Men allowed into the women's changing area. Bathroom debate.

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

A) People have been using the bathroom of their identified gender/gender they present as all of this time with no issue. Find me some evidence that there has been any problems with this. An instance of a person misrepresenting their gender to be a peeping tom.
B) It's still illegal to peep on people in the bathrooms. A woman can peep on another woman, it's a crime. You're worried about your kids? Maybe we should have segregated bathrooms for the priests because you do know that a person who's the same gender as your kid can molest your kid right?
C) Unless you're carding everyone who enters a bathroom what's to stop me claiming I'm a trans man? I'm 6'1" with a long beard. If I wanted to claim to be a transgendered woman I'd need to put some effort in, these bathroom bills are actually the laws that would make it easier for people who look like me to the wrong bathroom.

D) The op's entire thesis is we already discriminate so we should just accept this discrimination. That doesn't work. Let's just use that argument for racially segregated bathrooms shall we? Why not we have to just accept that we already discriminate.

A) the world is changing, 100 years ago transgender wasn't a thing, now it is ... especially with the snowfake squad.

C) Read B. It's pretty obvious when a person is trying to perv and yoiu could make it harder to perv by building the walls higher and lower.

Trans people existed for the entirety of human history, it's only in the last 100 years that being trans has been treated like a crime. The snowflake squad is something that's an exceptional case, only used seriously to demonize trans people for a teeny-tiny minority of liars amongst us.

 

[omega 616]

A) People have been using the bathroom of their identified gender/gender they present as all of this time with no issue. Find me some evidence that there has been any problems with this. An instance of a person misrepresenting their gender to be a peeping tom.
B) It's still illegal to peep on people in the bathrooms. A woman can peep on another woman, it's a crime. You're worried about your kids? Maybe we should have segregated bathrooms for the priests because you do know that a person who's the same gender as your kid can molest your kid right?
C) Unless you're carding everyone who enters a bathroom what's to stop me claiming I'm a trans man? I'm 6'1" with a long beard. If I wanted to claim to be a transgendered woman I'd need to put some effort in, these bathroom bills are actually the laws that would make it easier for people who look like me to the wrong bathroom.

D) The op's entire thesis is we already discriminate so we should just accept this discrimination. That doesn't work. Let's just use that argument for racially segregated bathrooms shall we? Why not we have to just accept that we already discriminate.

A) the world is changing, 100 years ago transgender wasn't a thing, now it is ... especially with the snowfake squad.

C) Read B. It's pretty obvious when a person is trying to perv and yoiu could make it harder to perv by building the walls higher and lower.

Trans people existed for the entirety of human history, it's only in the last 100 years that being trans has been treated like a crime. The snowflake squad is something that's an exceptional case, only used seriously to demonize trans people for a teeny-tiny minority of liars amongst us.

I somehow doubt that 2,000 years ago people where chopping penises off and inverting them into vagina's and somehow managing to turn a vagina into a penis (which to me is still fucking magic!) something tells me, that them kinds of people got killed sharpish.

As for snowfakes (I intentionally missed the L), I was talking about those who go on about gender fluid, none binary blah blah blah. I believe that these people are been giving an inch and running a mile ... making up new and even more bizarre categories to be in to be hipsters or just be the most unique snowflake that ever existed.

 

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

I somehow doubt that 2,000 years ago people where chopping penises off and inverting them into vagina's and somehow managing to turn a vagina into a penis (which to me is still fucking magic!) something tells me, that them kinds of people got killed sharpish.

As for snowfakes (I intentionally missed the L), I was talking about those who go on about gender fluid, none binary blah blah blah. I believe that these people are been giving an inch and running a mile ... making up new and even more bizarre categories to be in to be hipsters or just be the most unique snowflake that ever existed.

2,000 years ago wasn't that long ago, in fact that was a freaking golden age of civilization before the dark ages kicked in. All through the 6,000-10,000 years of recorded human history people have lived and functioned members of the opposite gender. See traditions like lady-boys in Thailand, India's Hijra, and the confirmed bachelors of Albania for a few examples of that.

Edit: Being transgender is more than a surgery and done, that's my point.

As for gender fluid, gender queer, non-binary, and gender non-conforming people... They actually exist, further people who really have those identities have a far harder time of it than binary trans folk. They literally fit nowhere in society and are much more visible than binary trans people. They get all the worst treatment the trans community has and get none of the support binary trans people get. Sure a few people say they're NB to seem cool, but there are a lot fewer of them than actual GNC trans people who live in a hellish state where transition is pushed on them constantly, but it won't help them.

 

[Namehere]

Cross dressing was a massive thing in the past. Particularly in the navy. Some of the piracy trials man... God damn funny when a pirate crew is captured and the women on the crew - impersonating men - get themselves knocked up to avoid dying the way the men on the crew did. Seriously. There's a massive history of cross dressing for women. Not so sure how that works with men. And while one might argue that cross dressing is hardly 'transgender' I would submit that in that period and all those preceding it and many after it was the only means of being 'transgender' available to people.

Any way OT: for those demanding evidence that rules have been abused in any way by any group... it will be found. It's a flawed argument. There is no ethnic group on the planet that doesn't have a member who is guilty of every crime on the books at some point, there are few lifestyle groups that don't share the same issues. Whether you gauge gender, religion, ethnicity or affiliation, by and large there is always at least one bad apple in the bunch. If that was enough to dictate how we shape our laws and customs we'd all basically have to kill ourselves to ensure the world was safe.

I figure mature adults ought to be able to manage desegregated bathrooms. Things get questionable in schools before University/Collage age, where again I'm guessing principally adult students. Concerned parents are naturally going to concern. There's no helping that.

As for the bathroom issue with transgender people specifically? Go where you identify as, I say. Why the hell not? You transitioned right? From male to female? Why the hell would you be in the men's room? Female to male? Why would you be in the women's room? It's silly.

 

[omega 616]

I somehow doubt that 2,000 years ago people where chopping penises off and inverting them into vagina's and somehow managing to turn a vagina into a penis (which to me is still fucking magic!) something tells me, that them kinds of people got killed sharpish.

As for snowfakes (I intentionally missed the L), I was talking about those who go on about gender fluid, none binary blah blah blah. I believe that these people are been giving an inch and running a mile ... making up new and even more bizarre categories to be in to be hipsters or just be the most unique snowflake that ever existed.

2,000 years ago wasn't that long ago, in fact that was a freaking golden age of civilization before the dark ages kicked in. All through the 6,000-10,000 years of recorded human history people have lived and functioned members of the opposite gender. See traditions like lady-boys in Thailand, India's Hijra, and the confirmed bachelors of Albania for a few examples of that.

As for gender fluid, gender queer, non-binary, and gender non-conforming people... They actually exist, further people who really have those identities have a far harder time of it than binary trans folk. They literally fit nowhere in society and are much more visible than binary trans people. They get all the worst treatment the trans community has and get none of the support binary trans people get. Sure a few people say they're NB to seem cool, but there are a lot fewer of them than actual GNC trans people who live in a hellish state where transition is pushed on them constantly, but it won't help them.

I know 2,000 years isn't that long ago but I didn't want to say 2 million. Was just a number picked out the air.

Yeah and we have drag queens but it's one thing to dress and act like the opposite gender but becoming the opposite gender is a recent thing (as a guess) since modern medicine has only recently got that advanced.

I was generalising a bit to be honest. The way I see it is, the vast majority of people are hetero, a certain percentage (lets say 20%) is gay, what percentage are trans? 5% of the population of the world is trans? By trans I mean some surgery, not drag queens or something.

So what is the percentage of the worlds population is gender fluid blah de blah? 0.001% and that probably covers most of the fakes. I Don't think it's something you need to really worry about, it would be nice to cater to every flavour of life but it's just not possible.

 

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

I somehow doubt that 2,000 years ago people where chopping penises off and inverting them into vagina's and somehow managing to turn a vagina into a penis (which to me is still fucking magic!) something tells me, that them kinds of people got killed sharpish.

As for snowfakes (I intentionally missed the L), I was talking about those who go on about gender fluid, none binary blah blah blah. I believe that these people are been giving an inch and running a mile ... making up new and even more bizarre categories to be in to be hipsters or just be the most unique snowflake that ever existed.

2,000 years ago wasn't that long ago, in fact that was a freaking golden age of civilization before the dark ages kicked in. All through the 6,000-10,000 years of recorded human history people have lived and functioned members of the opposite gender. See traditions like lady-boys in Thailand, India's Hijra, and the confirmed bachelors of Albania for a few examples of that.

As for gender fluid, gender queer, non-binary, and gender non-conforming people... They actually exist, further people who really have those identities have a far harder time of it than binary trans folk. They literally fit nowhere in society and are much more visible than binary trans people. They get all the worst treatment the trans community has and get none of the support binary trans people get. Sure a few people say they're NB to seem cool, but there are a lot fewer of them than actual GNC trans people who live in a hellish state where transition is pushed on them constantly, but it won't help them.

I know 2,000 years isn't that long ago but I didn't want to say 2 million. Was just a number picked out the air.

Yeah and we have drag queens but it's one thing to dress and act like the opposite gender but becoming the opposite gender is a recent thing (as a guess) since modern medicine has only recently got that advanced.

Well in a physical sense we're still not there. Inverting a penis and scrotum to construct an artificial vagina is pretty hollow comfort to trans women like me, who want to be able to give birth. The surgical procedure is recent, gender dysphoria is as old as we are as a species. There's a major difference between any amount of cross-dressing behavior and being some form of trans, like Two-Spirit, Hijra, Lady-Boys, confirmed bachelors, and so on. The crux of the matter is having a gender identity that does not match one's birth sex. Trans people existed before the surgery and some 60% to this day don't get the surgery for various reasons, ranging from inability to afford it, to just not seeking it, to the idea that it's too primitive a treatment.

I was generalising a bit to be honest. The way I see it is, the vast majority of people are hetero, a certain percentage (lets say 20%) is gay, what percentage are trans? 5% of the population of the world is trans? By trans I mean some surgery, not drag queens or something.

So what is the percentage of the worlds population is gender fluid blah de blah? 0.001% and that probably covers most of the fakes. I Don't think it's something you need to really worry about, it would be nice to cater to every flavour of life but it's just not possible.

About a third of the trans community in my experience is gender non-conforming, gender queer, gender fluid, or some other form of non-binary. The interesting thing is most GNC/NB folk default to using their birth sex's bathroom, if a single occupant gender neutral bathroom isn't available. So they're not even a factor in this controversy.

 

[happyninja42]

or I think we just need to admit that we discriminate, so either we don't discriminate at all or just accept that we will discriminate.

Just watched some Bill Maher and he was talking about what he calls boutique issues and considered the trans bathroom issue one of them, he said that he thinks people should be able to pee wherever they want but that it needs to be put on hold until the election is over.

This got me thinking about if that's the case then there should be no reason to have separate changing rooms.

The idea behind separate changing rooms is to make people comfortable and avoid any potential problems.

We see this as an acceptable level of discrimination, we know that most men won't cause problems but we disallow them because it makes women more comfortable and it drastically reduces the opportunity for men who will cause problems.

So who decided that Trans where exempt from this?

Not really sure if it does actually reduce the chance of a man doing something, as there is nothing stopping them from just coming in behind a woman. It's a freely swinging door, if they want in, they will come in. It's mostly just social agreement that we don't dip into the other gender's bathroom. Hell some facilities they don't even have a door, it's just a walk-in path. Any attacks that are theoretically being reduced, wouldn't be happening at peak traffic times anyway. They'd be happening at off hours, with minimal witnesses, and less chance of exposure. Which again, they could just do that anyway. So having a law for or against gender neutral bathrooms, I don't think will actually make any difference. A criminal is going to break the law no matter what, they aren't really going to worry about if they are violating some bathroom ordinance, when they have sexual assault and molestation/battery on their minds as the final goal. That's like saying someone who is planning on robbing a convenience store is less likely to do so if you make all the spots in front of the door Handicap Only. They're really not going to give a shit at that point.

OT: I have no issue with gender neutral bathrooms, as we have them at my job, and it causes zero issues. I think the biggest true resistance to this direction is social embarrassment. At least in the US, there is a lot of social shame/taboo about our bodily functions. Most people don't like to let the opposite sex know they poop and pee. So for a woman to have to sit down and drop a load, with all the associated sounds and smells, right next to some guy, she's going to be self-conscious about it. And vice versa. Guys will be reluctant to go in and take care of business, if they come out and see some woman standing there, looking at them, they will be embarrassed. It's a fairly stupid way to behave I think, but it is how a lot of Americans behave. This shows up a lot in our pop culture, in movies and tv shows and whatnot, where their is a phobia about acknowledging their bodily functions. And the amount of stupid things people will do, to hide the fact that they have to take a shit or whatever, around someone they are attracted to, or simply of the opposite sex.

To me, that, I think, is the main reason people are actually against the goal of same sex bathrooms. I'm sure some are genuinely worried about it for religious dogmatic reasons, but I honestly think they are simply a vocal minority on that side of things.

 

[Silent Protagonist]

I thought the thread was supposed to be about changing/locker rooms, so why is everyone talking about bathrooms?

I personally know three women who quit their gyms after they tried to do the progressive thing and make the changing rooms gender neutral. Two of them were even for it at first until they had to change with a bunch of teenage boys hanging around.

People already tend to be self-conscious and uncomfortable at the gym(and apparently in locker rooms in general according to this thread), it seems like it would be a bad business decision for gyms to mix the changing rooms. Given how rare transgenders are, it seems like their situations are something that a gym could deal with more economically on a case by case basis.

 

[happyninja42]

I thought the thread was supposed to be about changing/locker rooms, so why is everyone talking about bathrooms?

I'm going to take a stab in the dark here and say it's because the OP has the phrase "Bathroom Debate" in the subject title. So you know...that might be a clue.

 

[WolfThomas]

So 3 seconds to shut a door, that you might actually feel comfy not shutting and to lift a lid/seat ... well that's like arguing to say u instead you 'cos it's quicker.

Saves water? Fair play but I've never been convinced water is "used up", is cheaper would be a better argument 'cos you have to pay for water usage.

Can't argue with the rest of it, I've just never been a fan of standing shoulder to shoulder having a piss with other guys.

I'll admit the timing is the weakest reason. You would have to shut the door in a unisex bathroom, though. Though depending on the set up you might have to do the same in the urinal room. In a normal not busy bathroom those seconds don't matter. In a half time of a sporting event on the other hand. They add up.

I agree. Water isn't really used up. But most of society is stupid and doesn't like the idea of recycled drinking water. So for now it is. In Australia most urinals are chemically kept clean. Bricks and what not. You're right it does save a venue water costs as well. I didn't think about it.

That last point is fair enough. And no one is forcing you to do so. But some people aren't that concerned and would like to urinate quickly. Plus if three people are using the urinal instead of the cubicles. It's more likely one will be free for you.

I thought the thread was supposed to be about changing/locker rooms, so why is everyone talking about bathrooms?

I personally know three women who quit their gyms after they tried to do the progressive thing and make the changing rooms gender neutral. Two of them were even for it at first until they had to change with a bunch of teenage boys hanging around.

People already tend to be self-conscious and uncomfortable at the gym(and apparently in locker rooms in general according to this thread), it seems like it would be a bad business decision for gyms to mix the changing rooms. Given how rare transgenders are, it seems like their situations are something that a gym could deal with more economically on a case by case basis.

I think this would be easily fixed with changing cubicles. A little room with some pegs and a bench. That would be unisex. With larger ones for families or disabled people.

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

I'll admit the timing is the weakest reason. You would have to shut the door in a unisex bathroom, though. Though depending on the set up you might have to do the same in the urinal room. In a normal not busy bathroom those seconds don't matter. In a half time of a sporting event on the other hand. They add up.

I agree. Water isn't really used up. But most of society is stupid and doesn't like the idea of recycled drinking water. So for now it is. In Australia most urinals are chemically kept clean. Bricks and what not. You're right it does save a venue water costs as well. I didn't think about it.

That last point is fair enough. And no one is forcing you to do so. But some people aren't that concerned and would like to urinate quickly. Plus if three people are using the urinal instead of the cubicles. It's more likely one will be free for you.

I'd argue cubicles are quicker if their space is efficiently used. Because even after I was taking diuretics a lot of times I maximised my bodily efficiency to take a number two at the same time. Time is money, why waste it on unnecessary time spent in waste removal? So let's say if every 4 times you go to the toilet, you also need to do additional waste removal of a different nature ... so I would say a shitload of urinals in the men's room if in a bar, club or pub ... but the ratio should shift in other places, for instance at a workplace where you have likely consumed more food to deal with greater exertion at work and hopefully not consuming as much alcohol.

This is especially true if there are limited use toilets. Like a toilet that services only two or three floors in an office building.

Hrm ... I feel like I wasted brain cells thinking of specific ratios of cubicles to urinals in various settings. Though I do remember there was a section in a business help guide that talked about bathrooms extensively and how many of what you should have if you expect to cater for X amount of people at one time, what type of establishment, etc. If you have drunk guys lining up for a bathroom for ages just to use the urinals, it will likely colour their perception of how much fun they had ... so it works out in your favour if you can maximise toilet efficiency in any venue.

Plus the number of times I caught people fucking in cubicles... apparently leaving and going somewhere else didn't factor into their decision-making process.

(edit)Oh, and before people start ... I wasn't spying on them ... it was my joint and 'no fucking in the premises' is a pretty common rule of entry.

A: You're tying up bathroom space.
B: It's a really common way cubicle doors get broken.

 

[WolfThomas]

I'd argue cubicles are quicker if their space is efficiently used. Because even after I was taking diuretics a lot of times I maximised my bodily efficiency to take a number two at the same time. Time is money, why waste it on unnecessary time spent in waste removal? So let's say if every 4 times you go to the toilet, you also need to do additional waste removal of a different nature ... so I would say a shitload of urinals in the men's room if in a bar, club or pub ... but the ratio should shift in other places, for instance at a workplace where you have likely consumed more food to deal with greater exertion at work and hopefully not consuming as much alcohol.

This is especially true if there are limited use toilets. Like a toilet that services only two or three floors in an office building.

Hrm ... I feel like I wasted brain cells thinking of specific ratios of cubicles to urinals in various settings. Though I do remember there was a section in a business help guide that talked about bathrooms extensively and how many of what you should have if you expect to cater for X amount of people at one time, what type of establishment, etc. If you have drunk guys lining up for a bathroom for ages just to use the urinals, it will likely colour their perception of how much fun they had ... so it works out in your favour if you can maximise toilet efficiency in any venue.

Plus the number of times I caught people fucking in cubicles... apparently leaving and going somewhere else didn't factor into their decision-making process.

(edit)Oh, and before people start ... I wasn't spying on them ... it was my joint and 'no fucking in the premises' is a pretty common rule of entry.

A: You're tying up bathroom space.
B: It's a really common way cubicle doors get broken.

I think in a workplace you don't really need cubicles urinals. Because people are using them at different times of the day. Oh there might be a bit more traffic around lunch but it's not like a pub where as you say people get annoyed if they're lining up to pee.

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

I think in a workplace you don't really need cubicles. Because people are using them at different times of the day. Oh there might be a bit more traffic around lunch but it's not like a pub where as you say people get annoyed if they're lining up.

Yeah, but office workplaces kind of have the problem of visibly inefficient daily rituals of its people. For a marginal increase in costs you consolidate more workspace, and stop the visibly inefficient queueing of people. It's one thing for workers to waste time at their desks... at least you can do some rounds and directly interact with them to keep them focussed. Plus it helps cultivate an image of thd compassionate leader. "Ready smiles, walks by your desk each morning, just yell if you need them..." type of relationship.

But when you have people routinely wasting 5-10 minutes to simply go to the toilet, that time lag goes higher than just that worker. It's all the other workers so caught over the day. It's the irritation they feel. It's the worker who cut their finger on an envelope. All those bits of minutiae are persistent stoppages that adds up. For the cost of a few extra thousand you might save money over a 5 year period.

Sometimes it's worth having a few more toilets than allow for visible queueing. After all... never know when you'll have to put an 'Out of Order' on one, also. Plus I like to think it helps maintain a suitable pace. Walk in, walk out ... less stresses, lesser disturbances on a worker's train of thought.

 

[WolfThomas]

Yeah, but office workplaces kind of have the problem of visibly inefficient daily rituals of its people. For a marginal increase in costs you consolidate more workspace, and stop the visibly inefficient queueing of people. It's one thing for workers to waste time at their desks... at least you can do some rounds and directly interact with them to keep them focussed. Plus it helps cultivate an image of thd compassionate leader. "Ready smiles, walks by your desk each morning, just yell if you need them..." type of relationship.

But when you have people routinely wasting 5-10 minutes to simply go to the toilet, that time lag goes higher than just that worker. It's all the other workers so caught over the day. It's the irritation they feel. It's the worker who cut their finger on an envelope. All those bits of minutiae are persistent stoppages that adds up. For the cost of a few extra thousand you might save money over a 5 year period.

Sometimes it's worth having a few more toilets than allow for visible queueing. After all... never know when you'll have to put an 'Out of Order' on one, also. Plus I like to think it helps maintain a suitable pace. Walk in, walk out ... less stresses, lesser disturbances on a worker's train of thought.

Sorry I mean urinals not cubicles. And I don't think office workers should be lining up. I agree that you need enough toilets to avoid all of that. Just that they don't need to be urinals in an office. And that the pressures on toilets in a workplace are different to a pub.

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

I think this whole issue is puritanical. Lets say dudes are getting off by hearing you pee, so...what. Is your purity damaged, your honor impuned? Aren't these issues where people nowadays say that it doesn't matter wether one is pure or has such types of honor.


If some gay dude is gettig his kicks by being in the same bathroom as I am, I don't mind. I don't feel victimised by his presumptive boner, nor creeped on. I don't see what the fuss is. I think eveyone needs to stop sending mixed messages about such matters of purity and whatnot and either be for freedom such that sexual things aren't seen as something that removes value from your person, or, get back in the victorian era puritan garb and separate boys and girls from all acts like in a muslim country.

And yes, if the issue is fear of sexual assaults, I am sure someone willing to do such a thing will not be swayed by the bathroom being women only. Entering a womens bahroom is so much lower on the scale than assault that one fine with assault won't even take notice of the bathroom infraction.

 

[RaikuFA]

#wejustneedtopee is the best hashtag I've ever read.

 

[DanielDI]

I stopped going to church when the church embraced sodomy. You people can have it! I'd rather stay home and have bible study with neighbors.