Texas Bathroom Bill Criminalizes the Transgender

Post Reply New Topic

Yeah, if you can walk the walk, it really shouldn't matter in a public place; no one will know.

I have never heard of this before. Could you provide a source?

I tend to think transphobia is rooted in homophobia. Society others those of us who transgress the 'clearly defined' gender binary most often because we're thought of as gay. Transfolk who don't pass are almost always assumed to be gay by homophobic people. I believe the hate crimes and victimisation of transfolk is wholly based in homophobia (and often internalised homophobia) and reactive male violence.

Legislating against one oppressed group's safety to protect another oppressed group's safety isn't ok, but as someone may have mentioned before, cost is a factor. It's a money game to build more restrooms and change rooms that are gender neutral, and frankly nobody wants to spend the money. People in families like mine are affected by this as I previously mentioned. My son and I are often left waiting for the scarcely available disabled or family facilities because I am not allowed to take him into the women's change room at the age of 12 (which I respect).

Many of us would benefit from gender neutral facilities, but without extensive pressure on the powers that be (and the pressure would hit them in their pocketbooks), that's not going to happen. I don't think it's acceptable for a transwoman to have to use a male restroom, but I also don't think it's acceptable for a pre-op transwoman to undress in a women's change room in front of young girls and women.

A lot of commenters are making the assumption that all transfolk pass. Whilst many do, that's often not the case and the backlash and violence happens almost exclusively to those who don't, or to those who do and who work in the sex industry in some capacity (and violence against women and transwomen who work in the sex industry is unfortunately quite common).

Somewhere there has to be a middle ground.

When did we start playing Oppression Olympics..?

The simplest solutions, of course, would be to (a) add a gender neutral bathroom, which will mainly end up being used by cis-women due to the queues at the women's bathroom, or (b) abolish gendered bathrooms and just have single stalls. Really, if the bathroom is just a single stall anyway, there isn't any point in saying "this for men, this for women".

Or, we can have a special bathroom just for those people who have a problem with women using the women's bathroom, and men using the men's bathroom.

But I think abolishing gendered bathrooms is the best option, especially given the existence of gay people - if your concerned about "men" going in the women's bathroom because they might assault the women in there, then why aren't you concerned about lesbians going in the women's bathroom because they might assault the women in there?

Wow, that's some profound false equivalency you have going on there. Looking up the stats on 'male violence against women' and 'lesbian violence against women' should give you the answer as to why women need sex based protection.

I think we can all agree that this is a terrible and unnecessary law.

Seems to me that the solution is to provide a mixture of segregated and non-segregated toilets in towns and cities. Anyone who is afraid of being sexually assaulted by members of the opposite gender can use segregated toilets, trans and non-binary people can use integrated ones, everyone else can use whichever is most convenient.

However, is there any evidence that segregating toilets actually reduces rates of sexual assault? If not, should we nonetheless pander to people's groundless fears or preferences?

Unfortunately, that's not the real motive behind this law. The real purpose is to roll back any and all LGBT rights, and to drive gay, bi, and trans Americans back into the closet.

This.

Er, no. The relevant stats here would be "transwomen violence against women" and "lesbian violence against women". Or, to not exclude men (trans or cis), include the stats on "transmen violence against men" and "gay violence against men". Then include the other stats of "ciswomen violence against women (cis or trans)", "women violence against lesbians", "men violence against gays", "men violence againsgt men (trans or cis)"...

Of course, if everyone is in seperate stalls (they are, aren't they?) it's not really a problem.

Has there actually been any cases where a transwomen has assaulted a woman in a bathroom? If so, how do the stats on that compare with women being assaulted by ciswomen in a bathroom? Even if transwomen were far more likely to be violent (and I don't see any reason to believe they are), the sheer number of ciswomen compared to transwomen would mean a woman is far more likely to be attacked by a ciswoman than by a transwoman (see: Bayes theorem).

It's a sickening and un-American abrogation of basic rights for trans people. If letting people go into the gendered bathrooms of their identity and expression isn't good enough, then maybe we need to question why we even still segregate them at all in the first place.

I went looking for an aswer to that question and found this:

http://mediamatters.org/research/2014/03/20/15-experts-debunk-right-wing-transgender-bathro/198533

It's not stats as such, but it is the word from police departments in cities around the U.S. that such a problem is not something their department has encountered.








A google for assaults occuring in public bathrooms showed that yes- there is a real risk of assault in bathrooms (and an even higher risk of mugging and purse snatching) but gender identity plays no role. Males are assaulting males in public bathrooms. Females (cis females, I now see from Magneto's post that is the term I was looking for) are assaulting females in public bathrooms (generally to get their purses). And men are going into womens bathrooms with no attempt whatsoever of a female disguise. Assaults in bathrooms are real but it isn't the trans people doing them. I couldn't find stats (although I only went through a few google pages), just news story after news story. And of course trans people are also sometimes involved too, but as crime victims rather than perpetrators, according to news stories.

Any law that isn't solving an actual problem, but playing on people's fears is a bad law.

I cite the Garotters' Act of 1863 as a key example. A law, as a result of media frenzy for an essentially made up problem.

At what point do the necessity for this suddenly occur? How does this law apply to private businesses?

Law like this only happen becuase populism, and people looking to find issues for cheap votes.

I think you probably should go to the bathroom of the gender you most appear to be. I don't really care as a guy if women use the same bathroom altho I don't see why they'd want to so this is more of a women's issue in this regard, it doesn't really effect me. If you're bald and have a goatee even if you identify as a woman you probably should use the men's bathroom. I think making a law is pretty silly tho, it should be an issue when it is issue and you go from there. There seems to be fewer and fewer places with public restrooms in general now, too many weirdos and drug addicts. It's a shame about these junkies since they pretty much ruin these single user bathrooms for everybody.

Amen.

That solution doesn't work for those who are androgynous or less-than-passing. Putting people in boxes based on external appearances is never right.

I don't think it is really an issue with the androgynous but less than passing meaning what? A bald guy with a goatee? What is the line? The bathroom is simply about utility, social engineering and feelings shouldn't factor in at least in my opinion. I'm all for gender-neutral family bathrooms and single user ones, but wherever there are separate men and women's bathrooms that's what makes sense to me because otherwise it just defeats the purpose. What if I as man that identifies as a man would prefer to take dumps in the women's bathroom because I think the men's is gross, is that okay or am I going to be quizzed about my gender identity or what? I think it is easy to see why some people might be uncomfortable with it, people just need to understand what the bathroom is really for tho. It shouldn't be held up as some legal recognition of your gender identity, its about expelling waste and that's it.

Some trans activists and allies often hyperbole that thinking women should have sex based protection means we think transfolk are going to assault women in toilets. I guess that makes it sound dramatic, or maybe some actually do think that?

What I mean when talking about sex based protection is I think women and girls should be safe from penises in change room spaces. Stalls are not a big deal. The case of Colleen Francis (look her up) was over an over the top deal breaker for me when it came to supporting trans rights across the board.

I want everyone to be accepted and to not feel oppressed, but I don't think someone's identity should trump the safety of girls and women. Safety can also mean psychological safety. I don't think transwomen are going to go into the female toilets to assault women, and I do believe if they go into the male toilets they are putting themselves in a dangerous situation.

I do hope people will try and read and understand what I am saying here instead of react with the trans lobby hyperbole line that is so common. I'm actually on the side of keeping both transfolk and other oppressed people safe.