USA President revokes Obama guidelines on transgender bathrooms

[Crimson Dynamo]

http://c1.nrostatic.com/sites/default/files/uploaded/donald-trump-incapable-of-embarrassment-r_0.jpghttp://www.handelonthelaw.com/content_images/full/articles/20151204_transgender_bathroom_signage.jpg


President Donald Trump's administration on Wednesday revoked landmark guidance to public schools letting transgender students use the bathrooms of their choice, reversing a signature initiative of former Democratic President Barack Obama.

Reversing the Obama guidelines stands to inflame passions in the latest conflict in America between believers in traditional values and social progressives, and is likely to prompt more of the street protests that followed Trump's Nov. 8 election.

Obama had instructed public schools last May to let transgender students use the bathrooms matching their chosen gender identity, threatening to withhold funding for schools that did not comply. Transgender people hailed the step as victory for their civil rights.

Trump, a Republican who took office last month, rescinded those guidelines, even though they had been put on hold by a federal judge, arguing that states and public schools should have the authority to make their own decisions without federal interference.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-lgbt-idUSKBN161243

The White House said President Donald Trump believes the issue is for the states to decide without federal involvement.

The White House released a statement in January which said: "President Donald J Trump is determined to protect the rights of all Americans, including the LGBTQ community.

"President Trump continues to be respectful and supportive of LGBTQ rights, just as he was throughout the election."


http://www.standard.co.uk/news/world/donald-trump-set-to-scrap-transgender-student-rights-permanently-a3473786.html

Donald getting rid of Big Government interference and giving powers back to the people.

Thoughts?

[Vicky.]

Bloody hell, something he does that I agree with 100% :o

Loos, changing rooms, etc are separated by SEX, not gender...which amounts to not much more than dress sense and ones personality. And should remain so. Fair enough once someone has had a 'sex change' but before that and on self identification only..a whole world of nope.

Schools should not be forced to let boys into girl changing rooms. We are having issues with my stepdaughters school and this at the moment despite our laws not saying schools have to. Basically a pervy lad has decided he is now a girl and as such is let in the girls areas. the girls are up in arms as this lad has form for basically..being a perv. And the school are just enabling it. A group of girls are currently changing in the small staff room as they refuse to change infront of him. This same group are being called transphobic by a small group of young liberals. Its a bit of a mess tbh

[Livia]

Bloody hell, something he does that I agree with 100% :o



Exactly what I was going to say. It's a bit of a shocker, really...

[Vicky.]

Exactly what I was going to say. It's a bit of a shocker, really...

This was one of the issues that I was polar opposite with Obama on. I do not think 'gender' (which is dress sense, personality, and a 'feeling' in ones head) should trump sex ever. Its just nonsensical. Why have separate areas for males and females, when its not in all cases?! Why not have everything communal?

I mean, in this country we have violent male prisoners, hell male prisoners who are in prison for/have raped females put in with the females because...feelings. **** that.

[Livia]

This was one of the issues that I was polar opposite with Obama on. I do not think 'gender' (which is dress sense, personality, and a 'feeling' in ones head) should trump sex ever. Its just nonsensical. Why have separate areas for males and females, when its not in all cases?! Why not have everything communal?

I mean, in this country we have violent male prisoners, hell male prisoners who are in prison for/have raped females put in with the females because...feelings. **** that.

At work the toilets are non-gender specific. If I go to a gay club with my friends, the toilets are non-gender specific, certainly in 'Heaven'... everyone seems to be able to get on with it without the sky falling down.

[Niamh.]

I actually agreed with it for a while but Vicky changed my mind on it when she went deeper into the potential issues with it that I hadn't really considered before. I'm all for protecting transgenders rights but not at the expense of womens rights/right to feel safe.

[Niamh.]

At work the toilets are non-gender specific. If I go to a gay club with my friends, the toilets are non-gender specific, certainly in 'Heaven'... everyone seems to be able to get on with it without the sky falling down.

Yeah our toilets here are non gender specific but they're individual rooms

[Northern Monkey]

Bloody hell, something he does that I agree with 100% :o

Loos, changing rooms, etc are separated by SEX, not gender...which amounts to not much more than dress sense and ones personality. And should remain so. Fair enough once someone has had a 'sex change' but before that and on self identification only..a whole world of nope.

Schools should not be forced to let boys into girl changing rooms. We are having issues with my stepdaughters school and this at the moment despite our laws not saying schools have to. Basically a pervy lad has decided he is now a girl and as such is let in the girls areas. the girls are up in arms as this lad has form for basically..being a perv. And the school are just enabling it. A group of girls are currently changing in the small staff room as they refuse to change infront of him. This same group are being called transphobic by a small group of young liberals. Its a bit of a mess tbhOmg that's crazy.Tbf many lads at school when i was there would've tried that on.The school should have more sense than to pander to it.

[Vicky.]

At work the toilets are non-gender specific. If I go to a gay club with my friends, the toilets are non-gender specific, certainly in 'Heaven'... everyone seems to be able to get on with it without the sky falling down.

Well yes, this is the point. Either get rid of 'sex' separated loos...or don't. But it makes not a bit of sense to keep sex segregation...but not in some cases? Personally I would prefer mixed loos, less queues tbh :laugh:

The loos aren't really the issue for me. Its more, changing rooms and places like prisons, crisis centres and that.

Also in schools...loos ARE an issue. IMO anyway. I can remember being a teenager/younger. I would have been mortified starting my period and trying to sort that out with a boy looking over the cubicle at me D: I was mortified even without that

[Cal.]

They should just have unisex ones where everyone goes together.

[Vicky.]

They should just have unisex ones where everyone goes together.

For adults, I 100% agree. For teens though, not so much.

[Livia]

Not sure I feel the same about transgenders in prison, I think that's a whole new discussion. I think there should be provision made for them... not sure whether they should altomatically be able to use their chosen toilet. It's a minefield I know...

[Niamh.]

Not sure I feel the same about transgenders in prison, I think that's a whole new discussion. I think there should be provision made for them... not sure whether they should altomatically be able to use their chosen toilet. It's a minefield I know...

It is a minefield, I'm all for equality and am very sympathetic to transgenders, it most be very hard for them but we also have to consider womens rights and their right to feel safe. I think someone pointed this out in another thread already but you never ever hear of a transgender woman wanting to be moved into a mens prison ........

[Vicky.]

Not sure I feel the same about transgenders in prison, I think that's a whole new discussion. I think there should be provision made for them... not sure whether they should altomatically be able to use their chosen toilet. It's a minefield I know...

There are enough transgender prisoners (or who claim they are transgender) to have a separate wing in a couple of prisons up and down the country I am sure. This seems the only option. I do not think females should be thrown under the bus on this issue, which seems to be whats happening and with no resistance.

[Northern Monkey]

For prisons the only solution is to have a transgender wing somewhere imo.A transgender will be bullied or worse in a male or female prison.Female prisoners won't want go in the showers or toilets with a man and a male to female transgender wont want to go in the showers with a load of sexually frustrated male prisoners.

[Northern Monkey]

There are enough transgender prisoners (or who claim they are transgender) to have a separate wing in a couple of prisons up and down the country I am sure. This seems the only option. I do not think females should be thrown under the bus on this issue, which seems to be whats happening and with no resistance.
Beat me

[Tom4784]

He's done it for the wrong reasons (to spite Obama and try to undo everything he did in his administration) but it's not entirely wrong. It's a difficult issue but I do agree with Vicky that it's a matter of sex and not gender, as soon as they transition then it's fair game.

The solution before that would be a third bathroom if the transgender students aren't comfortable with the bathroom of their birth gender.

[Glenn-C]

They should just have unisex ones where everyone goes together.
.

[Alf]

I've decided, I want my own bathroom just for me. Every establishment should now build a new bathroom just for me, and if they don't, they're sexist, misogynist pigs, who are against progressive values.



I've changed my mind, I just want to use the female bathroom, so I can have a good perv, because that's what I've now decided who I am, and everyone should respect that, if you're progressive.


Everyone should respect the fantasies in my head, if I decide I want to play them out.

[Northern Monkey]

There's already disabled toilets in place.Just let them use that.Would save having to build extra unisex toilets.

[Brillopad]

Bloody hell, something he does that I agree with 100% :o

Loos, changing rooms, etc are separated by SEX, not gender...which amounts to not much more than dress sense and ones personality. And should remain so. Fair enough once someone has had a 'sex change' but before that and on self identification only..a whole world of nope.

Schools should not be forced to let boys into girl changing rooms. We are having issues with my stepdaughters school and this at the moment despite our laws not saying schools have to. Basically a pervy lad has decided he is now a girl and as such is let in the girls areas. the girls are up in arms as this lad has form for basically..being a perv. And the school are just enabling it. A group of girls are currently changing in the small staff room as they refuse to change infront of him. This same group are being called transphobic by a small group of young liberals. Its a bit of a mess tbh

I agree entirely - always thought it was a terrible idea.

[the truth]

I actually agreed with it for a while but Vicky changed my mind on it when she went deeper into the potential issues with it that I hadn't really considered before. I'm all for protecting transgenders rights but not at the expense of womens rights/right to feel safe.

and men would be put into a difficult situation too

[the truth]

There's already disabled toilets in place.Just let them use that.Would save having to build extra unisex toilets.

good point , disabled toilets are unisex

[user104658]

I'm not 100% set on my opinion on the actual issue really so it would be wrong to pretend that I am.

In general, though, I would say that I'm not against the idea of devolving the issues to the discretion of individual states. The more of that, the better, to be honest, in a country as geographically large and highly populated as the US. Yes it creates some problems with there being differences from state to state but - on the other hand - with the US being as divided as it is, it's probably a good idea to have as much devolution as possible so that people have more choice in living somewhere that aligns with them The option to move from a red state to a more liberal state and have the law of the land there more accurately represent your own values, for example, or vice versa, rather than having sweeping rules set by only half of the population. I'd happily see the vast majority of laws, rules and regulations, healthcare, welfare, most taxation etc. devolved to each state with only the real Big Picture stuff coming from Washington (defense, international trade, et al).

[Jamie89]

Bloody hell, something he does that I agree with 100% :o

Loos, changing rooms, etc are separated by SEX, not gender...which amounts to not much more than dress sense and ones personality. And should remain so. Fair enough once someone has had a 'sex change' but before that and on self identification only..a whole world of nope.

Schools should not be forced to let boys into girl changing rooms. We are having issues with my stepdaughters school and this at the moment despite our laws not saying schools have to. Basically a pervy lad has decided he is now a girl and as such is let in the girls areas. the girls are up in arms as this lad has form for basically..being a perv. And the school are just enabling it. A group of girls are currently changing in the small staff room as they refuse to change infront of him. This same group are being called transphobic by a small group of young liberals. Its a bit of a mess tbh

The problem I have with this is that there are so many cases of transgender people who aren't allowed to complete their sex reassignment surgery so it's not always as simple as that. I think I've mentioned before my friend who is female to male transgender, he underwent hormone treatment, was given the surgery to have his breasts removed, but he was denied his final surgery (for complicated reasons that I don't fully understand tbh and I haven't really asked him for the specific details lol, it's pretty upsetting for him to talk about, but it was something to do with failing part of a psychological assessment near the end of the process I think), but because of that his 'sex' is technically still female but he's absolutely a man and if you met him you wouldn't think otherwise. In fact if he used a female bathroom he'd probably be reported :laugh:


I understand what some people are saying about how some men may use laws like this to perv on women etc but every single system/institution/law in the world has examples of abuses within it and I don't think we should rule on whether a system should be in place because of those people. We deal with those people and those situations when they happen but have the systems in place to benefit the majority who are just decent people who want to live their lives.

All that needs to happen with something like this is that if a non transgender student tries to abuse the system to use the wrong bathroom, they get punished. I don't understand why girls would feel uncomfortable if there are male to female transgender students using the female bathroom, unless the discomfort is to do with transgender people, but it's steps like the Obama policy that help things like that seem more 'normal' and less of an issue/something to feel uncomfortable about, it happens over time though. And yes there's examples like the pervy boy using the girls changing room and I completely understand those fears but I honestly think that rather than situations like that growing and getting worse, the opposite will be true because the closer society gets to normalising transgenderism, people will see it less as something to pretend to be and more as something that people just are. And if I'm wrong and it turned out that hordes of male students were using it to be perverts, and 'fake transgenderism' became a major problem, then the order can be rescinded.

But it's like when gay rights were a big issue and laws were changing there were a lot of fears about the 'promotion' of being gay, that more people would decide to be gay, that gay people would be more dangerous to society because of their lifestyles etc etc, and there will have been odd examples to back up those fears, but things were changed regardless and life for gay people is dramatically better today than it was say 20 or 30 years ago, and the fears turned out to be unfounded. I know it's not exactly the same but there's fears when anything big like this changes, the way I see it though is there's huge potential benefits in terms of making big changes in society's attitudes and for the lives of transgender people, (and something does need to change considering the shocking suicide rate) the majority of who are just decent ordinary people who shouldn't be punished because some people (just as in any 'group' of people) are bad.

[Vicky.]

The problem I have with this is that there are so many cases of transgender people who aren't allowed to complete their sex reassignment surgery so it's not always as simple as that. I think I've mentioned before my friend who is female to male transgender, he underwent hormone treatment, was given the surgery to have his breasts removed, but he was denied his final surgery (for complicated reasons that I don't fully understand tbh and I haven't really asked him for the specific details lol, it's pretty upsetting for him to talk about, but it was something to do with failing part of a psychological assessment near the end of the process I think), but because of that his 'sex' is technically still female but he's absolutely a man and if you met him you wouldn't think otherwise. In fact if he used a female bathroom he'd probably be reported :laugh:


I understand what some people are saying about how some men may use laws like this to perv on women etc but every single system/institution/law in the world has examples of abuses within it and I don't think we should rule on whether a system should be in place because of those people. We deal with those people and those situations when they happen but have the systems in place to benefit the majority who are just decent people who want to live their lives.

All that needs to happen with something like this is that if a non transgender student tries to abuse the system to use the wrong bathroom, they get punished. I don't understand why girls would feel uncomfortable if there are male to female transgender students using the female bathroom, unless the discomfort is to do with transgender people, but it's steps like the Obama policy that help things like that seem more 'normal' and less of an issue/something to feel uncomfortable about, it happens over time though. And yes there's examples like the pervy boy using the girls changing room and I completely understand those fears but I honestly think that rather than situations like that growing and getting worse, the opposite will be true because the closer society gets to normalising transgenderism, people will see it less as something to pretend to be and more as something that people just are. And if I'm wrong and it turned out that hordes of male students were using it to be perverts, and 'fake transgenderism' became a major problem, then the order can be rescinded.

But it's like when gay rights were a big issue and laws were changing there were a lot of fears about the 'promotion' of being gay, that more people would decide to be gay, that gay people would be more dangerous to society because of their lifestyles etc etc, and there will have been odd examples to back up those fears, but things were changed regardless and life for gay people is dramatically better today than it was say 20 or 30 years ago, and the fears turned out to be unfounded. I know it's not exactly the same but there's fears when anything big like this changes, the way I see it though is there's huge potential benefits in terms of making big changes in society's attitudes and for the lives of transgender people, (and something does need to change considering the shocking suicide rate) the majority of who are just decent ordinary people who shouldn't be punished because some people (just as in any 'group' of people) are bad.
See..how I think on this is that people like your friend will have been using their preferred sex areas for years and noone will have been any the wiser. if you 'pass', noone will bat an eyelid. People like your friend do not need laws passed that allow basically anyone access to the opposite sex areas. This push for self identification I just don't understand. 'Genuine' transfolk...they do not need these laws as they are just quietly getting on with their lives, not shouting on about how unfair everything is. So who exactly do these laws help? I know 2 transwomen who are disgusted at the way some have been going on recently and feel that the way this is going is going to harm them in the long run...as they have never had any issues, never been 'called out' or anything, probably as they do 'pass', or one definitely does, the other you may do a bit of a double take but realistically, noone is going to say anything about a masculine looking woman in the loo/changing area as you do get masculine looking females...so unless (if she still had a dick) she was swinging a penis around or something, again it wouldn't be an issue. So basically, IMO the only people these self-identification laws will help, are those who wish to abuse it.

So if there has to be a blanket rule so to speak..I would go for post-srs is fine. But before all of the transactivists started bleating on about self identification and gender trumping sex...everything was ticking along pretty nicely. Its kind of an honour system...genuine transgender people will use where ever they feel they fit in best. A law is not needed for this. A law only allows pervs to take advantage

Obviously this wouldn't be the case in schools as everyone in the school would know what sex the kid actually was unless they started transitioning as a toddler (which is ****ing wrong) but I don't really see a way around this except for having a further option for 'transkids' or letting them use staff facilities if they don't want to use the ones for their own sex. The answer definitely is NOT to remove funding for schools who refuse to let kids into either loos/changing areas. That was a ridiculously stupid move on Obamas part.

I also really dislike when gay rights are brought up in relation to this issue. Mainly as...gay people were not wanting the rights of others taken away, they simply wanted to be treat as equals. Noone else had to lose protections and such. Also so many aspects of the whole transgender thing are homophobic...so many of my friends on facebook are up in arms about it and most do not even understand why T was added onto LGB given they have nothing in common and the first 3 are sexualities where transgender is not. To explain this further...the push for 'transing' children and getting them onto (dangerous) puberty blockers...if left alone to develop the huge majority of those who are dysphoric as kids/teens will simply grow up to be gay/bi adults, not trans at all. But once on blockers 100% of people go on to 'transition' as adults. So effectively, while the transactivists push for puberty blockers and such in young people, this is little more than conversion therapy. Secondly, the treatment of lesbians by 'lesbian' transwomen (aka...straight males...) is horrendous. I personally know 3 lesbians who have had issues with this, one of those was seriously assaulted for being so 'transphobic' as to refuse to shag someone with a penis (who did not mention said penis until it was...unveiled so to speak). Apparently being a lesbian is transphobic in itself, and should be known as vagina fetishism. Cuckoo or what :S There are hundreds of stories online from lesbians of similar treatment, so I would wager a guess that this is NOT rare, its not a 'couple of crazies' and that it seems to be the current mainstream thinking among transwomen, unless its the same couple of crazies moving up and down the country and to other countries constantly treating lesbian women this way, which I doubt. It would be amusing to see a transman trying to tell gay men that they should be shagging people with vaginas otherwise they are horrible bigots...I wonder how that would go down

I actually think the problem is with those who are 'transgender' not 'transsexual'. The second are those who actually suffer crippling dysphoria and deserve sympathy and respect, those who truly do feel 'trapped in the wrong body'. The first lot, are the ones who claim there is such thing as 'lady dick' and harass lesbians for not liking penis. The second lot appear to be those pushing for access to female areas. The first have been welcome there for years...

[arista]

Bloody hell, something he does that I agree with 100% :o

Loos, changing rooms, etc are separated by SEX, not gender...which amounts to not much more than dress sense and ones personality. And should remain so. Fair enough once someone has had a 'sex change' but before that and on self identification only..a whole world of nope.

Schools should not be forced to let boys into girl changing rooms. We are having issues with my stepdaughters school and this at the moment despite our laws not saying schools have to. Basically a pervy lad has decided he is now a girl and as such is let in the girls areas. the girls are up in arms as this lad has form for basically..being a perv. And the school are just enabling it. A group of girls are currently changing in the small staff room as they refuse to change infront of him. This same group are being called transphobic by a small group of young liberals. Its a bit of a mess tbh



Yes Vicky it was a Mess
Trump sorts out a mess,

[VanessaFeltz.]

Third bathroom/locker room etc would be the best solution.
I feel so bad that transgender people have to go through this hard problem and i cant even imagine how they feel basically everyday. I also understand the other people having concerns about fake transgenders perving on people.

[Greg!]

They should just have unisex ones where everyone goes together.

This

[Denver]

They should just have unisex ones where everyone goes together.

perverts would love that

[Vicky.]

The unisex option wouldn't work in schools though. Dunno about anyone else but I remember what it was like at school...I remember how the boys would grope and leer. I expect boys might have found girls to be pervy too though obviously I don't have that perspective myself. Separate spaces are needed, especially for females (sorry truth) who will be getting their first periods and such. Its a horrific enough time without having to worry that a boy might be hovering to take the piss/try to watch. It was bad enough dealing with that whilst knowing other girls were around.

Does anyone seriously think that having a unisex changing room for PE and stuff...would go down well with the average teenager? That it would not cause huge problems?

[user104658]

The unisex option wouldn't work in schools though. Dunno about anyone else but I remember what it was like at school...I remember how the boys would grope and leer. I expect boys might have found girls to be pervy too though obviously I don't have that perspective myself. Separate spaces are needed, especially for females (sorry truth) who will be getting their first periods and such. Its a horrific enough time without having to worry that a boy might be hovering to take the piss/try to watch. It was bad enough dealing with that whilst knowing other girls were around.

Does anyone seriously think that having a unisex changing room for PE and stuff...would go down well with the average teenager? That it would not cause huge problems?

My imagining of a unisex solution, personally, would be that it would be all individual self-contained cubicles (without gaps above / below the doors) and each cubicle would have a mirror / hand washing sink as well. It wouldn't be unisex in the sense of "shared", rather every individual toilet would be completely private so it would become irrelevant.

[Vicky.]

My imagining of a unisex solution, personally, would be that it would be all individual self-contained cubicles (without gaps above / below the doors) and each cubicle would have a mirror / hand washing sink as well. It wouldn't be unisex in the sense of "shared", rather every individual toilet would be completely private so it would become irrelevant.
So what would you do for changing rooms in schools? The funding and space is not there to have individual cubicles...

Also funding issues with the full length cubicles actually...

Our school changing was grim. Just a big room with some benches and clothes pegs. I was 'ill' nearly every PE lesson as I didn't want to change infront of anyone, let alone the guys who were touching me up and calling me 'tits' as an early developer :laugh:

[user104658]

So what would you do for changing rooms in schools? The funding and space is not there to have individual cubicles...

Also funding issues with the full length cubicles actually...



Changing rooms is another issue, to be honest the only realistic solution there is to have a "third option" changing room, though that's not really ideal.

Funding regarding the toilets wouldn't be an issue in newly designed buildings to be honest... if it was designed that way from the outset the cost wouldn't be hugely different to a "traditional" setup. You're talking a difference of a few thousand pounds in a building that will most likely total £millions so not really a concern. Similar to how anyone designing a commercial building these days will design it to be wheelchair accessible from the first stroke of the pen, and the cost isn't really any different. Whereas converting current buildings for wheelchair access can get complicated / expensive.

Of course the problem lies in the fact that it WOULD obviously be hugely expensive to convert currently existing facilities. I don't think that's any reason to not do it differently moving forwards, though. Just be honest and say that, unfortunately, it's not feasible to convert every school, but that school design going forward will be changing for future generations :shrug:.


Our school changing was grim. Just a big room with some benches and clothes pegs. I was 'ill' nearly every PE lesson as I didn't want to change infront of anyone, let alone the guys who were touching me up and calling me 'tits' as an early developer :laugh:

As a circumcised white Christian (atheist...) at a 99% white christian school, I feel your pain. The thought of the school changing rooms still fills me with horror...

[the truth]

Changing rooms is another issue, to be honest the only realistic solution there is to have a "third option" changing room, though that's not really ideal.

Funding regarding the toilets wouldn't be an issue in newly designed buildings to be honest... if it was designed that way from the outset the cost wouldn't be hugely different to a "traditional" setup. You're talking a difference of a few thousand pounds in a building that will most likely total £millions so not really a concern. Similar to how anyone designing a commercial building these days will design it to be wheelchair accessible from the first stroke of the pen, and the cost isn't really any different. Whereas converting current buildings for wheelchair access can get complicated / expensive.

Of course the problem lies in the fact that it WOULD obviously be hugely expensive to convert currently existing facilities. I don't think that's any reason to not do it differently moving forwards, though. Just be honest and say that, unfortunately, it's not feasible to convert every school, but that school design going forward will be changing for future generations :shrug:.




As a circumcised white Christian (atheist...) at a 99% white christian school, I feel your pain. The thought of the school changing rooms still fills me with horror...

most buildings are still not wheelchair access and ost new flats do not have any lifts in them so no one in a wheelchair can get upstairs? meanwhile women with babies are allowed to steal disabled peoples seats on buses too

[user104658]

most buildings are still not wheelchair access and ost new flats do not have any lifts in them so no one in a wheelchair can get upstairs? meanwhile women with babies are allowed to steal disabled peoples seats on buses too

Well exactly, a lot of buildings are still not wheelchair friendly because CONVERTING an existing building is expensive. However designing a brand new building to be wheelchair accessible doesn't really have any difference in cost at all to designing one that isn't. It's about forward planning. If the transgender toilet issue is a problem currently, then even if we can't realistically change anything in current buildings, we can at least consider it in building designs for the future.

[Vicky.]

Changing rooms is another issue, to be honest the only realistic solution there is to have a "third option" changing room, though that's not really ideal.

Funding regarding the toilets wouldn't be an issue in newly designed buildings to be honest... if it was designed that way from the outset the cost wouldn't be hugely different to a "traditional" setup. You're talking a difference of a few thousand pounds in a building that will most likely total £millions so not really a concern. Similar to how anyone designing a commercial building these days will design it to be wheelchair accessible from the first stroke of the pen, and the cost isn't really any different. Whereas converting current buildings for wheelchair access can get complicated / expensive.

Of course the problem lies in the fact that it WOULD obviously be hugely expensive to convert currently existing facilities. I don't think that's any reason to not do it differently moving forwards, though. Just be honest and say that, unfortunately, it's not feasible to convert every school, but that school design going forward will be changing for future generations :shrug:.




As a circumcised white Christian (atheist...) at a 99% white christian school, I feel your pain. The thought of the school changing rooms still fills me with horror...

Oh yes, newbuilds I agree entirely. Unisex cubicles are definitely the way forward. This will obviously work well in the long term but in the short term, obviously these are not going to be available, so there is still an issue of what to do for now :S I would argue though, that whilst adults would be fine with floor to ceiling loos and a communal sink area, in schools I do still think this could be a problem so maybe cubicles like current disabled ones, with a sink in each and no communal closed off bit?

This issue does go beyond toilets though. Loos is pretty easily solved as above.

[Vicky.]

most buildings are still not wheelchair access and ost new flats do not have any lifts in them so no one in a wheelchair can get upstairs? meanwhile women with babies are allowed to steal disabled peoples seats on buses too

OK this is kind of offtopic but do you realize quite how sexist this statement is? Its like you assume men do not take their children out of the house alone. Fathers are also perfectly capable of pushing prams and such..and a lot actually do do it funnily enough. Unless you are going to argue that fathers would never dream of using the disabled spots. If so, I would argue that men and women alike may well do this, it doesn't matter what sex the person is, its how twatty they are.

[Jamie89]

See..how I think on this is that people like your friend will have been using their preferred sex areas for years and noone will have been any the wiser. if you 'pass', noone will bat an eyelid. People like your friend do not need laws passed that allow basically anyone access to the opposite sex areas. This push for self identification I just don't understand. 'Genuine' transfolk...they do not need these laws as they are just quietly getting on with their lives, not shouting on about how unfair everything is. So who exactly do these laws help? I know 2 transwomen who are disgusted at the way some have been going on recently and feel that the way this is going is going to harm them in the long run...as they have never had any issues, never been 'called out' or anything, probably as they do 'pass', or one definitely does, the other you may do a bit of a double take but realistically, noone is going to say anything about a masculine looking woman in the loo/changing area as you do get masculine looking females...so unless (if she still had a dick) she was swinging a penis around or something, again it wouldn't be an issue. So basically, IMO the only people these self-identification laws will help, are those who wish to abuse it.

So if there has to be a blanket rule so to speak..I would go for post-srs is fine. But before all of the transactivists started bleating on about self identification and gender trumping sex...everything was ticking along pretty nicely. Its kind of an honour system...genuine transgender people will use where ever they feel they fit in best. A law is not needed for this. A law only allows pervs to take advantage

Obviously this wouldn't be the case in schools as everyone in the school would know what sex the kid actually was unless they started transitioning as a toddler (which is ****ing wrong) but I don't really see a way around this except for having a further option for 'transkids' or letting them use staff facilities if they don't want to use the ones for their own sex. The answer definitely is NOT to remove funding for schools who refuse to let kids into either loos/changing areas. That was a ridiculously stupid move on Obamas part.

I also really dislike when gay rights are brought up in relation to this issue. Mainly as...gay people were not wanting the rights of others taken away, they simply wanted to be treat as equals. Noone else had to lose protections and such. Also so many aspects of the whole transgender thing are homophobic...so many of my friends on facebook are up in arms about it and most do not even understand why T was added onto LGB given they have nothing in common and the first 3 are sexualities where transgender is not. To explain this further...the push for 'transing' children and getting them onto (dangerous) puberty blockers...if left alone to develop the huge majority of those who are dysphoric as kids/teens will simply grow up to be gay/bi adults, not trans at all. But once on blockers 100% of people go on to 'transition' as adults. So effectively, while the transactivists push for puberty blockers and such in young people, this is little more than conversion therapy. Secondly, the treatment of lesbians by 'lesbian' transwomen (aka...straight males...) is horrendous. I personally know 3 lesbians who have had issues with this, one of those was seriously assaulted for being so 'transphobic' as to refuse to shag someone with a penis (who did not mention said penis until it was...unveiled so to speak). Apparently being a lesbian is transphobic in itself, and should be known as vagina fetishism. Cuckoo or what :S There are hundreds of stories online from lesbians of similar treatment, so I would wager a guess that this is NOT rare, its not a 'couple of crazies' and that it seems to be the current mainstream thinking among transwomen, unless its the same couple of crazies moving up and down the country and to other countries constantly treating lesbian women this way, which I doubt. It would be amusing to see a transman trying to tell gay men that they should be shagging people with vaginas otherwise they are horrible bigots...I wonder how that would go down

I actually think the problem is with those who are 'transgender' not 'transsexual'. The second are those who actually suffer crippling dysphoria and deserve sympathy and respect, those who truly do feel 'trapped in the wrong body'. The first lot, are the ones who claim there is such thing as 'lady dick' and harass lesbians for not liking penis. The second lot appear to be those pushing for access to female areas. The first have been welcome there for years...

I get that trans issues are different to gay issues in that sexuality isn't the issue for trans people, but in a social respect they're interlinked and I'd guess that's to do with them feeling more welcomed in and a part of the 'gay community', and I think that's because there are a lot of similarities in terms of experiences. Trans people face a lot of similar struggles to gay people such as coming out, rejection from family and friends, workplace issues etc, so since a lot of gay people also have experience of those things they can empathise in a way that straight people might not be able to. Or at least historically gay people faced those things a lot, it's obviously much better now. But yeah I've heard the "they shouldn't be included they're not like us" thing from gay people before too but in my opinion that attitude goes against the whole idea of what LGBT should be about which is just a group of people who find an affinity in each other because of similar things they've been through and are supportive of each other, not necessarily having to be limited to strict definitions of sex/gender/sexuality but like I mentioned, societal issues too. So I think comparisons are fine if there's a comparison to be made, it's not taking away from anything else or taking away from gay people, or using gay people or anything like that, and I don't think they're looking for rights to be taken away from anyone. There's a lot of things I don't really know a lot about or disagree with such as puberty blockers and transing children, but on the whole I think trans people just want to be accepted, yes there'll be groups and individuals who push for things that they probably shouldn't, but the majority are just normal people who want better lives and treatment from society. The examples you've given about lesbians' experiences and 'vagina fetishism' etc all sound awful but I'd still argue that those people aren't representative of ordinary trans people and I would be shocked if it was the mainstream thinking amongst trans people, they're just normal people and on the whole they don't think differently to you or me. It's the crazies and the perverts who attract the attention though, but they're in every walk of life and examples could be made against gay people, straight people, any group of people. I would imagine however that many trans people suffer from psychological issues and this is just me guessing but just from looking at the suicide rates there's obviously something wrong there, so maybe something like that could go some way to explaining the 'crazies', I don't know I'm just thinking out loud. Basically though I think that if we had a more trans accepting society there'd be less psychological issues amongst trans people and we'd see less examples like those not more.

[Vicky.]

I get that trans issues are different to gay issues in that sexuality isn't the issue for trans people, but in a social respect they're interlinked and I'd guess that's to do with them feeling more welcomed in and a part of the 'gay community', and I think that's because there are a lot of similarities in terms of experiences. Trans people face a lot of similar struggles to gay people such as coming out, rejection from family and friends, workplace issues etc, so since a lot of gay people also have experience of those things they can empathise in a way that straight people might not be able to. Or at least historically gay people faced those things a lot, it's obviously much better now. But yeah I've heard the "they shouldn't be included they're not like us" thing from gay people before too but in my opinion that attitude goes against the whole idea of what LGBT should be about which is just a group of people who find an affinity in each other because of similar things they've been through and are supportive of each other, not necessarily having to be limited to strict definitions of sex/gender/sexuality but like I mentioned, societal issues too. So I think comparisons are fine if there's a comparison to be made, it's not taking away from anything else or taking away from gay people, or using gay people or anything like that, and I don't think they're looking for rights to be taken away from anyone. There's a lot of things I don't really know a lot about or disagree with such as puberty blockers and transing children, but on the whole I think trans people just want to be accepted, yes there'll be groups and individuals who push for things that they probably shouldn't, but the majority are just normal people who want better lives and treatment from society. The examples you've given about lesbians' experiences and 'vagina fetishism' etc all sound awful but I'd still argue that those people aren't representative of ordinary trans people and I would be shocked if it was the mainstream thinking amongst trans people, they're just normal people and on the whole they don't think differently to you or me. It's the crazies and the perverts who attract the attention though, but they're in every walk of life and examples could be made against gay people, straight people, any group of people. I would imagine however that many trans people suffer from psychological issues and this is just me guessing but just from looking at the suicide rates there's obviously something wrong there, so maybe something like that could go some way to explaining the 'crazies', I don't know I'm just thinking out loud. Basically though I think that if we had a more trans accepting society there'd be less psychological issues amongst trans people and we'd see less examples like those not more.

It depends on your definition of trans. Do you go 'old school' and think trans means sex dysphoric folk who were born in the wrong body?

Or todays meaning that includes males who expect people to just accept their say so that they are 'women deep down' and those who say it is transphobic to think sex dysphoria is (obviously) a requirement for being trans and bleat on about how penises can be female and so on?

If the first group, I would agree and probably say that someone who is actually transsexual harassing a lesbian for sex would be very rare. The issues (as I said on the end of my ridiculously long post) are with those who claim to be trans but have no dysphoria, shout on to get their own way, make a huge fuss about entering female areas, and attempt to bully lesbian women into sleeping with males, and more specifically, males with a penis. These males are self entitled horrible little ****s and I do not think they should be lumped in with those who actually are sex dysphoric...and sadly, it seems that these people outnumber the 'transsexual' people.

[Jamie89]

It depends on your definition of trans. Do you go 'old school' and think trans means sex dysphoric folk who were born in the wrong body?

Or todays meaning that includes males who expect people to just accept their say so that they are 'women deep down' and those who say it is transphobic to think sex dysphoria is (obviously) a requirement for being trans and bleat on about how penises can be female and so on?

If the first group, I would agree and probably say that someone who is actually transsexual harassing a lesbian for sex would be very rare. The issues (as I said on the end of my ridiculously long post) are with those who claim to be trans but have no dysphoria, shout on to get their own way, make a huge fuss about entering female areas, and attempt to bully lesbian women into sleeping with males, and more specifically, males with a penis. These males are self entitled horrible little ****s and I do not think they should be lumped in with those who actually are sex dysphoric...and sadly, it seems that these people outnumber the 'transsexual' people.

I suppose I'm somewhere in the middle. I think I generally just like to trust in what people say unless I'm given a reason not to, so if I met a man who said he felt he was a woman, but hadn't yet undergone any steps towards becoming a woman I'd take that on face value, and I'd refer to him as a woman if that's what he wanted, and I'd consider him a woman if I felt he was genuine, it's not something I've personally experienced so I can't really judge it and there's still not really a great deal of understanding around it. If I met someone though who gave me reason to think they had ulterior motives, or had beliefs that I disagreed with (such as the example of bullying lesbians to sleep with men or that it's transphobic to consider dysphoria a requirement in transsexuals etc) then that'd be different. I would hazard a guess that issues like these and these ways of thinking have always been around though amongst some people but are only becoming highlighted because there's more of a spotlight on all things trans related nowadays, rather than them being issues that are growing.

[Beso]

Not sure of the media source but the headline was, " world leaders shake heads at trumps transgender toilet ban" made me giggle.

[Vicky.]

I suppose I'm somewhere in the middle. I think I generally just like to trust in what people say unless I'm given a reason not to, so if I met a man who said he felt he was a woman, but hadn't yet undergone any steps towards becoming a woman I'd take that on face value, and I'd refer to him as a woman if that's what he wanted, and I'd consider him a woman if I felt he was genuine, it's not something I've personally experienced so I can't really judge it and there's still not really a great deal of understanding around it. If I met someone though who gave me reason to think they had ulterior motives, or had beliefs that I disagreed with (such as the example of bullying lesbians to sleep with men or that it's transphobic to consider dysphoria a requirement in transsexuals etc) then that'd be different. I would hazard a guess that issues like these and these ways of thinking have always been around though amongst some people but are only becoming highlighted because there's more of a spotlight on all things trans related nowadays, rather than them being issues that are growing.
I dare you to post on reddit/twitter/tumblr that you think sex dysphoria is an essential part of being trans. I know those sites are not necessarily representative of real life but you will be called a terf, told to die in a fire, and get rape threats by the minute, from hundreds of different users. I assure you.

[Jamie89]

I dare you to post on reddit/twitter/tumblr that you think sex dysphoria is an essential part of being trans. I know those sites are not necessarily representative of real life but you will be called a terf, told to die in a fire, and get rape threats by the minute, from hundreds of different users. I assure you.

D: I think I'll stick to tibb

But it's not so much that I think dysphoria is an essential part of being trans (I don't really have a solid opinion on that either way because I'm not sure) I just mean that I agree that it's wrong to go as far as to label someone as transphobic for having that belief.

[Vicky.]

D: I think I'll stick to tibb

But it's not so much that I think dysphoria is an essential part of being trans (I don't really have a solid opinion on that either way because I'm not sure) I just mean that I agree that it's wrong to go as far as to label someone as transphobic for having that belief.

Interesting. If you did not feel you were born in the wrong body and feel you should be the opposite sex....then how are you trans anything? I actually cannot understand this so I am genuinely interested in why you think this. When I have tried asking this elsewhere I have received answers such as 'I am not here to teach you, go educate yourself' which...don't help :laugh:

[Jamie89]

Interesting. If you did not feel you were born in the wrong body and feel you should be the opposite sex....then how are you trans anything? I actually cannot understand this so I am genuinely interested in why you think this. When I have tried asking this elsewhere I have received answers such as 'I am not here to teach you, go educate yourself' which...don't help :laugh:

Honestly I don't know, it's just that I don't fully understand everything relating to being trans, or the feelings trans people have, or how they view themselves etc, so it's just that if someone was to say to me that they were trans but didn't have gender dysphoria then I'd try to accept that even though I wouldn't fully understand it. I think psychologically it's probably far more complicated than non trans people would really be able to appreciate so I'd just consider it to be a case that they'd know how they feel better than me and that it wouldn't really be for me to lay a definitive on them of 'you must be this' or 'you must think like this' sort of thing.
Like I say, it's more that I'm undecided on it rather than having an opinion on it either way.

[Vicky.]

Thanks. I guess all of this interests me because going by current definitions, I am trans myself. Which is...odd. I always assumed that everyone felt like I do...which is basically this

I do not feel 'like a woman', though I am obviously female. I just feel 'like me', or like a person.

I honestly thought that this was how everyone felt. However, not 'identifying' as a woman whilst being female, makes me trans. As does not being 'purely feminine'. Which is an odd concept in itself. I don't think many people in the whole world perform femininity to a tee...and have nothing even slightly masculine about them.

[Jamie89]

Thanks. I guess all of this interests me because going by current definitions, I am trans myself. Which is...odd. I always assumed that everyone felt like I do...which is basically this

I do not feel 'like a woman', though I am obviously female. I just feel 'like me', or like a person.

I honestly thought that this was how everyone felt. However, not 'identifying' as a woman whilst being female, makes me trans. As does not being 'purely feminine'. Which is an odd concept in itself. I don't think many people in the whole world perform femininity to a tee...and have nothing even slightly masculine about them.

I think there's a lot of 'definitions' for things that we don't really understand, which is very odd when you think about it. How can we define something that we don't understand? I don't really know what 'feeling like a man' entails so maybe I'm trans too :laugh:
I think the definitions are only really there to try and help people who struggle with their identity though and are trying to understand themselves better and who do have feelings that connect with those definitions, I'd guess that even if you don't consider yourself 'male' or 'female' but are content with who you are then there's no trans issue there because you're not looking for anything to change and you're not looking to be thought of differently, I don't know

[RichardG]

I do not feel 'like a woman', though I am obviously female. I just feel 'like me', or like a person.



I am the same and I think that's probably the case for a lot of people? Last year a video came out online of a girl 'coming out' to Obama as non-binary, supposedly meaning she doesn't identify as male or female, and I thought... big deal, isn't that the case for most people. :laugh: Unless I'm totally misunderstanding the definition of it. Not that I mean to sound rude, if a friend told me they were non binary then I'd respect that, but I'm not really sure why people want to give every possible identity a label.

[Northern Monkey]

It's a mine field.I don't think inventing all these labels is helpful for society as a whole tbh.There comes a point where things get so complicated that people just give up trying to understand.
Everone's different.I don't think there needs to be a label for every different feeling or emotion that everyone experiences.

[Jack_]

The obvious answer - as has been touched on - is to do away with segregated bathrooms altogether. We have a few sets of newly built gender neutral toilets at our uni library - which are literally three separate cubicles that have a toilet, sink and Dyson Airblade in, and they are a **** load nicer than the regular segregated toilets :laugh: when I stumbled upon them by accident I was amazed

There is literally no reason to separate toilets by gender. Or changing rooms, for that matter. Do away with those awful open spaces you get at some leisure centres - I don't wanna see a 70 year old's dick flapping around, thanks. I agree with TS that the solution is individual cubicles.

On topic - I think the notion that 'pervy' men are going to dress up as women to gain access to their toilets so they can attack someone is problematic on two counts: the first being that as has already been pointed out, many trans people will have been using the 'wrong' bathroom without anyone knowing for decades and I don't think there's much evidence of this being a particularly pertinent problem, and the second that if a man (or a woman, actually) wishes to lurk in a bathroom waiting to attack someone, they will do it regardless. A sign above a door isn't going to stop anyone. Not to mention the fact that most sexual assaults don't take place inside a public toilet at the hand of a stranger, but rather with people you know in a place you're familiar with.

[Jack_]

On topic - I think the notion that 'pervy' men are going to dress up as women to gain access to their toilets so they can attack someone is problematic on two counts: the first being that as has already been pointed out, many trans people will have been using the 'wrong' bathroom without anyone knowing for decades and I don't think there's much evidence of this being a particularly pertinent problem, and the second that if a man (or a woman, actually) wishes to lurk in a bathroom waiting to attack someone, they will do it regardless. A sign above a door isn't going to stop anyone. Not to mention the fact that most sexual assaults don't take place inside a public toilet at the hand of a stranger, but rather with people you know in a place you're familiar with.

lol I post this and then this article pops up on my Facebook feed

http://www.newsobserver.com/opinion/op-ed/article96746917.html

[Denver]

The obvious answer - as has been touched on - is to do away with segregated bathrooms altogether. We have a few sets of newly built gender neutral toilets at our uni library - which are literally three separate cubicles that have a toilet, sink and Dyson Airblade in, and they are a **** load nicer than the regular segregated toilets :laugh: when I stumbled upon them by accident I was amazed

There is literally no reason to separate toilets by gender. Or changing rooms, for that matter. Do away with those awful open spaces you get at some leisure centres - I don't wanna see a 70 year old's dick flapping around, thanks. I agree with TS that the solution is individual cubicles.

On topic - I think the notion that 'pervy' men are going to dress up as women to gain access to their toilets so they can attack someone is problematic on two counts: the first being that as has already been pointed out, many trans people will have been using the 'wrong' bathroom without anyone knowing for decades and I don't think there's much evidence of this being a particularly pertinent problem, and the second that if a man (or a woman, actually) wishes to lurk in a bathroom waiting to attack someone, they will do it regardless. A sign above a door isn't going to stop anyone. Not to mention the fact that most sexual assaults don't take place inside a public toilet at the hand of a stranger, but rather with people you know in a place you're familiar with.

Unisex bathrooms is a breeding ground for perverts and rapists

[Jack_]

On what basis?

There is just no logic to this argument whatsoever. The proliferation of unisex toilets would inevitably mean more people in any one bathroom at any one time. Which, by all conventional wisdom, thus makes them safer.

And again, if you think that right now, this very minute, with the existing set ups we have - 'perverts and rapists' won't enter toilets that don't correspond to their gender because of a sign above the door, you are sadly mistaken. Also again - you're more likely to be attacked at home than you are in a public toilet.

[Denver]

On what basis?

There is just no logic to this argument whatsoever. The proliferation of unisex toilets would inevitably mean more people in any one bathroom at any one time. Which, by all conventional wisdom, thus makes them safer.

And again, if you think that right now, this very minute, with the existing set ups we have - 'perverts and rapists' won't enter toilets that don't correspond to their gender because of a sign above the door, you are sadly mistaken. Also again - you're more likely to be attacked at home than you are in a public toilet.

Nobody will notice people taken pics of people in other cubicles because they can be in there and nobody will kick up a fuss of someone entering late at night and rapes the only person in there.

Also everyone is entitled to privacy within there own gender and should not be forced to share

[Jack_]

With all due respect, you're making no sense at all.

People can take pictures of other people in cubicles now. In fact, if we're going to be stereotypical about this (since it only seems to be 'pervy men' that are being discussed), I'd hazard a guess that the majority of people who would be doing so would be men...to other men.

For the third time, someone could enter a public toilet late at night now and rape the only person in there. I don't know how many times I have to say this - a sign above a door isn't going to stop them from entering. What may prevent them, however, is the likelihood that comes with unisex toilets of there being more people in them at any one time.

Gender segregation is absurd on a whole multitude of levels that go way beyond toilets and changing rooms, but if we run with your last sentence then fair enough - but such a privilege is also granted to any trans person wishing to go to the toilet they feel comfortable with in private. It's as simple as that. You can't have your cake and eat it.

[Denver]

Anyway it will never be brought in so you are wasting your time

[Jack_]

It's gone 2am and you're posting on a Big Brother forum. We're both wasting our time, except you're doing so by losing a debate.

You'll see anyway. I'm sure many thought the same about racial segregation.

[Denver]

race is different to gender.

Women have not thought for decades to be equal just to be shoved back into sharing bathrooms with men it is a pointless and weird thing for people to want.

Why would anyone want a young girl sharing the same bathroom as a man who isnt her dad

[Jack_]

You'd be surprised, the two are related in many ways.

Women have not fought for 'decades' for segregated toilets, either. What a laughable proposition.

Because not everyone lives their life engulfed by these weird Daily Mail esque fallacies where all adult men are child molesters in waiting, or rapists hanging around public toilets, or desperate to take pictures of people in other cubicles but won't enter because a nasty little sign says they're not allowed in, perhaps?

[Denver]

Why the **** are you campaigning so hard for children to be exposed to more people this way

[Jack_]

Why the **** are you so obsessed with this disturbing idea that all men are child molesters hanging around public toilets?

[Denver]

We have enough child abuse problems as it is now this makes them easier targets by anyone and everyone

[Denver]

Why the **** are you so obsessed with this disturbing idea that all men are child molesters hanging around public toilets?

Stop trying to be edgy daffodil facts is it is a terrible idea and there is a reason it is not legal

[Jack_]

Christ this is monotonous.

How does it? For the last time (well, it won't be, let's be honest) - sexual assaults (especially against children) are far more likely to take place somewhere familiar to the child than they are in a ****ing public toilet. I don't know whether your vision of the world is some dystopian Maddie McCann/Jimmy Saville nightmare where all public toilets are like the BBC in the 70s, but it has no basis in reality.

Unisex toilets means more people, which automatically makes them safer.

[Jack_]

Stop trying to be edgy daffodil facts is it is a terrible idea and there is a reason it is not legal

'Edgy daffodil'? Okay, now you must be trolling.

It's not legal? So my university is breaking the law having just built several unisex toilets then? Right, I got you.

There are no 'facts' on your side of the argument. Only bizarre dystopian nightmares that have no basis in reality.

[Denver]

Doesnt make it safer if it is a group of people against one

[Denver]

'Edgy daffodil'? Okay, now you must be trolling.

It's not legal? So my university is breaking the law having just built several unisex toilets then? Right, I got you.

There are no 'facts' on your side of the argument. Only bizarre dystopian nightmares that have no basis in reality.

They can never make people use Unisex what more facts do you need

[Jack_]

So now there's groups of people (let me guess, men with long beards, trench coats and gloves - right?) hanging around public toilets waiting for women and children to enter alone so they can rape them? That's quite an imagination you've got there.

Erm, well...for starters, never say 'never', and more to the point, they can never make anyone use any toilet so long as their gender presentation corresponds to the sign on the door, since no one would know any different. Which is the entire debate in this thread in the first place. And it's funny, since once again - no sign on a door can make any of these ~potential paedos and rapists and child molesters~ you keep banging on about refrain from entering a public toilet should they so wish.

You have no facts. Only fallacies.

[Denver]

You are making it into something it isnt and adding your own bit onto what i said so im done her daffodil

[Jack_]

No, you're adding bits on to your already absurd argument. Quite literally inventing dystopian nightmare scenarios that have no basis in reality just to fit your failing agenda.

Nice try, but you lost I'm afraid sunbeam.

[Denver]

Like you posted facts

[Jack_]

More than you did.

I literally posted an article full of them in the post before you began this whole charade.

[Jamie89]

lol I post this and then this article pops up on my Facebook feed

http://www.newsobserver.com/opinion/op-ed/article96746917.html

Great article, it raises some really valid points imo (and great posts too Jack I totally agree with everything you're saying)


From the article...

Sometimes change isn’t comfortable, but it’s still the right thing to do. And guess what? Eventually it becomes so comfortable that the next generation can’t imagine what all the fuss was about.

The 'uncomfortable' argument is one that I haven't been able to understand, it's an argument that could be used against any type of progression but discomfort is just that and fades over time, it doesn't relate to any actual or realistic possibility of increased danger in this case, I can't help but see it as more of an irrational fear.

Harassment in bathrooms is a serious problem, but the new laws enacted to protect North Carolina citizens are protecting the wrong people. House Bill 2 makes the bathrooms less safe for those who really do have to worry about violence.

The stories I heard came from young people who do not conform to gender stereotypes. Fifteen were raised as girls but are not now easily identifiable as men or women. Some are straight and some gay. Women often challenged them if they entered women’s restrooms because they looked boyish. But they were often afraid to enter men’s rooms because they feared violence.

It's a good point that people may not necessarily be transsexual and therefore don't require sex reassignment surgery but still face difficulty in terms of how other people perceive their gender/sex and the treatment they receive because of that. I suppose it's those kinds of people who would benefit the most from these laws (and I'd guess the numbers of people like this are increasing... although that is just a total guess lol).

[Brillopad]

The obvious answer - as has been touched on - is to do away with segregated bathrooms altogether. We have a few sets of newly built gender neutral toilets at our uni library - which are literally three separate cubicles that have a toilet, sink and Dyson Airblade in, and they are a **** load nicer than the regular segregated toilets :laugh: when I stumbled upon them by accident I was amazed

There is literally no reason to separate toilets by gender. Or changing rooms, for that matter. Do away with those awful open spaces you get at some leisure centres - I don't wanna see a 70 year old's dick flapping around, thanks. I agree with TS that the solution is individual cubicles.

On topic - I think the notion that 'pervy' men are going to dress up as women to gain access to their toilets so they can attack someone is problematic on two counts: the first being that as has already been pointed out, many trans people will have been using the 'wrong' bathroom without anyone knowing for decades and I don't think there's much evidence of this being a particularly pertinent problem, and the second that if a man (or a woman, actually) wishes to lurk in a bathroom waiting to attack someone, they will do it regardless. A sign above a door isn't going to stop anyone. Not to mention the fact that most sexual assaults don't take place inside a public toilet at the hand of a stranger, but rather with people you know in a place you're familiar with.

Coming from a male perspective.

Many women would not be comfortable sharing bsthrooms with men - it doesn't matter whether you agree with that or not, that is how many women feel and such decisions should be theirs, not men's.

It's not just about sex crimes although this is undoubtedly an issue as most victims of sex crimes are female and most perpetrators are male, that is fact.

It is also about about simple things such as comfort, dignity and privacy - things that often affect/bother women more than men. You don't understand that, as a woman I do.

It really isn't for men to say women shouldn't be 'allowed' their own toilets/bathrooms.

[Kizzy]

Coming from a male perspective.

Many women would not be comfortable sharing bsthrooms with men - it doesn't matter whether you agree with that or not, that is how many women feel and such decisions should be theirs, not men's.

It's not just about sex crimes although this is undoubtedly an issue as most victims of sex crimes are female and most perpetrators are male, that is fact.

It is also about about simple things such as comfort, dignity and privacy - things that often affect/bother women more than men. You don't understand that, as a woman I do.

It really isn't for men to say women shouldn't be 'allowed' their own toilets/bathrooms.

Yeah... thanks for mansplaining how women feel :thumbs:

[user104658]

Yeah... thanks for mansplaining how women feel :thumbs:
There's a rumour going around that Brillo is female... Brillo is yet to confirm or deny. It's all very confusing.

[user104658]

You don't understand that, as a woman I do.

:omgno: the plot thickens...

[Brillopad]

Yeah... thanks for mansplaining how women feel :thumbs:

Maybe not put well, but I mean't that jack was seeing this from a male perspective. I on the other hand see it from a female perspective and therefore get how many women feel.

If men or women are happy to use unisex toilets that's fine, but people should still have a choice.

[Brillopad]

:omgno: the plot thickens...

I used to think you were female until you mentioned your wife. How mystifying these sites can be.

[Kizzy]

Maybe not put well, but I mean't that jack was seeing this from a male perspective. I on the other hand see it from a female perspective and therefore get how many women feel.

If men or women are happy to use unisex toilets that's fine, but people should still have a choice.

Ah right ok, I think I would prefer a choice too tbh.

[Mystic Mock]

I still can't get over that Stretch Armstrong is in charge of the US.

[user104658]

I used to think you were female until you mentioned your wife. How mystifying these sites can be.
Err that is offensive, I could have been a lesbian. :hmph:

I'm not, but I could have been.

I feel like the only explanation is that I have a... Creative flourish... In my writing style whereas you come across as harsh and brutish like a Russian ice trucker.

Ironically this means that both of us are non-binary and should probably be sharing the TiBB trans bathroom.

[user104658]

I would just like the choice to use ANY toilet that doesn't contain a urinal of any kind because they are - both in concept and visually - ****ing repulsive. Especially the ones in your more... Down to earth... Pubs. Just a long metal trough clogged up with piss and vomit and more often than is reasonable, a big fat turd.

[Brillopad]

Err that is offensive, I could have been a lesbian. :hmph:

I'm not, but I could have been.

I feel like the only explanation is that I have a... Creative flourish... In my writing style whereas you come across as harsh and brutish like a Russian ice trucker.

Ironically this means that both of us are non-binary and should probably be sharing the TiBB trans bathroom.

Ah, it seems things are not always as they seem! Russian ice trucker indeed. Don't know whether to laugh or cry - :hee:

[Kizzy]

There's that feminine flourish in your writing style at the end there TS? :laugh:Well... seeing as it's cropped up in conversation, I'd have to say one of my objections to unisex toilets would be hygiene related.... SOME MEN MISS THE POT OK!

Phew, I feel better for getting that off my chest.

[Brillopad]

There's that feminine flourish in your writing style at the end there TS? :laugh:Well... seeing as it's cropped up in conversation, I'd have to say one of my objections to unisex toilets would be hygiene related.... SOME MEN MISS THE POT OK!

Phew, I feel better for getting that off my chest.

I agree.

[Vicky.]

lol I post this and then this article pops up on my Facebook feed

http://www.newsobserver.com/opinion/op-ed/article96746917.html

This author starts out in bad faith argument and never lets up. The Obama administration made a unlateral and, frankly, unconstitutional overreach when it declared title IX that specifically deals with sex includes "gender identity." The same over-reach that Leftist Charlotte did by requiring all businesses to allow self-identified trans people full access to locker rooms, changing rooms, showers of the opposite sex.

It should be noted that this author never addresses the issue of locker rooms/showers/changing areas or even sports. We've seen already situations in which males are competing in girls sports and winning. And the major newspaper in Charlotte editorializing that women and girls need to "get used to" being exposed to male genitalia in their locker rooms.

So this isn't "just" about wondering who is in the next stall in a restroom, this is about telling women & girls they no longer have the right to refuse naked men in their locker rooms, changing rooms and showers. That a woman's bodily integrity, privacy and safety must give way to a larger religiously-held ideology.

First comment on it says it all for me tbh...

[Vicky.]

On what basis?

There is just no logic to this argument whatsoever. The proliferation of unisex toilets would inevitably mean more people in any one bathroom at any one time. Which, by all conventional wisdom, thus makes them safer.

And again, if you think that right now, this very minute, with the existing set ups we have - 'perverts and rapists' won't enter toilets that don't correspond to their gender because of a sign above the door, you are sadly mistaken. Also again - you're more likely to be attacked at home than you are in a public toilet.

This is true, however at the moment if you see a bloke in the womens, you can tell them to piss off or complain. If this 'gender identity bill' gets passed (in the UK, not USA) then gender identity trumps sex and you cannot do this anymore. You would be committing a hate crime by going to walk into the loo, seeing a hairy biker and walking back out because of this, as this would be bigoted as he 'is a woman too'. Its all silly when you look deep enough into it. Basically, if 'gender'' trumps sex, ****ing sexism can no longer be defined by law either! Sacked for breastfeeding? Not sexist...men can breastfeed too. And so on...

I do feel deeply sorry for transsexual people who have been caught in this cross fire as as I said, they have been using their chosen sex facilities for years and years with no issue. So they are being harmed also by all of this bollocks. A law isn't needed and will ONLY help those wishing to abuse it.

New builds, make everything communal, fair enough. Convert older places if you can afford it. But to say the sexed areas are open to all? What help does this do anyone? It certainly does not help transsexual people who are already using the female areas as they are scared of the male violence in the males...given any male can now stroll in anyway. I use this as an example as I am yet to see any complaints the other way round, infact from what I have seen transmen do not want to use the mens...

[Vicky.]

Anyway it will never be brought in so you are wasting your time

Actually, it might well be

http://citizengo.org/en-gb/pc/41304-say-not-dangerous-gender-identity-bill

Its about to be passed in this country...

[Vicky.]

Why the **** are you so obsessed with this disturbing idea that all men are child molesters hanging around public toilets?

Adam hasn't said that tbf. Also the overwhelming amount of sexual crime is committed by males. 95% I believe it is. So it kind of is an issue...clearly

[Vicky.]

Coming from a male perspective.

Many women would not be comfortable sharing bsthrooms with men - it doesn't matter whether you agree with that or not, that is how many women feel and such decisions should be theirs, not men's.

It's not just about sex crimes although this is undoubtedly an issue as most victims of sex crimes are female and most perpetrators are male, that is fact.

It is also about about simple things such as comfort, dignity and privacy - things that often affect/bother women more than men. You don't understand that, as a woman I do.

It really isn't for men to say women shouldn't be 'allowed' their own toilets/bathrooms.

Indeed. I have extremely strong views on this topic as its something thats only became apparent to me fairly recently and before that I was a good little 'trans ally' who did not question anything about it all. I still hold the view that transgender people should recieve support, should not be discriminated against when it comes to housing, healthcare, and so on. However I cannot get behind this throwing females under the bus...I just can't. Its throwing males under the bus too but not quite as much as it is mainly females in danger from males, not the other way around.

My husband started off thinking that these laws and stuff only applied to those who have 'fully transitioned' and as such he thought I was transphobic for my views. However once it became apparently that they were not, and that those who have transitioned have no issues anyway...he now agrees with me 100% and also says he would not be comfortable with females in the male loos/changing rooms/whatever. I get that this is likely a rare view as men probably don't really give a crap if a woman sees his dick. But some do.

Male and female are not a state in ones head. They are a biological reality. Honestly..I have seen articles and such claiming that sex is the social construct :laugh: No dear, that would be 'gender'.

I also do not believe that part in that article that states many young women were being questioned for looking like young boys in female areas. That just doesn't happen, or definitely not enough to make out its common. I know so many butch women and not one has ever had an issue. People do realise that women who are not feminine exist....

[Brillopad]

Actually, it might well be

http://citizengo.org/en-gb/pc/41304-say-not-dangerous-gender-identity-bill

Its about to be passed in this country...

That maybe time for me to protest on the streets if so.

No way I am using unisex bathrooms. My poor mother would be mortified. What about little old ladies who frequently need the loo - are they really expected to share a bathroom with men of all age groups.

It's ridiculous and really not thought through properly - just a hysterical reaction to PC in my opinion.

[Vicky.]

I would use unisex, no problem. However I also know many women/men would not. As you say older people are unlikely to be comfortable with it, perhaps people who have previously been raped/sexually assaulted who are (sorry) 'triggered' by being in close contact with the opposite sex, especially in areas where one is more vulnerable. I know this won't go down too well on here but...Muslim women too. Yes I know its the religion thats a bit backwards when it comes to womens rights, but they aren't 'allowed' in many places where men are. So for example...a Muslim woman who has been taking advantage of the female only time at the swimming pool...can now not go as gender comes before sex. Honestly...it worries me how many people are unquestioning about this matter and seemingly refuse to look at it any deeper, or have done so and don't give a crap.

[Vicky.]

Also protesting this will get you labelled a 'TERF' mind...which will in turn invite death/rape threats and possibly exclusion from your social groups. As clearly, being concerned about any aspect of this means you actively hate transpeople and deny they exist. There are amusing cases where transwomen have been labelled TERFS...and the term for transpeople who are 'gender critical' or think that 'trapped in the wrong body'/sex dyshporia is a requirement of being trans...is truscum :(

[Brillopad]

I would use unisex, no problem. However I also know many women/men would not. As you say older people are unlikely to be comfortable with it, perhaps people who have previously been raped/sexually assaulted who are (sorry) 'triggered' by being in close contact with the opposite sex, especially in areas where one is more vulnerable. I know this won't go down too well on here but...Muslim women too. Yes I know its the religion thats a bit backwards when it comes to womens rights, but they aren't 'allowed' in many places where men are. So for example...a Muslim woman who has been taking advantage of the female only time at the swimming pool...can now not go as gender comes before sex. Honestly...it worries me how many people are unquestioning about this matter and seemingly refuse to look at it any deeper, or have done so and don't give a crap.

Good points; especially the point about Muslim women. What are they supposed to do, not go out or hold it.

Definitely not thought through properly by anyone including those who defend minority rights who haven't actually thought about female minorities.

[Brillopad]

I would use unisex, no problem. However I also know many women/men would not. As you say older people are unlikely to be comfortable with it, perhaps people who have previously been raped/sexually assaulted who are (sorry) 'triggered' by being in close contact with the opposite sex, especially in areas where one is more vulnerable. I know this won't go down too well on here but...Muslim women too. Yes I know its the religion thats a bit backwards when it comes to womens rights, but they aren't 'allowed' in many places where men are. So for example...a Muslim woman who has been taking advantage of the female only time at the swimming pool...can now not go as gender comes before sex. Honestly...it worries me how many people are unquestioning about this matter and seemingly refuse to look at it any deeper, or have done so and don't give a crap.

I'm presuming a typo there Vicky as I think most older women would be uncomfortable with it.

[Vicky.]

Actually thinking about it...sexuality is no longer allowed to exist by law if this gender thing happens. LGB people will no longer have protections as...chosing sexual partners will only be down to personal choice rather than actually being straight/gay? Which leads us back to gay being a choice as its now just 'personal choice' for a man to be exclusively attracted to the male sex, and vice versa, no different to preferring tall people or whatever? And being straight/gay will be bigoted in itself as it is refusing to acknowledge ones chosen gender identity? This is the natural conclusion that I can see. Though I may be overthinking this. If sex no longer actually matters at all and it is bigoted to say it does (in any area) or that it is more important that 'gender' (which is a feeling in ones head, not measurable) then...everything that has roots in sex is actually bigoted...

[Northern Monkey]

This stuff is crazy really.All these oppressed people all competing for their rights to come first and stepping on each others toes in the process.Sometimes i think that too much 'progressiveness' causes more problems than it solves.

[Northern Monkey]

Actually thinking about it...sexuality is no longer allowed to exist by law if this gender thing happens. LGB people will no longer have protections as...chosing sexual partners will only be down to personal choice rather than actually being straight/gay? Which leads us back to gay being a choice as its now just 'personal choice' for a man to be exclusively attracted to the male sex, and vice versa, no different to preferring tall people or whatever? And being straight/gay will be bigoted in itself as it is refusing to acknowledge ones chosen gender identity? This is the natural conclusion that I can see. Though I may be overthinking this. If sex no longer actually matters at all and it is bigoted to say it does (in any area) or that it is more important that 'gender' (which is a feeling in ones head, not measurable) then...everything that has roots in sex is actually bigoted...Hopefully common sense will prevail before this becomes a reality.

[Jack_]

Coming from a male perspective.

Many women would not be comfortable sharing bsthrooms with men - it doesn't matter whether you agree with that or not, that is how many women feel and such decisions should be theirs, not men's.

It's not just about sex crimes although this is undoubtedly an issue as most victims of sex crimes are female and most perpetrators are male, that is fact.

It is also about about simple things such as comfort, dignity and privacy - things that often affect/bother women more than men. You don't understand that, as a woman I do.

It really isn't for men to say women shouldn't be 'allowed' their own toilets/bathrooms.

Just to play devils advovate here for a second - on what basis have you assumed I am a man? My name? You've never seen a photo of me (not that that would be an indicator either) so why have you presumed I am? I expect someone will quote this with the perennially unfunny and overdone 'did you just assume my gender' but I'm interested, considering the only thing you know of me is the text you're reading on a screen

Considering I'm a feminist, please don't patronise me by pointing out facts I already know. For what it's worth, many women who've I spoken to about this issue agree with me and don't understand why toilets are segregated and would have no issue using a unisex toilet (I get the feeling people tend to misunderstand what they actually are too, generally they're not a room full of cubicles in the regular sense but rather a collection of disabled-esque toilets that are little rooms with a floor to ceiling door and sink). Perhaps as the article surmised, it's a millennial thing.

The solution then - if people wish to continue operating on futile gendered lines - is to provide three sets of toilets, to give everyone a choice. Because while you're sat here (partially justified) lecturing me on how a woman's feelings are important to this issue, you're forgetting that if you aren't trans yourself, you aren't considering the experiences of trans people. It works both ways.

This is true, however at the moment if you see a bloke in the womens, you can tell them to piss off or complain. If this 'gender identity bill' gets passed (in the UK, not USA) then gender identity trumps sex and you cannot do this anymore. You would be committing a hate crime by going to walk into the loo, seeing a hairy biker and walking back out because of this, as this would be bigoted as he 'is a woman too'. Its all silly when you look deep enough into it. Basically, if 'gender'' trumps sex, ****ing sexism can no longer be defined by law either! Sacked for breastfeeding? Not sexist...men can breastfeed too. And so on...

I do feel deeply sorry for transsexual people who have been caught in this cross fire as as I said, they have been using their chosen sex facilities for years and years with no issue. So they are being harmed also by all of this bollocks. A law isn't needed and will ONLY help those wishing to abuse it.

New builds, make everything communal, fair enough. Convert older places if you can afford it. But to say the sexed areas are open to all? What help does this do anyone? It certainly does not help transsexual people who are already using the female areas as they are scared of the male violence in the males...given any male can now stroll in anyway. I use this as an example as I am yet to see any complaints the other way round, infact from what I have seen transmen do not want to use the mens...

I don't think it would open the can of worms you think it would. Put it this way, there is no reason why at this moment a 'biological' female (for arguments sake we'll say in the possession of breasts and a vagina) who identifies as a female but has a beard and short hair (i.e. is 'unfeminine' in their appearance) couldn't and wouldn't enter a woman's toilet. What happens then? If we separate toilets on sex, the only way it could be policed would be through mandatory and intrusive inspection upon entry.

What this of course comes down to is the problematic and silly ideas about how both women and men should dress and appear to the world. We need to stop assuming that women and men must both dress and appear a certain way before they can be assumed to be 'real' men and women because our ideas of what constitute 'proper' masculinity and femininity are culturally formed.

Adam hasn't said that tbf. Also the overwhelming amount of sexual crime is committed by males. 95% I believe it is. So it kind of is an issue...clearly

Correct, but is it overwhelmingly committed in public toilets by strangers? I'm guessing not.

Male and female are not a state in ones head. They are a biological reality. Honestly..I have seen articles and such claiming that sex is the social construct :laugh: No dear, that would be 'gender'.

I don't particularly want to get into this now but I'm actually writing an entire chapter of my dissertation on this, one I only began after having discovered through reading that it's not actually as unproblematic as one might assume (I used to hold the same position that you did up until a couple of months ago). So come back to me in three months, and I should hopefully be able to go into this a bit deeper :laugh:

Actually thinking about it...sexuality is no longer allowed to exist by law if this gender thing happens. LGB people will no longer have protections as...chosing sexual partners will only be down to personal choice rather than actually being straight/gay? Which leads us back to gay being a choice as its now just 'personal choice' for a man to be exclusively attracted to the male sex, and vice versa, no different to preferring tall people or whatever? And being straight/gay will be bigoted in itself as it is refusing to acknowledge ones chosen gender identity? This is the natural conclusion that I can see. Though I may be overthinking this. If sex no longer actually matters at all and it is bigoted to say it does (in any area) or that it is more important that 'gender' (which is a feeling in ones head, not measurable) then...everything that has roots in sex is actually bigoted...

Again, would rather have this discussion in a couple of months but on the slightly related issue of sexuality, demarcating one's sexual desires into neat little categories is also problematic and not as inherent as you might think. The work of Michel Foucault points to how discourses around sex brought into being the identity categories we work with today.

[Crimson Dynamo]

can people get real and realise that 3 types of toilets will never happen DUE TO COST AND SPACE

:facepalm:

[Jack_]

Reminds me of those establishments who break disability laws by not providing access under the guise of 'COST AND SPACE WASNT ACCOMMODATING SOZ x'

Money might be everything to you LT but not it's not to everyone. And anyway, if we follow your line of thinking then the logical solution to save 'COST AND SPACE' is actually to provide unisex toilets, not two. But somehow I'm guessing that's not your real agenda...

[Crimson Dynamo]

Reminds me of those establishments who break disability laws by not providing access under the guise of 'COST AND SPACE WASNT ACCOMMODATING SOZ x'

Money might be everything to you LT but not it's not to everyone. And anyway, if we follow your line of thinking then the logical solution to save 'COST AND SPACE' is actually to provide unisex toilets, not two. But somehow I'm guessing that's not your real agenda...

The minute you change a routine installation like like loos you add cost so it wont happen. No point thinking it will. The numbers here are so minute the best solution is to go at home of just use the disabled toilet which is already in situ

[Jack_]

It will happen if people campaign for it and generationally it becomes a more socially acceptable idea. Again, I'm sure many people thought desegregation in the US would never happen but it did. I have every belief that in fifty years time this won't be the issue it is now

'Go at home' is not entirely practical and although we're all guilty of it I don't think more people should be encouraged to use disabled toilets if they don't need to

[Denver]

It will happen if people campaign for it and generationally it becomes a more socially acceptable idea. Again, I'm sure many people thought desegregation in the US would never happen but it did. I have every belief that in fifty years time this won't be the issue it is now

'Go at home' is not entirely practical and although we're all guilty of it I don't think more people should be encouraged to use disabled toilets if they don't need to

Who is going to campaign for it? most people actually dont kick up a fuss about this trans-gendered in a bathroom

[Jack_]

Are you sure about that? Have you seen the reaction in the States about this issue? The protests? No?

It will happen, just not anytime soon. But I don't know why I'm bothering to reply because three posts down the line you'll be calling me daffodil and saying you're done so

[Denver]

The UK is a more understanding country then the USA

[Jack_]

Well, I wouldn't go too far on that but I guess to an extent we finally agree?

[Denver]

I mean this country has done **** loads for the LGBT community

[Jack_]

In some ways, yes

[user104658]

can people get real and realise that 3 types of toilets will never happen DUE TO COST AND SPACE

:facepalm:
Neither cost nor space are particularly relevant when considering NEW establishments though. It's very rare for toilets to be so small that they couldn't be divided again by a third option. It's barely more than the addition of a few partition walls.

In some cases it would honestly be a cheaper option. My shop for example has a men's with two cubicles plus three urinals, an individual ladies, and an individual disabled. A waste of space AND money as really all we need is the two individual ones. In fact half the time that's what IS used because the men's is perpetually out of order due to shoddy pipework... We just let the men use whichever of the ladies / disabled is available.

Thus far though, you've refused to comment on the idea of admitting that not all establishments can be required to change immediately, but that new designs should change going forward. I suspect like Jack, to be honest, that you still wouldn't like that and your talk of cost and space is a smoke screen for just straight up not wanting it to happen...

Also interesting to this topic: even though out ladies is simply ONE toilet plus sink behind one locking door... I have previously had to stick a big handwritten sign simply saying "toilet!" over the ladies toilet sign, because some of the men "aren't going to use the ladies, are ye joking???" :facepalm:. Cover up the little picture of a stick person in a dress and they're suddenly fine with it. Bizarre.

[Vicky.]

I don't think it would open the can of worms you think it would. Put it this way, there is no reason why at this moment a 'biological' female (for arguments sake we'll say in the possession of breasts and a vagina) who identifies as a female but has a beard and short hair (i.e. is 'unfeminine' in their appearance) couldn't and wouldn't enter a woman's toilet. What happens then? If we separate toilets on sex, the only way it could be policed would be through mandatory and intrusive inspection upon entry.
Well it doesn't need to be policed though? It hasn't been policed ever and oddly enough trans people have been using their preferred sex areas with no/little fuss? The honour system works pretty well IMO. Granted I only know 2 trans women, but they are both fine with the way things are now...one 'passes' easily, the other not so much in proper lighting anyway, but she has still never ever been challenged in the ladies...I know a load of lesbians also who are extremely butch and have never had issues.

For anyone wodnering how I know so many LGBT people...when I go out we go to the 'pink triangle' which is the gay bars and such :p
I don't really get this 'we would have to check for vaginas' thing if I am honest. Its fairly easy to tell males from females. And if it isn't, then the person obviously 'passes'.



Correct, but is it overwhelmingly committed in public toilets by strangers? I'm guessing not. I don't think there is data on this. Also currently the data would say n o I expect. But...opening areas to everyone would change the data. There are many examples of places in America who have allowed the 'whatever sex you feel you are' and because of this, pervs HAVE taken advantage. There is actually a site that lists all of these instances and there are over a hundred in a short space of time. This tells me that yes, this would be a problem if it happened here.



I don't particularly want to get into this now but I'm actually writing an entire chapter of my dissertation on this, one I only began after having discovered through reading that it's not actually as unproblematic as one might assume (I used to hold the same position that you did up until a couple of months ago). So come back to me in three months, and I should hopefully be able to go into this a bit deeper :laugh: I don't really understand this part. Are you going into how 'sex' is a social construct in your dissertation? if so, I know this is personal but when you have done it, could I read it? As I honestly cannot see this at all. Humans are a sexually dimorphic species. Yes you get 'mistakes' of nature which results in some people being intersex. But this does not mean there are more than 2 sexes. Anymore than the fact that some people are born without arms and legs does not mean that human beings do not as a species have 2 arms and 2 legs. Natures 'mistakes' do not change reality. All in my opinion of course. I am open to change too as always but as it stands, I do not believe sex is a social construct. And I don't believe anyone can ever change sex. However I do believe 'gender' is a social construct. And that gender should be abolished completely as this would end so many problems. I kind of feel that for example, a male who likes wearing dresses feels he HAS to say he is trans to be accepted...which is ****ing wrong. If we get rid of the silly 'boys must do X and girls must do X' 'rules' that society has then I think we would see a decline in the amount of people who are 'trans' and it would just go back to those who have sex dysphoria being trans...as trans really is all about the dysphoria and again, I do not understand those who say it is not.



Again, would rather have this discussion in a couple of months but on the slightly related issue of sexuality, demarcating one's sexual desires into neat little categories is also problematic and not as inherent as you might think. The work of Michel Foucault points to how discourses around sex brought into being the identity categories we work with today.
I would disagree with this tbh. Most people know for sure if they are gay, straight or bi. Most gay men would be disgusted at the thought of shagging a female person, even if they 'presented' male and vice versa. Lesbians do not do penis anymore than gay men perform cunnilingus. Even bi people my not be impressed by someone who looks female but has a dick. Of course pansexuals are perfectly fine with anyone (within their tastes...not meaning they would shag ANYTHING :laugh: ) but generally..I do think sexuality is pretty simple. Either you are attracted to the opposite sex, the same sex, or both. Unless I have misunderstood what you are saying here...

[Vicky.]

It will happen if people campaign for it and generationally it becomes a more socially acceptable idea. Again, I'm sure many people thought desegregation in the US would never happen but it did. I have every belief that in fifty years time this won't be the issue it is now

'Go at home' is not entirely practical and although we're all guilty of it I don't think more people should be encouraged to use disabled toilets if they don't need to

The problem here is, the most vocal transactivists do NOT want unisex facilities. They want into the female areas. Unisex is not what they campaign for, or want. One might ask, why? Unisex (where possible) is the obvious solution, and these people have a very loud voice, so why not campaign for something that will help them, whilst making others feel more comfortable also? Sometimes it really seems like they (transactivists, not transgender people) just want to make others feel uncomfortable and take away their rights to privacy from males...rather than want, as they claim 'somewhere to pee'

[VanessaFeltz.]

can people get real and realise that 3 types of toilets will never happen DUE TO COST AND SPACE

:facepalm:

So what are transgendered people supposed to do? Go to a bathroom where they dont belong and be bullied in? Not pee? Or as some would say dont change sexes?

I have read some comments about this issue saying "be happy with the sex you born in, deal with it" We all need to listen other people more and try to understand their problems, thats why we are all living together. Just because you dont understand, it is not your problem or you feel secure in your sex doesnt mean you should just wait other people to apply for your way of living.

Also LT if it does cost more money.. So be it. Money is just a stupid piece of paper that humanity created. It has no values without human lifes.

[Vicky.]

Gender is a social construct though. And sexed areas are separated by...sex. Sex is unchangeable, though science has made it possible to imitate the opposite sex, which has made a lot of people happy. If you 'pass' or could pass, fine. If not, then its kinda unfortunate but these areas are still separated by sex, for now anyway. Once 'gender' trumps sex, both male and female areas will be open to literally anyone. As 'gender' is all in someones head...so...anyone could be male or female whenever they chose to be. I may use this to escape the queues in the womens, though not too sure I could put up with the smell from the urinals...

[VanessaFeltz.]

Gender is a social construct though. And sexed areas are separated by...sex. Sex is unchangeable, though science has made it possible to imitate the opposite sex, which has made a lot of people happy. If you 'pass' or could pass, fine. If not, then its kinda unfortunate but these areas are still separated by sex, for now anyway. Once 'gender' trumps sex, both male and female areas will be open to literally anyone. As 'gender' is all in someones head...so...anyone could be male or female whenever they chose to be. I may use this to escape the queues in the womens, though not too sure I could put up with the smell from the urinals...

i mixed it up , now i fixed it

[Vicky.]

The 'bullied in the mens room' argument doesn't really hold up either, as there have been no attacks on transgender people in mens toilets (there ARE reports of transgender people attacking others in the bathroom of their 'preferred sex' though), none on record anyway. On the other hand there are hoards of reports about gay men being beaten up in loos. Does this mean gay men should be in the womens also as they are bullied and in danger?

Or is the answer to tackle toxic masculinity and the male violence, that everyone seems to be scared of...

People say 'oh, if a transwoman attacks you in the womens there are laws to protect you' and such. But equally, this is true the opposite way. If a transwoman was attacked in the mens, there are the same laws that could be used. So I kinda...don't get it. Though I do understand why not many people like to use the mens...given the amount of violence committed by males for random reasons.

[VanessaFeltz.]

Just because there hasnt been reported many crimes so far that doesnt mean there wont be/there havent been. Transgendered people are VERY vunerable in this type of crimes.

Everyone should get educated better. It breaks my heart to hear that amount of bullying taking place not just for lgbt but for everyone they dont see "fitting in" in schools. Headmasters/teachers should not be afraid and they should take action and punish the violent people harshly.

[Denver]

^^^^^ It is not really a problem in the UK

[Northern Monkey]

Gender is a social construct though. And sexed areas are separated by...sex. Sex is unchangeable, though science has made it possible to imitate the opposite sex, which has made a lot of people happy. If you 'pass' or could pass, fine. If not, then its kinda unfortunate but these areas are still separated by sex, for now anyway. Once 'gender' trumps sex, both male and female areas will be open to literally anyone. As 'gender' is all in someones head...so...anyone could be male or female whenever they chose to be. I may use this to escape the queues in the womens, though not too sure I could put up with the smell from the urinals...

Totally agree.You can't change sex.'Gender' seems to be a state of mind but that doesn't and can't effect sex.That is unchangable no matter how many ops are carried out.
The seperation of toilets is based on sex.
I've been to clubs with unisex toilets and it didn't really bother me except the lack of urinals and having to lift the pissy seat up to take a pee.
I don't think the privacy thing bothers men tbh.I been in nightclubs where women would run in and look at your dick while your taking a piss and sometimes try and grab it i was'nt bothered.
However women need their space and womens rights should'nt be violated just to please an extremely small section of society.

[Brillopad]

Totally agree.You can't change sex.'Gender' seems to be a state of mind but that doesn't and can't effect sex.That is unchangable no matter how many ops are carried out.
The seperation of toilets is based on sex.
I've been to clubs with unisex toilets and it didn't really bother me except the lack of urinals and having to lift the pissy seat up to take a pee.
I don't think the privacy thing bothers men tbh.I been in nightclubs where women would run in and look at your dick while your taking a piss and sometimes try and grab it i was'nt bothered.
However women need their space and womens rights should'nt be violated just to please an extremely small section of society.

Makes sense why those type of women may be happy for unisex bathrooms, I think most of the rest are not though. Also women generally don't want to use 'pissy' seats. Yuk!

Men don't have to sit down, women do - it's unfair to expect women to put up with that. I also agree that all women should not effectively be penalised, in more ways than one, to please as you say a very small section of society.

[Vicky.]

Totally agree.You can't change sex.'Gender' seems to be a state of mind but that doesn't and can't effect sex.That is unchangable no matter how many ops are carried out.
The seperation of toilets is based on sex.
I've been to clubs with unisex toilets and it didn't really bother me except the lack of urinals and having to lift the pissy seat up to take a pee.
I don't think the privacy thing bothers men tbh.I been in nightclubs where women would run in and look at your dick while your taking a piss and sometimes try and grab it i was'nt bothered.
However women need their space and womens rights should'nt be violated just to please an extremely small section of society.

Most of the clubs I go to have...unofficial unisex facilities. meaning they have male and female but anyone uses either. Its not uncommon to see a couple of gay guys in the womens doing their makeup in the mirror or something (as mens don't have a big mirror apparently...which is odd)

Everyone accepts this as...well in the gay clubs and that you are in 'their territory'

Unisex has never ever bothered me (though I wouldn't feel comfortable changing clothes infront of men. But I don't feel comfortable changing infront of other women either tbh). However, this may well be because I have had in my life, no reason to fear men. I have been lucky enough to have never been attacked by a male, sexually or otherwise. A hell of a lot of women are NOT as lucky as I have been, and I do think they should be considered in all of this.

[Jamie89]

For anyone wodnering how I know so many LGBT people...when I go out we go to the 'pink triangle' which is the gay bars and such :p

In Newcastle? Legit my favourite place, I used to go there all the time when I started drinking before I moved away :flutter:

[Vicky.]

In Newcastle? Legit my favourite place, I used to go there all the time when I started drinking before I moved away :flutter:

Indeed. I know its an absolute dump but I LOVE 'the bank'. It stinks, its always dirty, but the drag queens are mint and it just feels so...homely :laugh: We tend to sit in the beer garden bit mostly. My first date with my husband was actually in 'the dog' (which has sadly changed its name recently :( )

The eagle scares the **** out of me. I only went in there once, was told of the bondage room and glory holes, and then I noticed a USED CONDOM behind me on the seat so njust...nope. never been back :D

[Jamie89]

Indeed. I know its an absolute dump but I LOVE 'the bank'. It stinks, its always dirty, but the drag queens are mint and it just feels so...homely :laugh: We tend to sit in the beer garden bit mostly. My first date with my husband was actually in 'the dog' (which has sadly changed its name recently :( )

The eagle scares the **** out of me. I only went in there once, was told of the bondage room and glory holes, and then I noticed a USED CONDOM behind me on the seat so njust...nope. never been back :D

Lmao, ahh memories :laugh2: I lived in Manchester afterwards and Canal Street is amazing by comparison just because it's so much bigger and the places are so nice (mostly) but the pink triangle will always be my favourite because of the atmosphere, I think the people are generally so much friendlier as well (and just bias because it's where I'm from :flutter: )

[Jack_]

Well it doesn't need to be policed though? It hasn't been policed ever and oddly enough trans people have been using their preferred sex areas with no/little fuss? The honour system works pretty well IMO. Granted I only know 2 trans women, but they are both fine with the way things are now...one 'passes' easily, the other not so much in proper lighting anyway, but she has still never ever been challenged in the ladies...I know a load of lesbians also who are extremely butch and have never had issues.

Well that is true, but my point was that as it is we don't - practically speaking at least - separate toilets by sex since the only way anyone self identifies and becomes intelligible to anyone else is through their gender presentation. Nobody knows the materiality of any strangers body until if and when you sleep with them. So thus, if a female who identifies as a woman but isn't stereotypically 'feminine' in appearance were in a woman's toilet - there's no reason why at the moment they wouldn't experience the questioning you mention.

I actually in a roundabout way think I'm agreeing with what you're saying, the campaigns that have brought this issue into public discourse are having the opposite effect in that they are making people realise that for decades they may have been sharing a toilet with somebody of the opposite sex.

I think what I'm trying to say is getting lost in translation cause it's confusing having to address all these different issues at once but as I said before the problem is and always will be the the assumption that a female body must feminine and a male one masculine.

I don't think there is data on this. Also currently the data would say n o I expect. But...opening areas to everyone would change the data. There are many examples of places in America who have allowed the 'whatever sex you feel you are' and because of this, pervs HAVE taken advantage. There is actually a site that lists all of these instances and there are over a hundred in a short space of time. This tells me that yes, this would be a problem if it happened here.

It's still not an argument that makes any sense to me, because if someone is lurking about with the intention of attacking somebody, they'll do so whether or not a sign on a door allows them in. But if what you're saying is true, that's hence why I'm in favour of unisex toilets - because it would inevitably with more people make them safer.


I don't really understand this part. Are you going into how 'sex' is a social construct in your dissertation? if so, I know this is personal but when you have done it, could I read it? As I honestly cannot see this at all. Humans are a sexually dimorphic species. Yes you get 'mistakes' of nature which results in some people being intersex. But this does not mean there are more than 2 sexes. Anymore than the fact that some people are born without arms and legs does not mean that human beings do not as a species have 2 arms and 2 legs. Natures 'mistakes' do not change reality. All in my opinion of course. I am open to change too as always but as it stands, I do not believe sex is a social construct. And I don't believe anyone can ever change sex. However I do believe 'gender' is a social construct. And that gender should be abolished completely as this would end so many problems. I kind of feel that for example, a male who likes wearing dresses feels he HAS to say he is trans to be accepted...which is ****ing wrong. If we get rid of the silly 'boys must do X and girls must do X' 'rules' that society has then I think we would see a decline in the amount of people who are 'trans' and it would just go back to those who have sex dysphoria being trans...as trans really is all about the dysphoria and again, I do not understand those who say it is not.

You and anyone else is more than welcome to read it! Provided I'm happy with it of course....there's still a long way to go :laugh:

Basically, what you discover when you delve deeper into the work on gender is that a lot of scholars have contested the distinction we make between sex and gender in the first place. It's not so much that they outright reject biological differences between humans, more than it is only through the paradigm of gender that we come to understand sex as something presocial. The argument that it is a 'mistake of nature' can also only be understood through discourse also, for what is 'normal' and 'abnormal' in the first place and who determines this, how does it differ across time and space and what agendas are inherent within such discourse? It's a bit like how their are critical disability scholars who reject outright the demarcation we make between 'disabled' and 'able bodied', the former can only be understood in opposition to the latter and that in reality, our bodies and lives are far more complex than such simple divisions (I must point out this is an area of which I've done little reading on though).

Back to sex...you might be surprised to discover that the commonality of intersexuality is more than one might assume, and goes beyond that of genital ambiguity. Further, there have been and are cultures around the world that have not divided gender and indeed sex into a binary, and 'two spirit' people have lived quite happily in society.

I feel like it's better to read something first hand than a secondary account of it (especially from someone typing up a quick response on his phone) so the meaning of someone's work doesn't get conflated though, so I can provide you with some relevant reading in the meantime if you'd be interested.

I would disagree with this tbh. Most people know for sure if they are gay, straight or bi. Most gay men would be disgusted at the thought of shagging a female person, even if they 'presented' male and vice versa. Lesbians do not do penis anymore than gay men perform cunnilingus. Even bi people my not be impressed by someone who looks female but has a dick. Of course pansexuals are perfectly fine with anyone (within their tastes...not meaning they would shag ANYTHING :laugh: ) but generally..I do think sexuality is pretty simple. Either you are attracted to the opposite sex, the same sex, or both. Unless I have misunderstood what you are saying here...

I don't disagree that people generally do self identity their sexuality along binary lines, what I was referencing was the work of Michel Foucault, whose series of books The History of Sexuality sought to give a genealogical account of sexuality, and argue that far from the 17th/18th centuries being marked as an era of sexual repression (as conventional wisdom dictates), it actually saw a huge explosion of discourses around sex, through scientific investigation, confession, population management etc etc. It was through these discourses, like the pathologisation of homosexuality, that took sexual desire from being something that one did, to something one was. I would thoroughly recommend reading the first volume, it's not too long and is a fascinating account of how power really manifests itself in society. Here's some good quotes which basically sum up his argument:

Homosexuality appeared as one of the forms of sexuality when it was transposed from the practice of sodomy into a kind of interior androgyny, a hermaphroditism of the soul. The sodomite had been a temporary aberration; the homosexual was now a species.

The appearance in nineteenth-century psychiatry, jurisprudence, and literature of a whole series of discourses on the species and subspecies of homosexuality, inversion, pederasty, and "psychic hermaphroditism" made possible a strong advance of social controls into this area of "perversity"; but it also made possible the formation of a "reverse" discourse: homosexuality began to speak in its own behalf, to demand that its legitimacy or "naturality" be acknowledged, often in the same vocabulary, using the same categories by which it was medically disqualified.

[Vicky.]

. Nobody knows the materiality of any strangers body until if and when you sleep with them. So thus, if a female who identifies as a woman but isn't stereotypically 'feminine' in appearance were in a woman's toilet - there's no reason why at the moment they wouldn't experience the questioning you mention.


Snipping a bit as I am typing between being beat up with balloons by the kids :laugh:

This is where we seem to disagree. Even without 'feminine' or 'masculine' presentation, 99% of the time you can tell a male from a female. Facially even butch women look...female. males tend to have sharper cheekbones and all of the subtle little differences add up. I would say near 100% of the time I could tell a male from a female, on facial features, voice and body...not naked body, but just build. Its even more apparent in late transitioners. I mean, use Caitlyn Jenner as an example. Would ANYONE who did not know her story actually think she was a woman (meaning adult human female, not the circular meaning that seems to be given these days) from sight? Of course not, she is an obvious male bodied person. She may be a woman socially, but she is not and obviously has never been female. She is a male who likes to present in a feminine way. And she should be able to do that WITHOUT claiming womanhood. She should be able to be who she is without this trans business. I follow this guy on twitter, and this is how it should be...males being able to be themselves without claiming they are something they are not. He is amazing, and very brave for challenging peoples perceptions. https://twitter.com/streetvoiceuk

Infact I hadn't checked his feed today... 'Thirdly most men who claim to be transgender don't take hormones + are happy to use their penis for sex. In other words they are still male.' this is totally true. How on earth can someone claim they are a woman in this instance? These are the people causing the problems, not those with sex dysphoria...ad unfortunately they make up a very large percentage of the 'trans umbrella'. these would be the people who claim penises are female and that lesbians are transphobic for not sucking them off...

I also follow Miranda Yardley and her partner Helen who seem to be so...on point with everything. Both transwomen, neither claim to be 'female' and they describe themselves as a gay couple rather than claiming to be lesbians, as lesbians are female people. Like using female pronouns and 'presenting' as female...but accept that they aren't actually female.

Obviously if someone had started on hormones and such early in life, its very hard to tell. However, I actually totally disagree with using puberty blockers and hormones, especially given we don't know the full side effects of said treatment. I kind of feel its going to end up a bit like the lobotomy situation...where in 10/20 years time using cancer drugs to stop childrens puberty, then pumping them full of artificial hormones is looked upon as a...wtf were we thinking time.

[Vicky.]

I also challenge anyone to tell me the difference between Rachel Dolezal and 'transgender' people.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/feb/25/rachel-dolezal-not-going-stoop-apologise-grovel?CMP=share_btn_tw

Story if you didn't know^

In short, she claims she is 'trans-racial' and this is a massive problem apparently. I do not see the difference between claiming to be a different race, and claiming to be a different sex. Except claiming to be a different race, you aren't imposing yourself into areas you shouldn't be. Unless there are areas that I don't know about that are 'Africans only' or something that she was forcing her way into.

[Rogan Josh]

There is another problem, if you install a third toilet for transgender people alone, you could, in theory, be accused of discriminating, by forcing transgender people to use a transgender only toilet. There is no easy answer with this issue.

[Vicky.]

Ugh. Just been to the shop and I totally understand why kids feel the need to say they are the opposite sex. Prime placing on the chocolate...pink kinder eggs with barbie on them with a sign saying 'for girls' and superhero blue ones 'for boys'. **** that. Everything is too gendered.

[Vicky.]

There is another problem, if you install a third toilet for transgender people alone, you could, in theory, be accused of discriminating, by forcing transgender people to use a transgender only toilet. There is no easy answer with this issue.

I don't see how that would be a problem? Toilets are seperated by sex. If people do not wish to use the toilet for their sex for whatever reason, then a further option is available. I don't see how it would be discriminating?

[Rogan Josh]

I don't see how that would be a problem? Toilets are seperated by sex. If people do not wish to use the toilet for their sex for whatever reason, then a further option is available. I don't see how it would be discriminating?

I didn't say it was discriminating, Vicky, what I said was you could be accused of discriminating and who knows? You maybe could?

[Vicky.]

I didn't say it was discriminating, Vicky, what I said was you could be accused of discriminating and who knows? You maybe could?

Oh right I get you. These days you seem to be accused of discriminating no matter what you do tbh...