Congratulations, Fordham University! You have now become a “religion neutral” university. Or, how about “reality neutral” university? Whatever it is, it certainly ain’t Catholic, it’s just plain idiotic! Wouldn’t it be nice if you thought of “Catholic inclusive” when you came up with this game plan? http://www.cardinalnewmansociety.org/CatholicEducationDaily/DetailsPage/tabid/102/ArticleID/4512/Fordham-Changes-Restroom-Signs-as-Part-of-‘Gender-Inclusive’-Campaign.aspx
Let me just let you in on something, Fordham, as PC as it is, 99.9% of women in this world don’t want to go to the bathroom anywhere near the opposite sex. The Battlestar Galactica circa 2009 isn’t real. Real women don’t want to “do their business” in earshot, eyeshot, or anywhere within 10,000 feet of a man. Not only that, we don’t want men using our facilities, no matter how much they “feel like a woman.” It’s ingrained into us, and any woman who disagrees has taken feminism to an all new and disturbing level.
Guys are not the neatest, and I’m sure everyone woman who’s used the Starbuck’s unisex bathroom is thinking, “Oh yeah, right!” at this point. I’m not a guy, so I won’t presume to answer for them, but I’m pretty sure that, unless they’re completely perverted, they feel the same way. Remember, we’re not just talking about “men who feel like women” and vice versa, we’re talking about all men and women using the same restroom. Talk about ruining the mystery. It’s just a new and exciting way to ruin the attraction for the opposite sex.
To those hipsters who think it’s going to be cool to be so liberated from the constraints of society, just you wait. I’m predicting this will be gone soon, along with your beards. Women don’t really like those, either. To those that claim they do…I can’t help you.
Reality Neutral Fordham
- November 24, 2015
- No Comments
0 thoughts on “Reality Neutral Fordham”
Pingback: Fordham Changes Restroom Signs as Part of ‘Gender Inclusive’ Campaign | Deaconjohn1987's Blog
I’m unclear on how this is supposed to work. I am employed at a public college, so I’m sure it’s going to come up soon enough. Is there one restroom for biological males, one for biological females, one for males who think they’re females, one for females who think they’re males, and one for whatever? That’s a lot of bathrooms. I’m also a little unclear on how women who think they’re men use urinals.
Or do we redefine male and female on the basis of how we feel? That seems remarkably unscientific. I know one can change one’s plumbing through surgical mutilation, but how does a male swap out 850 trillion Y-chromosomes for an additional 850 trillion X-chromosomes?
I would suggest just one giant unisex bathroom, but I get the impression that those who “feel” that their biological gender doesn’t match their imaginary gender would be offended.
Finally, shouldn’t an authentically Catholic university be upholding the teachings of the Catholic Church on such matters, instead of taking the lead in rejecting–and even flaunting–them?
Sorry for the rambling discourse. This whole subject makes me feel like I’ve entered “The Twilight Zone.” I half expect to see Rod Serling.
The plan is to label all restrooms “restroom” instead of “men’s restroom,” “women’s restroom,” or “highly confused restroom.” No mores sex segregation. Sad.
And then there is the fire hydrant……..for those who think they may be dogs.
We wouldn’t want to leave them out!
Well, not that it matters anymore, but modesty will be preventing me from using any restroom that is “co-ed” or “unisex” or whatever label they place upon the door other than “ladies.” That’s what I am and that’s how I expect to be treated – like a lady. You can place all the politically correct labels you want on the outside of the restroom, but you cannot make me use it.
The fact that it is Fordham that is complying with the politically correct use of facilities is well, getting me nowhere. I used to be shocked when a Catholic College did such things so as to not make waves with the current politic, such as allowing interns to do their internship at Planned Parenthood, or complying with HHS mandates for employees contraceptive needs, and all there other areas of Catholic Compromise that really are anything but Catholic. Not any more. I’m just wondering who’s next and how low will they go before the bottom is hit. It is getting worse, not better. There are a few who’ve turned back from the madness, but not many. Have you seen this past week’s Jesuit Post article highlighting a particular Jesuit to be’s Yoga Madness? It is from Nov. 20 and if you haven’t seen it, give it a whirl. You see a whole group of students being misled down a path that no Catholic Priest should be guiding young impressionable minds towards. God help them. https://thejesuitpost.org/2015/11/when-yoga-and-ignatian-spirituality-meet/ It’s a bit shocking even for the numb among us, like me.
God bless. Ginnyfree
I must admit the Jesuit Post isn’t at the top of my reading list. Can’t imagine why. Sigh. I’ll have to give this one a read. St. Ignatius, pray for us!
I got it on a lark just to see what it is all about. Nice to know what they think is important. God bless. Ginnyfree.
Do you ever use a restroom at a place like Starbucks where the rooms are not labelled? What do you think is going to happen to you if you use a rr that both men and women use? If you are married, do you and your husband use separate restrooms.
Come on TT. We’re talking about group restrooms with urinals and nice little stalls. We’re not talking cooties, we’re talking privacy. BTW, if you bothered to read, I actually mentioned the occaisional one bathroom starbucks and how, uh, not clean they are.
Come on OMM. We are talking about “The Observer reported that new signs were installed in SINGLE STALL restrooms in the Leon Lowenstein building’s third floor. The new signs are “void of gender icons, include braille, the latest New York State handicap symbol and simply say ‘restroom.’” Frankly I find women’s restrooms to be disgusting with urine on the seat and floor. Not sure what people think they can catch from urine since it is sterile. CAPS are all mine!
I forgot to add that I frequently use the “men’s restroom” at a restaurant, etc if the women’s line is incredibly long. They are not dirty. I think it’s woman peeing while standing because they are afraid of catching something that makes a bathroom messy.
Honey, I don’t want men waiting outside the single stall while I’m using it. Sorry. They’re not saying single bathrooms. They’re talking single stalls and, in case of the men’s room I’m betting stall and urinal. There’s a nice little picture on Fordham’s site. Think about it. There was a reason that they were labeled in the first place. There was a reasonable expectation of privacy for men and women. Now there is none. Sigh..
As far as restrooms go, sorry, I don’t want urine on the seat or on the floor and that’s usually what I find in unisex bathrooms at places that share.
For one who is “teaching tolerance” you sure aren’t very tolerant of those of us who aren’t as comfortable as you are in a unisex world. No, it has nothing to do with tolerance. It has everything to do with forced compliance with a gender bending agenda that is indicative of the further moral decline of the West. God bless. Ginyfree.
Only in an emergency. BTW, the intimacy that I had with my husband, now deceased, God rest his soul, is not for any other than my husband. Yes, I even had a brother, oh yuk, who I had to share a bathroom with for a period of time growing up. Once again the level of intimacy is one that is reserved for a brother-sister relationship and not one that any stranger can have with me. What you are failing to see is a forced compliance with the gender bending agendas of those who consider my personal space and civil rights no longer something society as a whole holds as a priority. I’m told I simply must change. I’m forced to accept things that are unacceptable to me because those in places of power can enforce a minority’s viewpoint and cause trouble for me if I buck their new system. Forced to use a restroom that others not my own sex, have used. That’s about it. My privacy has been stripped from me. That is not civil, nor is it charitable, nor is it kind and loving. It is force. God bless. Ginnyfree.
I’m pretty sure that what they mean as single stall is just a toilet and a locked door. It is no different than being at a friend’s house where both men and women use a bathroom. No one is lurking outside. It is only in ONE building.
Google Fordham gender inclusive or just look at the article linked. The pic is of a bathroom with no lock so it presumably has a nice little sink,mirror and stall trio. There’s a men’s bathroom right next door which presumably has the same and a urinal. Doesn’t matter how many buildings it’s in, it’s about privacy and deciding to turn everything on its head for a very, small minority. If “she” or “he” considers themselves whatever, why don’t they just use whatever. It’ll pretty much cause the same problem but without changing the names on the door. Most places are offering a “confused” bathroom but they don’t want that either. They want to inflict their beliefs on everybody else. A truly neutral solution just aint’ good enough and then that opens the door for a myriad of other people to take advantage of the situation.
Hello TT. See, you are still insisting that my need of privacy isn’t acceptable and the fact that I have used the bathroom after both my brother and my husband in my lifetime nullifies my need for any kind of privacy. I don not want to use a unisex bathroom, nor do I want to have to go elsewhere to find my privacy again. It is taking that away from me. You seem to think that I’m unusual for needing it, but most persons have a similar need. If we didn’t all bathrooms would’ve been designed differently. Heck might even find open stalls along the walls of all public buildings. No need for walls at all. Imagine that! You go to the Mall and along a strip of tiled wall there are several potties lined up a gleaming. No walls or any other kinds of barriers between them. Just a row of tidy toilets ready and waiting for those who have no need of privacy. Why not a trough in the gym with water trickling down it? No need to leave the ball game to use the urinal. Just whip it out at the edge of the gym floor and go. Why they’re so accommodating there’s even a bar about 20 inches off the ground along a section to assist the gals who have to squat instead of being able to stand and wee. Gee, if everyone who ever peed agreed that it is weird to need privacy after peeing in the same toilet as one’s own brother or father or hubby were like you TT, this could be our reality. It isn’t. Bathrooms are private for a reason. There are actually several reasons. But persons who think they know better generally discount those reasons. Some even will go so far as to imply those reasons are unacceptable and even harmful or unhealthy, etc. simply because they aren’t in keeping with an agenda’s intent. Nuff said. God bless. Ginnyfree.
Know thy enemy!
Well, they aren’t exactly the enemy, but they are seriously misguided and in troubled waters. They still are my Brothers in Christ and in need of much prayer. That is obvious from the Yoga Master and his misguidance counseling of the students who may actually think they can have a deeper relationship with Jesus thru yoga because of this poor guy. God bless. Ginnyfree.
In many respects they are the enemy of truth and morality.
WHERE ARE THE ALLEGED clergy administrators and the local AB Dolan Nyc.. in all this. Time to reform or Abolish the Jesuit order at least at the apostate Univ. such as Marquette Fordham & Fairfield etc.. they run. Only Francis our Pope can do this.
Where in Gods name are the alleged Jesuit clergy and Administrators trying to run this alleged Jesuit college . Obviously not to mention where is the otherwise vocal Ab Dolan of NYC saying or doing Anything on the apostate goings on at Fordham.First promoting Ssm by a alleged theologian there and now this gendercide madness.
I used to take around a blind man. Of course he’d occasionally have to use the toilet. I refused to go into the men’s room to help him. I’d just stick my head in to see where to tell him to go and leave him to it. Often another man would help him.
No, I would not take him into the women’s!
Our local health clinic has unisex one-toilet-and-sink restrooms as well as the normal ones segregated by sex. The single one is usually also handicap accessible. This kind worked much better for us. They’ve had these for ages. Seems to me this type should satisfy those whose sexual “identity” isn’t the same as their equipment. Of course that’s no solution when they have more of an agenda than a need to use the facilities!
Nope, Tawdry, it won’t work simply because the agenda won’t allow them to be labeled “handicapped.” The single toilet that is in my Dr.’s office is also labeled “handicapped.” It is very accessible and made so even a wheelchaired individual can use it. I use it often as it is the most kept up of the others and sees the least use. It is unisex by happenstance, not intent. Those who are confused about their sex and live with assumed identities do not under any circumstances want to be labeled handicapped, so though such facilities can provide an accommodation to their needs of a unisex facility that is private, it still labels them. That is the big problem. Their agenda police are very insistent about the dropping of all language the implies a deficiency or mental problem associated with their difficulties. We are simply supposed to see them as normal. Anything less to some is discrimination. If a facility tries to accommodate them and uses the example in this discussion, that is simply points to the already unisex handicapped single bathrooms, they will be shocked suddenly to be told not good enough. Then we can point to the long standing acceptance of those who utilize such facilities and rebutt with “Well, they don’t feel demeaned by these accommodations and it is wrong to see them as less-thans now because they use the bathroom labeled “handicapped.” And on, and on, and on, and on. See what I mean? God bless, Ginnyfree.
Why do the Jesuits at Fordham hate our Holy Father Francis?
Why do they refuse to follow his wonderful teaching, his new, wonderful never before spoken teaching in the evils of gender theory?
Why, oh why do they hate our Holy Father and refuse to listen to his new, wonderful teaching?
Actually, I recently found out a really sad truth about the current help these refugees in places like Iraq, Syria, Libya, etc. are getting. As it turns out, there are two parties to getting each person and/or family relocated into our country, one being the State Department and the other being Catholic Social Services. The person reporting this to us, gave the impression that if the Bishops in our country really wanted to, they could use CSS to do so and would be successful in a very short time. If we used all those Catholics in our government to apply even the slightest pressures, the oiled wheels would turn smoothly and these people would be coming to our country. His indictment, and yes, I choose that word for a reason, as a priest and a citizen of these States, against those who can do something but refuse. is valid. They lay the blame entirely on the State Department. But wake up sleepy Catholics – we do have social service structures in place that IF they were employed in this situation, Christians being actively persecuted in other lands by Muslims and others would be relocated here. Our Parishes could easily find families able and willing to act as Sponsors of immigrants to give them a place to go while their paperwork is pending. This is a necessary item in the refugee process and I have absolutely no doubt that if there was an appeal made by the Bishops of this country to the Catholics in our parishes to open their homes to these nearly Martyred refugees, there would be a very large outpouring of charity towards them. Our homes would become theirs in a heartbeat. The priest doing the reporting said that he was actually shamed by the responses he got when he contacted some in Catholic Social Services. There are no plans in their future to help and they are the most able.
I was a stranger, and you took me in………………………And when did we see Thee a stranger,…………Depart from me you cursed, into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels…………For….I was a stranger and you took me not in……Matt 25:35-43 (Douay Rheims version)
It’s that important.
God bless. Ginnyfree.