Science My transgender hobbyhorse

[Oleg]

It's not your place to say what other people have a right to be, nor what they feel in the process of being it.

It’s certainly may place to say I don’t have to affirm this:

 

[Jarhyn]

It's not your place to say what other people have a right to be, nor what they feel in the process of being it.

It’s certainly may place to say I don’t have to affirm this:

There's nothing there for you to "affirm" in the first place.

It's a stranger relating their experience, and one they themselves discuss as being UNWANTED.

As it is, I wonder sometimes how awkward it would be if EVERYONE was "visible" when their tissues were undergoing an erection.

What I can say is your abject disaffirmation, despite the fact there was nothing there to affirm in the first place, is yet another act of shitty and intolerant behavior.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

One angry mother shared, "The cubicles were open at the bottom and top so older pupils can easily climb up the toilets and peer over."

So what? The doors out to the rest of the building aren't locked, so anyone could just walk in when the bathrooms were gendered.

Having gendered bathrooms does nothing to stop rule-breakers from breaking the rules. No rules ever stop rule-breakers from breaking the rules. If people are climbing up and peering into toilet cubicles to harass the users, that's a behavioural problem that needs to be corrected, and putting up a sign saying "Ladies" is just kicking that can down the road. Bullying and harassment of teenagers by teenagers isn't new, isn't surprising, and isn't effectively addressed by gendering bathroom spaces

Exactly. Gendered bathrooms provide an illusion of protection, they provide no actual protection.

 

[Oleg]

One angry mother shared, "The cubicles were open at the bottom and top so older pupils can easily climb up the toilets and peer over."

So what? The doors out to the rest of the building aren't locked, so anyone could just walk in when the bathrooms were gendered.

Having gendered bathrooms does nothing to stop rule-breakers from breaking the rules. No rules ever stop rule-breakers from breaking the rules. If people are climbing up and peering into toilet cubicles to harass the users, that's a behavioural problem that needs to be corrected, and putting up a sign saying "Ladies" is just kicking that can down the road. Bullying and harassment of teenagers by teenagers isn't new, isn't surprising, and isn't effectively addressed by gendering bathroom spaces

Exactly. Gendered bathrooms provide an illusion of protection, they provide no actual protection.

Said the man.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

One angry mother shared, "The cubicles were open at the bottom and top so older pupils can easily climb up the toilets and peer over."

So what? The doors out to the rest of the building aren't locked, so anyone could just walk in when the bathrooms were gendered.

Having gendered bathrooms does nothing to stop rule-breakers from breaking the rules. No rules ever stop rule-breakers from breaking the rules. If people are climbing up and peering into toilet cubicles to harass the users, that's a behavioural problem that needs to be corrected, and putting up a sign saying "Ladies" is just kicking that can down the road. Bullying and harassment of teenagers by teenagers isn't new, isn't surprising, and isn't effectively addressed by gendering bathroom spaces

Exactly. Gendered bathrooms provide an illusion of protection, they provide no actual protection.

Said the man.

If it's used enough that a man in the women's is likely to get caught it's also likely if he does something wrong that a woman will walk in and catch him. The sign on the door is irrelevant, it's the risk of someone walking in that matters whatever the sign says.

 

[Jarhyn]

One angry mother shared, "The cubicles were open at the bottom and top so older pupils can easily climb up the toilets and peer over."

So what? The doors out to the rest of the building aren't locked, so anyone could just walk in when the bathrooms were gendered.

Having gendered bathrooms does nothing to stop rule-breakers from breaking the rules. No rules ever stop rule-breakers from breaking the rules. If people are climbing up and peering into toilet cubicles to harass the users, that's a behavioural problem that needs to be corrected, and putting up a sign saying "Ladies" is just kicking that can down the road. Bullying and harassment of teenagers by teenagers isn't new, isn't surprising, and isn't effectively addressed by gendering bathroom spaces

Exactly. Gendered bathrooms provide an illusion of protection, they provide no actual protection.

Said the man.

Gendered bathrooms provide an illusion of protection, they provide no actual protection.

 

[bilby]

One angry mother shared, "The cubicles were open at the bottom and top so older pupils can easily climb up the toilets and peer over."

So what? The doors out to the rest of the building aren't locked, so anyone could just walk in when the bathrooms were gendered.

Having gendered bathrooms does nothing to stop rule-breakers from breaking the rules. No rules ever stop rule-breakers from breaking the rules. If people are climbing up and peering into toilet cubicles to harass the users, that's a behavioural problem that needs to be corrected, and putting up a sign saying "Ladies" is just kicking that can down the road. Bullying and harassment of teenagers by teenagers isn't new, isn't surprising, and isn't effectively addressed by gendering bathroom spaces

Exactly. Gendered bathrooms provide an illusion of protection, they provide no actual protection.

Said the man.

Gendered bathrooms provide an illusion of protection, they provide no actual protection.

Like male only sea-bathing; Mandatory neck-to-knees bathing suits; Mandatory wearing of long skirts (rather than trousers or, heaven forbid, short skirts) by women; Mandatory face or hair coverings for women; And a litany of other things that highly puritanical religious societies have (and in many cases still do) imposed in an attempt to throw the blame for sexual harassment and assault onto the (mostly women and girls) who are its victims.

If a bathroom provides privacy against casual exposure of user's nakedness, then it's suitable for all. If it doesn't, it's unsuitable for anyone - people mostly like privacy, and mostly don't like watching other people shitting or pissing.

If people are deliberately circumventing the protection against casual exposure, and are harassing, ogling, or assaulting other users of the facility, those people need to be penalised for their misbehaviour, even if their victim had her hair uncovered like a wanton hussy, or if the bathroom was shared, or if the victim was wearing a dress that showed her ankles, or any of the other breaches of arbitrary rules that do nothing but give the illusion of safety from such harassment.

If you poll Saudi women, you will find a non-trivial percentage who would be opposed to relaxation of the requirement for women to wear burkas in public for the exact reasons American and British women give for opposing unsegregated bathrooms. People like the illusion of safety. That doesn't make it any less an illusion.

 

[Oleg]

One angry mother shared, "The cubicles were open at the bottom and top so older pupils can easily climb up the toilets and peer over."

So what? The doors out to the rest of the building aren't locked, so anyone could just walk in when the bathrooms were gendered.

Having gendered bathrooms does nothing to stop rule-breakers from breaking the rules. No rules ever stop rule-breakers from breaking the rules. If people are climbing up and peering into toilet cubicles to harass the users, that's a behavioural problem that needs to be corrected, and putting up a sign saying "Ladies" is just kicking that can down the road. Bullying and harassment of teenagers by teenagers isn't new, isn't surprising, and isn't effectively addressed by gendering bathroom spaces

Exactly. Gendered bathrooms provide an illusion of protection, they provide no actual protection.

Said the man.

If it's used enough that a man in the women's is likely to get caught it's also likely if he does something wrong that a woman will walk in and catch him. The sign on the door is irrelevant, it's the risk of someone walking in that matters whatever the sign says.

This sort of misses the point. Women do not like to be vulnerable / naked in front of men they don't know. Men are different about this. I've never seen a story where guys are upset that a transman is in the lockerroom / bathroom. Because dudes don't care. Chicks do.

 

[bilby]

This sort of misses the point. Women do not like to be vulnerable / naked in front of men they don't know. Men are different about this.

That's not "the point"; It's an irrelevant distraction you have introduced in an apparent attempt to steer discussion away from the uncomfortable fact that you are utterly and hopelessly mistaken to believe that ungendered bathrooms are problematic.

Nobody is seen naked against their will in a public bathroom; So whether or not anyone dislikes being seen naked is completely irrelevant.

 

[Oleg]

This sort of misses the point. Women do not like to be vulnerable / naked in front of men they don't know. Men are different about this.

That's not "the point"; It's an irrelevant distraction you have introduced in an apparent attempt to steer discussion away from the uncomfortable fact that you are utterly and hopelessly mistaken to believe that ungendered bathrooms are problematic.

Nobody is seen naked against their will in a public bathroom; So whether or not anyone dislikes being seen naked is completely irrelevant.

You're a dude. Of course you think that way. It's the triump of the patriachy that women and girls lose their own space.

Randolph High School investigating gender locker room dispute

Randolph High Schools girl’s volleyball team has been banned from its own locker room while school officials investigate a conflict involving a transgender student on the team.

www.wcax.com

Again, you never see stories of guys upset that girls are in their space. 'cause they don't care. Why can't a woman be more like a man? Right, Bilby?

 

[southernhybrid]

Without getting into the debate, I'd just like to clarify that most American cis women, as far as I can tell, don't want any men in their rest rooms. It's not so much about danger as it is about privacy. I don't want to pee in a stall next to a man. I have no problem with trans women in the ladies room and I don't mind super butch. looking women in my rest room. I just don't want men in there. I've actually discussed this thread with a friend the other day. She was horrified at the thought of having men in our rest room.

Plus, at least in the US, the Women's room is more than just a place to pee. Some older rest rooms have lounges where women can breast feed, literally rest, support a friend who is upset, fix their hair or makeup, or share secrets with female friends. It's always been a place to get away from the male dominated world, as well as a place to take a quick pee. I've never pooped in a public rest room, but some women do. I doubt they want men coming and going while they are emptying their bowels. I've even known women who don't want their own husbands in the area when they are eliminating. I would assume that these same women don't want strange men in the area when they are doing their business, as the saying goes.

It may be cultural. That's fine. I'm fine with the male or female single rest rooms, but I do miss the traditional ones that were mostly found in large department stores or hotels. This reminds me of Marilyn French's first feminist novel, titled "The Women's Room". Too bad I can't remember much of it since I read it about 30 or 40 years ago. Maybe it's time for a reread.

While I didn't save the link, I read that American men don't want women in their rest rooms either. I once accidentally started to wander into what I thought was a ladies room. It didn't have a door. It was one of those that had a hallway leading to the room. A man was on his way out and he gave me an ugly, horrified look. "Oh, excuse me," I said, as I turned around and located the ladies room.

I don't think little girls want little boys in their rest rooms either. There are times when females want to be totally free of men. Having a private place to pee is one of those times, at least that's the case where I live.

I'm done, so now this male dominated discussion can go back to making claims about what women want.

 

[Bomb#20]

Oh, please. Procreation is not messy

It is if you're doing it right.

 

[bilby]

Without getting into the debate, I'd just like to clarify that most American cis women, as far as I can tell, don't want any men in their rest rooms. It's not so much about danger as it is about privacy. I don't want to pee in a stall next to a man. I have no problem with trans women in the ladies room and I don't mind super butch. looking women in my rest room. I just don't want men in there. I've actually discussed this thread with a friend the other day. She was horrified at the thought of having men in our rest room.

I have absolutely no doubt that this is true.

Most Edwardian women didn't want to swim in the same pools as men, for the exact same reasons.

Also, most Saudi women don't want to go out in public without a head covering, for exactly the same reasons.

The desire is the result of the rule; The rule isn't a reflection of an innate desire.

People (even including women) want things to be the way they're used to things being. The rule causes the desire which causes the rule - it's a circular argument.

Women who grew up with segregated bathrooms are often horrified at the thought of unsegregated bathrooms. That's true whether the segregation excludes men from women's bathrooms, or excludes blacks from white's bathrooms.

People who grew up without such segregation are incapable of understanding why anyone would give a rat's about it in the first place.

 

[Bomb#20]

Mixed gender bathrooms have been the norm in many places in Europe since bathrooms were invented. The idea that such spaces must be segregated is an odd and twisted offshoot of puritanism.

If you encounter a woman who prefers her public bathrooms to be female-only, I'm sure she'll come to see how wrong she is if only you mansplain her feelings to her.

Life imitates art.

Without getting into the debate, I'd just like to clarify that most American cis women, as far as I can tell, don't want any men in their rest rooms. It's not so much about danger as it is about privacy. I don't want to pee in a stall next to a man. I have no problem with trans women in the ladies room and I don't mind super butch. looking women in my rest room. I just don't want men in there. I've actually discussed this thread with a friend the other day. She was horrified at the thought of having men in our rest room.

I have absolutely no doubt that this is true.

Most Edwardian women didn't want to swim in the same pools as men, for the exact same reasons.

Also, most Saudi women don't want to go out in public without a head covering, for exactly the same reasons.

The desire is the result of the rule; The rule isn't a reflection of an innate desire.

People (even including women) want things to be the way they're used to things being. The rule causes the desire which causes the rule - it's a circular argument.

Women who grew up with segregated bathrooms are often horrified at the thought of unsegregated bathrooms. That's true whether the segregation excludes men from women's bathrooms, or excludes blacks from white's bathrooms.

People who grew up without such segregation are incapable of understanding why anyone would give a rat's about it in the first place.

 

[bilby]

Mixed gender bathrooms have been the norm in many places in Europe since bathrooms were invented. The idea that such spaces must be segregated is an odd and twisted offshoot of puritanism.

If you encounter a woman who prefers her public bathrooms to be female-only, I'm sure she'll come to see how wrong she is if only you mansplain her feelings to her.

Life imitates art.

Without getting into the debate, I'd just like to clarify that most American cis women, as far as I can tell, don't want any men in their rest rooms. It's not so much about danger as it is about privacy. I don't want to pee in a stall next to a man. I have no problem with trans women in the ladies room and I don't mind super butch. looking women in my rest room. I just don't want men in there. I've actually discussed this thread with a friend the other day. She was horrified at the thought of having men in our rest room.

I have absolutely no doubt that this is true.

Most Edwardian women didn't want to swim in the same pools as men, for the exact same reasons.

Also, most Saudi women don't want to go out in public without a head covering, for exactly the same reasons.

The desire is the result of the rule; The rule isn't a reflection of an innate desire.

People (even including women) want things to be the way they're used to things being. The rule causes the desire which causes the rule - it's a circular argument.

Women who grew up with segregated bathrooms are often horrified at the thought of unsegregated bathrooms. That's true whether the segregation excludes men from women's bathrooms, or excludes blacks from white's bathrooms.

People who grew up without such segregation are incapable of understanding why anyone would give a rat's about it in the first place.

Meh.

It's rather odd that you think my reply beginning "I have absolutely no doubt that this is true" constitutes an attempt to show someone "how wrong she is".

 

[Bomb#20]

One angry mother shared, "The cubicles were open at the bottom and top so older pupils can easily climb up the toilets and peer over."

So what? The doors out to the rest of the building aren't locked, so anyone could just walk in when the bathrooms were gendered.

Having gendered bathrooms does nothing to stop rule-breakers from breaking the rules. No rules ever stop rule-breakers from breaking the rules.

Interesting argument. Do you find it persuasive when American right-wing gun-lovers use that exact same argument -- when they tediously tell us over and over that gun control laws do nothing to stop gun crime because criminals don't obey laws?

The whole thing is only an issue because Americans (and the Poms) are so steeped in these random puritan rules that they've come to imagine these rules to be laws of nature.

It is painfully obvious that your assertion is false. Gendered bathrooms used to be standard in continental Europe. I lived in Germany for a year and never saw a gender-neutral public bathroom. The notion that this issue is purely Anglo-American is beyond laughable.

Nobody in the EU cares, so <unsupported conclusion snipped>

You assume facts not in evidence. Did any country in the EU that has gone down the non-gendered path offer its female population a vote on whether to lose their women's rooms?

These are completely artificial cultural idiosyncrasies, and no more harm arises from un-gendered bathrooms than from wanton refusal to wear a burka,

In the first place, you must be utterly lacking in empathy for women if you classify the psychological suffering that leads so many women to adopt desperate measures like dehydration and enduring extended urinary urgency as not counting as "harm".

And in the second place, you assume facts not in evidence...

We believe this study to be the first available longitudinal analysis related to gender-inclusion policies and harms. Relying on media-reported sexual incidents in Target stores, we databased and analyzed 220 sexual incidents. ...
Using the three-season forced-category measure, probably the most conservative measure, there were 2.3x the amount of upskirt incidents post-policy and 2.9x the amount of peeping tom incidents. ...
The most likely hypothesis to explain our findings is that Target’s policy signaled to sexual offenders that voyeuristic offenses would be easier to perpetrate in their stores than elsewhere.​

https://womanmeanssomething.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/A-Longitudinal-Analysis-of-Media-Reports-at-Target-Stores.pdf

If you don't classify voyeurism as "harm", I guess you can mansplain that to women too.

or from women wearing trousers, or from bathing in costumes that fail to cover every inch of skin between neck and knee.

All of which protections for women against predatory men were (and in some cases and places, still are) deeply believed to be absolutely essential, the the point of requiring laws ensuring their continued universality. And none of which laws ever did anything to actually protect women against sexual harassment or assault.

As should be painfully obvious to anybody who isn't a misogynist, those were all restrictions on women. Men decided to protect women from men by subjecting women to male authority. What a surprise that that didn't work. Retaining ladies' rooms is not a restriction on women. It is a restriction on men. What a surprise that this does work.

 

[Bomb#20]

Meh.

It's rather odd that you think my reply beginning "I have absolutely no doubt that this is true" constitutes an attempt to show someone "how wrong she is".

Life imitating art was when you mansplained SH's feelings to her.

As for "how wrong she is", when you wrote "I have absolutely no doubt that this is true", your use of "this" was transparently a reference to the fact that she has the feelings she has; it was not a reference to her being right to favor the policy she favors. So the beginning of your reply in no way constitutes evidence against the hypothesis that you're attempting to show her she's wrong.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

While I didn't save the link, I read that American men don't want women in their rest rooms either. I once accidentally started to wander into what I thought was a ladies room. It didn't have a door. It was one of those that had a hallway leading to the room. A man was on his way out and he gave me an ugly, horrified look. "Oh, excuse me," I said, as I turned around and located the ladies room.

I don't think little girls want little boys in their rest rooms either. There are times when females want to be totally free of men. Having a private place to pee is one of those times, at least that's the case where I live.

Once when my wife got hurt I had to wheel her into the men's because there was no family restroom. Nobody seemed to care. And I'd say half a dozen times I've seen women come into the men's at tech events. Again, nobody seemed to care. (Admittedly, those strongly skew young and nerdy and are not representative.)

 

[Bomb#20]

So what? The doors out to the rest of the building aren't locked, so anyone could just walk in when the bathrooms were gendered.
... Bullying and harassment of teenagers by teenagers isn't new, isn't surprising, and isn't effectively addressed by gendering bathroom spaces

Exactly. Gendered bathrooms provide an illusion of protection, they provide no actual protection.

"Unisex changing rooms are more dangerous for women and girls than single-sex facilities, research by The Sunday Times shows. Almost 90% of reported sexual assaults, harassment and voyeurism in swimming pool and sports-centre changing rooms happen in unisex facilities, which make up less than half the total."​

archive.ph

[3... 2... 1... Cue somebody explaining that changing rooms are totally different from restrooms, so the fraction of sexual assaulters, harassers and voyeurs deterred by single-sex rules in changing rooms are invariably unaffected by single-sex rules in restrooms.]

 

[Bomb#20]

Gendered bathrooms provide an illusion of protection, they provide no actual protection.

Like male only sea-bathing; Mandatory neck-to-knees bathing suits; Mandatory wearing of long skirts (rather than trousers or, heaven forbid, short skirts) by women; Mandatory face or hair coverings for women; And a litany of other things that highly puritanical religious societies have (and in many cases still do) imposed in an attempt to throw the blame for sexual harassment and assault onto the (mostly women and girls) who are its victims.
...
If people are deliberately circumventing the protection against casual exposure, and are harassing, ogling, or assaulting other users of the facility, those people need to be penalised for their misbehaviour, even if their victim had her hair uncovered like a wanton hussy, or if the bathroom was shared, or if the victim was wearing a dress that showed her ankles, or any of the other breaches of arbitrary rules that do nothing but give the illusion of safety from such harassment.

If you poll Saudi women, you will find a non-trivial percentage who would be opposed to relaxation of the requirement for women to wear burkas in public for the exact reasons American and British women give for opposing unsegregated bathrooms. People like the illusion of safety. That doesn't make it any less an illusion.

[my bolding]
As should be painfully obvious, women-only bathrooms are not an attempt to throw the blame for sexual harassment and assault onto the victims. Equating them with burkas is insane.

Moreover, male attempts to police women's sexual behavior in pursuit of male interests are rife in the Middle East and North Africa; burkas are the moderate, compassionate solution to those patriarchies' female problem. Cross from Arabia into Africa and the burkas are gone. Egyptian women are out in public where anyone can see them, "protected" from the consequences of their wanton hussyhood only by female genital mutilation. If Saudi women prefer their burkas, what a surprise.