Switch Theme:

General Trans bathroom thread, incl. target, federal involvement and more  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
  • No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
  • Times and dates in your local timezone.
  • Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
  • Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
  • Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.




Made in us
Imperial Admiral




 Peregrine wrote:
Which is a pretty irrelevant fact, since the myth of bathroom attacks is just that: a myth.


Obviously you've never seen True Lies.

I'm also sympathetic to the argument that chicks don't wanna see dong in their changing rooms. I don't wanna see it in mine, either.
   
Made in us
Douglas Bader






Seaward wrote:
I'm also sympathetic to the argument that chicks don't wanna see dong in their changing rooms. I don't wanna see it in mine, either.


And yet somehow you manage to cope. I suspect that women will figure it out just as well, and men will probably figure out how to cope with female bits in "their" changing rooms.

There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices. 
   
Made in us
Imperial Admiral




 Peregrine wrote:
And yet somehow you manage to cope. I suspect that women will figure it out just as well, and men will probably figure out how to cope with female bits in "their" changing rooms.


Why have sex-segregated changing rooms at all?
   
Made in us
Douglas Bader






Seaward wrote:
Why have sex-segregated changing rooms at all?


We shouldn't. Allow me to quite myself from the previous page:

This is a valid point that has been raised. We probably should just have one shower/locker room for everyone, and get over our absurd cultural belief that non-sexual nudity is some kind of simultaneously horrifying and fascinating thing. It turns out that, once you get over that issue, having a bunch of mixed-gender people naked in a non-sexual context is pretty boring. All those other naked people just become part of the background and are about as stare-worthy as the naked people you're already around.

There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices. 
   
Made in us
Imperial Admiral




 Peregrine wrote:


We shouldn't. Allow me to quite myself from the previous page:

This is a valid point that has been raised. We probably should just have one shower/locker room for everyone, and get over our absurd cultural belief that non-sexual nudity is some kind of simultaneously horrifying and fascinating thing. It turns out that, once you get over that issue, having a bunch of mixed-gender people naked in a non-sexual context is pretty boring. All those other naked people just become part of the background and are about as stare-worthy as the naked people you're already around.


It's a consistent answer, I'll give you that. It's just not an opinion I happen to share.
   
Made in au
[MOD]
Making Stuff






Under the couch

 Spinner wrote:
although I have reservations about the assertions that there's hundreds for every one one that's 'convincing'.

Indeed. If only because, really, the 'unconvincing' ones are the only ones you're generally going to know about. Short of going all Mick Dundee on every woman you encounter on the street, you'd have no way of knowing how many of them were actually born women or not...

 
   
Made in gb
Bryan Ansell





Birmingham, UK

I'll admit to being ignorant of Trans issues. Woefully undereducated and all that but as I see it the use of bathrooms by gender identity preference is a non issue isnt it?

Before change to federal law and this becoming a hot topic issue trans male to female persons would have had to use male bathrooms and trans female to male would have had to use female bathrooms...thats right isnt it? And I would assume that for decades people have used whatever bathroom they feel comfortable using?

If so has this been a big issue in the past? Has anyone cared enough to make it an issue?

Same with changing rooms I would assume?

I'm not too sure about anyone who has gender identity issues but who isn't transitioning or whatever the terminology is. But for those who are or have transitioned I personally feel that switching to their preferred bathroom does not really impact me. I'm not interested in their junk, I don't care about their life story. I'm not going to have any interaction with them.

I'm not too sure I buy the argument for criminal activity to increase due to signs changing either. I would guess that anyone anti such a change or is obsessed with the purity of their restrooms would statistically be more likely to cause harm to someone using such a facility than those using it for the correct purpose?

And as a father I am probably safe in saying that the worst thing that would happen should we use a facility is that I will have to man up and answer some questions.

Whats the statistical chance of me noticing a transgender person using the same restroom/toilet/bathroom/changing room?



   
Made in us
Proud Triarch Praetorian





 Ouze wrote:
Why not just be completely naked in the rest of the gym as well, helicoptering on the treadmill? Just helicopter in, run a few laps, helicopter out?




My name is Dreadwinter and I approve this message. We should be allowed to helicopter wherever we want! FREE THE PEEN! LET THE HELICOPTERING COMMENCE!
   
Made in gb
[DCM]
Et In Arcadia Ego





Canterbury

 insaniak wrote:
 Spinner wrote:
although I have reservations about the assertions that there's hundreds for every one one that's 'convincing'.

Indeed. If only because, really, the 'unconvincing' ones are the only ones you're generally going to know about. Short of going all Mick Dundee on every woman you encounter on the street, you'd have no way of knowing how many of them were actually born women or not...



You do realise that a substantial portion of our members won't be old enough to get that reference right ?


The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
 
   
Made in jp
[MOD]
Anti-piracy Officer






Somewhere in south-central England.

Seaward wrote:
 Peregrine wrote:
And yet somehow you manage to cope. I suspect that women will figure it out just as well, and men will probably figure out how to cope with female bits in "their" changing rooms.


Why have sex-segregated changing rooms at all?


It's a good question.

I think it's a cultural norm in modern western society that derives ultimately from the Christian idea that the nude body is provoking to the sin of lust, particularly the female body to male lust. Islam has the same concept to an even greater degree, hence purdah, the hijab and so on. This leads to the creation of a sense of shame and embarrassment for revealing one's naked body at all, let alone to the opposite sex, as well as an obsession with getting a eyeful if possible.

Whether these feelings are good or bad is a matter of interpretation based on personal circumstances.

As with other cultural norms there are exceptions. Unisex changing rooms are common in swimming baths in Sweden and Austria, for instance. Outside the western European tradition, mixed nude bathing is not uncommon in Japan, and there's no stigma involved in public nudity and washing in the more common segregated bathing areas. Mixed public nude beaches have been around for a long time in many European countries.

Things change over time, of course. 100 years it was pretty racy for women to appear in the street not wearing clothes that completely covered their bodies. Mixed bathing and changing of different races was highly anti-social or even illegal in many places. Those attitudes have completely changed in the western world.

There is a significant amount of installed infrastructure of segregated lavatories and changing rooms, but these could gradually be converted or replaced with unisex facilities.

I'm writing a load of fiction. My latest story starts here... This is the index of all the stories...

We're not very big on official rules. Rules lead to people looking for loopholes. What's here is about it. 
   
Made in us
Dakka Veteran






Just get rid of public washrooms, make every do their business at home behind closed doors.
   
Made in us
Imperial Admiral




 Kilkrazy wrote:
There is a significant amount of installed infrastructure of segregated lavatories and changing rooms, but these could gradually be converted or replaced with unisex facilities.


Why would we want to? Aren't you arguing in another thread that it's important to make sure cultural traditions of religious origin be accommodated by a broader society altering around them rather than the other way around? Or is this simply a little progressive stack calculus that I don't have the right equations for?
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





There's a huge difference between traditions that require you to do something and traditions that insist other people do things.
   
Made in us
Imperial Admiral




 skyth wrote:
There's a huge difference between traditions that require you to do something and traditions that insist other people do things.


Yeah, I don't buy that. If a tradition insists that people wear pants, for example, that's insisting that other people do things.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





 Ouze wrote:
Why not put up a sign that says "don't molest anyone in the bathroom" instead?



Because then you have to put up the explanation that anything more than three shakes is playing with yourself and thus, depending on your beliefs, molestation (even if it is to your own person)


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Mr. Burning wrote:

Before change to federal law and this becoming a hot topic issue trans male to female persons would have had to use male bathrooms and trans female to male would have had to use female bathrooms...thats right isnt it? And I would assume that for decades people have used whatever bathroom they feel comfortable using?

If so has this been a big issue in the past? Has anyone cared enough to make it an issue?



AFAIK, before these absurd laws started popping up, we had a sign on the door that said 'men' and 'women' but generally speaking, followed the "Duck rule".... as in, if it looks like a man, talks like a man, it is a man. Now these laws are creating a problem by saying, "looks like a man, talks like a man.... really a man?"


Also in general, I think that prior to this decade, the only real time I can ever recall Trans issues being brought up in the public eye, were when a trans person was the victim of a horrendous crime because of them being trans. Doesn't mean there weren't hot button issues around, just that I don't remember them.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/05/14 17:26:25


 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





Seaward wrote:
 skyth wrote:
There's a huge difference between traditions that require you to do something and traditions that insist other people do things.


Yeah, I don't buy that. If a tradition insists that people wear pants, for example, that's insisting that other people do things.


That's not a religious based tradition. I believe you are moving the goalposts.

And it still works. Making a woman wear pants because wearing a skirt is against your religion is bad. A woman choosing to wear pants because it's required by her religion is fine and you're in the wrong if you try to make her wear a skirt.
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





Denison, Iowa

I don't think that there is an answer that would totally please everyone. I would however like to try.

I have some questions (serious questions) and some ideas that I'd like to bounce off you guys.

As I see it, despite what the Justice department is stating, discrimination based upon gender IS sometimes legal. If a man that identifies as male walks into the ladies room he can be in legal trouble.

Also, correct me if I'm wrong here, the Federal Government has never legislated a definition of what the genders actually are. According to the Constitution any right that is not specifically given to the Federal Government is reserved for the states.

Could the problem be that we are trying to force several genders into a (as we see it now) gender binary society? Could the answer be to legislate in more than two genders?

I know this is technically "separate, but equal" and that leaves a bad taste in people's mouths, but why not just have a trans-bathroom? Men only in one, women only in one, trans only in the third bathroom. This kind of thing isn't exactly unheard of. In several Asian countries they have specific bathrooms for "lady-boys" as they call them. natural men and women are not allowed to use them. After they did this assaults on Trans people in the restroom dropped. Trans people got behind it and fully supported the idea and it appears to be working great.

I know many will say "but a trans-woman doesn't see herself as a third gender, she sees herself as a WOMAN." Without trying to sound like a bigot, if you are not physically a woman, you are NOT a woman. I'll give you the same respect I'd give a woman, but you really aren't one.

Trans supporters used to scoff when people brought up the idea of "trans racial" and even said that it's not a thing, until 2014 came and a Trans-racial professor happened. I honestly talked with several LGBT supporters who DIDN'T accept the idea of trans racial. This puzzled me as I really don't see the difference.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Leerstetten, Germany

When public bathrooms and locker rooms were desegregated many years ago it didn't result on any significant amount of rapes, despite fears to the contrary.

Gays don't rape straight people that change in the same dressing room with them, despite fears to the contrary.

This is just the newest "there is change, and I don't understand it" episode, and it too will pass.
   
Made in au
[MOD]
Making Stuff






Under the couch

 cuda1179 wrote:

Could the problem be that we are trying to force several genders into a (as we see it now) gender binary society? Could the answer be to legislate in more than two genders?

Yes, that's the problem, but no, that's not the solution.

The solution is to stop writing legislation that is based on gender.



I know this is technically "separate, but equal" and that leaves a bad taste in people's mouths, but why not just have a trans-bathroom?

Because it would be as pointless and unenforceable as the current derided 'use the right toilet' legislation.

Just make bathrooms non-gender-specific and privately enclosed, and move on.

 
   
Made in us
Pyromaniac Hellhound Pilot





 cuda1179 wrote:
but why not just have a trans-bathroom?


You just answered that question.


I know this is technically "separate, but equal"


Unless you're either willing to kick out everyone who 'don't look right' or go the full South Park route and install a Toilet Safety Administration, any 'no trans people in this or that bathroom' law is completely unenforceable. It wouldn't stop people from being assaulted in bathrooms, it wouldn't protect children, and it wouldn't really deter less-violent creepy people. Any privacy issues are easily addressed via closing and locking the stall door - frankly, I'd think stalls without properly working doors are a bigger issue, along with those stupid urinals that don't have dividers between them. Can't we put all this energy into fixing that?

   
Made in us
Douglas Bader






 cuda1179 wrote:
I know this is technically "separate, but equal" and that leaves a bad taste in people's mouths, but why not just have a trans-bathroom?


Because "trans" is not a gender. A trans-woman and trans-man are two very different things, and it doesn't make any sense to put them together in a third bathroom.

Without trying to sound like a bigot, if you are not physically a woman, you are NOT a woman.


Define "physically a woman". When you do, please remember that sex and gender are two very different things.

Trans supporters used to scoff when people brought up the idea of "trans racial" and even said that it's not a thing, until 2014 came and a Trans-racial professor happened. I honestly talked with several LGBT supporters who DIDN'T accept the idea of trans racial. This puzzled me as I really don't see the difference.


The difference is that with transgender people we have a plausible explanation for how it happens. We know that the process of turning a genderless blob of cells into a male or female human is complex and can go wrong in various ways, so it's entirely plausible that one of those ways things can go wrong is for the brain to get the opposite hormones/genetic triggers/whatever as the rest of the body and go down the opposite development path. There is no similar concept with race. The same development process doesn't exist, and most of what we think of as "race" is cultural, not physical.

There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices. 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





Denison, Iowa

 Peregrine wrote:
 cuda1179 wrote:
I know this is technically "separate, but equal" and that leaves a bad taste in people's mouths, but why not just have a trans-bathroom?


Because "trans" is not a gender. A trans-woman and trans-man are two very different things, and it doesn't make any sense to put them together in a third bathroom.

Without trying to sound like a bigot, if you are not physically a woman, you are NOT a woman.


Define "physically a woman". When you do, please remember that sex and gender are two very different things.

Trans supporters used to scoff when people brought up the idea of "trans racial" and even said that it's not a thing, until 2014 came and a Trans-racial professor happened. I honestly talked with several LGBT supporters who DIDN'T accept the idea of trans racial. This puzzled me as I really don't see the difference.


The difference is that with transgender people we have a plausible explanation for how it happens. We know that the process of turning a genderless blob of cells into a male or female human is complex and can go wrong in various ways, so it's entirely plausible that one of those ways things can go wrong is for the brain to get the opposite hormones/genetic triggers/whatever as the rest of the body and go down the opposite development path. There is no similar concept with race. The same development process doesn't exist, and most of what we think of as "race" is cultural, not physical.


As I stated, a third gender could legally be legislated in. Trans Men and Trans Women sharing a bathroom isn't any more silly than a trans woman sharing a bathroom with a cis woman.

I would like to add one thing to the Sex vs Gender thing. Your are right, there is a difference. However, the constitution only provides protections for sex, not gender.

If race is more cultural than biology, then would a man of European decent that grew up from infancy in Africa, among Africans that treated him as an equal, be Black? By your logic he would, and trans racial IS a thing.
   
Made in us
Douglas Bader






 cuda1179 wrote:
As I stated, a third gender could legally be legislated in.


Lots of things can be legislated in. That doesn't mean they make any sense. Trans-men and trans-women have essentially nothing in common, grouping them together is just something you think would be convenient. It makes about as much sense as creating a separate bathroom for all people under 5" tall, regardless of gender, because they're all short people.

Trans Men and Trans Women sharing a bathroom isn't any more silly than a trans woman sharing a bathroom with a cis woman.


According to you. However, there is a rather obvious difference that most other people can see: one involves two women sharing a bathroom, the other involves a man and a woman sharing a bathroom.

I would like to add one thing to the Sex vs Gender thing. Your are right, there is a difference. However, the constitution only provides protections for sex, not gender.


What is your point? How is this a response to what I asked you to define? Please don't change the subject.

If race is more cultural than biology, then would a man of European decent that grew up from infancy in Africa, among Africans that treated him as an equal, be Black? By your logic he would, and trans racial IS a thing.


You're missing the point here. The concept of "trans racial" means "I am inherently {race}, not {race they appear to be}". IOW, "I'm a white guy from a white family, but I was supposed to be black". That is not at all the same as talking about a person who is adopted by a different race/culture.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/05/14 22:35:18


There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices. 
   
Made in au
[MOD]
Making Stuff






Under the couch

 cuda1179 wrote:
Trans Men and Trans Women sharing a bathroom isn't any more silly than a trans woman sharing a bathroom with a cis woman.

You know what else would be exactly the same as Trans Men and Trans Women sharing a bathroom?

Men and Women sharing a bathroom.



If race is more cultural than biology, then would a man of European decent that grew up from infancy in Africa, among Africans that treated him as an equal, be Black?


The more pertinent question would be: why does it matter?

 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





Denison, Iowa

 insaniak wrote:
 cuda1179 wrote:
Trans Men and Trans Women sharing a bathroom isn't any more silly than a trans woman sharing a bathroom with a cis woman.

You know what else would be exactly the same as Trans Men and Trans Women sharing a bathroom?

Men and Women sharing a bathroom.



If race is more cultural than biology, then would a man of European decent that grew up from infancy in Africa, among Africans that treated him as an equal, be Black?


The more pertinent question would be: why does it matter?


This whole thread is about accepting people as the identity they most identify with. This really isn't that different yet there is no where near the acceptance for it. Just the duality of logic.

I would say that trans men and women sharing a bathroom isn't quite as bad as cis men and women. For starters, the population difference is far from 50-50. plus, they both kind-of have one foot on each side of the fence.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/05/14 23:46:44


 
   
Made in us
Douglas Bader






 cuda1179 wrote:
This whole thread is about accepting people as the identity they most identify with. This really isn't that different yet there is no where near the acceptance for it. Just the duality of logic.


I've already explained why the two situations are completely different. It's interesting to me that you'd reply to insaniak's post and ignore mine with an explanation.

There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices. 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





Denison, Iowa

 Peregrine wrote:
 cuda1179 wrote:
This whole thread is about accepting people as the identity they most identify with. This really isn't that different yet there is no where near the acceptance for it. Just the duality of logic.


I've already explained why the two situations are completely different. It's interesting to me that you'd reply to insaniak's post and ignore mine with an explanation.


Some people do claim that they feel like they were born into the wrong race. They have NEVER identified with their own race. If you want another case of someone not "being born to the right body" with an actual biological link, like what you claim is needed, how about people with body integrity identity disorder? Some of these people feel like some of their limbs are not truly them, and want them amputated. We are not accepting of this behavior. We simply think it is a mental disorder......kind of like how transsexuals were once viewed.
   
Made in au
[MOD]
Not as Good as a Minion






Brisbane

 cuda1179 wrote:
 Peregrine wrote:
 cuda1179 wrote:
This whole thread is about accepting people as the identity they most identify with. This really isn't that different yet there is no where near the acceptance for it. Just the duality of logic.


I've already explained why the two situations are completely different. It's interesting to me that you'd reply to insaniak's post and ignore mine with an explanation.


Some people do claim that they feel like they were born into the wrong race. They have NEVER identified with their own race. If you want another case of someone not "being born to the right body" with an actual biological link, like what you claim is needed, how about people with body integrity identity disorder? Some of these people feel like some of their limbs are not truly them, and want them amputated. We are not accepting of this behavior. We simply think it is a mental disorder......kind of like how transsexuals were once viewed.


Just to be clear, are you saying we should go back to the 'good ol days' where we classified a whole bunch of stuff as a mental illness just because we didn't understand it? A whole bunch of stuff that now we know most certainly isn't?

I wish I had time for all the game systems I own, let alone want to own... 
   
Made in us
Never Forget Isstvan!





Chicago

 motyak wrote:
 cuda1179 wrote:
 Peregrine wrote:
 cuda1179 wrote:
This whole thread is about accepting people as the identity they most identify with. This really isn't that different yet there is no where near the acceptance for it. Just the duality of logic.


I've already explained why the two situations are completely different. It's interesting to me that you'd reply to insaniak's post and ignore mine with an explanation.


Some people do claim that they feel like they were born into the wrong race. They have NEVER identified with their own race. If you want another case of someone not "being born to the right body" with an actual biological link, like what you claim is needed, how about people with body integrity identity disorder? Some of these people feel like some of their limbs are not truly them, and want them amputated. We are not accepting of this behavior. We simply think it is a mental disorder......kind of like how transsexuals were once viewed.


Just to be clear, are you saying we should go back to the 'good ol days' where we classified a whole bunch of stuff as a mental illness just because we didn't understand it? A whole bunch of stuff that now we know most certainly isn't?


The good old days where women were diagnosed with hysteria and sent to get hysterectomys

Ustrello paints- 30k, 40k multiple armies
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/614742.page 
   
Made in us
Douglas Bader






 cuda1179 wrote:
Some people do claim that they feel like they were born into the wrong race. They have NEVER identified with their own race.


And? We know that those claims are not plausible, regardless of how sincere they are.

If you want another case of someone not "being born to the right body" with an actual biological link, like what you claim is needed, how about people with body integrity identity disorder? Some of these people feel like some of their limbs are not truly them, and want them amputated. We are not accepting of this behavior. We simply think it is a mental disorder......kind of like how transsexuals were once viewed.


The very obvious difference is that someone who believes they shouldn't have legs is going to be at a significant functional disadvantage if their wish is granted. You can look at that situation and say very clearly that they'd be better off if they could fix their mental "map" of their body and accept it with everything intact. But with transgender people we can't say that they're better off in their current body. The changes they seek are all superficial ones, with little or no functional impact. They aren't going to be disabled and unable to walk, for example, they're just going to look different.

The other relevant issue here is that gender is a massive part of how we define ourselves. If you change a person's mental gender you're changing who that person is, so trying to treat their gender identity issues as a mental illness is getting dangerously close to "killing" the old person and overwriting it with a new one. So ideally you want to keep their identity intact and fix their body to match it. But things like "how many limbs do I have" are much less likely to be a core part of a person's identity, and getting someone to accept their existing body in that case is a lot less likely to involve serious re-writing of who they are.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/05/15 00:20:45


There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices. 
   
 
Forum Index » Off-Topic Forum
Go to: