Does the right wing have a point(may upset people)

[Guest KathleenMarie27]

I have been reading many many things on many many things, the California bathroom bill is something that has been on my mind for a while there and I wonder if if conservatives dont have a point.

I firmly believe that a mtf or an ftm transgender person should be able to use the bathroom that that reflects who they are, and I know that in many areas this has been the way for years without incident.

Having said that I worry about our umbrella. The term transgender basically covers all no gender conforming people, this includes cross dressers, andros, gender queers etc. Please understand that I sympathize with anyone who lacks civil rights, I do however have a problem with men using womens restrooms and visa versa.

I do not mean to upset anyone, but I think that we as a community are to broad on what we seek. A crossdresser to me is not transgender. We need a third option here.

apologies to anyone I offend but this is how I feel and the battles we face are to great to have them derailed by those who to me are seeking thrills and not transition.

[Guest]

Hi Kathleen,

You're not alone. The fact that we are a gender spectrum not a clear binary makes any binary-sexed bathroom a conundrum for some people.

Unfortunately, the Right seems to add a huge paranoia spin to their arguments, imagining all sorts of indecency that may happen. To me, that's rather simple: make the laws against indecent behavior apply where they should. After all, a person's gotta go sometime, somewhere. And as long as they keep to their business at hand, what's the difference?

Love, Megan

[tracy_j]

Obviously the California Bathroom Bill is meaningless to me here and I don't know what it states but I must admit being male but androgyne means that I have little understanding of the issue unless I look from a ridgidly social viewpoint. I have recently noticed some females as well as the usual males use male bathroom facilities and I do admit I have no concerns. Personally I have no issues but I suspect the vast majority of females would be worried. I don't think it really needs to be a gender issue as such. My first (and every other) experience of unisex facilities has been good and seemed totally natural.

We are all human

Tracy x

[Drea]

Transgender does include CD so if one is fighting for transgender (the umbrella) one can't exclude such folks. Then again more and more all transgender (including CD) are viewed as just the same as transsexual.

Yes I agree with an issue there and it isn't just restrooms, but locker rooms and other places.

I have expressed need to have reasonable accommodation for those medically transitioning no different than anyone with a medical condition or handicap can expect reasonable accommodation.

But the push for legal protections which is often justified by medical need, all too often, while agreed to because of understanding that medical need, is pushed for with language so by to encompass any trans.

As a result you get laws so ill defined that get used by folks most wouldn't have considered as being protected.

I think this is intentional to stretch the laws to be overly broad and to the way that medical need is used to justify such that it is exploitive of those who are going thru the medical process of transition.

[Carolyn Marie]

I had grave doubts about AB 1266 when I read it. To this day I wish it had been written with more specific guidelines and protections, because the reaction from the right is exactly what I was afraid would happen. I am still worried that some school district in the state will rush forward without thinking through reasonable privacy protections for non-trans students.

I have learned some things since that have eased my concerns (thanks, Vicky!). One is that the legislative analysis that accompanies the bill (but which is not part of the law itself) discusses privacy issues and offers guidance. School district lawyers would be remiss in not reading those analyses. The second is that the state's interscholastic sports body has guidelines in place for TG athletes, and districts and coaches are expected to seek assistance when the issue comes up. The third is that the LA Unified School District, the second largest in the nation, has had an almost identical policy in place for years and has had not a single complaint or problem with it.

Those factors are not discussed much by the parties involved, pro or con. They are lost amid the hyperbole and hysteria over mythical student pranksters who would risk getting kicked out of school or sent to juvenile court to have some "fun" in the bathroom. We are all, according to the right wing media, just perverts in waiting for our big chance. Of course, those media types don't mention that statistically, a young person is far safer in the company of one of us evil transfolk, than they would be in the company of a random Catholic priest.

Legislation is rarely perfect, and perhaps the legislature will tweak this one eventually. In the meantime, I'm a lot less concerned than I was. And if some pranksters do their worst come next year and dress up in skirts just to peek at girls combing their hair in the restroom, I hope they get what's coming to them.

Carolyn Marie

[Drea]

The second is that the state's interscholastic sports body has guidelines in place for TG athletes, and districts and coaches are expected to seek assistance when the issue comes up.

A guideline is very different than a law. Guidelines are just that, a guide, and specific policies and allowances. Law means what the law says and as has been proven very often, the intent of a law has very little with the results and application of the law.

[Guest KathleenMarie27]

Drea, I consider my self intelligent, but your first post makes no sense, im not even sure what you were trying to say

[Guest Sarah Faith]

I agree with you Kathleen on many points. I think bathroom laws do need to be more specific to protect us from the harm non trans people claiming to be trans could cause. I know it's not going to be popular with some here but I definitely feel that one should at least have some kind of proof on their record that they are in transition from one gender to the other, and at the BARE minimum be presenting as the proper gender for the bathroom. I don't care if someone says its their right because they identify as trans.. If you walk into a womens bathroom dressed like a man and looking like a man there are going to be problems period. Personally since just after going full time I had been carrying a note from my Doctor with contact information for her saying that I was undergoing medical treatment from Male to Female and such, just in case I ever got asked for ID or something... Now that my ID has changed though I don't worry about it as much...

But these bathrooms laws do often tend to be too broad, but also don't forget the Transcommunity has a habit of defending the wrong people too like Coleen Francis who was pre-op and marched into a girls shower and had no problem showing off her male junk.. So it shouldn't be too shocking the umbrella for these laws is far far too broad.

[Drea]

Drea, I consider my self intelligent, but your first post makes no sense, im not even sure what you were trying to say

That's okay. In a nutshell I was saying the law was too broad, lacked definition, allows those who aren't dealing with a medical need, to use the law to their benefit in ways that cause harm to the specific sub-group's needs (the medical need) which was the biggest justification for the law in the first place and the needs that are most widely understood by the general non-trans population.

[Guest lostflower]

Your point is well made but simply if the other sections of Transgender can be exempted from protections what stops a person from challenging someone on whether they're a transwoman or a crossdresser it just lets another kind of discrimination in. As much as I wish we could educate certain members of the T community about when to pick there battles it's all or nothing because it has to be that and because it's the right wing point of view so I'm against it I'm a lefty so lefty in fact most Americans would call me a Communist (I'm actually a Socialist Anarchist but that's just a detail)

Hannah

[Guest Sarah Faith]

Your point is well made but simply if the other sections of Transgender can be exempted from protections what stops a person from challenging someone on whether they're a transwoman or a crossdresser it just lets another kind of discrimination in. As much as I wish we could educate certain members of the T community about when to pick there battles it's all or nothing because it has to be that and because it's the right wing point of view so I'm against it I'm a lefty so lefty in fact most Americans would call me a Communist (I'm actually a Socialist Anarchist but that's just a detail)

Hannah

What stops some non-trans dude from walking into the womens bathroom and then saying it's okay because he identifies as a woman? I'm sorry but if some guy walks into the bathroom my first thought and probably most cis-womens first thought is NOT going to be "Oh that person identifies as a woman!". Most transwomen have enough common sense to be presenting as a woman when going to the womens room, so why some of the broad rules that so many bathroom laws seem to push?

[Guest KathleenMarie27]

That entails that we all agree on what constitutes being transgender. The andro has no skin in the game because they identify with neither so the bathroom they have been using since birth poses no issue, a cross dresser to me is a person living out a fantasy for that short lenghth of time that they are dressed, afterword they return to the person they were before. Im not up to date on what a genderqueer person is so I dont no if this is an issue for them or not.

I say the right wing has a point because of the huge umbrella transgenderism encompasses. While I realize there have been bills like this for a long time, it gives me pause, I have a 12 yo daughter and I do not want a man living out a sexual fantasy in the bathroom with her.

[Guest KathleenMarie27]

Drea thank you for the clarification.

[Guest KimberlyF]

One way or another people are going to be discriminated against in the state. It all comes down to who has the most pull.

[Carolyn Marie]

While I realize there have been bills like this for a long time, it gives me pause, I have a 12 yo daughter and I do not want a man living out a sexual fantasy in the bathroom with her.

Kathleen, that argument repeats the straw man that the right has repeatedly used. First, in what restroom can anyone, male or female, see children or adults in the buff, or doing anything other than washing their hands or combing their hair? Second, if a man did such a thing, there are laws on the books that would quickly put such a person in prison for a long time. A TG rights bill isn't going to let that person off the legal hook. Third, other than Coleen what's-her-face, when has it ever happened, anywhere, involving a real or alleged transperson?

If a man wanted to prey on children, he wouldn't need a TG rights bill to give him cover, and it wouldn't in any case. Sure, anything is possible. The best solution would be to home school ones children. The restroom access portion of AB 1266 was never an issue for me.

Carolyn Marie

[Guest Sarah Faith]

While I realize there have been bills like this for a long time, it gives me pause, I have a 12 yo daughter and I do not want a man living out a sexual fantasy in the bathroom with her.

Kathleen, that argument repeats the straw man that the right has repeatedly used. First, in what restroom can anyone, male or female, see children or adults in the buff, or doing anything other than washing their hands or combing their hair? Second, if a man did such a thing, there are laws on the books that would quickly put such a person in prison for a long time. A TG rights bill isn't going to let that person off the legal hook. Third, other than Coleen what's-her-face, when has it ever happened, anywhere, involving a real or alleged transperson?

If a man wanted to prey on children, he wouldn't need a TG rights bill to give him cover, and it wouldn't in any case. Sure, anything is possible. The best solution would be to home school ones children. The restroom access portion of AB 1266 was never an issue for me.

Carolyn Marie

Be that as it may, if the bathroom access is based entirely on a persons claimed gender identity then you are inviting trouble. Im not going to give someone who looks male, and is dressed male the benefit of the doubt in the womens restroom. There does need to be a certain line, because no matter how much you want to think the best of people there are always going to be the ones who will take advantage of the lax rules such as Coleen Francis. You wanted an example with the exception of the one well known example.

You can't sit here and say it's never happened and unlikely to happen, it has happened it will happen again and it will always make the rest of us look like perverts. I'm not saying we need to check peoples papers for entering the bathroom, but I sure don't think someone should get a pass for acting like a creep simply because they go "Oh but Im expressing my gender identity!".

[Carolyn Marie]

I would not object if a restroom access bill required that the person claiming to be transgender presents as the appropriate gender. The problem becomes, who defines "appropriate gender presentation" and does it then leave it up to interpretation? Is it going to be long hair (mine is short), makeup (male Goths wear makeup) or attire (I'm almost always in slacks or jeans)? How detailed should the law be? Shall we leave it to a store owner or a police officer to determine what is "appropriate presentation?"

I don't have answers to those questions. Anyone want to take a stab at it?

I will leave it at this; I will fight tooth and nail against any bill that would require me to carry a doctor's note to enter a woman's restroom, unless every woman was required to carry a similar note.

Carolyn Marie

[Guest KathleenMarie27]

Ok let me make my opinion clear on this, the only trans person that should be in the womens loo is a mtf that has been on hormones and is in transition. Same goes for the mens, other then that you either need to find a family restroom or use the one you have used since you were a kid, anyone who is not one of these 2 people has no buisness in the restroom of another sex. Look im trans, I know this must sound odd coming from a trans person, being trans does not meam I lose my common sense.

[Guest KathleenMarie27]

I would not object if a restroom access bill required that the person claiming to be transgender presents as the appropriate gender. The problem becomes, who defines "appropriate gender presentation" and does it then leave it up to interpretation? Is it going to be long hair (mine is short), makeup (male Goths wear makeup) or attire (I'm almost always in slacks or jeans)? How detailed should the law be? Shall we leave it to a store owner or a police officer to determine what is "appropriate presentation?"

I don't have answers to those questions. Anyone want to take a stab at it?

The sign says women or men right, its really not difficult to tell the two apart

[Guest EvaO]

Okay, here’s my problem with this: the fear is that this law will allow any man to enter a woman’s bathroom and potentially rape all of the women, right? Some male pervert will go inside the lady’s room and say, “I identify as a woman.” and then start getting his rocks off or molesting women in the bathroom. But there are several problems I find with this theory and here’s why I think it’s irrational:

This first one is that women are at risk of being sexually attacked by other women in bathrooms – I’m not just talking about what happens in prison, it happens outside of prison too. You can read more about it here:

http://www.ourbodiesourselves.org/book/companion.asp?id=8&compID=95

http://www.upne.com/1555535283.html

The idea that the phallus is a symbol of rape and violence is what has also prevented trans women from unjustly participating in music festivals in Michigan and women-only spaces for too long.

Secondly, what about sexual assault against male children in men’s restrooms? What about sexual assault against other men? My point is that sexual assault is sexual assault. My personal opinion: If I have a daughter or a son, I am not going to let him/her go into the restroom by him/herself, regardless of whether it’s the lady’s room or the men’s room. You darn-well better be sure I am going to keep my eyes on my child at ALL times and not trust anyone, regardless of whether they are a man, a woman or anything else in between.

Thirdly, what exactly constitutes as having transitioned or “presenting as a woman.” I mean, don’t we all have different ideas about what makes a man and what makes a woman? The standard way of determining was genitals – if you had an outie, you were a man; if you had an innie, you were a woman; well, we found that this wasn’t exactly the safest policy for trans women:

http://www.bubblews.com/news/639805-why-anti-transgender-quotbathroom-lawsquot-are-dangerous

So what else do we use? I mean, we’d have to then create a rigid criterion to determine who is a man and who is a woman or who is a “real” transsexual and who is a fake – in other words, we’d have to police gender and become exactly what we’re fighting against. Do we really want that? Btw, I suspect, if we did start policing gender, there would be a few masculine-looking cisgender women who would be asked to show their “papers” and would get in trouble for not having them.

For the record, some countries have common unisex, non-gender segregated public bathrooms (France is one of them) and, as far as I know, there hasn’t been an overwhelming number of sexual assaults that have occurred in public restrooms because of that.

[Guest Sarah Faith]

Okay, here’s my problem with this: the fear is that this law will allow any man to enter a woman’s bathroom and potentially rape all of the women, right? Some male pervert will go inside the lady’s room and say, “I identify as a woman.” and then start getting his rocks off or molesting women in the bathroom. But there are several problems I find with this theory and here’s why I think it’s irrational:

This first one is that women are at risk of being sexually attacked by other women in bathrooms – I’m not just talking about what happens in prison, it happens outside of prison too. You can read more about it here:

http://www.ourbodiesourselves.org/book/companion.asp?id=8&compID=95

http://www.upne.com/1555535283.html

The idea that the phallus is a symbol of rape and violence is what has also prevented trans women from unjustly participating in music festivals in Michigan and women-only spaces for too long.

Secondly, what about sexual assault against male children in men’s restrooms? What about sexual assault against other men? My point is that sexual assault is sexual assault. My personal opinion: If I have a daughter or a son, I am not going to let him/her go into the restroom by him/herself, regardless of whether it’s the lady’s room or the men’s room. You darn-well better be sure I am going to keep my eyes on my child at ALL times and not trust anyone, regardless of whether they are a man, a woman or anything else in between.

Thirdly, what exactly constitutes as having transitioned or “presenting as a woman.” I mean, don’t we all have different ideas about what makes a man and what makes a woman? The standard way of determining was genitals – if you had an outie, you were a man; if you had an innie, you were a woman; well, we found that this wasn’t exactly the safest policy for trans women:

http://www.bubblews.com/news/639805-why-anti-transgender-quotbathroom-lawsquot-are-dangerous

So what else do we use? I mean, we’d have to then create a rigid criterion to determine who is a man and who is a woman or who is a “real” transsexual and who is a fake – in other words, we’d have to police gender and become exactly what we’re fighting against. Do we really want that? Btw, I suspect, if we did start policing gender, there would be a few masculine-looking cisgender women who would be asked to show their “papers” and would get in trouble for not having them.

For the record, some countries have common unisex, non-gender segregated public bathrooms (France is one of them) and, as far as I know, there hasn’t been an overwhelming number of sexual assaults that have occurred in public restrooms because of that.

I would simply draw the line with someone who is undergoing verifiable treatment, beyond that.. a CIS-woman would never "get in trouble for not having them" because their ID would say Female.. those are "papers" too.

If we are going to create such lax laws where simply saying "I identify as a woman" while having absolutely nothing to back it up why have gender appropriate bathrooms at all? Why not simply advocate for unisex bathrooms?

[Guest EvaO]

Okay, here’s my problem with this: the fear is that this law will allow any man to enter a woman’s bathroom and potentially rape all of the women, right? Some male pervert will go inside the lady’s room and say, “I identify as a woman.” and then start getting his rocks off or molesting women in the bathroom. But there are several problems I find with this theory and here’s why I think it’s irrational:

This first one is that women are at risk of being sexually attacked by other women in bathrooms – I’m not just talking about what happens in prison, it happens outside of prison too. You can read more about it here:

http://www.ourbodiesourselves.org/book/companion.asp?id=8&compID=95

http://www.upne.com/1555535283.html

The idea that the phallus is a symbol of rape and violence is what has also prevented trans women from unjustly participating in music festivals in Michigan and women-only spaces for too long.

Secondly, what about sexual assault against male children in men’s restrooms? What about sexual assault against other men? My point is that sexual assault is sexual assault. My personal opinion: If I have a daughter or a son, I am not going to let him/her go into the restroom by him/herself, regardless of whether it’s the lady’s room or the men’s room. You darn-well better be sure I am going to keep my eyes on my child at ALL times and not trust anyone, regardless of whether they are a man, a woman or anything else in between.

Thirdly, what exactly constitutes as having transitioned or “presenting as a woman.” I mean, don’t we all have different ideas about what makes a man and what makes a woman? The standard way of determining was genitals – if you had an outie, you were a man; if you had an innie, you were a woman; well, we found that this wasn’t exactly the safest policy for trans women:

http://www.bubblews.com/news/639805-why-anti-transgender-quotbathroom-lawsquot-are-dangerous

So what else do we use? I mean, we’d have to then create a rigid criterion to determine who is a man and who is a woman or who is a “real” transsexual and who is a fake – in other words, we’d have to police gender and become exactly what we’re fighting against. Do we really want that? Btw, I suspect, if we did start policing gender, there would be a few masculine-looking cisgender women who would be asked to show their “papers” and would get in trouble for not having them.

For the record, some countries have common unisex, non-gender segregated public bathrooms (France is one of them) and, as far as I know, there hasn’t been an overwhelming number of sexual assaults that have occurred in public restrooms because of that.

I would simply draw the line with someone who is undergoing verifiable treatment, beyond that.. a CIS-woman would never "get in trouble for not having them" because their ID would say Female.. those are "papers" too.

If we are going to create such lax laws where simply saying "I identify as a woman" while having absolutely nothing to back it up why have gender appropriate bathrooms at all? Why not simply advocate for unisex bathrooms?

Well, why not? If someone is dead set on assaulting someone, I doubt that a gender-exclusive sign on the bathroom door is going to prevent them from going in:

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2012/11/15/3666530/uncc-alert-woman-sexually-assaulted.html#.Ui0kvD-4y0A

-- or, like I said, they might simply be the same gender.

[Guest KathleenMarie27]

Sexual assault, while a worry for some is not my overwhelming concern, my issue is that simply put most places now have 3 bathrooms, 1 for men 1 for women and 1 for unisex use, its not that difficult to figure out which one to use. But this bill does not include just bathrooms, it also includes public showers.

[Guest KimberlyF]

So women do not have a right to change in their locker rooms without being gawked at by people who are not legally nor ID as female all of the time?

[Guest EvaO]

So women do not have a right to change in their locker rooms without being gawked at by people who are not legally nor ID as female all of the time?

Funny, it almost sounds like you're insinuating that all crossdressers like "to gawk at people" in locker rooms...

Sexual assault, while a worry for some is not my overwhelming concern, my issue is that simply put most places now have 3 bathrooms, 1 for men 1 for women and 1 for unisex use, its not that difficult to figure out which one to use. But this bill does not include just bathrooms, it also includes public showers.

I think my argument can be applied to ANY space. As for unisex bathrooms...not ALL public places have them.