wrote:Anyone else really glad they aren't going to any North Carolina schools right now? Really disappointed in the legislation that just passed.


Duke rejecting me doesn't seem so bad now. It's very discouraging.

Re: c/o 2019 LGBTQ Applicants (2015-2016)

Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2016 7:39 pm
by Draconem
Navyhornguy wrote:
Draconem wrote:Anyone else really glad they aren't going to any North Carolina schools right now? Really disappointed in the legislation that just passed.


Duke rejecting me doesn't seem so bad now. It's very discouraging.


I didn't even apply to Duke because of the area's anti-LGBT reputation, but I am really glad that I didn't throw an app in for the hell of it right about now.

Re: c/o 2019 LGBTQ Applicants (2015-2016)

Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2016 7:44 pm
by GrayGamut
Draconem wrote:Anyone else really glad they aren't going to any North Carolina schools right now? Really disappointed in the legislation that just passed.

Yeah, it's absolutely terrifying. There is zero point to it other than bigotry. So much for all that small government talk.

Re: c/o 2019 LGBTQ Applicants (2015-2016)

Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2016 7:54 pm
by tsujimoto74
Navyhornguy wrote:
Draconem wrote:Anyone else really glad they aren't going to any North Carolina schools right now? Really disappointed in the legislation that just passed.


Duke rejecting me doesn't seem so bad now. It's very discouraging.


Yyyyup. I mean, they waitlisted me rather than an outright rejected, but I'm gonna be withdrawing my app. Also, basketball is a terrible sport.

Re: c/o 2019 LGBTQ Applicants (2015-2016)

Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2016 7:59 pm
by Olliedemars
.

Re: c/o 2019 LGBTQ Applicants (2015-2016)

Posted: Thu Mar 24, 2016 8:00 pm
by Draconem
Olliedemars wrote:
GrayGamut wrote:
Draconem wrote:Anyone else really glad they aren't going to any North Carolina schools right now? Really disappointed in the legislation that just passed.

Yeah, it's absolutely terrifying. There is zero point to it other than bigotry. So much for all that small government talk.


Y'all read about how many major businesses based in/with a significant presence in NC are publicly denouncing the new policies, though? Disney, American Airlines, etc. Very heartening.


Indeed. I'm hoping this ends shortly, but still. The fact that it even happened is so frustrating.

Re: c/o 2019 LGBTQ Applicants (2015-2016)

Posted: Fri Mar 25, 2016 8:36 am
by bruceaquizzer1
GrayGamut wrote:
Draconem wrote:Anyone else really glad they aren't going to any North Carolina schools right now? Really disappointed in the legislation that just passed.

Yeah, it's absolutely terrifying. There is zero point to it other than bigotry. So much for all that small government talk.

I wouldn't say its bigotry. The problem is that that type of law could easily be abused by people who wouldn't be using it for the right reason. For instance it gives male sex offenders a chance to go into womens bathroom and do whatever. Its a slippery slope

Re: c/o 2019 LGBTQ Applicants (2015-2016)

Posted: Fri Mar 25, 2016 9:12 am
by GrayGamut
bruceaquizzer1 wrote:
GrayGamut wrote:
Draconem wrote:Anyone else really glad they aren't going to any North Carolina schools right now? Really disappointed in the legislation that just passed.

Yeah, it's absolutely terrifying. There is zero point to it other than bigotry. So much for all that small government talk.

I wouldn't say its bigotry. The problem is that that type of law could easily be abused by people who wouldn't be using it for the right reason. For instance it gives male sex offenders a chance to go into womens bathroom and do whatever. Its a slippery slope

That slippery slope argument has been disproved over and over by states that have legislation specifically allowing trans folk to use restroom of their choosing. There have been no increases in sexual assault because of it, nor any sort of mass societal confusion. This is about trans folk being able to pee in public facilities without outing themselves. A binary, passing trans man
will not look like he belongs in a women's restroom, and going in could result in physical harm to him if the wrong person takes offense. Trust trans folk to know where to pee. That's it.

Re: c/o 2019 LGBTQ Applicants (2015-2016)

Posted: Fri Mar 25, 2016 9:19 am
by bruceaquizzer1
GrayGamut wrote:
bruceaquizzer1 wrote:
GrayGamut wrote:
Draconem wrote:Anyone else really glad they aren't going to any North Carolina schools right now? Really disappointed in the legislation that just passed.

Yeah, it's absolutely terrifying. There is zero point to it other than bigotry. So much for all that small government talk.

I wouldn't say its bigotry. The problem is that that type of law could easily be abused by people who wouldn't be using it for the right reason. For instance it gives male sex offenders a chance to go into womens bathroom and do whatever. Its a slippery slope

That slippery slope argument has been disproved over and over by states that have legislation specifically allowing trans folk to use restroom of their choosing. There have been no increases in sexual assault because of it, nor any sort of mass societal confusion. This is about trans folk being able to pee in public facilities without outing themselves. A binary, passing trans man
will not look like he belongs in a women's restroom, and going in could result in physical harm to him if the wrong person takes offense. Trust trans folk to know where to pee. That's it.

I agree that trans people will use it to pee where they should. However, whats to stop a non-trans man from going into the womens bathroom just to look? Heck, if I was a guy that's what id do
And on the other hand, in bathrooms your bound to see genitals, be it accidentally or whatever, and im not sure anyone would want their young son/daughter seeing things they shouldn't

Re: c/o 2019 LGBTQ Applicants (2015-2016)

Posted: Fri Mar 25, 2016 9:26 am
by alohalaw
GrayGamut wrote:
bruceaquizzer1 wrote:
GrayGamut wrote:
Draconem wrote:Anyone else really glad they aren't going to any North Carolina schools right now? Really disappointed in the legislation that just passed.

Yeah, it's absolutely terrifying. There is zero point to it other than bigotry. So much for all that small government talk.

I wouldn't say its bigotry. The problem is that that type of law could easily be abused by people who wouldn't be using it for the right reason. For instance it gives male sex offenders a chance to go into womens bathroom and do whatever. Its a slippery slope

That slippery slope argument has been disproved over and over by states that have legislation specifically allowing trans folk to use restroom of their choosing. There have been no increases in sexual assault because of it, nor any sort of mass societal confusion. This is about trans folk being able to pee in public facilities without outing themselves. A binary, passing trans man
will not look like he belongs in a women's restroom, and going in could result in physical harm to him if the wrong person takes offense. Trust trans folk to know where to pee. That's it.


Isn't it still a slippery slope? If even one person gets assaulted due to "bathroom sharing" it should count for something. Sexual assault is something an individual has to cope with for a lifetime, so there are legitimate interests in having separate bathrooms. As a LGBT member I can see where sometimes our community can be over-aggressive.

Re: c/o 2019 LGBTQ Applicants (2015-2016)

Posted: Fri Mar 25, 2016 9:32 am
by bruceaquizzer1
alohalaw wrote:
GrayGamut wrote:
bruceaquizzer1 wrote:
GrayGamut wrote:
Draconem wrote:Anyone else really glad they aren't going to any North Carolina schools right now? Really disappointed in the legislation that just passed.

Yeah, it's absolutely terrifying. There is zero point to it other than bigotry. So much for all that small government talk.

I wouldn't say its bigotry. The problem is that that type of law could easily be abused by people who wouldn't be using it for the right reason. For instance it gives male sex offenders a chance to go into womens bathroom and do whatever. Its a slippery slope

That slippery slope argument has been disproved over and over by states that have legislation specifically allowing trans folk to use restroom of their choosing. There have been no increases in sexual assault because of it, nor any sort of mass societal confusion. This is about trans folk being able to pee in public facilities without outing themselves. A binary, passing trans man
will not look like he belongs in a women's restroom, and going in could result in physical harm to him if the wrong person takes offense. Trust trans folk to know where to pee. That's it.


Isn't it still a slippery slope? If even one person gets assaulted due to "bathroom sharing" it should count for something. Sexual assault is something an individual has to cope with for a lifetime, so there are legitimate interests in having separate bathrooms. As a LGBT member I can see where sometimes our community can be over-aggressive.

I appreciate your input. Sometimes people are quick to say "Oh you're against this, you must hate___"

Re: c/o 2019 LGBTQ Applicants (2015-2016)

Posted: Fri Mar 25, 2016 9:34 am
by GrayGamut
bruceaquizzer1 wrote:
GrayGamut wrote:
bruceaquizzer1 wrote:
GrayGamut wrote:
Draconem wrote:Anyone else really glad they aren't going to any North Carolina schools right now? Really disappointed in the legislation that just passed.

Yeah, it's absolutely terrifying. There is zero point to it other than bigotry. So much for all that small government talk.

I wouldn't say its bigotry. The problem is that that type of law could easily be abused by people who wouldn't be using it for the right reason. For instance it gives male sex offenders a chance to go into womens bathroom and do whatever. Its a slippery slope

That slippery slope argument has been disproved over and over by states that have legislation specifically allowing trans folk to use restroom of their choosing. There have been no increases in sexual assault because of it, nor any sort of mass societal confusion. This is about trans folk being able to pee in public facilities without outing themselves. A binary, passing trans man
will not look like he belongs in a women's restroom, and going in could result in physical harm to him if the wrong person takes offense. Trust trans folk to know where to pee. That's it.

I agree that trans people will use it to pee where they should. However, whats to stop a non-trans man from going into the womens bathroom just to look? Heck, if I was a guy that's what id do
And on the other hand, in bathrooms your bound to see genitals, be it accidentally or whatever, and im not sure anyone would want their young son/daughter seeing things they shouldn't

Really? Because I'm pretty sure that just means you'd be an awful, creepy man, but it still has zero to do with trans folk.

I have a feeling you assume that you can ID every trans person you come across and that you know what their genitals look like, which are assumptions on which this legislation is based. Those assumptions are laughably wrong, but the very real physical danger that it puts trans folk into is no laughing matter.

Re: c/o 2019 LGBTQ Applicants (2015-2016)

Posted: Fri Mar 25, 2016 9:35 am
by Draconem
GrayGamut wrote:
bruceaquizzer1 wrote:
GrayGamut wrote:
bruceaquizzer1 wrote:
GrayGamut wrote:
Draconem wrote:Anyone else really glad they aren't going to any North Carolina schools right now? Really disappointed in the legislation that just passed.

Yeah, it's absolutely terrifying. There is zero point to it other than bigotry. So much for all that small government talk.

I wouldn't say its bigotry. The problem is that that type of law could easily be abused by people who wouldn't be using it for the right reason. For instance it gives male sex offenders a chance to go into womens bathroom and do whatever. Its a slippery slope

That slippery slope argument has been disproved over and over by states that have legislation specifically allowing trans folk to use restroom of their choosing. There have been no increases in sexual assault because of it, nor any sort of mass societal confusion. This is about trans folk being able to pee in public facilities without outing themselves. A binary, passing trans man
will not look like he belongs in a women's restroom, and going in could result in physical harm to him if the wrong person takes offense. Trust trans folk to know where to pee. That's it.

I agree that trans people will use it to pee where they should. However, whats to stop a non-trans man from going into the womens bathroom just to look? Heck, if I was a guy that's what id do
And on the other hand, in bathrooms your bound to see genitals, be it accidentally or whatever, and im not sure anyone would want their young son/daughter seeing things they shouldn't

Really? Because I'm pretty sure that just means you'd be an awful, creepy man, but it still has zero to do with trans folk.

I have a feeling you assume that you can ID every trans person you come across and that you know what their genitals look like, which are assumptions on which this legislation is based. Those assumptions are laughably wrong, but the very real physical danger that it puts trans folk into is no laughing matter.


Exactly.

Re: c/o 2019 LGBTQ Applicants (2015-2016)

Posted: Fri Mar 25, 2016 9:40 am
by bruceaquizzer1
GrayGamut wrote:
bruceaquizzer1 wrote:
GrayGamut wrote:
bruceaquizzer1 wrote:
GrayGamut wrote:
Draconem wrote:Anyone else really glad they aren't going to any North Carolina schools right now? Really disappointed in the legislation that just passed.

Yeah, it's absolutely terrifying. There is zero point to it other than bigotry. So much for all that small government talk.

I wouldn't say its bigotry. The problem is that that type of law could easily be abused by people who wouldn't be using it for the right reason. For instance it gives male sex offenders a chance to go into womens bathroom and do whatever. Its a slippery slope

That slippery slope argument has been disproved over and over by states that have legislation specifically allowing trans folk to use restroom of their choosing. There have been no increases in sexual assault because of it, nor any sort of mass societal confusion. This is about trans folk being able to pee in public facilities without outing themselves. A binary, passing trans man
will not look like he belongs in a women's restroom, and going in could result in physical harm to him if the wrong person takes offense. Trust trans folk to know where to pee. That's it.

I agree that trans people will use it to pee where they should. However, whats to stop a non-trans man from going into the womens bathroom just to look? Heck, if I was a guy that's what id do
And on the other hand, in bathrooms your bound to see genitals, be it accidentally or whatever, and im not sure anyone would want their young son/daughter seeing things they shouldn't

Really? Because I'm pretty sure that just means you'd be an awful, creepy man, but it still has zero to do with trans folk.

I have a feeling you assume that you can ID every trans person you come across and that you know what their genitals look like, which are assumptions on which this legislation is based. Those assumptions are laughably wrong, but the very real physical danger that it puts trans folk into is no laughing matter.

Again, im really not arguing about trans people being able to use the correct bathroom. I think that's a given that they should be allowed that. However, its not so clear cut because of people who will then have the ability to abuse the system per se.

Re: c/o 2019 LGBTQ Applicants (2015-2016)

Posted: Fri Mar 25, 2016 9:47 am
by GrayGamut
alohalaw wrote:
GrayGamut wrote:
bruceaquizzer1 wrote:
GrayGamut wrote:
Draconem wrote:Anyone else really glad they aren't going to any North Carolina schools right now? Really disappointed in the legislation that just passed.

Yeah, it's absolutely terrifying. There is zero point to it other than bigotry. So much for all that small government talk.

I wouldn't say its bigotry. The problem is that that type of law could easily be abused by people who wouldn't be using it for the right reason. For instance it gives male sex offenders a chance to go into womens bathroom and do whatever. Its a slippery slope

That slippery slope argument has been disproved over and over by states that have legislation specifically allowing trans folk to use restroom of their choosing. There have been no increases in sexual assault because of it, nor any sort of mass societal confusion. This is about trans folk being able to pee in public facilities without outing themselves. A binary, passing trans man
will not look like he belongs in a women's restroom, and going in could result in physical harm to him if the wrong person takes offense. Trust trans folk to know where to pee. That's it.


Isn't it still a slippery slope? If even one person gets assaulted due to "bathroom sharing" it should count for something. Sexual assault is something an individual has to cope with for a lifetime, so there are legitimate interests in having separate bathrooms. As a LGBT member I can see where sometimes our community can be over-aggressive.

I have trans guy friends who have been socially IDed (i.e. "passed") as men for years. You think it's good policy to force them to use the women's restroom because they haven't been able to completely jump through all of the ridiculous administrative hoops necessary to change their birth certificate? This forces men to choose between legal penalties and a potential ass-whooping every time they go out and need pee.

Please can we stop conflating this with sexual assault. It's apples and oranges. Sexual assault is already illegal. Trans folk using the restroom shouldn't be.

Re: c/o 2019 LGBTQ Applicants (2015-2016)

Posted: Fri Mar 25, 2016 9:55 am
by MarshallMarshal
GrayGamut wrote:
alohalaw wrote:
GrayGamut wrote:
bruceaquizzer1 wrote:
GrayGamut wrote:
Draconem wrote:Anyone else really glad they aren't going to any North Carolina schools right now? Really disappointed in the legislation that just passed.

Yeah, it's absolutely terrifying. There is zero point to it other than bigotry. So much for all that small government talk.

I wouldn't say its bigotry. The problem is that that type of law could easily be abused by people who wouldn't be using it for the right reason. For instance it gives male sex offenders a chance to go into womens bathroom and do whatever. Its a slippery slope

That slippery slope argument has been disproved over and over by states that have legislation specifically allowing trans folk to use restroom of their choosing. There have been no increases in sexual assault because of it, nor any sort of mass societal confusion. This is about trans folk being able to pee in public facilities without outing themselves. A binary, passing trans man
will not look like he belongs in a women's restroom, and going in could result in physical harm to him if the wrong person takes offense. Trust trans folk to know where to pee. That's it.


Isn't it still a slippery slope? If even one person gets assaulted due to "bathroom sharing" it should count for something. Sexual assault is something an individual has to cope with for a lifetime, so there are legitimate interests in having separate bathrooms. As a LGBT member I can see where sometimes our community can be over-aggressive.

I have trans guy friends who have been socially IDed (i.e. "passed") as men for years. You think it's good policy to force them to use the women's restroom because they haven't been able to completely jump through all of the ridiculous administrative hoops necessary to change their birth certificate? This forces men to choose between legal penalties and a potential ass-whooping every time they go out and need pee.

Please can we stop conflating this with sexual assault. It's apples and oranges. Sexual assault is already illegal. Trans folk using the restroom shouldn't be.


Nailed it. This slippery slope argument you're making is the same one that discriminiating legislatures around the country are making. But we have no basis for that other than prejudice and imaginary monsters that lobbyist and a prejudiced public has created. Over 200 cities have bills that that allow trans folks to use the bathrooms that best fit them, and there is literally no evidence that they are actually abused by cisgender criminals.

Sexual assault is obviously a real problem. But I can guarantee you that if we were 1/2 as worked up about the imaginary assaults that come about as the result of fair and inclusive bathroom policies, we could probably do some major good.

Re: c/o 2019 LGBTQ Applicants (2015-2016)

Posted: Fri Mar 25, 2016 9:57 am
by GrayGamut
bruceaquizzer1 wrote:
GrayGamut wrote:
bruceaquizzer1 wrote:
GrayGamut wrote:
bruceaquizzer1 wrote:
GrayGamut wrote:
Draconem wrote:Anyone else really glad they aren't going to any North Carolina schools right now? Really disappointed in the legislation that just passed.

Yeah, it's absolutely terrifying. There is zero point to it other than bigotry. So much for all that small government talk.

I wouldn't say its bigotry. The problem is that that type of law could easily be abused by people who wouldn't be using it for the right reason. For instance it gives male sex offenders a chance to go into womens bathroom and do whatever. Its a slippery slope

That slippery slope argument has been disproved over and over by states that have legislation specifically allowing trans folk to use restroom of their choosing. There have been no increases in sexual assault because of it, nor any sort of mass societal confusion. This is about trans folk being able to pee in public facilities without outing themselves. A binary, passing trans man
will not look like he belongs in a women's restroom, and going in could result in physical harm to him if the wrong person takes offense. Trust trans folk to know where to pee. That's it.

I agree that trans people will use it to pee where they should. However, whats to stop a non-trans man from going into the womens bathroom just to look? Heck, if I was a guy that's what id do
And on the other hand, in bathrooms your bound to see genitals, be it accidentally or whatever, and im not sure anyone would want their young son/daughter seeing things they shouldn't

Really? Because I'm pretty sure that just means you'd be an awful, creepy man, but it still has zero to do with trans folk.

I have a feeling you assume that you can ID every trans person you come across and that you know what their genitals look like, which are assumptions on which this legislation is based. Those assumptions are laughably wrong, but the very real physical danger that it puts trans folk into is no laughing matter.

Again, im really not arguing about trans people being able to use the correct bathroom. I think that's a given that they should be allowed that. However, its not so clear cut because of people who will then have the ability to abuse the system per se.

Well then I'm glad we can agree that the legislation is terrible, because it penalizes exactly that. We already have laws that prohibit sexual assault and harassment. If anyone wants to try and "abuse the system" by entering a bathroom for those purposes, there is clear legal recourse. No need for more legislation.

Re: c/o 2019 LGBTQ Applicants (2015-2016)

Posted: Fri Mar 25, 2016 9:57 am
by GrayGamut
MarshallMarshal wrote:
GrayGamut wrote:
alohalaw wrote:
GrayGamut wrote:
bruceaquizzer1 wrote:
GrayGamut wrote:
Draconem wrote:Anyone else really glad they aren't going to any North Carolina schools right now? Really disappointed in the legislation that just passed.

Yeah, it's absolutely terrifying. There is zero point to it other than bigotry. So much for all that small government talk.

I wouldn't say its bigotry. The problem is that that type of law could easily be abused by people who wouldn't be using it for the right reason. For instance it gives male sex offenders a chance to go into womens bathroom and do whatever. Its a slippery slope

That slippery slope argument has been disproved over and over by states that have legislation specifically allowing trans folk to use restroom of their choosing. There have been no increases in sexual assault because of it, nor any sort of mass societal confusion. This is about trans folk being able to pee in public facilities without outing themselves. A binary, passing trans man
will not look like he belongs in a women's restroom, and going in could result in physical harm to him if the wrong person takes offense. Trust trans folk to know where to pee. That's it.


Isn't it still a slippery slope? If even one person gets assaulted due to "bathroom sharing" it should count for something. Sexual assault is something an individual has to cope with for a lifetime, so there are legitimate interests in having separate bathrooms. As a LGBT member I can see where sometimes our community can be over-aggressive.

I have trans guy friends who have been socially IDed (i.e. "passed") as men for years. You think it's good policy to force them to use the women's restroom because they haven't been able to completely jump through all of the ridiculous administrative hoops necessary to change their birth certificate? This forces men to choose between legal penalties and a potential ass-whooping every time they go out and need pee.

Please can we stop conflating this with sexual assault. It's apples and oranges. Sexual assault is already illegal. Trans folk using the restroom shouldn't be.


Nailed it. This slippery slope argument you're making is the same one that discriminiating legislatures around the country are making. But we have no basis for that other than prejudice and imaginary monsters lobbyist and a prejudiced public has created. Over 200 cities have bills that that allow trans folks to use the bathroomsthat best fits them, and there is no literally evidence that they are actually abused by cisgender criminals.

Sexual assault is obviously a real problem.But I can guarantee you that if we here 1/2 as worked up about imaginary assaults that come about as the result of fair and inclusive bathroom policies, we could probably do some major good.

Yes, thank you.

Re: c/o 2019 LGBTQ Applicants (2015-2016)

Posted: Fri Mar 25, 2016 10:03 am
by scone
GrayGamut wrote:Please can we stop conflating this with sexual assault. It's apples and oranges. Sexual assault is already illegal. Trans folk using the restroom shouldn't be.


Exactly.

Also, I don't think this is the place to argue about whether this legislation is LGBTQ-friendly or not. This is a thread for LGBTQ applicants and law students to discuss their experiences applying to law school and their impressions of different schools. If any of us feel threatened by or worried about particular legislation in a state we might choose to go to law school in, we have a right to post about that here without the thread descending into a load of people debating whether the law is objectively good or not. Those discussions belong in the lounge, not here.

Re: c/o 2019 LGBTQ Applicants (2015-2016)

Posted: Fri Mar 25, 2016 10:05 am
by alohalaw
GrayGamut wrote:I have trans guy friends who have been socially IDed (i.e. "passed") as men for years. You think it's good policy to force them to use the women's restroom because they haven't been able to completely jump through all of the ridiculous administrative hoops necessary to change their birth certificate? This forces men to choose between legal penalties and a potential ass-whooping every time they go out and need pee.

Please can we stop conflating this with sexual assault. It's apples and oranges. Sexual assault is already illegal. Trans folk using the restroom shouldn't be.


I actually don't know the answer to the issue. I do believe that understanding helps to solve the problem though. Unfortunately it sounds like you're over-simplifying, because sexual assault is something a lot of women live in fear of everyday.

Sexual assault is already illegal, but it has not stopped being a serious ongoing issue.

Allowing transgendered individuals to use the bathroom of their choice is not going to stop "predators", however it could be helpful if we learned to be considerate of everyone. No cause is not greater than another, and we certainly won't beat any of them if we disregard the very serious issues regarding others.

Re: c/o 2019 LGBTQ Applicants (2015-2016)

Posted: Fri Mar 25, 2016 10:11 am
by GrayGamut
scone wrote:
GrayGamut wrote:Please can we stop conflating this with sexual assault. It's apples and oranges. Sexual assault is already illegal. Trans folk using the restroom shouldn't be.


Exactly.

Also, I don't think this is the place to argue about whether this legislation is LGBTQ-friendly or not. This is a thread for LGBTQ applicants and law students to discuss their experiences applying to law school and their impressions of different schools. If any of us feel threatened by or worried about particular legislation in a state we might choose to go to law school in, we have a right to post about that here without the thread descending into a load of people debating whether the law is objectively good or not. Those discussions belong in the lounge, not here.

Thanks. Sorry for my role in hijacking the thread. Appreciate you keeping us on track, OP.

Re: c/o 2019 LGBTQ Applicants (2015-2016)

Posted: Fri Mar 25, 2016 12:36 pm
by tsujimoto74
bruceaquizzer1 wrote:
GrayGamut wrote:
bruceaquizzer1 wrote:
GrayGamut wrote:
bruceaquizzer1 wrote:
GrayGamut wrote:
Draconem wrote:Anyone else really glad they aren't going to any North Carolina schools right now? Really disappointed in the legislation that just passed.

Yeah, it's absolutely terrifying. There is zero point to it other than bigotry. So much for all that small government talk.

I wouldn't say its bigotry. The problem is that that type of law could easily be abused by people who wouldn't be using it for the right reason. For instance it gives male sex offenders a chance to go into womens bathroom and do whatever. Its a slippery slope

That slippery slope argument has been disproved over and over by states that have legislation specifically allowing trans folk to use restroom of their choosing. There have been no increases in sexual assault because of it, nor any sort of mass societal confusion. This is about trans folk being able to pee in public facilities without outing themselves. A binary, passing trans man
will not look like he belongs in a women's restroom, and going in could result in physical harm to him if the wrong person takes offense. Trust trans folk to know where to pee. That's it.

I agree that trans people will use it to pee where they should. However, whats to stop a non-trans man from going into the womens bathroom just to look? Heck, if I was a guy that's what id do
And on the other hand, in bathrooms your bound to see genitals, be it accidentally or whatever, and im not sure anyone would want their young son/daughter seeing things they shouldn't

Really? Because I'm pretty sure that just means you'd be an awful, creepy man, but it still has zero to do with trans folk.

I have a feeling you assume that you can ID every trans person you come across and that you know what their genitals look like, which are assumptions on which this legislation is based. Those assumptions are laughably wrong, but the very real physical danger that it puts trans folk into is no laughing matter.

Again, im really not arguing about trans people being able to use the correct bathroom. I think that's a given that they should be allowed that. However, its not so clear cut because of people who will then have the ability to abuse the system per se.



Nothing is stopping creeps from being creeps NOW (oooo a door that doesn't lock with a picture of a person on it, wouldn't wanna fuck with that). Letting trans people pee in the correct place has zilch to do with it.