Marquette Univ transgender bathrooms

  • Thread starter Thread starter JRRTFAN
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

JRRTFAN

Guest
Well, another Jesuit University, Marquette, has changed restrooms to transgender so as not to offend anybody, except the female students who now get to enjoy having some guy in the next stall, but they don’t matter, only the offended trandgenderist practitioner matters. I guess they run into a lot of transgenderism in Jesuit Universities. Wonder why that is? Something in the water maybe? Certainly not anything in their staunch Catholic theology.
 
Here is a link to a news article to keep the thread alive:

cardinalnewmansociety.org/CatholicEducationDaily/DetailsPage/tabid/102/ArticleID/4541/Marquette-Changes-Restroom-Signs-for-Transgender-Students-and-Guests-Blasted-by-Alumni-Group.aspx

According to the statements from Marquette, the bathrooms being changed are single-person bathrooms only (that require a key to enter). So, while I agree that Marquette may be missing the boat with regards to their Catholic identity, it does not appear that there are actually bathrooms where men and women will be using the same bathroom at the same time.

Really, they could have made such a change and left off the mention of “transgender” and no one would have noticed. I think that would have been more prudent of them. There are plenty of places with “family” restrooms.
 
Joe_5859 said:
Here is a link to a news article to keep the thread alive:

cardinalnewmansociety.org/CatholicEducationDaily/DetailsPage/tabid/102/ArticleID/4541/Marquette-Changes-Restroom-Signs-for-Transgender-Students-and-Guests-Blasted-by-Alumni-Group.aspx

According to the statements from Marquette, the bathrooms being changed are single-person bathrooms only (that require a key to enter). So, while I agree that Marquette may be missing the boat with regards to their Catholic identity, it does not appear that there are actually bathrooms where men and women will be using the same bathroom at the same time.

Really, they could have made such a change and left off the mention of “transgender” and no one would have noticed. I think that would have been more prudent of them. There are plenty of places with “family” restrooms.
Click to expand...
True enough, but claiming to be “transgender friendly” is so trendy, so hip, so exquisitely correct in these days.
 
If they were single person bathrooms anyway I would say it was unnecessary and irritating (a certain modern-day Order). Though very sad (subject matter).
 
Most restrooms have those “men” and “women” symbols; one supposes for the benefit of non English speakers. Wonder what the symbol is for “transgender”.
 
Ridgerunner said:
Most restrooms have those “men” and “women” symbols; one supposes for the benefit of non English speakers. Wonder what the symbol is for “transgender”.
Click to expand...
I wonder too. These poor transgender people. What shall they do? 😉
 
Ridgerunner said:
Most restrooms have those “men” and “women” symbols; one supposes for the benefit of non English speakers. Wonder what the symbol is for “transgender”.
Click to expand...
There isn’t one, and there won’t be. The symbol for trans women is a stick figure in a dress. The symbol for a trans man is the stick figure in pants. Transgender is not a " third gender ".
 
I thought even the Pope came out strongly against the sin of encouraging people in their sins? Why would the university do this?
 
You just put male AND female signs on the doors. We already have those kind of single-person toilets in the UK and I’m sure you do in the USA, too.
 
Tarpeian_Rock said:
True enough, but claiming to be “transgender friendly” is so trendy, so hip, so exquisitely correct in these days.
Click to expand...
Exactly.

So what happens should sharia becomes cool and in? Are all of these activists going to risk their lives for what they believe in? Or even risk being called a racist?

I won’t be holding my breath.
 
SuperLuigi said:
Exactly.

So what happens should sharia becomes cool and in? Are all of these activists going to risk their lives for what they believe in? Or even risk being called a racist?

I won’t be holding my breath.
Click to expand...
To be honest, when it comes to personal choice and conscience, shouldn’t we make allowances. I’m not saying “don’t educate the truth”, because goodness and right action must be inspired, but at the same time we could reserve a little sensitivity for those whose lives are maybe quite hard to work out (for them). Just a thought. Despite the fact that I see having an extra door as a kind of okay for what’s happened and so this eventuality is maybe going a little far in expressing sympathy.
 
The bathroom is for a biological function and not a psychological one. So they should be divided by sex, not by gender.
 
BlueEyedLady said:
There isn’t one, and there won’t be. The symbol for trans women is a stick figure in a dress. The symbol for a trans man is the stick figure in pants. Transgender is not a " third gender ".
Click to expand...
You’re right. It’s not a gender at all, it’s a figment of some poor tortured soul’s imagination.
 
zz912 said:
I thought even the Pope came out strongly against the sin of encouraging people in their sins? Why would the university do this?
Click to expand...
Well maybe because they don’t think too much of the pope, or the scripture or natural law or because they’re Jesuits in need of papal suppression – again.
 
On one hand, I have to wonder what the big deal is. If the bathroom’s individual stalls have lockable doors with no see-thru gaps, where’s the problem?

On the other hand, how long are women going to put up with men who sprinkle when they tinkle, and then don’t clean up after themselves :bigyikes:
 
They should not be supporting the transgender people in their sin.
 
40.png
DaveBj:
DaveBj, was that the official sign you posted? But isn’t that sign suggesting that all women wear dresses?

🙂
 
Confiteor_Deo said:
They should not be supporting the transgender people in their sin.
Click to expand...
Hi. 🙂 How about supporting people after they’ve sinned? Unless they can undo as if by magic the surgical self-abuse already undertaken?

Maybe the surgeons should be the ones that are penalized by having outside public holes in the ground reserved for those who carry out inhumane acts?
 
Point being, where is the line between mercy and complicity? Is it in the intention?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top