North Carolina Bathroom Law

[/]

I cannot tell if this is a good explanation or not. Perhaps there is a disconnect here. You're plainly well-versed in the science and psychology of transgender, but do not appear to be well-versed in the real life implications of someone who looks like a man entering a woman's restroom. If a woman is using a woman's restroom and someone who looks like a man enters the restroom, what do you think would happen? Do you think the woman would say "Oh, must be a transgender individual with gender dysphoria, I will not feel uncomfortable."? Or do you think it is more likely that the woman will feel uncomfortable and/or go to management to complain? As indicated previously, I'm supportive of unisex bathrooms but I bet there are a whole lot of people who are not supportive of unisex bathrooms (and not for religious or social conservative reasons). Additionally, I'm trying to determine what makes a particular transgender person (or person with gender dysphoria) subject to equal protection considerations such that he or she should feel comfortable using a restroom of his or her choice that does not correspond to the genitalia he or she was born with (or, in fact, currently sports).

Eh? People are supposed to feel comfortable in a public restroom? What sort of utopia are you pissing in?

Honestly, I'm not sure. I, and people I've known, have known it not uncommon for staff, custodians, or parents (and occasionally someone having a severe emergency) to enter restrooms of either opposite gender without incident. That of course is purely anecdotal, and thus not worth much. I'd like to think that most women would not view a man displaying proper etiquette, clearly doing a purposeful task in the restroom as some sort of criminal by default. I mean it's one thing if a man were to enter and start loitering, but it they went straight to a stall or sink, like everyone should do, wouldn't most reasonable people assume they weren't causing trouble?

[AndyDufresne]

What sort of utopia are you pissing in?

I use to support BBS for president in past election cycles. I now support /. Perfect campaign slogan.


--Andy

[Metsfanmax]

It's not that a woman is uncomfortable that a transgender person is using the same restroom as she is; it's that a man is using the same restroom as she is.

Well, it wasn't all that long ago that white men were uncomfortable with black men using the same restrooms as they did. The personal desire of bigots not to interact with the people they are bigoted against never outweighs the personal desire of others to have freedom of movement and access.

Bigoted against what and who exactly? Bigoted against men or bigoted against men who identify as women?

The way you framed the question blurs the line between biological sex and gender identity in the exact way that is so problematic to this issue. If we take "man" and "woman" as gender labels and not as labels of biological sex, then there is no such thing as a "man who identifies as a woman," there are only people who identify as men and people who identify as women. Transgender people are those whose gender identity does not match what traditionally their biological sex would be associated with, but if we step back and ignore what private parts they have, then we can see that their biological sex doesn't matter for how they identify -- any person can identify to be any gender they choose. Going forward, I urge you to specify when you mean "biologically male" and when you mean the masculine gender identity. In general, a culturally sensitive and enlightened person should refer to gender identity and not biological sex unless there is a particularly good reason for talking about the latter (which is not really your business). Also, be aware that some people don't fit easily into this binary gender dichotomy, and one should be respectful of such people as well.

So the answer to your question is that I am talking about the people who are bigoted against those whose biological sex is not determinative of their gender identity.

A woman has no idea if a man who enters a woman's restroom is a man identifying as a man or transgender; therefore, she can't possibly be bigoted against transgender.

No, she certainly can be bigoted against trans folks, and many are, even if she doesn't always know who is trans and who is not.

I find it fascinating that people liken the transgender bathroom movement to the desegregation movement.

I suspect that, given another 50 or 60 years, people will look upon our current policies relating to gender with the same level of disgust that we now look upon the existence of segregration. With that being said, I didn't equate the transgender bathroom movement with the desegregation movement. I observe only that if today a white man insisted that a black man cannot use the same bathroom as him, we would not even credit that statement as being a reasonable view to hold. Yet today, when it comes to gender identity, some people are like "yeah, I can see how someone might think that, even if I'm not bigoted like they are." Understanding the other person's point of view is fine; you should understand it. That does not require you to endorse it as a viable piece of public policy.

If a woman is using a woman's restroom and someone who looks like a man enters the restroom, what do you think would happen? Do you think the woman would say "Oh, must be a transgender individual with gender dysphoria, I will not feel uncomfortable."? Or do you think it is more likely that the woman will feel uncomfortable and/or go to management to complain?

And at one time if a white man saw a black man not using the coloreds only restroom, he could call the local sheriff to put together a posse and hang the black man, but that doesn't make it right. One must always fight discrimination; one must never allow the discomfort some will feel with the new system to prevent needed change. If we always waited until everyone was on board before giving people the rights they deserve, social progress would not be made.

[thegreekdog]

If a woman is using a woman's restroom and someone who looks like a man enters the restroom, what do you think would happen? Do you think the woman would say "Oh, must be a transgender individual with gender dysphoria, I will not feel uncomfortable."? Or do you think it is more likely that the woman will feel uncomfortable and/or go to management to complain?

And at one time if a white man saw a black man not using the coloreds only restroom, he could call the local sheriff to put together a posse and hang the black man, but that doesn't make it right. One must always fight discrimination; one must never allow the discomfort some will feel with the new system to prevent needed change. If we always waited until everyone was on board before giving people the rights they deserve, social progress would not be made.

This is the most relevant part of your lengthy post. I agree with most of what you've said other than what you've indicated above. A white man can tell when a black man uses a "whites only restroom." A woman cannot tell when a transgender man uses a woman's restroom. Your wish for equality is great; I support it. Unfortunately, it is impossible to reconcile this point of view with real life unless we make all bathrooms unisex. If the Obama administration's letter says that, I'm supportive (but I doubt it says that).

A somewhat related example (bathroom and locker room wise, not sexuality wise) is a question I've asked my friends: Is a lesbian woman showering in a public woman's shower the same as a man showing in a public woman's shower? Ultimately, the woman who would otherwise be uncomfortable would not know whether the woman who was sharing the shower was a lesbian or not.

I think many of us can agree that transgender individuals deserve to be treated the same way as everyone else. Other than arch conservatives, I believe most of the American public is on board with it. I'm thinking about the real life implications of enforcing that type of equal protection. Again, it's about perceptions. A woman doesn't see a woman or transgender man using the locker room shower; she sees a man. How would you deal with that situation?

And let me tell you, at the risk of being labelled - when I was in college and we had co-ed bathrooms, it was a regular topic of conversation amongst the guys as to who was in the shower and what they looked like.

[Metsfanmax]

This is the most relevant part of your lengthy post. I agree with most of what you've said other than what you've indicated above. A white man can tell when a black man uses a "whites only restroom." A woman cannot tell when a transgender man uses a woman's restroom.

Okay, supposing this was true, doesn't it defeat a large part of the point in support of this law? If women cannot tell whether their bathroom colleagues are biologically male or female, then they'd never have any reason to be uncomfortable in thinking that there's a man in their restroom, so there's no reason to have the law.

Your wish for equality is great; I support it. Unfortunately, it is impossible to reconcile this point of view with real life unless we make all bathrooms unisex. If the Obama administration's letter says that, I'm supportive (but I doubt it says that).

No idea what the administration's letter says. I think that I would support a move towards unisex facilities in general, though that's part of a larger societal conversation about gender identity.

A somewhat related example (bathroom and locker room wise, not sexuality wise) is a question I've asked my friends: Is a lesbian woman showering in a public woman's shower the same as a man showing in a public woman's shower? Ultimately, the woman who would otherwise be uncomfortable would not know whether the woman who was sharing the shower was a lesbian or not.

I think this is going to vary from person to person. Some might be uncomfortable with it, I think anecdotally most don't care.

A woman doesn't see a woman or transgender man using the locker room shower; she sees a man. How would you deal with that situation?

Why does it require dealing with? In general my attitude is the same as for the example of racial segregation -- if they don't like it, they have to deal with it and eventually they will die and be replaced by people who have more enlightened social views.

[muy_thaiguy]

Just do the whole Unisex bathroom thing. Plenty of those in public places anyway. That way, everyone wins.

[apey]

Just do the whole Unisex bathroom thing. Plenty of those in public places anyway. That way, everyone wins.

right!
The only problem i have with the whole bathroom debacle is that the way they have it set up now nothing stops a pedophile from going into the bathroom with my kiddos.
He or she just has to say they identify as the other sex. Doesn't mean my kid will be violated but it could happen. On the other hand tho if a true transgender person say Caitlin Jenner walked into a bathroom after my son i would totally flip!!whereas if she walked in after my daughter i wouldnt care. Seems like a catch 22
Maybe unisex potties are the answer
Walmart has "family" bathrooms but no where else that i have noticed do.

[Metsfanmax]

the fear of rape is always a concern among women.

The conservative position: laws banning guns don't stop criminals from using guns, but laws banning people from entering restrooms stop rape.

[apey]

the fear of rape is always a concern among women.

The conservative position: laws banning guns don't stop criminals from using guns, but laws banning people from entering restrooms stop rape.

lol but if you carry a gun that will stop rape.....

[tzor]

the fear of rape is always a concern among women.

The conservative position: laws banning guns don't stop criminals from using guns, but laws banning people from entering restrooms stop rape.

Typical met's argument, comparing an apple with a pear. It's also typical to imply that I have been strongly supporting the North Carolina bathroom law, which I have not.

The liberal position is clear in its paradox: Safe Space; Safe Space; Safe Space; You can't have a Safe Space!

Simply put, I really don't care or mind if a woman enters the men's room, heads to a urinal, pulls out one of those many devices on the market today and doesn't worry about what is on those toilet seats. This doesn't violate my sense of space nor makes me uncomfortable. I know there is this notion of "equality" among the sexes but that doesn't mean there is "equivalency." Women have a right to feel safe in the women's room.

It gets even more complex when the issue occurs with children, who should not only be sex separated but age bracket separated (this happens naturally in schools where young children are sent to different facilities than older children). People will break into houses all the time, but that doesn't mean you can't make it illegal to break into someone's house (the notion that you have to wait until the person actually attempts to rob the house once he is silly and stupid).

[tzor]

lol but if you carry a gun that will stop rape.....

It depends on where you carry that gun.

[apey]

Well not in my pocket that would look awkward!

[Phatscotty]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/05/09/the-legal-fight-over-north-carolinas-transgender-bathroom-law-explained-in-4-questions/

I'm sick of the lack of political discussion in this forum. I used to be able to get lots of good threads without creating them... not so much any more. Therefore, I'm creating this one.

North Carolina's transgender bathroom law basically says a person can only use a restroom that corresponds to the gender that person was born with; thus, a transgender man can't use the men's room and a transgender woman can't use the ladies' room.

Discuss.

somebody predicted this would happen 3-4 years ago.

WHY HOW DARE I?

[saxitoxin]

Just tear-out all the toilets in mens and womens restrooms and put in urinals exclusively. Preferably stadium trough-style urinals because they're funnest. Problem solved.

[Dukasaur]

Or just big holes in the floor, like in Spain.

[tzor]

Just tear-out all the toilets in mens and womens restrooms and put in urinals exclusively. Preferably stadium trough-style urinals because they're funnest. Problem solved.

You can't do that ... shit happens.

[notyou2]

One question. Why is this such a big deal in the US but not Canada, Europe, Australia or NZ?

[muy_thaiguy]

One question. Why is this such a big deal in the US but not Canada, Europe, Australia or NZ?

Internet parodies.

[Serbia]

Or just big holes in the floor, like in Spain.

Not any of the restrooms I was in while in Spain...

[mrswdk]

the fear of rape is always a concern among women.

The conservative position: laws banning guns don't stop criminals from using guns, but laws banning people from entering restrooms stop rape.

Typical met's argument, comparing an apple with a pear. It's also typical to imply that I have been strongly supporting the North Carolina bathroom law, which I have not.

The liberal position is clear in its paradox: Safe Space; Safe Space; Safe Space; You can't have a Safe Space!

Simply put, I really don't care or mind if a woman enters the men's room, heads to a urinal, pulls out one of those many devices on the market today and doesn't worry about what is on those toilet seats. This doesn't violate my sense of space nor makes me uncomfortable. I know there is this notion of "equality" among the sexes but that doesn't mean there is "equivalency." Women have a right to feel safe in the women's room.

It gets even more complex when the issue occurs with children, who should not only be sex separated but age bracket separated (this happens naturally in schools where young children are sent to different facilities than older children). People will break into houses all the time, but that doesn't mean you can't make it illegal to break into someone's house (the notion that you have to wait until the person actually attempts to rob the house once he is silly and stupid).

So do you support separate restrooms for grown men and boys, to prevent boys being preyed on by pedos?

[Phatscotty]

One question. Why is this such a big deal in the US but not Canada, Europe, Australia or NZ?

Because our stone age thinking is still standing in the way by referring to our genitals as 'private' parts

[Phatscotty]

the fear of rape is always a concern among women.

The conservative position: laws banning guns don't stop criminals from using guns, but laws banning people from entering restrooms stop rape.

Typical met's argument, comparing an apple with a pear. It's also typical to imply that I have been strongly supporting the North Carolina bathroom law, which I have not.

The liberal position is clear in its paradox: Safe Space; Safe Space; Safe Space; You can't have a Safe Space!

Simply put, I really don't care or mind if a woman enters the men's room, heads to a urinal, pulls out one of those many devices on the market today and doesn't worry about what is on those toilet seats. This doesn't violate my sense of space nor makes me uncomfortable. I know there is this notion of "equality" among the sexes but that doesn't mean there is "equivalency." Women have a right to feel safe in the women's room.

It gets even more complex when the issue occurs with children, who should not only be sex separated but age bracket separated (this happens naturally in schools where young children are sent to different facilities than older children). People will break into houses all the time, but that doesn't mean you can't make it illegal to break into someone's house (the notion that you have to wait until the person actually attempts to rob the house once he is silly and stupid).

Sadly tis. Not saying this is what anyone here said or putting words in mouths, but I do note the absolute lack of common sense gladly surrendered and abandoned for the greater good of fighting 'discrimination'. What I speak of is a certain person who actually tried to defend their point that perverts don't lurk out in bathrooms.

[Phatscotty]

I think we already had a thread for it though.

Forgive me if I'm wrong, I've had about 1 hour of sleep the last 48 hours.

Sure do, quite a few actually. All the way from the South Park 'sissy' episode to transracial/transpecies. Problem is said threads were Prometheus'd so long ago we'd have to necrobump so new thread on topic shall suffice

[Phatscotty]

This law is the same as making restrooms for white people only, or drinking fountains. Or perhaps only protestants can use public transit. Or only men can enter bars. Discrimination needs to be dealt with head on and eradicated.

No, it's really not. It's about making a restroom that is for men only and a restroom that is for women only. It's separate but equal as between genders for restrooms only. This has been the case for a long time in a lot of different places (my freshman dorm notwithstanding). This is not about excluding transgenders from using restrooms so your analogies are inaccurate.

And... all a person has to do to get around the North Carolina law is to change his/her birth certificate. That's it. This law is completely ineffective. I am a 6'1" 250 pound, dark-skinned man with facial hair. If I change my birth certificate, I can use a women's room in North Carolina without breaking the law (admittedly, I need to do some things to get my birth certificate changed from male to female).

I can't help but reintroduce the relationship to how this is going to impact boy scouts and girl's softball teams. We really did make the decision to steer America 2.0 directly into crazy town to the point where the answer is 'YES, nobody can have anything that might possibly discriminate against .1% of any certain population. I wouldn't doubt urinals get banned since someone in a wheelchair might get pissed off at the mere sight of one.