Trans Women are not Women

[Lithrael]

ETA: I suppose it may be too cute by half to say that everyone should use the restroom wherein they generally raise the fewest eyebrows? That’s going to make for a handful of edge cases, the most androgynous among us, but hopefully we can just let them do their business in peace.

I’m pretty sure that, in practice, this is what everyone except gender edgelords and really hardline ‘no man in a dress calling themselves Stacey will ever be welcome to pee in the next stall down from my granddaughter’ types, wants.

 

[Steve]

What the hell do people think there is to see in public washrooms? You may see a fully clothed person washing their hands. You may see the clothed back of a penis-equipped person standing at a urinal. If you try (bend over a little) you can probably see the feet of a person sitting on a toilet in a cubicle, maybe with trousers around their ankles. There is absolutely nothing sexual on view unless you have an uncommon fetish. No genitals, no breasts, no naked body parts or bare skin that you would not see anywhere else outside of the washroom.

Public washrooms are smelly. They are not the type of place that most men would consider a prime pick-up spot and hang out waiting for the "right" woman to come along. They are not the type of place where those with voyeuristic inclinations can expect to see anything other than clothed people doing normal every-day things. They are not the type of places where a rapist will have sufficient undisturbed time to plan and carry out an attack. Any person loitering in a washroom will immediately attract unwanted attention in a place where everybody else conducts their necessary business and leaves as quickly as possible.

If there is really any rational reason why a person would feel threatened or vulnerable or embarrassed while using a multi-gender washroom it has not been presented here.

 

[Meadmaker]

What the hell do people think there is to see in public washrooms? You may see a fully clothed person washing their hands. You may see the clothed back of a penis-equipped person standing at a urinal. If you try (bend over a little) you can probably see the feet of a person sitting on a toilet in a cubicle, maybe with trousers around their ankles. There is absolutely nothing sexual on view unless you have an uncommon fetish. No genitals, no breasts, no naked body parts or bare skin that you would not see anywhere else outside of the washroom.

Public washrooms are smelly. They are not the type of place that most men would consider a prime pick-up spot and hang out waiting for the "right" woman to come along. They are not the type of place where those with voyeuristic inclinations can expect to see anything other than clothed people doing normal every-day things. They are not the type of places where a rapist will have sufficient undisturbed time to plan and carry out an attack. Any person loitering in a washroom will immediately attract unwanted attention in a place where everybody else conducts their necessary business and leaves as quickly as possible.

If there is really any rational reason why a person would feel threatened or vulnerable or embarrassed while using a multi-gender washroom it has not been presented here.

Ok. One vote for unisex restrooms.

Locker rooms?
Sports leagues?

 

[carlitos]

rule 34

Is rape more likely in a busy public washroom than in a dark movie theater? a public parkade? a restaurant? any other location where males and females mix freely? What is so special about a place where people go to eliminate their waste? There is nothing erotic or sexual about it.

Public washrooms are smelly. They are not the type of place that most men would consider a prime pick-up spot

Steve, I'd like you to meet Senator Larry Craig. Back when he was in the news, Slate wrote a helpful Q&A about sex in the men's room.

 

[Steve]

Steve, I'd like you to meet Senator Larry Craig. Back when he was in the news, Slate wrote a helpful Q&A about sex in the men's room.

Of course there are exceptions. I considered them when writing my spiel. I could have written a page or more if I had included all the qualifications.

I just don't think that the likelihood of anyone actually encountering wierdos in a public washroom is any greater than in most other public spots.

 

[Steve]

Ok. One vote for unisex restrooms.

Locker rooms?
Sports leagues?

Our local YMCA has open change areas in the locker rooms along with some private cubicles. Also open gang showers along with some private showers. Those who do not wish to expose their bodies to others are easily and properly accommodated.

Professional sports leagues (in the US at least) have been allowing clothed female reporters into the locker rooms for a long time. There were a couple of incidents in the early days but it has been a non-issue for years.

 

[caveman1917]

Perhaps some men may be very uncomfortable using a toilet with apparently women walking around and using the facilities.

The reason I've seen given is that they risk assault if they use the men's restroom.

Men: "We feel uncomfortable with transwomen in our bathrooms."
Response: "We'll accommodate your discomfort by seeking changes in the law."

Transwomen: "If we go to the men's bathroom then we're afraid of assault."
Response: "We'll accommodate your fear by seeking changes in the law."

Women: "We feel uncomfortable with transwomen in our bathrooms."
Response: "Well we can't just base the law on some group's discomfort, now can we? You'll just have to put up with it, you bigots."

Women: "Ok well we're afraid of assault with males in our bathrooms."
Response: "Well we can't just base the law on some group's fear of assault. Stop demonizing males, you bigots."

Why are the exact same arguments accepted without question when they come from men but not from women?

 

[Steve]

Men: "We feel uncomfortable with transwomen in our bathrooms."
Response: "We'll accommodate your discomfort by seeking changes in the law."

Transwomen: "If we go to the men's bathroom then we're afraid of assault."
Response: "We'll accommodate your fear by seeking changes in the law."

Women: "We feel uncomfortable with transwomen in our bathrooms."
Response: "Well we can't just base the law on some group's discomfort, now can we? You'll just have to put up with it, you bigots."

Women: "Ok well we're afraid of assault with males in our bathrooms."
Response: "Well we can't just base the law on some group's fear of assault. Stop demonizing males, you bigots."

Why are the exact same arguments accepted without question when they come from men but not from women?

I know. I know. Ask meee! - They are not!

Every statement and opinion in this thread has been questioned and disputed. There has been no consensus or general agreement on any topic. Many good points, and some not so good, have been made for all the different positions here. Trying to appear clever by summarizing many posts into one straw man is pointless

 

[d4m10n]

One vote for unisex restrooms.

Two votes. I found both Mary Anne Case and Michael Nugent fairly persuasive on the question of multiuser public restrooms.

(See links upthread.)

 

[Jack by the hedge]

It would be ironic if the battle between two groups who want the use of female-only spaces were ended by the complete removal of female-only spaces.

 

[Darat]

What the hell do people think there is to see in public washrooms? You may see a fully clothed person washing their hands. You may see the clothed back of a penis-equipped person standing at a urinal. If you try (bend over a little) you can probably see the feet of a person sitting on a toilet in a cubicle, maybe with trousers around their ankles. There is absolutely nothing sexual on view unless you have an uncommon fetish. No genitals, no breasts, no naked body parts or bare skin that you would not see anywhere else outside of the washroom.



Public washrooms are smelly. They are not the type of place that most men would consider a prime pick-up spot and hang out waiting for the "right" woman to come along. They are not the type of place where those with voyeuristic inclinations can expect to see anything other than clothed people doing normal every-day things. They are not the type of places where a rapist will have sufficient undisturbed time to plan and carry out an attack. Any person loitering in a washroom will immediately attract unwanted attention in a place where everybody else conducts their necessary business and leaves as quickly as possible.



If there is really any rational reason why a person would feel threatened or vulnerable or embarrassed while using a multi-gender washroom it has not been presented here.

Look up "cottaging and homosexual". But not at work!

 

[caveman1917]

I know. I know. Ask meee! - They are not!

Every statement and opinion in this thread has been questioned and disputed. There has been no consensus or general agreement on any topic. Many good points, and some not so good, have been made for all the different positions here. Trying to appear clever by summarizing many posts into one straw man is pointless

It's not so much a strawman as an observation. And an accurate one at that. But feel free to show your case, plenty of comments about women "demonizing men" by arguing based on fear of assault and such, so you should have no problem quoting some comments about transwomen "demonizing men" by arguing based on fear of assault and such.

 

[Steve]

Ok. One vote for unisex restrooms.

Locker rooms?
Sports leagues?

Coming back to this again. I have worked in plumbing engineering for over 40 years. I have designed and specified fixtures and equipment for hundreds of public washrooms. The cost of providing the architecture and plumbing for separate washrooms for men and women right beside each other is considerably greater than providing one large room with the extra fixtures to accommodate everybody in one room. In an era of very tight construction budgets unisex washrooms would save owners and developers enough money that they would quickly become common if the social issues could be overcome.

 

[The Atheist]

I doubt that they're the source. Evolution is the source.

Nonsense - evolution provides no basis for morality, otherwise things like rape, murder & theft would not be against human laws. Evolution says the fittest survive and the strongest mate with the most females, so as to replicate their genes.

It wasn't until someone first claimed to have seen a sky-fairy that covering up one's genitals became a thing.

It would be ironic if the battle between two groups who want the use of female-only spaces were ended by the complete removal of female-only spaces.

I think that's entirely the problem as a lot of women see it.

 

[Steve]

Look up "cottaging and homosexual". But not at work!

OK, I won't look it up here.

As I said a few posts ago, of course there are exceptions. I knew that some posters would quickly point out any exceptions that they thought relevant. That is a defining feature of this forum. I think most people using public facilities will never encounter these exceptions.

Homosexual situations really have nothing to do with the reasons why women do not want to share facilities with men. Women's primary concerns related here are to do with heterosexual men. And homosexual situations in public washrooms exist within, and perhaps because of, the current segregated washroom system. Remains to be seen if unisex washrooms will have an effect on that.

 

[Meadmaker]

Our local YMCA has open change areas in the locker rooms along with some private cubicles. Also open gang showers along with some private showers. Those who do not wish to expose their bodies to others are easily and properly accommodated.

Not bad. I think those Palatine High School girls might still have an issue, depending on the number of private stalls available.

 

[Steve]

It's not so much a strawman as an observation. And an accurate one at that. But feel free to show your case, plenty of comments about women "demonizing men" by arguing based on fear of assault and such, so you should have no problem quoting some comments about transwomen "demonizing men" by arguing based on fear of assault and such.

I am not about to read back through the thread to count, categorize and quote posts any more than you did when you posted your lousy generalization with the fake quotes.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Nonsense - evolution provides no basis for morality, otherwise things like rape, murder & theft would not be against human laws. Evolution says the fittest survive and the strongest mate with the most females, so as to replicate their genes.



It wasn't until someone first claimed to have seen a sky-fairy that covering up one's genitals became a thing.







I think that's entirely the problem as a lot of women see it.

No. Evolution rewarded cooperation and mutual assistance as long term strategies for success. That's why we think they're good and right. Selfishness is sometimes also a winning strategy so we have that trait too. But we don't tend to brag about that for the practical evolutionary reason that people would not trust us to cooperate with them. Bible stories didn't *teach* us right from wrong, we already knew it, they just illustrate it in easy to remember ways.

 

[Steve]

Not bad. I think those Palatine High School girls might still have an issue, depending on the number of private stalls available.

I should clarify. My description was of the adult males locker room specifically. There is also a separate but similar youth locker room for boys 12 and under, and their guardians (of either sex) if required. The women's and girls rooms are similarly segregated but I have no idea of the arrangement of facilities within their rooms. I assume they would be typical for a female change room so likely more individual cubicles and showers.

There is a fifth Family change room. This room is filled with sufficiently large cubicles to accommodate 2 parents and several children. Each cubicle has its own shower. I think there are about 10 cubicles within this space. Men with young female children are expected to use this space rather than the under 12 girls facility. I used this a lot when my daughter was young and taking swim lessons.

This Y is very inclusive and I believe their policy is to allow individuals to use whichever room suits their gender needs the best. They seem to trust the members to act responsibly. I have not heard of any issues arising from this but then such issues would be confidential and very unlikely to reach the general membership.

 

[Ziggurat]

Look up "cottaging and homosexual". But not at work!

I remember reading an article with "advice" to London tourists. It claimed that "cottaging" was riding those boats you push with poles down the canals. People would apply petroleum jelly to the poles in order to protect the wood against water damage. Proper etiquette when going boating was to bring your own petroleum jelly to apply to the poles, so if you were interested in going boating on the canals, then approach some locals with a jar of petroleum jelly and ask if you could go cottaging with them.

I was not tempted to take this advice.