In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
I am so upset by how gender identity is now a key political issue, and I'm so fucking sorry to all of you that are directly affected by it. You don't deserve this cruelty.
Just FYI, "transgenderism" is a term right wingers use to try and say being trans is an ideology and not just people trying to exist. It is not a term we use to describe ourselves, and you sound like you are trying to support trans folks, so probably best to avoid it.
Thanks! What word would best fit in this context?
ETA: I've just changed it to "gender identity" - seems appropriate to cover the other topics being attacked also.
That totally works. Another FYI, and I don't think it applies in this case since there is a comment thread that shows what happened, but typically you want to leave the mistake visible in some way (like using a strikethough on the original). This helps potentially prevent marginalized folks from having to repeat their advice by allowing others to see the issue.
Again, I don't think it is necessary in this case, but just wanted to give you a heads up.
That's a fair point. I will admit it comes across a little nitpicky, which is something to be wary of if you're building bridges with someone new to allyship. This is the point where some people will dig their heels in due to embarrassment.
Totally. People naturally get defensive when told they didn't do something right. That why I was trying to make it abundantly clear it was not necessary in this instance, but might be for other things. It also seemed like you were willing to put in effort after you took my first comment super well, so that was an indicator I could probably push a little more. It's not something I would have mentioned to someone that was more defensive initially
Totally gender identity is fine, transgender people or just trans people works fine too
'Transgender people could therefore come under investigation regardless of which bathroom they use.'
I know it's preaching to the choir here, but we all know that's the point of all this. Can't wait for mandatory genital examinations from the party that keeps complaining about grooming.
It's so disgusting. I know they're talking about mandatory inspections for CHILDREN for sports. I mean can they even hear themselves????? They're so consumed with hatred they can't even hear how crazy it all sounds.
I think the fact that the Republican Party has made child molestation not only legal but legally mandated needs to be shouted from the roof tops. GOP = Group of Pedophiles
Don't forget, when the GOP is done taking a peek, they want the kids back on the job while ensuring they roll back all the remaining child labor law protections.
(Michael Knowles) this quote haunts me, full mask-off moment where they just... openly call for genocide, and a room of thousands claps for it. And then in follow-up interviews they complain about people pointing out it's genocidal. Like, yes Michael, saying you need to eradicate people (because existing isn't an ideology) is genocidal. You don't need to be at the stage of gas chambers for it to qualify, we need only see that's the direction you're sprinting towards. And fulfilling 7 out of 10 of the stages of genocide.spoiler
"Transgenderism must be eradicated from public life entirely"
I proudly defied this law at a local restaurant. Fuck the transphobes.
What's he going to do, establish a toilet-based police force? Post officers outside of all toilets and ask people to show their IDs?
Shit Squad
This is the poolice
Piss Force
I propose they build a wall around all of the bathrooms
Outside? No, the excretory inspectors must fully observe the process of urination and defecation from start to finish. No one in Florida must use the toilet unsupervised. Brought to you by the party of Small Government™.
How is this even enforceable????
Gonna get real interesting when an angry mob calls the cops on a homely woman trying to use the women's restroom.
Dude, I’m a tall homely woman with long hair who dresses femme and always wears make-up; and I’ve been yelled at for using the women’s restroom. There needs to be a 5’3 gate at the door with a sign on it “You must be shorter than this to use this bathroom!” Like those gates on carnival rides.
It’s going to get rough.
I think that has already happened. Before the ban, just with people bullying a woman because they thought she was trans (she wasn't).
Yeah it's been happening to adults and children. Some trans men, some cis women, possibly others.
"It" here meaning "Harassed and assaulted for using the appropriate change or bathrooms."
All it takes is one case to be made to let trans people know they are on notice. Then it is back to the gay-bashing of olde. This is a dog whistle to individuals to take “the law” in their own hands and harass, including the use of violence, trans people from being visible. Calling up the brown shirts. They can now say that the law is on their side.
I'm split on this.
One one hand, I think people should be allowed to use whatever facilities best fit their "plumbing", so a pre-op trans person should (edit: be allowed to, or prefer to) use whichever bathroom matches their (edit: sex assigned at birth).
On the other, trans people should not be subject to any harassment their external appearance might cause in the bathroom they choose.
On yet another... what's wrong with "unisex" bathrooms? Just have a single bathroom, everyone uses it... problem solved? Removing "whites vs. colored" bathrooms worked just fine, why shouldn't removing "guys vs. gals" work too?
Most trans people never have any surgeries. I transitioned 16 years ago and I've never had any surgeries, nor do I have plans for any.
That being said, it is not comfortable for anyone involved for me to walk into a men's room. I don't look like I belong in a men's room.
I say this with respect, because you seem well-meaning, just lacking some understanding. Here's a counterexample: if I point-blank asked you to describe your genitals, you'd be uncomfortable, perhaps you'd even feel violated, and rightly so.
This is what bathroom laws are asking trans people to do, and it's not okay. It's an invasion of our privacy. I belong in the women's bathroom, and it has nothing to do with my genitals. My genital situation is nobody's business.
Moreover, anyone who enters a public restroom with the intent of hurting or violating anyone inside should be punished severely. That also has nothing to do with anyone's genitals. Single sex spaces, while well-meaning, do not protect anyone. The fact that a person could theoretically "claim to be trans" in order to follow someone into a restroom to attack them is immaterial; such a person could enter that restroom to attack someone even if single-sex spaces were enforced. The assault is the problem, not the sexes of the people involved.
Trans people are not predators; we just have to pee.
I'll admit that I lack understanding, since I've had little contact with this problematic. Personally I feel more agender, but can pass as cis for the purpose of bathroom usage, so haven't had anyone question me. I also have little sense of taboo, so if anyone actually were to ask me about my genitals... I'd just answer point blank, and probably in more detail than they wanted to know... but you're right, it's really nobody's business. And totally agree on the assault part.
So what's your opinion on what would be the best solution, having non-gendered bathrooms with all the appliance options?
I'm not who you asked, but I am also a trans person that's not planning on bottom surgery so thought I might chime in here.
Personally, the best solution is simply: Don't legislate anything regarding bathroom/gender. Leave the bathrooms as they are. Let people use the bathrooms that they feel fit them best, that they're most comfortable in. And if someone attempts to sneak in and assault/harass women in the bathroom, that's already a crime that we have laws for.
Places that want to be more friendly or progressive will generally provide gender-neutral options. To me, the presence of a gender-neutral or all-gender bathroom is a good signifier that the place of business could be considered a potentially "safe" space -- the staff there are probably going to be more accepting/less tolerant of open hate or bigotry and I can afford to let my guard down a little bit.
Thank you for chiming in, this is being a good learning/reflection opportunity on many levels.
The problem I see, is that bathrooms need to be legislated somehow, otherwise it would let cost cutting places not install any, or keep them "for staff use only", while public places can't really do anything without some legislation in place. So the question is more of what that legislation should look like.
I agree that assault/harassment is orthogonal to any gender related legislation (men can as well assault men in men bathrooms), so maybe the legislation should tend towards all-gender bathrooms going forward, while removing gender prescriptions and just listing the kind of facilities offered for "legacy" ones? Or maybe change the facilities, like require stalls to be fully enclosed as a sort of private bathrooms?
The problem I see, is that bathrooms need to be legislated somehow, otherwise it would let cost cutting places not install any, or keep them “for staff use only”, while public places can’t really do anything without some legislation in place. So the question is more of what that legislation should look like.
Sorry, I meant more to keep bathroom legislation as it was prior to any legslation re: trans people.
As far as trying to shift culture towards mixed/all-gender bathrooms, I have mixed opinions. I've heard there have been studies done that show you can have as many/more people serviced by a space filled with single-stall non-gendered bathrooms, using the same footprint as our current separate men's/women's rooms set up, maybe that's a way to go. But it feels kind of odd to me. Women's bathrooms have served as a somewhat "safe" space for women, and from my understanding there was a big push by feminists to have men's and women's segregated bathrooms that I don't feel a need to undo.
Honestly, it feels like you're still buying the right-wing arguments that men are going to dress up as trans women to harass/assault people in women's bathrooms. This is a made up problem created by bigots who are looking to come up with more ways to hate and belittle us, and spending time trying to find a better solution is only giving credence to the made-up bigoted bullshit in the first place. It feels like you're only halfway accepting what trans people are saying.
If I tell you that the problem is completely made up on false pretenses, the response shouldn't be "yes, but how do we solve that problem?" -- we don't. It's not actually a problem. Trans people, by and large, aren't upset that there are men's and women's rooms -- we're upset that we're getting legislated out of the bathrooms that we belong and fit in. The solution is to recognize the bull it's based on and stop any of that legislation, not to re-write how we do bathrooms altogether.
Well said!
What's your reasoning for sorting people into bathrooms based on their genitals?
I'm assuming you're thinking it means someone is "done" with transition. It doesn't work that way. A good portion of trans people don't have genital surgery, both due to access issues but also simply not wanting surgery. And, then, depending on where you live, not having surgery may prevent you from updating your gender marker so you don't have ID, either. (US citizens can change gender markers on passports/passport cards without surgery. Yes, this does mean you have people with different gender markers on different forms of ID.)
Signed, a transmasculine person who was harassed in women's bathrooms pre-social transition (never mind medical!). (ETA: I mention this because it goes to show this is ultimately about policing women's genders--I was seen as "woman-ing wrong" while living as a woman. I have also been harassed in a gender neutral bathroom, believe it or not.)
What's your reasoning for sorting people into bathrooms based on their genitals?
Just the availability of different appliances and accomodations, same as like for kids (lower heights and smaller sizes), disabled people (ability to enter with and transfer from a wheelchair), dogs (piss post and self-cleaning grate), etc.
I would think everyone would want the best fitting solution for their needs... but maybe general male vs female is not something that should create a "physical" problem.
I have also been harassed in a gender neutral bathroom, believe it or not
I haven't seen any of those, so if you don't feel uncomfortable elaborating, I'd be glad to hear more (I have a hard time wrapping my mind around harassing anyone, much less in a bathroom).
I mean, the vast majority of people are able to sit to pee. Now, men's bathrooms are chronically underprovisioned when it comes to stalls (there is a formula, and, yes, it assumes cis people, but OMG so many airports have too few stalls), and that's annoying and a social interaction one has to learn to navigate, but hardly a big deal. The fact I can't stand to pee has been awkward exactly once, and it was totally all in my head--I was on a train in Japan and didn't speak Japanese. I totally hadn't noticed that there was a separate urinal available (in addition to the "Japanese" toilet and the "western" toilet) and a Japanese woman pointed it out to me and I had to convey that, while I hadn't noticed it, I wasn't going to use it. (We're skirting the boundary of "trans info I will not discuss online with cis people", but not all genital surgery options for transmasculine people result in being able to stand to pee.)
When I was in grad school, there was a multiuser gender neutral bathroom in an adjacent building. If I had time and needed to use the bathroom, I'd go across the street to the union (which had a couple of single user ones) rather than climb five flights of stairs. This bathroom had been won after a good deal of lobbying and it was a re-signed women's restroom. There was even a bright orange sign on the door telling you where the nearest gendered restrooms were. While it had two stalls, you could actually lock the door to the entire bathroom if you so desired (a fact also mentioned on the sign). Nonetheless, a woman who worked on the floor believed only people who met her standards of womanhood should use it. Instead of the usual "this is the women's", it was "the men's is at the other end of the hall, you should use that".
Eventually I discovered the unicorn of all bathrooms--a single user men's room near a lecture hall that was somehow consistently clean. (If you are an apparently able-bodied person, single user all gender restrooms are fraught too, especially if they're signed as "family restrooms". You're not disabled, where is your kid, etc, etc. The all gender restrooms at SFO have paper signs saying "anyone may use this restroom" that were clearly added because people were being hassled.)
Based on the difference in typical queues to men's an women's bathrooms, I'd say both are underprovisioned in stalls. Makes me wonder if an optimal solution would be like the case of single queues for shops... but then again, urinals are quicker to use when possible, so separate queues might still make more sense, hm.
"trans info I will not discuss online with cis people"
That's fine, I bet anyone interested can check with Google.
Thank you for sharing the extra info. It's a pity that people feel entitled to harass others, and that we haven't found yet a general solution for such a basic issue.
a pre-op trans person should (edit: be allowed to, or prefer to) use the bathroom matching their cis gender.
Pre-op trans people are still trans, not cis. It's not the plumbing that makes the gender.
I meant it in the sense that cis gender gets assigned based on the plumbing. What would be a better way of expressing that?
A better way to articulate that would be something along the lines of "gender assigned at birth" or "biological sex".
Hm, maybe I was misunderstanding the meaning of "cis". Biological sex means to me the actual chromosomes, which don't change in trans people (at least until there is some genetic therapy available). I'll go with the Wikipedia's suggested "sex assigned at birth", but I don't feel like any of these fully transmits what I wanted to say. Interesting.
I used to think gendered bathrooms were silly, but my Sex & Gender & American Imperialism professor mentioned that getting separate bathrooms was an early feminist issue, which might explain (a small percent of) the TERF backlash, they see it as "men invading women's spaces" which they fought for. There's also something to be said for rape culture, our current cultural climate might make it actively dangerous for women, cis or trans, to be in compromised positions in spaces men are sanctioned to appear in. Not that men are dangerous, but that dangerous men exist and are shielded by rape culture.
So I say this with full openness to be told otherwise, but does the origin of the rule matter if it's no longer relevant. I find it interesting that people would be annoyed with gendered bathrooms but after being told it was a feminist request being ok with it. To me, if gendered bathrooms no longer serve their purpose, let's nuke em.
My take on this is simple. The only reason I like gendered bathrooms is because I can pee faster at a urinal. lol. Saves me so much time at huge events like concerts and sports arenas.
getting separate bathrooms was an early feminist issue
Interesting, didn't know that.
dangerous men exist and are shielded by rape culture.
Sadly true. It's sometimes hard to remember, since, paraphrasing Pen Jillette, "I've always raped all I wanted, and that amount is zero".
So, if separate bathrooms was a feminist issue, what was the situation before that?
PS: this article seems to paint a different reasoning: https://time.com/4337761/history-sex-segregated-bathrooms/
So what, are their going to be bouncers feeling you up to check at all the loos in Florida now?
Gotta pay your toll to the pooper snooper. 😒
Probably they just want a legal excuse to make open use of the cameras they put in the stalls a long time ago, TBH. Why be a closet perv when you can claim to be doing good with it? They can't let their spy agencies have all the fun.
I predict less than 2 weeks before "vigilante strip search" is a thing people have to worry about.
This guy and all his supporters are hypocritical assholes.