Besides, the commissioners won’t be in office forever, so why vote for a charter amendment that can only hurt “unpopular” minorities in our community for some time to come? Just because some people don’t like the commissioners’ legal prose and activist style, they take it upon themselves to punish innocents by stripping away their rights? There’s not one scintilla of logic or justice in such a maneuver, so we have to look deeper for their actual motives.

To begin, I reiterate: we can tell nothing from the photo above except that it shows a person–not necessarily even a man. The details of this unresolved case remain sketchy, and if what you say above is true, the individual in question remains “at large.” Do you have more details than you state above? Whatever allegations have been made remain just that–allegations, and absent an arrest and conviction, it’s irresponsible to vote on the basis of propaganda disseminated by a shadowy group of conservative political activists.

It takes little effort to realize that the thrust of Charter Amendment 1 is to disfranchise people who don’t conform neatly to traditional gender stereotypes. If it were passed, those who pushed for it’s adoption would not stop with public restrooms but would, in my judgment, advance their agenda so that it began to undermine everything that’s socially and culturally progressive about Gainesville. I want to live in a city that’s welcoming and inclusive, one that will attract–not repel–interesting new, open-minded people; families; and businesses. I’m not willing to court discrimination and the international disgrace that would surely follow by depriving certain vulnerable groups of the best hard-won legal armor they now possess.

This is a reasonable projection of the outcome, and I’m surely as entitled to make such predictions as you are to opine that “Under Charter One, if someone cannot get into the mens room, the clerk at the store can tell you to use the ladies since it’s empty.” That promise is nowhere in Charter Amendment 1.

From the look of things, a majority of our fellow citizens have decided Charter Amendment 1 is pretty much how I called it.

http://elections.alachua.fl.us/elections_and_records/March_24_Gainesville/r.aspx

Thanks for the opportunity to discuss this issue in a virtual public forum.

Charter One makes NOTHING illegal, except the bonehead city commissioners from making new civil rights categories with crazy caveats. And their dumb ordinance kept a business owner from using his judgment when a woman complains that some man is holed up in the ladies room. He could be sued for violating his rights if he “feels like a woman”.

Under Charter One, if someone cannot get into the mens room, the clerk at the store can tell you to use the ladies since it’s empty. I have been given that green light myself not long ago. It’s sensible, and it will continue to be the way we are nice to each other.

If you’re a guy going out to vote in Gainesville today, you can probably relate to the following scenario.

You’re in a restaurant with no other businesses around and have eaten half of your order when suddenly nature calls. You rush to the men’s room, only to find that it’s out of service, even though there’s no sign telling you so. You really need to relieve yourself and fast–but where to go?

It’s an emergency, so you politely knock on the door of the nearby women’s restroom. No answer. You wait five minutes more, and since nobody has meanwhile come out, you discreetly knock again. Still no answer, and nature can wait no more. You enter the women’s restroom, see that it’s empty, perform the necessary bodily functions, then leave expeditiously.

No harm done, right? Things like this happen every day in real life.

But wait! Those who support Charter Amendment 1 want to criminalize what you’ve just done. Their web site says, “Keep men out of women’s restrooms!” If they saw you do what was just described, they’d be inclined to suspect you’re a pervert. From what they suggest, you’d think there are perverts by the thousands hanging around public restrooms across the country just waiting for the opportunity to take dirty pictures of you under bathroom stall partitions. The next thing you know, they’ll want a Constitutional Amendment requiring gender identification cards to make sure you eliminate only where, when, and in the manner they prescribe.

Of course, their real agenda is only thinly disguised behind that disingenuous fear-mongering slogan–”Keep men out of women’s restrooms,” and they full well know it. They want to strip away the protections Gainesville has given certain “unpopular” minorities like gays, lesbians, transsexuals, and transgendered persons, whose behavior they consider “unnatural.”

What’s really “unnatural,” however, is to have to hold it in when you’re about to burst because of some absurdly regressive law. Let’s make Gainesville a socially progressive city–not some medieval fortress. Let’s keep our bladders healthy and happy. Vote NO on Charter Amendment 1.

Since Mastrodicasa is the only candidate who does not support Charter Amendment 1, that’s reason enough to vote for her. Everyone’s bladders will be grateful.

I’m happy to support a “Yes” vote on Charter Amendment 2.

The omnipresence of God is established Christian doctrine. “He” is already everywhere, including public restrooms for women. And if “He” wanted to, “He” could take on the fleshly form of Jesus that people are most likely to identify with–namely, the Jesus represented in traditional works of art as described above. Of course, “He” might very well. as a consequence of personal dress and manner, be taken for a “pervert” by those who define the appearance of men and women by rigidly conventional gender stereotypes.

Those promoting Charter Amendment 1 have stated that they want to keep men out of women’s restrooms. Evidently, they didn’t think far enough ahead to realize that, if strictly enforced, that exclusion would necessarily apply to the Jesus “divinely inspired” artists have depicted for centuries. So if “He” decided to remain omnipresent and stay in women’s restrooms, and if he retained his traditional manner of dress, “He” could very well end up getting arrested in Gainesville if Charter Amendment 1 should pass.

Of course, this is an absurd scenario, since Jesus is unlikely to make an appearance here any time too soon. But it is no more absurd than Charter Amendment 1 itself.

Supporters of Charter Amendment 1 would do well, however, to educate themselves to the fact that not every human being can be neatly assigned to a specific gender–even on a purely biological basis. A small number of individuals are neither genetically male nor female because they were simply born that way.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersex

They may feel compelled to assume the conventional appearance and behavior of a male or female, or they may undergo surgery at a very early age to “normalize” their appearance to some extent–a decision made by physicians and/or parents which can have devastating consequences. However, it is clear to any fair-minded person that forcing anyone to seem to be what s/he is not is both inhumane and ethically indefensible. Hypocrisy is hardly a virtue–Christian or otherwise–that we should want to encourage.

The similarly inane “marriage protection” legislation that has already been passed in many states, allowing only “one man” and “one woman” to marry, is a de facto violation of the human rights of these rare intersex individuals. As soon as attempts are made to legally define “male” and “female,” the inconvenient facts of human biology will necessarily come to light, and all such discriminatory legislation will, if justice prevails, have to be revoked.

There is nothing “hypothetical” about the intersex condition and its logical legal implications. There is nothing “hypothetical” about the fact that sometimes one’s psychosexual orientation, for reasons quite beyond one’s control, differs from what is generally considered the norm for a particular body type. In a free, enlightened society, it is morally repugnant for any group of citizens to force those who are choicelessly different from the majority into rigid conformity with sexual stereotypes. Whatever one thinks of the mayor and commissioners, that is reason enough to vote NO on Charter Amendment 1.

I have said this before and I will keep saying it: They city commission made this about bathrooms when they decided that anyone could self-identify on-the-fly as transgendered simply by claiming an “inner sense” of being whatever sex they need to be for that bathroom. This problem was explained again and again and again to the recalcitrant Mayor and the 3 other votes she needed, but they would make no adjustment or compromise.

Furthermore, at any point since then the Mayor and her coterie of activist commissioners could have made this amendment a dead issue by making some compromise in the ordinance. Instead, they have let the activists (people like you) disparage what is likely a majority of the citizens who thought the ordinance was irresponsible.

Some months ago as I was leaving the Millhopper Publix store, I was approached by someone whom I did not know who asked me to sign a petition to “keep perverts out of public restrooms.” I had no idea what this person was talking about. Having been a homeowner and resident in Gainesville for nearly ten years, I have never encountered anyone in any public facility whom I took to be a “pervert.” Indeed, this person made me very uncomfortable, pressing me to sign the petition. I only succeeded in terminating our conversation by telling this petition bearer that I had to inform myself better about the matter before placing my name on any such document.

It is now abundantly clear to me what that petition was actually intended to accomplish, and I am frankly appalled that the Charter Amendment 1, as insidiously discriminatory as it actually is, has advanced to this stage.

Gainesville should recognize gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered citizens as individuals who are not adequately protected by the Florida Civil Rights Act (Fla. Stat. ss. 760.01-760.11 and 509.092), and the City’s leaders should demonstrate the wisdom, foresight, and will to preserve and extend legislation that ensures the rights of all citizens–even those belonging to so-called “unpopular” minorities.

If the ***omnipresent*** Christian God appeared as a human–Jesus Christ–in a public restroom, with his long hair, flowing robes, and gentle manner, I wonder how many supporters of Charter Amendment 1 would identify him as a “pervert” and have him arrested? The ‘traditional” artist’s conception of Jesus is often rather androgynous and thus sexually ambiguous. Charter Amendment 1 would banish such a Jesus from public restrooms, too. Indeed, the net outcome would be to banish from any public restroom anyone whose appearance did not conform to gender stereotypes.

So where would Jesus and fellow androgynes relieve themselves–or are they simply expected to burst at the seams outside public restrooms?

I urge the citizens of Gainesvlle to vote NO on Charter Amendment 1, one of the most absurd and socially irresponsible ballot items I have ever seen.

Now in the men’s toilets I once went into there were heads stuffed under the stall walls and hands and feet and fingers on occasion, but complaints to the store management seemed to get a positive response to end such goings on.

In point of fact I have now read about three such incidences over the past year: one in Maryland that appeared to be a set-up job by people who supported your position in Montgomery County, one somewhere else in Florida about a bus-station (I believe it was) restroom in which someone did complain about a transsexual or transgender person using said toilet and then one Ms. Brain reported that happened some years ago in Portland, OR, (I believe) where it took the pattern of harassing someone who was transgender in some fashion or another.

So, three in the past year. Hmmmm. Does it ever dawn on people who make arguments such as you are making that you are currently giving the pedarasts and voyeurs ideas about doing such things with the thought that since you lot say they can they may not get jailed for actually taking such measures to scratch their itches?

I think you should consider that: that you are actually suggesting means and opportunities for perverts to do their nasty work. Please do us all a service and stop placing ideas for further law-breaking into the minds of a few of your readerships.

Argue facts, not suppositions and what-ifs. Perhaps the embarrassment you save will be your daughter’s or some other innocent woman’s who’s visually assaulted by a very sick individual who believes that he’ll be able to get off by claiming to be transgender.

Shame on you.

I feel that they only passed this ordinance to make it into the National spotlight.

Something else that has been said by opponents to the amendment is that businesses will suffer and large companies will not come to the Gainesville area if the amendment passes. I do not believe this at all. If the city was actually business friendly the companies will move here. the more regulation the more difficult it is to actually run a business.