|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: How will we ever get the right-wing to shut up re: trans people and girls' bathrooms?
|
stonespring
Shipmate
# 15530
|
Posted
In the US there is no national law banning discrimination in all employment, housing, services, or public accommodations for LGBT people. Some states have them but many do not, so many cities and towns have gone about passing them on their own. It's now quite popular for the right wing to being a circus into each of these towns to fight for repeal and what they often attack is the idea that transgender girls (born with bodies that were called male at birth) will be able to use girls' bathrooms and locker rooms in schools without any need to "prove" that they are trans by showing evidence of medical treatment or by dressing feminine enough. The whole argument is that it will be open season for perverts to go into girls' private spaces.
Although in some places (California for example) the argument is specifically over a law accommodating trans students in public schools only (and the governor luckily stuck to his guns), campaigns over girls' bathrooms in and out of schools (just imagine what would happen in a department store women's room? - they would ask, and an episode of the television show Transparent dealt with this) - have succeeded in passing referenda to repeal all an ordinance banning discrimination against all LGBT people in general.
I agree that LGBT people should remain united - especially because trans people are the most subject to violence and it would be a betrayal to turn our backs on them as LGB people - but I want to win this argument and shut up these idiots scaremongering people about their daughters. Trans girls (and boys) in schools (and outside schools) should be able to use the bathrooms they feel comfortable in without having to be subjected to any medical or fashion tests. How can we go about this?
Posts: 1537 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Horseman Bree
Shipmate
# 5290
|
Posted
Have a separate bathroom for homophobes and related idiots.
--------------------
It's Not That Simple
Posts: 5372 | From: more herring choker than bluenose | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
Have cubicles only and cctv in the communal bit of the bathroom - then you wouldn't need to gender the bathrooms anyway.
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
If I knew it was a transgender person, I'd be happy. But how would I know it wasn't a violent rapist pretending to be transgender in order to gain access and attack someone? At the moment, anyone male in the Ladies' makes me feel very nervous. Perhaps that's a UK thing?
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Byron
Shipmate
# 15532
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by stonespring:
[...] How can we go about this?
Unfortunately, same as with equal marriage and DADT: keep fighting 'em til the majority turns against 'em, and they go elsewhere. Which means a string of small, vicious battles that no one should have to fight.
Unless they give up their mindset, they'll always seek a scapegoat, but they can be marginalized.
Posts: 1112 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
If I knew it was a transgender person, I'd be happy. ... At the moment, anyone male in the Ladies' makes me feel very nervous. Perhaps that's a UK thing?
It's not a UK thing alone.
Gendered public restrooms are normally private, unmonitored and often empty spaces, which means they make wonderful places for people to commit crimes in, including rape. And women are socialized to be aware of that kind of solitude, and many of us feel mildly uneasy about it even in a women's restroom. But you can't avoid going to the restroom, after all. And the strong social norm against invading the opposite sex restroom makes you feel safer. You're not likely to be raped by another woman, statistically speaking.
So you go--and maybe one time, while you're in there, someone who appears to be male walks in--and doesn't rush straight back out again, all flustered at his mistake. Suddenly it's scary time. What is this unknown man doing here, alone with you in a private place he had to break major social norms in order to enter? What kind of person does that, and with what intentions?
I think this is the major problem, not people going "ewwwww" at transsexuality. After all, there are non-transsexual women who appear very masculine. They are likely to rouse the same fears, poor people.
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Net Spinster
Shipmate
# 16058
|
Posted
I suspect the risk of trans women being attacked if they use the communal bathroom assigned to them by their biological sex is quite high.
--------------------
spinner of webs
Posts: 1093 | From: San Francisco Bay area | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
Probably less of a problem in busy places in the UK, but in my very rural context where public loos can be very quiet places, I know that - despite my wish to be welcoming and accommodating to all - if I saw a man, dressed in anything, in such a place, I'd get out FAST! and ask questions later.
I've noticed recently that, in our more rural areas, the trend has been, when building new loos, to adopt the single, unisex locked cubicle - which seems to be the safest (and fairest) solution, as suggested by a previous poster. With the well-designed ones, it's possible to open the door fully, to check there's no-one else inside, before entering. The only door is open to the street, so you could call for help if necessary. And, once inside, it is only a single person in a single small building - your space cannot be invaded once the door is locked.
The only downside to unisex, in such a context, that I can see is - through grim experience - the discovery that the loos tend to be dirtier and smellier when used by all! Perhaps the old-fashioned department store, beautifully scented and decorated 'Ladies' Powder Rooms' were not to be ridiculed after all....
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
stonespring
Shipmate
# 15530
|
Posted
I agree that the issue is more complicated than simply saying "we just have to wait for the bigots to die out" because of the reasons given in this thread, not that I agree with all of them.
However, I don't see a way that you can pass a non-discrimination law that applies to ALL LGBT people in the same way that existing civil rights laws apply to racial equality for example, without having to deal with the fact that most restrooms in the country are communal and gender-segregated - and that it is unfair to force transgender people at any stage in their transition (which may not necessarily include ever "passing" as the opposite sex) to use the opposite gender bathroom just because someone might think they are a cisgender person of the opposite sex with evil intentions. (As already stated, this line of reasoning could lead people to not allow cisgender people with non-gender conforming habits of dress/hairstyle, etc., or with genes that make them look like the other sex, into communal restrooms of their own gender.)
It's unrealistic to make all restrooms single-person and unisex, and not only unrealistic but deeply unpopular for obvious reasons to have security cameras or security guards in all communal bathrooms all the time. But this country still does not have national employment protection for LGBT people, and the tradition of the Civil Rights Act makes it unjust to make civil rights piecemeal (doing so basically says that LGBT rights are not equal to other civil rights). So you can't have LGBT nondiscrimination legislation without having to deal with restrooms, and the right wing gets their perfect wedge issue.
I would love to have a way to break the propaganda loop and address legitimate concerns while furthering social justice but I (as a cisgender-ish male) don't know how to.
Posts: 1537 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Teufelchen
Shipmate
# 10158
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
If I knew it was a transgender person, I'd be happy. But how would I know it wasn't a violent rapist pretending to be transgender in order to gain access and attack someone? At the moment, anyone male in the Ladies' makes me feel very nervous. Perhaps that's a UK thing?
Trans women are not male.
If I thought 'cis men dressing as women to commit rape' was a realistic fear, I'd be a little less downright about this. But it seems mainly to be trotted out as a hypothetical, in order to continue treating trans women unfairly.
t
--------------------
Little devil
Posts: 3894 | From: London area | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
saysay
Ship's Praying Mantis
# 6645
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
I think this is the major problem, not people going "ewwwww" at transsexuality. After all, there are non-transsexual women who appear very masculine. They are likely to rouse the same fears, poor people.
I agree. When I was in college there was a high school girl who was getting skeeved out by the behavior of a particular guy. She went into the bathroom thinking he wouldn't follow her there (I did the same thing in high school myself on more than one occasion). He followed her and raped her.
One of my most feminist friends said something along the lines of "I know it's not her fault at all, it's his, but I still want to ask her what the hell her parents were teaching her."
Here the trend has been to keep male and female restrooms separate, but to build a certain number of stand alone 'family' bathrooms that can be used by people of either gender including trans individuals and which are useful for families when, say, the daughter is getting old enough that her dad doesn't want to take her into the men's restroom but she might not quite be old enough to go into the ladies room herself.
--------------------
"It's been a long day without you, my friend
I'll tell you all about it when I see you again"
"'Oh sweet baby purple Jesus' - that's a direct quote from a 9 year old - shoutout to purple Jesus."
Posts: 2943 | From: The Wire | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink.:
Have cubicles only and cctv in the communal bit of the bathroom - then you wouldn't need to gender the bathrooms anyway.
And so give up significant efficiency in both space and time for the penis-owning half of the population.
For low-traffic areas, one or two unisex cubicles is just fine. To build facilities with the same capacity as a normal mens' room out of cubicles alone would require a significantly larger footprint.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
Have you any idea how many males get assaulted in mens toilets ?
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
No doubt. But that isn't the focus of the OP, is it?
The problem is that transwomen going about their ordinary business may unintentionally set off false alarms among other users of the women's restroom. I don't know how to avoid this problem. Asking them to wear a giant T or something is just plain nasty and discriminatory. Telling other women to just get over their fears is stupid and unlikely to work. Reconfiguring restrooms so there are fewer safety issues would be ideal, but would also cost the earth and be physically impossible in many buildings. I just don't know that this problem is solvable. ![[Frown]](frown.gif)
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink.:
Have you any idea how many males get assaulted in mens toilets ?
Have you any idea how many people are injured in road accidents?
That's the point. Are single-user cubicles less likely to offer opportunities for assault than shared facilities? Yes, probably - I find that quite believable.
Are there costs associated with constructing facilities like that? Yes, there are. It doesn't make much difference as far as women go (single-user cubicles would take as long to use, and take up about as much space) but a single-user cubical is both larger and slower to use than a urinal for a penis-equipped urinator. Probably by a factor of two to three in each case, so to build single-user cubicals with the same throughput, you'll need a factor of between 5 and 10 more space.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by saysay:
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
I think this is the major problem, not people going "ewwwww" at transsexuality. After all, there are non-transsexual women who appear very masculine. They are likely to rouse the same fears, poor people.
I agree. When I was in college there was a high school girl who was getting skeeved out by the behavior of a particular guy. She went into the bathroom thinking he wouldn't follow her there (I did the same thing in high school myself on more than one occasion). He followed her and raped her.
Sorry, but this doesn't make sense. What you are basically supplying is an anecdote that demonstrates that a male rapist is prepared to follow a woman into a women's toilet anyway.
Allowing a trans person access to the women's toilet isn't going to increase this risk, unless you think that male rapists are for some reason more likely to be prepared to enter a woman's toilet while dressed in female clothing in full view of other people.
This seems deeply unlikely. Such a person is going to attract attention.
The decision for such a man to enter a women's toilet is based on his assessment of whether he and his victim are going to be alone and unobserved.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
stonespring
Shipmate
# 15530
|
Posted
A transman or transwoman is at risk or rape, beating or murder, especially in the bathroom, but also everywhere else. You could argue that perhaps transwomen are at less risk of rape in a women's room but are still at risk of violence. So they don't have the luxury of "not feeling threatened."
No one is addressing the issue that in the US, LGBT nondiscrimination ordinances are all-or-nothing things if they purport to be in the spirit of the Civil Rights Act (which took some years to reach where it is now but once it got there, when a new category was added, it was assumed that it was added to all the categories that the law covered for race). Some towns are leaving out transgender in their ordinances in hopes of getting things passed without a repeal referendum, or are only doing employment and not "public accomodations" (which means treating LGBT customers/users of your business or facility just like any others)...even Congress, I admit, only has an "Employment" Non-Discrimination Act before it for LGBT persons (so no public accomodations) and that law won't pass anyway because Republicans. - However, the justice department is trying to file civil rights cases for transgender people (not LGB) people based on sex discrimination and is waiting to see how it flies in the courts. They haven't tried public accomodations yet though and are only doing it for employment and housing. But all of this is because no freaking law is getting through congress about this so it's all moot.
Anyway, the big frontier of non-discrimination aside from gay marriage is being blocked by two things: a. the "religious freedom" argument (I should have the right to not let my employees talk about their "sex lives" BS - because straight employees talk about their boyfriends and girlfriends and spouses all the time and it isn't called their sex life). or b. the bathroom invasion argument. The bathroom invasion argument is really popular now among the people traveling the country just like Anita Bryant did way back when trying to get local non-discrimination ordinances repealed (think about the children!). These repeal referenda always happen before a single person is able to come forward with any complaint of being offended or frightened or abused, ever, by someone claiming to be a transperson in a bathroom - it's before the law even takes effect.
Not only that, but if an exception is made in these laws only for transpeople only for bathrooms (meaning that discrimination is ok in just this case - or that transpeople have to use unisex bathrooms even if they are much more limited or require more distance to travel (sometimes going to another building or in the case of one school to a private business across the street)) it might not stand in courts so the whole law might be overturned by the court - leaving LGBT people with no protections at all from discrimination in employment, housing, from private businesses, etc.
It's very likely that in a few months we'll have national gay marriage from the supreme court based, in true Justice Kennedy fashion, on some squishy rational basis plus reasoning (no heightened scrutiny). But in huge swaths of the country people will still be able to be fired or kicked out of an establishment for being LGBT. So we need to reach some kind of consensus on this issue and stop letting the scaremongers hold the floor. It could be that "accessibility" for transpeople will need to be as universal as it is for disabled people (which sadly it isn't - the ADA only applied to all new facilities and did not require all types of old facilities to be retrofitted).
The truth is that safety from violence and rape for both cis and transpeople is a product of a culture more than it is about rules about who does #1 and #2 where. So no one is safe in any communal restroom that isn't guarded unless people are able to respect each other's bodies and this requires a whole lot of education. As long as women feel unsafe in a bathroom because of who the people sharing the bathroom with them might be - or as long as transpeople feel unsafe in a bathroom because of who might harm or harass them - the real culprit - sexual violence - remains unaddressed. We can't fight sexual violence without addressing it in all its forms, including those that we want to keep in the shadows.
Posts: 1537 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
The point is that most women, faced with the unexpected sight of an apparent male in their restroom, would be frightened; and if they then discovered that the apparent male was in fact a transgendered person, would then feel relieved and safer, as there would be an obvious nonthreatening reason for their presence (namely, a need to use the facilities). Discovering the transgender aspect would be reassuring, not frightening. It would logically be a case of "oh, I get it now."
The trouble comes not from the presence of a transgendered person but from the failure to correctly identify them as such (and therefore as nonthreatening).
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
If someone recognizably male came into a women's bathroom while I was in there, I'd be startled, and possibly freaked out if he didn't exit immediately. But when someone in women's clothing who isn't quite reading as a woman comes in -- which has happened more times than I can remember -- it doesn't startle or scare me. I think the answer to the OP's question is that we pass and enforce the hell out of non-discrimination laws that say a person can use the bathroom that is assigned to people of their gender identity. As to how long this will take, I think it will depend on how many people are willing to be public about their identity as transgender, as people are more likely to get over their issues about transgender people once they know one or two personally.
Frankly, I'm surprised at the discussion here of men coming into women's rooms, because transgender people don't as a rule use the restroom belonging to the sex they feel is really their own until they start presenting themselves as that sex. In other words, someone designated male at birth isn't going to use the women's room until she starts dressing as a woman. So this isn't about someone who is clearly male walking into the women's room. This is about someone who is trying very hard to present as female walking into the women's room. I've seen this happen often enough that I give a silent cheer that they are doing something that must be pretty fucking scary.
And that's the transwomen. The transmen, who are probably most in danger, given that men are a whole lot more likely than women to harass or assault someone who seems to be in a place where they think he's not supposed to be -- my God. Women here are talking about being scared of MTF transgender people coming into women's room, but think for a moment about how much nerve it would take if you were FTM (designated female at birth but transitioning into being male), and you had to hope you looked male enough that some asshole wouldn't read you as female and beat the snot out of you or worse.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
balaam
Making an ass of myself
# 4543
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
And that's the transwomen. The transmen, who are probably most in danger, given that men are a whole lot more likely than women to harass or assault someone who seems to be in a place where they think he's not supposed to be -- my God.
I don't see any danger. I have been using the gents when a woman, who either are too desperate to queue or don't wish to queue, have come in and used the gents. It is common in crowded bars round here. I can't see that someone who is dressed as a man would have any more problems.
--------------------
Last ever sig ...
blog
Posts: 9049 | From: Hen Ogledd | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Teufelchen:
If I thought 'cis men dressing as women to commit rape' was a realistic fear, I'd be a little less downright about this. But it seems mainly to be trotted out as a hypothetical, in order to continue treating trans women unfairly.
t
I think it would be a very rare threat at the moment. But if it became common knowledge that men would be accepted in women's loos if they are transgender, then it would become much more likely.
Changing rooms at public swimming baths often have panic buttons. Perhaps that would be one 'last resort' way to allay fears??
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Teufelchen
Shipmate
# 10158
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
quote:
Originally posted by Teufelchen:
If I thought 'cis men dressing as women to commit rape' was a realistic fear, I'd be a little less downright about this. But it seems mainly to be trotted out as a hypothetical, in order to continue treating trans women unfairly.
t
I think it would be a very rare threat at the moment. But if it became common knowledge that men would be accepted in women's loos if they are transgender, then it would become much more likely.
Trans women are not men.
t
--------------------
Little devil
Posts: 3894 | From: London area | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331
|
Posted
Teufelchen: quote:
Trans women are not men.
I think everyone gets that. But how are we to tell the difference between trans women who currently appear to be male and cisgender men just by looking? That's what the problem is. From the trans person's point of view it's a much bigger problem for the trans men, as Ruth W points out. Although, as a cisgender woman, I have been known to use the men's room myself when desperate. Any port in a storm...
Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
Frankly, I'm surprised at the discussion here of men coming into women's rooms, because transgender people don't as a rule use the restroom belonging to the sex they feel is really their own until they start presenting themselves as that sex. In other words, someone designated male at birth isn't going to use the women's room until she starts dressing as a woman. So this isn't about someone who is clearly male walking into the women's room. This is about someone who is trying very hard to present as female walking into the women's room. I've seen this happen often enough that I give a silent cheer that they are doing something that must be pretty fucking scary.
I'm surprised as well. And it's still happening even after you've said this. We're still talking about "trans women who appear to be male".
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331
|
Posted
Sorry. Bad use of language there, did not intend to offend anyone.
Maybe we should ban all scary-looking people from using public conveniences?
But that might be very inconvenient - supposing someone thought *I* looked scary? And who would enforce this ban? If scary-looking people are banned, who is going to have the nerve to go up to them and tell them to leave? Maybe it would be easier to ban people who don't look scary...
I'm doomed either way ![[Ultra confused]](graemlins/confused2.gif)
Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
Frankly, I'm surprised at the discussion here of men coming into women's rooms, because transgender people don't as a rule use the restroom belonging to the sex they feel is really their own until they start presenting themselves as that sex. In other words, someone designated male at birth isn't going to use the women's room until she starts dressing as a woman. So this isn't about someone who is clearly male walking into the women's room. This is about someone who is trying very hard to present as female walking into the women's room. I've seen this happen often enough that I give a silent cheer that they are doing something that must be pretty fucking scary.
I'm surprised as well. And it's still happening even after you've said this. We're still talking about "trans women who appear to be male".
Well, in my case I was responding to a post lower down than the OP. And I responded to that one because it was clearly written and raised the only legitimate issue I can think of, which is that of fear and public safety. ("We don't want transgender cooties" is not a legitimate issue and deserves no response other than "Shut the fuck up" IMHO.)
When it comes to fear and public safety, a transgender person who appears to be of the new gender (damn these slippery words) and goes into that gender's restroom is not likely to cause fear in anybody. Basically because who the hell is going to notice?
Which is maybe why this discussion has focused on transgender people who don't/don't yet appear to be of the new gender, and yet use that gender's restroom. That's the only case likely to arouse public notice and confusion.
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
But people who are transitioning, even when they are first starting out, work very hard to be read as possessing the gender that aligns with their gender identity. Especially when they are first starting out. They wear clothing that clearly belongs to that gender, makeup if appropriate, jewelry, etc. You won't see someone who clearly appears male going into a women's room; you'll see a woman who might appear somewhat masculine. In general you will have to look carefully enough to be rude to figure out that they might have previously been called Joe instead of Jane.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
Also, others' fear is not a good reason to make transgender people use the wrong bathroom. No one here has demonstrated any threat to public safety.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
No, of course not. What we HAVE done is demonstrate a possibility for confusion-based fear which is likely to end in painful embarrassment for everyone involved. I wish there was some way to avoid that. Short of single cubicles, I can't think of any.
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
But people who are transitioning, even when they are first starting out, work very hard to be read as possessing the gender that aligns with their gender identity. Especially when they are first starting out. They wear clothing that clearly belongs to that gender, makeup if appropriate, jewelry, etc. You won't see someone who clearly appears male going into a women's room; you'll see a woman who might appear somewhat masculine. In general you will have to look carefully enough to be rude to figure out that they might have previously been called Joe instead of Jane.
Yes, exactly. And that person will probably act far more scared of any other women around than the other women will of them.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
saysay
Ship's Praying Mantis
# 6645
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
Sorry, but this doesn't make sense. What you are basically supplying is an anecdote that demonstrates that a male rapist is prepared to follow a woman into a women's toilet anyway.
I was talking about the end of a cultural taboo. It used to be that no man would think of going into the women's bathroom because even the act of getting caught going in or out would get you in trouble although the reverse wasn't true. Occasionally boys would be punished by the other boys by getting thrown in the girl's bathroom, but that was different.
quote:
Allowing a trans person access to the women's toilet isn't going to increase this risk, unless you think that male rapists are for some reason more likely to be prepared to enter a woman's toilet while dressed in female clothing in full view of other people.
From the OP: quote:
Trans girls (and boys) in schools (and outside schools) should be able to use the bathrooms they feel comfortable in without having to be subjected to any medical or fashion tests.
This thread is specifically about teens being allowed to use the bathroom of the opposite sex without any visible sign that they are transitioning.
quote:
Yes, exactly. And that person will probably act far more scared of any other women around than the other women will of them.
Why would you think that?
I got dragged to an illegal after-hours gay bar back in 1999 and wound up having a fascinating conversation with a guy dressed as a woman as we stood in the extremely long line for the ladies room (most of them had such elaborate outfits on that it took them twenty minutes of undressing just to be able to pee). He wasn't trans so don't yell at me for describing him that way.
I find it hard to believe that society has gotten less tolerant, particularly since I see people who are either trans or drag queens or something walking around places like Walmart (which is frequently a redneck wonderland so if there's someplace you'd think they'd act afraid of women that's it) all the time. There tends to be laughter on their part, but not fear.
Is anyone else uncomfortable that this debate seems to be making arbitrary gender distinctions (wearing skirts and jewelry, having long hair, etc.) that are not inherent to either sex into things that people talk about as if they were inherent to that sex?
--------------------
"It's been a long day without you, my friend
I'll tell you all about it when I see you again"
"'Oh sweet baby purple Jesus' - that's a direct quote from a 9 year old - shoutout to purple Jesus."
Posts: 2943 | From: The Wire | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Teufelchen
Shipmate
# 10158
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by saysay:
I find it hard to believe that society has gotten less tolerant, particularly since I see people who are either trans or drag queens or something walking around places like Walmart (which is frequently a redneck wonderland so if there's someplace you'd think they'd act afraid of women that's it) all the time. There tends to be laughter on their part, but not fear.
I'll take the direct testimony of many friends of mine who are definitely trans rather than drag practitioners, who tell me that they often feel unsafe just doing the things that people of their gender ordinarily do, because of the harassment, abuse, creepy comments, and occasional straight-up assault that they encounter. And that's here in the UK, which on paper is a long way ahead of the US in terms of trans recognition.
t
--------------------
Little devil
Posts: 3894 | From: London area | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by saysay:
Is anyone else uncomfortable that this debate seems to be making arbitrary gender distinctions (wearing skirts and jewelry, having long hair, etc.) that are not inherent to either sex into things that people talk about as if they were inherent to that sex?
We're talking about them as if they are important to trans women, not to women generally. Women who don't have a biologically female body use skirts, jewelry, hair etc to assert their female identity.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
bib
Shipmate
# 13074
|
Posted
I've always found it odd that we have gender specific public lavatories, when at home everyone uses the same toilet. Just get rid of the urinals and make all the facilities private.
--------------------
"My Lord, my Life, my Way, my End, accept the praise I bring"
Posts: 1307 | From: Australia | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
stonespring
Shipmate
# 15530
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by saysay:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
Sorry, but this doesn't make sense. What you are basically supplying is an anecdote that demonstrates that a male rapist is prepared to follow a woman into a women's toilet anyway.
I was talking about the end of a cultural taboo. It used to be that no man would think of going into the women's bathroom because even the act of getting caught going in or out would get you in trouble although the reverse wasn't true. Occasionally boys would be punished by the other boys by getting thrown in the girl's bathroom, but that was different.
quote:
Allowing a trans person access to the women's toilet isn't going to increase this risk, unless you think that male rapists are for some reason more likely to be prepared to enter a woman's toilet while dressed in female clothing in full view of other people.
From the OP: quote:
Trans girls (and boys) in schools (and outside schools) should be able to use the bathrooms they feel comfortable in without having to be subjected to any medical or fashion tests.
This thread is specifically about teens being allowed to use the bathroom of the opposite sex without any visible sign that they are transitioning.
quote:
Yes, exactly. And that person will probably act far more scared of any other women around than the other women will of them.
Why would you think that?
I got dragged to an illegal after-hours gay bar back in 1999 and wound up having a fascinating conversation with a guy dressed as a woman as we stood in the extremely long line for the ladies room (most of them had such elaborate outfits on that it took them twenty minutes of undressing just to be able to pee). He wasn't trans so don't yell at me for describing him that way.
I find it hard to believe that society has gotten less tolerant, particularly since I see people who are either trans or drag queens or something walking around places like Walmart (which is frequently a redneck wonderland so if there's someplace you'd think they'd act afraid of women that's it) all the time. There tends to be laughter on their part, but not fear.
Is anyone else uncomfortable that this debate seems to be making arbitrary gender distinctions (wearing skirts and jewelry, having long hair, etc.) that are not inherent to either sex into things that people talk about as if they were inherent to that sex?
First, let me say that what most people are saying here is true - that the overwhelming majority (so great that I can't think of any counterexamples) of transpeople who begin to use their own gender's bathroom as part of their transitioning process are attempting to "pass" - with their own bodies being however they may be and their own personal idiosyncrasies informing their self-expression, but often with a more "feminine" or "masculine" manner of dress than many of their cisgender peers adopt.
That said, you can't draft anti-discrimination legislation based on gender norms of clothing. That ironically would take us back to the 1960s where transgender people, along with cisgender transvestites, were arrested for not conforming to these gender norms. You also cannot base the laws on whether or not people have gotten their legal sex changed yet, or whether they have had any medical treatment- surgery, hormones, or even just psychotherapy for gender dysphoria. I am not saying that any of those standards are not good ways of identifying people who are transgender (although most trans people do not meet those criteria) - what I am saying is that we cannot have a society where police, security guards, etc., can walk up to people in bathrooms who do not look male or female enough and ask them for identification or proof of medical treatment in order to "prove" that they belong in that bathroom.
I have not yet brought up people who identify as genderqueer or androgynous - which for lack of a good explanation means that they either identify as somewhere on a spectrum between male and female, or as equally male and female, or as neither male nor female at all. I have no idea of the psychology or any other science behind this, if there is any - and I doubt there is much in the way of legal policy about this if any.
It is also worth questioning whether or not being transgender even if it means for some people having "treatment" as in gender reassignment hormones or surgery actually constitutes a medical disorder. If it does not, and quite a few would argue now that it is not a disorder, than how is it different than being genderqueer or androgynous (note that this is different than being intersex, which is when one's body - as opposed to one's identity, has both male and female characteristics)? People may say that many transgender people feel that life is so awful that very many attempt suicide if they cannot transition to publicly living life as the gender they identify as, whether this may or may not be true for genderqueer or androgynous individuals (again, there is so little data and so little agreement on what these categories mean but much more data on transgender issues and much more science about transgender). But these questions seem worth contemplating because, as long as most of the world's bathrooms, locker rooms, and university dormitory roommate assignments are single sex and based on a sexual binary, genderqueer and androgyny threaten to throw that whole system on its head if they receive official recognition.
Posts: 1537 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by bib:
I've always found it odd that we have gender specific public lavatories, when at home everyone uses the same toilet. Just get rid of the urinals and make all the facilities private.
At a cost of a factor of between 5 and 10 (my guesstimate above) in required footprint for penis-equipped urinators? It's inefficient.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Teufelchen
Shipmate
# 10158
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
quote:
Originally posted by bib:
I've always found it odd that we have gender specific public lavatories, when at home everyone uses the same toilet. Just get rid of the urinals and make all the facilities private.
At a cost of a factor of between 5 and 10 (my guesstimate above) in required footprint for penis-equipped urinators? It's inefficient.
In my experience, this isn't what happens. What happens is that planners allow approximately the same footprint to each set of toilets. Then, with a mix of stalls urinals in the gents' and only stalls in the ladies', the capacity of the ladies' is lower, leading to long queues at the ladies' during busy times. This can even feed the misperception that women take longer to go. But it takes fewer men all needing to sit down simultaneously to run into problems in the gents'.
So in short, I agree that we should move to all-seated toilets. It's not like men are going to be significantly disadvantaged.
t
--------------------
Little devil
Posts: 3894 | From: London area | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
stonespring
Shipmate
# 15530
|
Posted
As an unashamed sitzpinkler (German for a man who prefers to pee sitting down), I feel no qualms with switching to all unisex bathrooms with no urinals and only stalls (for those men who do pee standing up there can even be a flush lever (and, if someone wants to invent it, a seat-lifting and lowering button) on the side of the wall). It might be a generational thing, but urinals, even with barriers on the sides (which are largely a new thing), have always struck me as voyeuristic, even if they are not intended to be. That, and they smell worse than toilets.
However, some people belong to religions (Orthodox Judaism, conservative Islam) that I would imagine do not allow them to be in a restroom with people of the opposite sex who they are not married to, so they would protest against replacing single-sex bathrooms with unisex bathrooms.
I wonder what people in such religions feel about transgender people? (Iran's Shia theocratic government is quirky in that it allows male to female gender reassignment surgery and the post-op woman can marry a man but not a woman - I am not sure if this reflects mainstream Shia or Sunni thought). Would Orthodox Jews (particularly the Ultra-Orthodox) and conservative Muslims be ok with having transgender people in the same public bathroom as they, or would they feel that the transgender persons are people of the opposite sex and therefore causing them to break their religion's taboos concerning modesty? I know that various religions have had eunuchs, hijras (in the Indian subcontinent), and a "third gender" in their histories, but I am not sure if conservative religious authorities in these religions would consider transgender people to be appropriate company in a single-sex bathroom (especially transmen (female-to-male), as hijras and most other third gender people you hear about in south and southwest Asia are born biologically male).
Should these religious opinions matter in terms of the law? Practically you would think they might, because there are neighborhoods with very large populations of these religions - although the law in the US refuses to segregate bus seating in Ultra-Orthodox Jewish neighborhoods, and rightly so in my opinion.
Posts: 1537 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Louise
Shipmate
# 30
|
Posted
Hosting
I've just checked and the Dead Horse as per guidelines is homosexuality, not LGBT. It's problematic to put transgender issues under the heading of 'homosexuality'. We're just discussing this on the host board. I'm temporarily closing this thread until a decision is made.
Thanks,
Louise
Dead Horses Host
Hosting off
--------------------
Now you need never click a Daily Mail link again! Kittenblock replaces Mail links with calming pics of tea and kittens! http://www.teaandkittens.co.uk/ Click under 'other stuff' to find it.
Posts: 6918 | From: Scotland | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Thread closed
Printer-friendly view
