The politics of bathrooms

paulbaxter · Post by **paulbaxter** » Thu Mar 24, 2016 6:32 pm

This is currently a HUGE shitstorm in North Carolina.

For those who know nothing about it the basics are this. The city of Charlotte passed a law stating that people were allowed to use bathrooms that corresponded to their self-identified gender. Or something like that. The state legislature just met and passed a bill specifically to overturn that law. If you want more detail than that you'll have to look around because I myself haven't looked up the specifics of either the Charlotte law or the state bill.

I was sort of hoping that at least some amount of rational discussion of the issue would be possible, but my friends on the left seem to have gone all in on this topic, to the point that I really don't think that anything via facebook would be productive.

Of course the devil is often in the details in these things, and I've already mentioned my ignorance on that score. On a general note, though, there seem to be two significant points to discuss.

First, I have full sympathy for any person for whom this is truly a personal issue, i.e. a transgendered person who faces uncomfortable choices about using a bathroom in a public building. I certainly have no problem with bathrooms designed to be unisex, and I don't know anyone who has a problem with that, aside from practical considerations of costs to change or renovate existing structures.

Second, and on the other side, I have serious concerns about this sort of law becoming an enabling device for sexual predators. I hadn't really thought about it much until I read this article:

http://thefederalist.com/2015/11/23/a-r ... bathrooms/

Anyhow, feel free to have at this topic from whatever point of view.

PLW · Post by **PLW** » Thu Mar 24, 2016 6:35 pm

I don't like making theoretical costs outweigh real gains. Let Charlotte experiment. If it turns out that this actually encourages sexual assault (which, honestly, I find preposterous), then intervene.

Pyperkub · Post by **Pyperkub** » Thu Mar 24, 2016 6:39 pm

I'm reasonably sure the state law is more because of an "Ick!" reaction than any desire to protect women.

Jaymann · Post by **Jaymann** » Thu Mar 24, 2016 6:49 pm

So the general public is oozing with sexual predators just waiting for an excuse to visit women's restrooms? Seems legit.

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Thu Mar 24, 2016 6:54 pm

They have to do something while they wait for the chance to commit voter fraud.

gilraen · Post by **gilraen** » Thu Mar 24, 2016 6:59 pm

paulbaxter wrote: Second, and on the other side, I have serious concerns about this sort of law becoming an enabling device for sexual predators. I hadn't really thought about it much until I read this article:

http://thefederalist.com/2015/11/23/a-r ... bathrooms/

It's ironic that the article is by a survivor of childhood abuse - that is, someone in her household did that to her. Not some stranger in a public bathroom or locker room. I can understand that she has very strong opinions on the subject due to the horrific things that happened to her but that doesn't make her qualified to debate this law.

If a guy is a sexual predator and wants to follow a woman into a public bathroom (especially when there aren't many people around), he won't care about the M or W on the door.

gbasden · Post by **gbasden** » Thu Mar 24, 2016 7:08 pm

This law did a lot more than outlaw bathroom usage based on gender identity. The bill also prohibits and overrides any anti-LGBT discrimination ordinances, such as the one passed in Charlotte. It effectively makes it legal for any person in NC to openly discriminate against the LGBT community including barring them from stores, restaurants and other businesses. It was pushed through by the Republican majority in only three hours and immediately signed into law by the Governor.

It's a fucking travesty.

em2nought · Post by **em2nought** » Thu Mar 24, 2016 7:23 pm

I got rid of my public toilet, therefore no problems. Banks and the Post Office don't have them, and I never keep people waiting longer than a bank, or certainly not longer than the Post Office.

People make so much crap up and convince themselves that it's true, that I'm seriously uncomfortable anytime a child enters a public restroom when I'm in there. Almost feels like I should have a body cam like a cop just in case the tyke's a nutjob.

paulbaxter · Post by **paulbaxter** » Thu Mar 24, 2016 9:40 pm

If anyone wishes to read it, the text of the NC state bill is here:

http://www.ncleg.net/Sessions/2015E2/Bi ... F/H2v1.pdf

Daehawk · Post by **Daehawk** » Thu Mar 24, 2016 9:44 pm

Ive always thought public restrooms should all be private single toilet ones. Have 5 per sex. Ive never liked multi toilet restrooms because of many things but my main is a shy bladder and its hell to get to go sometimes when Im out.

But even as a guy I do not want a girl....born or post op'd.....to be in my bathroom with me no more than Id want a guy in my wife's. Public restrooms the way they are now should have gone out of style with the Romans.

Archinerd · Post by **Archinerd** » Thu Mar 24, 2016 10:53 pm

Daehawk wrote:Ive always thought public restrooms should all be private single toilet ones.

Private bathrooms are nicer, but this would be very expensive from a construction standpoint.

Blackhawk · Post by **Blackhawk** » Thu Mar 24, 2016 11:39 pm

Daehawk wrote: But even as a guy I do not want a girl....born or post op'd.....to be in my bathroom with me no more than Id want a guy in my wife's.

It makes most people feel self-conscious to go to the bathroom around others, and more so if the others are of a different gender.

What is the right answer, though, if the solution that makes one person comfortable makes the other uncomfortable, and vice-versa? What do you choose when either solution is unpleasant for someone?

Personally, in a situation like this, I think the only real answer is to choose in favor of free choice.

wonderpug · Post by **wonderpug** » Thu Mar 24, 2016 11:53 pm

Ages ago I went to the Lilith Fair concert, whose attendee population had to be at least 95% female. The venue kept all the women's restrooms the same as always, but the men's restrooms were "men/women" restrooms. Other than an initial few seconds of "teehee! two genders in the same room!" it turned out that peeing and pooping in the same restroom was actually not that big a deal.

GreenGoo · Post by **GreenGoo** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 12:08 am

wonderpug wrote:Ages ago I went to the Lilith Fair concert, whose attendee population had to be at least 95% female. The venue kept all the women's restrooms the same as always, but the men's restrooms were "men/women" restrooms. Other than an initial few seconds of "teehee! two genders in the same room!" it turned out that peeing and pooping in the same restroom was actually not that big a deal.

Ally McBeal had unisex bathrooms almost 2 decades ago. Half the nation watched that show, but somehow a less than fully unisex bathroom is controversial in 2016?

I swear we're going backwards in time.

Rip · Post by **Rip** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 12:19 am

Chaz · Post by **Chaz** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 6:51 am

The law covers all publicly-administrated buildings, which apparently also includes airports. So basically, if you're transgender and happen to be passing through the state, going to the bathroom is going to be a potentially uncomfortable experience.

There's a link floating around that I'll try and dig up that looks at the states that have passes laws allowing transgender people to use the restroom that matches their gender identity, and compares the rates of sexual assaults in restrooms before and after the law passed. Short version is that there was no change.

Another fun note about this law is that it also removes protection for sexual orientation. Oh, and they stuck an amendment on there to prohibit any municipality from passing a minimum wage higher than the state minimum. That was a nice little cherry on top.

Montag · Post by **Montag** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 8:59 am

GreenGoo wrote:
wonderpug wrote:Ages ago I went to the Lilith Fair concert, whose attendee population had to be at least 95% female. The venue kept all the women's restrooms the same as always, but the men's restrooms were "men/women" restrooms. Other than an initial few seconds of "teehee! two genders in the same room!" it turned out that peeing and pooping in the same restroom was actually not that big a deal.
Ally McBeal had unisex bathrooms almost 2 decades ago. Half the nation watched that show, but somehow a less than fully unisex bathroom is controversial in 2016?

I swear we're going backwards in time.

So if it isn't that big of a deal then let's have the itsy bitsy tiny fraction of the population (estimated 0.3 to 0.5%) think bathrooms as unisex and the overwhelming exceedingly vast majority of the population (99+%) carry on.

YellowKing · Post by **YellowKing** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 9:16 am

Our governor is a complete train wreck. Put it this way - my dad is the most hardcore conservative you've ever seen in your life. He thinks Obama is the Anti-Christ, and he posts probably 10 politically right-wing Facebook posts a day. And even HE hates Pat McCrory.

The sexual abuse argument is ridiculous. There's nothing stopping a predator from going into a women's bathroom right now and raping someone. You think a guy that's going to rape someone in a public restroom is currently being deterred because he has no excuse for being in there? Seriously? That's just a cockamamie excuse to justify a bigoted, discriminatory law.

I can't wait to vote that dickhead out of office.

Malificent · Post by **Malificent** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 10:17 am

I wish we could stop making so many decisions based on fear.

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 10:37 am

This is the part that I never get with "States' Rights!!" folks. If favoring the State over the Federal govt is preferable because FREEDOM!, wouldn't it make sense that favoring the Local over the State govt be preferable because MORE FREEDOM!!?

Why are they so comfortable with the State controlling their lives? It makes no sense to me.

Chaz · Post by **Chaz** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 11:02 am

I asked that very question in a different forum talking about this. The answer is probably less "It's about State's rights!" and more "It's about MY rights!"

gbasden · Post by **gbasden** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 1:40 pm

Daehawk wrote:Ive always thought public restrooms should all be private single toilet ones. Have 5 per sex. Ive never liked multi toilet restrooms because of many things but my main is a shy bladder and its hell to get to go sometimes when Im out.

But even as a guy I do not want a girl....born or post op'd.....to be in my bathroom with me no more than Id want a guy in my wife's. Public restrooms the way they are now should have gone out of style with the Romans.

Why? We had coed bathrooms in the dorms at college. It was absolutely no big thing. People make it into something much bigger than it is.

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 1:44 pm

gbasden wrote:
Daehawk wrote:Ive always thought public restrooms should all be private single toilet ones. Have 5 per sex. Ive never liked multi toilet restrooms because of many things but my main is a shy bladder and its hell to get to go sometimes when Im out.

But even as a guy I do not want a girl....born or post op'd.....to be in my bathroom with me no more than Id want a guy in my wife's. Public restrooms the way they are now should have gone out of style with the Romans.
Why? We had coed bathrooms in the dorms at college. It was absolutely no big thing.

I would've considered that a challenge in my younger years.

gbasden · Post by **gbasden** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 1:49 pm

Montag wrote: So if it isn't that big of a deal then let's have the itsy bitsy tiny fraction of the population (estimated 0.3 to 0.5%) think bathrooms as unisex and the overwhelming exceedingly vast majority of the population (99+%) carry on.

That's what most transgender folks do, and unfortunately, that's exactly what this law prevents. So for most of us, we would use the bathrooms as we always have. However, since the law says that you must use the restroom that corresponds to the gender on your birth certificate, the person transitioning to a woman with a dress on *must* use the men's room under the new law. The woman who has transitioned to a man and has a beard *must* use the ladies room. The rhetoric and pearl clutching around this issue makes my teeth ache. It's like the bullshit medical safety excuses the Republicans are using to shut down abortion. There is no evidence that coed bathrooms have any more incidents of sexual assault, but the hard line conservatives were livid that Charlotte would let the icky gays and transgender folks have a shred of dignity.

Chaz · Post by **Chaz** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 2:20 pm

Shockingly, states that have passed laws protecting trangender bathroom access haven't seen any increase in sexual assault numbers.

GreenGoo · Post by **GreenGoo** » Fri Mar 25, 2016 2:41 pm

Montag wrote:
So if it isn't that big of a deal then let's have the itsy bitsy tiny fraction of the population (estimated 0.3 to 0.5%) think bathrooms as unisex and the overwhelming exceedingly vast majority of the population (99+%) carry on.

I actually agree with this logic to a certain extent. That being said, the only people who are going to be aware that they are in the wrong place (according to this law) are the transgendered. They will know that they are one gender (physically) using the other gender's washroom. As far as everyone else, they would have no idea (unless they are in the habit of checking peoples' gender in the washroom) that there was someone with male genitalia in the same washroom.

The law basically makes what is usually not an issue for ANYONE involved into a crime. That's pretty goofy.

Zarathud · Post by **Zarathud** » Sat Mar 26, 2016 9:10 pm

It's more disruptive for someone in a dress to come into the men's bathroom. They way bathrooms work, you don't notice their junk (or lack thereof), but you may notice their clothing.

Unless hepcat's on another pants optional day.

Defiant · Post by **Defiant** » Sat Mar 26, 2016 9:21 pm

I don't know what the best solution is, though I would think an interm solution would be to make any building with 3 or more bathrooms convert a third of them to all gender bathrooms.

I would think that locker rooms are a tougher issue than bathrooms.

Octavious · Post by **Octavious** » Sat Mar 26, 2016 10:13 pm

RunningMn9 wrote:This is the part that I never get with "States' Rights!!" folks. If favoring the State over the Federal govt is preferable because FREEDOM!, wouldn't it make sense that favoring the Local over the State govt be preferable because MORE FREEDOM!!?

Why are they so comfortable with the State controlling their lives? It makes no sense to me.

The other thing that drives me nuts about the states rights thing is that it only applies to things they agree with. Christie was going to roll over Colorado about legalizing pot. God I f'n hate him. Super states rights when it applies to the rights he likes.

YellowKing · Post by **YellowKing** » Mon Mar 28, 2016 4:41 pm

I'm hoping this shitstorm costs NC enough business that McCrory is run out on a rail. My dad went on a 30-minute rant about him last night, covering everything from his building of an arena with taxpayer dollars that voters VOTED AGAINST to his slashing of unemployement benefits to his implementation of a trolley system nobody used.

Defiant · Post by **Defiant** » Mon Mar 28, 2016 8:32 pm

New York City instituting non-essential travel ban to North Carolina for city employees

Edit: Now New York State:

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Tue Mar 29, 2016 2:38 pm

Reuters

The North Carolina Attorney General's office said it would not defend a new state law being challenged in federal court by opponents who say it discriminates against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people.

Attorney General Roy Cooper, a Democrat who is running for governor this year, on Tuesday called the measure shameful and unconstitutional.
...
Senate Leader Phil Berger, a Republican, fired back with a statement calling for Cooper to resign from office for refusing to defend the state against the lawsuit.

GuidoTKP · Post by **GuidoTKP** » Tue Mar 29, 2016 5:21 pm

YellowKing · Post by **YellowKing** » Tue Mar 29, 2016 11:10 pm

Vermont and Washington have now also banned non-essential travel, and Georgia is petitioning the NBA to pull out of Charlotte for the 2017 finals.

Way to go, NC! Now all those transgender rapists from Vermont and Washington can't get here on the company dime!

Alefroth · Post by **Alefroth** » Wed Mar 30, 2016 12:27 am

We could end this now if only Hollywood would get involved.

Jaymann · Post by **Jaymann** » Wed Mar 30, 2016 1:31 am

YellowKing wrote:Vermont and Washington have now also banned non-essential travel, and Georgia is petitioning the NBA to pull out of Charlotte for the 2017 finals.

They are expecting the Hornets to reach the finals? The fix must be in.

raydude · Post by **raydude** » Wed Mar 30, 2016 7:09 am

It seems the ridiculousness of the law can be publicly and dramatically exposed just by having a large group of transgender women who were male by birth go to the NC governor's office and use the male public restroom while wearing dresses. With a judicious call to the media to record the whole thing.

GreenGoo · Post by **GreenGoo** » Wed Mar 30, 2016 9:57 am

YellowKing wrote:Vermont and Washington have now also banned non-essential travel, and Georgia is petitioning the NBA to pull out of Charlotte for the 2017 finals.

Way to go, NC! Now all those transgender rapists from Vermont and Washington can't get here on the company dime!

You should see the transgender rapist tourism pamphlets too! Georgia was a hot spot of transgender rape tourism. Now where they gonna go? Georgia? Hardly.

Jeff V · Post by **Jeff V** » Wed Mar 30, 2016 10:16 am

YellowKing wrote:Vermont and Washington have now also banned non-essential travel, and Georgia is petitioning the NBA to pull out of Charlotte for the 2017 finals.

Way to go, NC! Now all those transgender rapists from Vermont and Washington can't get here on the company dime!

Unfortunately, on the "Essential Travel" drop down list on the travel request form, right there, near the bottom, is "Transgender Raping." This isn't going to stop anyone at all!

YellowKing · Post by **YellowKing** » Wed Mar 30, 2016 10:23 pm

Oregon has now joined the ranks of states banning non-essential travel. San Francisco and NYC have joined from the city side.

McCrory's response? "Political theater."

Fuck you, McCrory. Hope you enjoy watching that theater from the sidelines when your ass is out of office next year.