Bridal Shop Refuses Transgender Customer

[jacee]

HIS side of the story, not credible. He already has an established pattern as a habitual liar.

So where's the other side?

[Bryan]

So where's the other side?

Exactly.

Notice the Spec hid behind the old "couldn't be reached for comment" trick. Translation: "the other viewpoint would ruin the narrative we've decided to take, so were not going to even try to get it".

[GostHacked]

You beat me to it - some people are all over the place with their opinions. It truly is unbelievable.

I thought I was reading the post wrong when I read that cybercoma said it shouldn't make any difference if males were to share the same changing rooms as females at a public pool. This from someone who didn't think children should be subjected to Katy Perry showing cleavage on Sesame Street.

But evidently seeing a naked man in a public pool changing room should be A-ok.

I don't think anyone should be exposed to Katy Perry, let alone her cleavage.

[Guest]

That's not a cleavage!

This is a clea...

Banned!

[BC_chick]

The store-owner's actions were merely a reflection on her personal views about gender and I think it would be a lot more respectful to just come out and say that she can't accept Singh as a woman than to come up with these ridiculous excuses about making the 'customers' uncomfortable. It's not like she asked to get naked in the middle of the room.

Ditto for those defending her.

[Guest American Woman]

The store-owner's actions were merely a reflection on her personal views about gender and I think it would be a lot more respectful to just come out and say that she can't accept Singh as a woman than to come up with these ridiculous excuses about making the 'customers' uncomfortable. It's not like she asked to get naked in the middle of the room.

So you were there?

[cybercoma]

What are you smoking?

a/ The trans person was asked to leave the bridal shop because patrons were uncomfortable with his/her presence.

b/ Men were asked to leave a public pool because patrons were uncomfortable with their presence.

Either exclusion to accommodate discomfort IS legitimate, or it's not. If b/ is acceptable, then so is a/.

Does that count for people that are uncomfortable with "niggers" and "Jews" too?

Edited May 6, 2013 by cybercoma

[cybercoma]

You beat me to it - some people are all over the place with their opinions. It truly is unbelievable.

I thought I was reading the post wrong when I read that cybercoma said it shouldn't make any difference if males were to share the same changing rooms as females at a public pool. This from someone who didn't think children should be subjected to Katy Perry showing cleavage on Sesame Street.

But evidently seeing a naked man in a public pool changing room should be A-ok.

I said it was inappropriate for a children's show to be portraying women in this fashion and I stand by that. I'm sorry that you can't seem to grasp why that has nothing to do with the issue in this thread.

[cybercoma]

So you are basically saying it is ok to ban fathers from public swimming pools unless they claim they are transgendered because being transgender trumps being muslim?

I am amazed that you cannot see the inane hypocrisy in your world view.

The fact is many people are not comfortable with transgendered people using facilities designed for a sex opposite to what they currently appear to have. This discomfort is no different from the discomfort felt by muslims when strange men watch them swimming. Why should we accomodate Muslim discomfort if everyone else is told they have to put up with transgendered? If we accommodate Muslim discomfort then why can't we tell the transgendered they have to accommodate the discomfort of the majority?

Facilities designed for the opposite sex? How on earth are men's changing rooms different from women's?

[cybercoma]

So you were there?

Neither were you, so I guess that means you're going to shut up about it now too, right?

[cybercoma]

The amount of knuckle-dragging ignorance in this thread is despicable. You're all a bunch of intolerant assholes. Shame on you.

[Guest]

Facilities designed for the opposite sex? How on earth are men's changing rooms different from women's?

More urinals, fewer tampon dispensers.

[Canuckistani]

I've never been inside a changing room and seen a urinal. Guess I shop at the wrong stores, tho I would actually find that kind of disgusting. Oh, wait, this is more of that mixing up bathrooms and changerooms stuff, isn't it? Funny how a transgender who wants to try on a dress, ie put it on in a private dressing room where nobody can see her, and then come out fully dressed for her friends to see gets turned into discussions about bathrooms and what not. Guess because the original story is just about a shop owners bigotry and people trying to defend that.

Edited May 6, 2013 by Canuckistani

[TimG]

Facilities designed for the opposite sex? How on earth are men's changing rooms different from women's?

They aren't. But there are designated for women's use only. That is the society we live in. Deal with it.

If you really think that public swimming pools should accommodate Muslims then you should have no problems telling transgender people to accommodate the majority in the society that they are part of.

Basically, you are a shameless hypocrite because you think you should be the one who decides what social taboos are acceptable. You call people 'knuckle-draggers' because they don't share your opinion on these things. That is an extremely intolerant attitude for someone who claims to demand tolerance. Where is your tolerance for the social taboos of the majority?

Edited May 6, 2013 by TimG

[jacee]

They aren't. But there are designated for women's use only. That is the society we live in. Deal with it.

If you really think that public swimming pools should accommodate Muslims then you should have no problems telling transgender people to accommodate the majority in the society that they are part of.

Basically, you are a shameless hypocrite because you think you should be the one who decides what social taboos are acceptable. You call people 'knuckle-draggers' because they don't share your opinion on these things. That is an extremely intolerant attitude for someone who claims to demand tolerance. Where is your tolerance for the social taboos of the majority?

The "majority" doesn't have those prejudices ... er ... "taboos", just the knuckledraggers do.

[TimG]

Does that count for people that are uncomfortable with "niggers" and "Jews" too?

A red herring. Society has two equal boxes: male and female. The question is not one of discrimination but which box one is allowed to use.

[Guest]

I've never been inside a changing room and seen a urinal. Guess I shop at the wrong stores, tho I would actually find that kind of disgusting. Oh, wait, this is more of that mixing up bathrooms and changerooms stuff, isn't it? Funny how a transgender who wants to try on a dress, ie put it on in a private dressing room where nobody can see her, and then come out fully dressed for her friends to see gets turned into discussions about bathrooms and what not. Guess because the original story is just about a shop owners bigotry and people trying to defend that.

Oh, store changing rooms? The type where one tries on jeans and such. I thought he was talking about swimming pool changing rooms. That's what was mentioned in the quote he was replying to.

I do understand now that Cybercoma was not referring to the facilities at a swimming pool, as your post made me go back and take a closer look at what I was commenting on.

[TimG]

The "majority" doesn't have those prejudices

Now you are just making stuff up. I am pretty sure the overwhelming majority of people would have a real problem with a visibly male person using a woman's change room.

[Canuckistani]

Oh, store changing rooms? The type where one tries on jeans and such. I thought he was talking about swimming pool changing rooms. That's what was mentioned in the quote he was replying to.

I do understand now that Cybercoma was not referring to the facilities at a swimming pool, as your post made me go back and take a closer look at what I was commenting on.

Well, the OP is about a transgender woman going to a store to try on a dress. People took it in all sorts of silly directions because a male looking person trying on a dress in a store just isn't outrageous enough.

[Canuckistani]

A red herring. Society has two equal boxes: male and female. The question is not one of discrimination but which box one is allowed to use.

Society has changed, as have our views on gender identity. No more little boxes.

[Guest]

Well, the OP is about a transgender woman going to a store to try on a dress. People took it in all sorts of silly directions because a male looking person trying on a dress in a store just isn't outrageous enough.

Well, in my defence, Cybercoma himself did introduce urinals to the debate...

[TimG]

Society has changed, as have our views on gender identity.

What has changed is people accept that some people will need a transgender operation. What has not changed is the willingness to accept obviously male people in areas reserved for females. I don't think this will ever change nor should it. Edited May 6, 2013 by TimG

[Canuckistani]

It's happened with bathrooms, where male appearing but female identifying people have won human rights cases, so I'm sure the bridal shop doesn't have a leg to stand on. Does the shop bar all males from coming in, or only from trying on dresses? If the latter, why?

[jacee]

Now you are just making stuff up. I am pretty sure the overwhelming majority of people would have a real problem with a visibly male person using a woman's change room.

She's getting married.

I'm pretty sure Canadians could roll with that.

The sky isn't falling.

[TimG]

It's happened with bathrooms, where male appearing but female identifying people have won human rights cases

So? Human rights tribunals cannot change peoples attitudes.