cross-posted from: https://sh.itjust.works/post/65235734
On August 8, police arrived on the scene of Long Branch Lagoon Water Park in Dodge City, Kansas, to the sight of three self-described “bearded, burly men” who had been in the women’s bathroom and changing area. The manager of the municipally run property allegedly screamed and rushed children out the door.
The men knew this was likely. They didn’t agitate any of the women; they didn’t remove their clothes or make crass comments. They simply used the gendered spaces that the state of Kansas requires them to use by law, because these men are transgender.
“Supporters of SB244, including Attorney General Kris Kobach and Senate Majority Leader Ty Masterson, billed it as a way to keep men out of women’s spaces; it clearly requires some men to enter women’s spaces,” a press release sent to news outlets reads. So, these men took action—using malicious compliance to prove their point.
“Segregating people by suspected genitalia does nothing to improve public safety; it does quite the opposite by opening Kansans up to sexual harassment and discrimination. At no point should anyone be asking anyone else what genitals they have in public.”
The men, dressed in yellow “Compliance Crew” shirts, were part of a small group of trans-masculine Kansans who used the women’s room at facilities across the state that day in a coordinated action. They were also spotted at a zoo, a library, a museum, and other parks. They were in Emporia, Great Bend, Garden City, and Dodge City. At the library, at least one patron complained; at other places, the men used the bathroom and received dirty looks, and simply left the space without confrontation.
But at Long Branch Lagoon, members of the Kansas Compliance Crew resorted to having to describe their genitals to police in order to resolve the matter and avoid arrest.
“The men had a discussion with the manager and police and explained the situation, including uncomfortable descriptions of their bodies,” the press release said. Furthermore, both the manager and the police reportedly said “they had never heard of SB244 nor been notified by any government entity of its passage.”
“I could easily continue using the men’s restroom under the radar,” said Ray Vieux, who participated as one of the demonstrators.
You must log in or register to comment.
The best bathroom I ever used, at a Thai restaurant in Washington DC:
One hallway. Four toilets with doors and full floor-to-ceiling walls that provide total privacy. One row of sinks. I don’t care about the genitals of the person in the stall next to me, and I certainly don’t care about washing my hands next to them, either.
Fucking Kings!
So, these men took action—using malicious compliance to prove their point.
Is it malicious compliance? They went to the restroom they were told to go to. It’s more a demonstration of what Kansas law actually means.
It is. They are complying with the law to the letter with the sole aim of pissing off the lawmakers, and succeeding.
But good-faith compliance would look the same way, wouldn’t it? It’s not against the spirit of the law, because this is the actual intent of the law.
Good faith compliance is impossible.
Go to the restroom that is not compliant: violate the law.
Go to the restroom compliant with your assigned gender: police is called because you don’t look like your assigned gender.
The spirit of the law is to prevent trans people (and anyone else who is not strictly gender conforming) from existing in public spaces.
Yeah, that’s a good point. I was just thinking in terms of the law alone without the broader context.
Good faith compliance (according to the bigots) is to not be trans in public.
deleted by creator
A friend of mine is a lesbian. She identifies fully as female. She does not want to be a man at all. She is a woman who wears somewhat men’s type clothing for the comfort. Her face is extremely feminine. She does not try to present as a man at all.
She’s had numerous issues going to the bathroom. One time male employees of the bar went into the women’s loo and opened the stall she was in, without identifying themselves or saying anything… while she was changing her pad. I was at the mirror when it happened and tried to stop them. I was physically pushed away and told to stfu.
These MEN walked in on her while she was cleaning her period. It’s clear she’s female at this point, but they didn’t Apologize and close the stall door. They stood there and yelled at her while she was trying to put a new pad on without pulling her panties up, because it would stain them.
They didn’t Apologize. I asked them to. She asked them to. They demanded to see her ID saying she was female before they’d close the stall door. I ended up going out of the bathroom and calling 911 to say that 3 men sexually harassed a woman in a stall while she was cleaning her period. They said “well, we thought she was a man so it’s ok”. But she was doing nothing to anyone.
The owner tried giving us a $200 bar tab, but I told her to refuse because if legal issues came from it, it would be like accepting the pay out.
She still has mental stress issues when she goes out and has to use the bathroom, especially while on her period. We only go to places where people know her or places that have unisex bathrooms.
These maga a holes wanted to “protect women” by forcing a woman to change her pad in front of them. Even if they thought she was a man, was that the right move? Even if she was a man, would that have been the right move? I was in that bathroom with her. I’m extremely feminine. So, even if my friend Bri was trans … these dudes were willing to bust in the women’s room aggressively on someone they knew was definitely a woman.
It’s not about protecting children. They just want to fight people and have a reason to “legally” and aggressively force themselves into women’s bathrooms.
I think back on that day a lot. I should have immediately viewed these men as the threat they genuinely were and pulled either my canister of cs gas or my lifecard (single Action .22) but I was in shock. And I only had a single action on me. I’m a tall woman. If I defended us, both my friend and I would probably be dead right now. And those guys would have gotten probation for killing us.
Is not about protecting women or kids. Bc those same people think every woman who has reported a sexual assault are “false allegations ruining a man’s life” (false allegations are real. But they’re very very very rare. )
You know, sometimes I don’t realize how good it is around me (central bum fucked egypt) until I read about these experiences. I got a little food truck bazaar near me with the only permanent structure being a stage/wine bar/bathroom. There is only one bathroom, and it has a sign with the classic stick figures, and a half half mix of the two, and an alien that reads “whatever, just wash your hands.”
I also see some pride flags in front of businesses downtown and no crazies making the local news by tearing them down.
Yeah if anything these laws gave men the justification to angrily and violently enter women’s restrooms. And that’s the purpose of them, it’s just that shockingly often these men do that against someone they weren’t intended to target doing so.
One time male employees of the bar went into the women’s loo and opened the stall she was in, without identifying themselves or saying anything… while she was changing her pad. I was at the mirror when it happened and tried to stop them. I was physically pushed away and told to stfu.
These MEN walked in on her while she was cleaning her period. It’s clear she’s female at this point, but they didn’t Apologize and close the stall door. They stood there and yelled at her while she was trying to put a new pad on without pulling her panties up, because it would stain them.
They didn’t Apologize. I asked them to. She asked them to. They demanded to see her ID saying she was female before they’d close the stall door. I ended up going out of the bathroom and calling 911 to say that 3 men sexually harassed a woman in a stall while she was cleaning her period. They said “well, we thought she was a man so it’s ok”. But she was doing nothing to anyone.
The owner tried giving us a $200 bar tab, but I told her to refuse because if legal issues came from it, it would be like accepting the pay out.
Doubt 🧐🙄 Are you a master of creative fictional writing?
Nothing ever happens, right? Yawn. No need for your shit tier response.
Between 1.5 and 2 billion people speak english. You suppose that’s not enough for this to have plausibly happened?
Tbf the Lemmy number is much lower -_-
Im a member of the nothing-ever-happens club but even I believe this story. Conservative men have a ideaology that demands they become hypocrites and social police at every opportunity
A woman walks into a women’s restroom and two male employees follow her in there and witness her pussy & menstrual blood then continued to harass her because they still think she’s a man in a woman’s restroom?
Suuuuure.
Yawn.
And you think this would be easily resolved with well designed unisex bathrooms where each stall is completely private.
It would not be completely solved. Women are often harassed by men unwilling to leave them alone. The women’s bathroom is used as a safe space to basically hide from men.
Yes a woman could hide in a stall, but there’s less plausible deniability for a man waiting in front of the door of a woman’s bathroom (which looks and is creepy as fuck) than for a man inside an non-gendered bathroom
I hate that this is how things are, but women have very few places free of the patriarchy.
The Museum of Sex in NYC has a unisex bathroom similar to this. TBH I’m not sure if it has urinals tucked in it somewhere (since I don’t use them, I didn’t look for them.) Otherwise, it was one open place without an entry door, with full-length stalls, and communal sinks just like in your diagram.
It also had a temporary exhibit that was a bouncy castle where all the floor and walls were tits. It wasn’t as fun as it sounds, though, since if you jumped on a tit you fell through to the hard floor beneath. Still a fun concept! Just needed a little work to make it safer.
where each stall is completely private.
But then what if people do the drugs!??!?!?!
Gotta have those stall gaps to make sure nobody ever gets high.
I thought the gaps were there because it’s cheaper to install and easier to clean. The drugs thing is going to happen regardless of gap.
Then we all get to share the drugs in a communal area!
Well in that case you can have the trashy gay bar version of unisex bathrooms. Very little privacy, but people are still doing drugs among other things
Maybe if we installed some flock cameras in the stalls to screen for drug abuse
But those are only for reading license plates right? No way they can used to ID people /S
Clean needle dispensers and needle disposal bins?
true good thing we fixed that problem
Hey as long as people are washing their hands then it dont matter to me.
So often the person next to me walks out without a rinse even lmao
Ally McBeal’s law firm had one like that almost 30 years ago. You’d think there would have been more of them popping up, at least in law firms.
Thats what they did at my climbing Gym (Urban Climb). They’re full length cubicles and seem soundproof pretty much.
Gendered bathrooms only triggers homophobes in practice. If you had a unisex bathroom, they wouldn’t even notice. And on facebook at least, it always seems to be the people who seem highly abusive, who you wouldn’t want near your kids anyway who make a big deal about it.
At concerts here in Australia, nrgptr switching to unisex, it was fairly common for many women to line up for the mens bathrooms (as they they were often less busy)
If your first instinct is that “they’re going to rape your kids”, the problem is you
They’re full length cubicles and seem soundproof pretty much.
Exercise can make people need to poop as it gets stiff moving throughout the body
Half the public washrooms in Toronto are like that. Many of them have a sink in the booth itself.
I love this. The one time I used a gender neutral bathroom I was annoyed because there were no urinals. Meaning I had to wait for the slower sitting pissers.
95% of the time I’m using a public restroom it’s to drain the main vein in the piss trough and move on.
I’ve actually used a bathroom designed exactly like this before. Was definitely weird experience as an American
It’s strange people of a different sex can’t wash their hands next to each other.
Also there really no difference between the picture/layout above and going to a concert and seeing this.
Communal sinks and seperate “stalls”.
It’s not so much about washing hands next to each other itself, but rather that that never happens here. Either you wash your hands alone or next to somebody your gender. It feels weird because bathrooms have become safe spaces of sorts for each gender, that are enclosed rooms.
At a concert the bathroom area is just the entire concert area and then the bathrooms. In the coed bathrooms pictured above the sinks are located in what is very much still “The bathroom”.
It’s not that there’s anything actually wrong with the coed design, but it’s just sort of a culture shock thing. It feels weird to me because it’s a novel situation I hadn’t ever found myself in before. I would also argue that people wouldn’t like it because of that alternate usage bathrooms have evolved to be, which is that gender-separated safe space. A small group of women could separate from the men they’re with and have a private conversation at a social venue for example.
small group of women could separate from the men they’re with and have a private conversation at a social venue for example.
Preserving this is not worth perpetuating a strict gender binary.
I’ve known people who don’t even feel comfortable walking by a person of a different gender as they exit a restroom.
Those people are fucking weird and need to grow up.
If I were in charge bathrooms would be single rooms with nothing but a toilet.
Handwash sink is outside.
There is a person who maintains the facilities and offers a mint candy to only people who wash their hands.
If were gonna police anything in the bathrooms it should be hand washing.
In my secondary school, it was a small school as far as the building went, so to save space they operated exclusively unisex toilets.
The “bathrooms” were simply open-plan onto the main corridors, with sinks on one side, and maybe 15 individual cubicles on the other. There were no urinals, no gendered spaces, once outside the cubicle you’d be in view of anyone walking through the corridor. There were 4 stories including the ground floor, with these unisex toilets on levels 1 and 3.
Never did anything happen, never heard any complaints from anyone about them, it was, dare I say, perfect.
Petition for the abolishment of traditional gendered spaces, individual cubicles is all we need.
Our current Monkey paw Supreme Court would take your gender equality push and end up overturning Brown V Board because separate toilets have to be unequal (you know Roberts and Thomas would do it, along with the rest of the racist justices).
a mint candy to only people who wash their hands.
It all goes back to pavlov
I like it, but I would put a urinal in as well. Not because as a male I would appreciate that more, but as a male, I’ve seen what other savages do to the toilet seat when they have to hit a stationary target from a couple feet away. I don’t want to punish sitters with that.
Do urinals tend to stink more?
I feel like people flush less because after the pee drains out you can’t see it any more, despite it still being there in the trap.
Some autoflush periodically or when you open the door.
Nah urinals don’t smell worse than standard toilets.
That’s not my observed experience.
Piss-soaked floors smell worse, but that’s not a urinal problem per se. The steel/porcelain unit itself does not hold odor and even low-flow flush styles effectively clear liquid waste. But there are bad geometries that create splashback, drunkenness and social causes of bad aim, and business staff stretched too thin to adequately attend to the bathrooms.
And as someone that has been paid to clean toilets, all of the worst messes I’ve seen have been in the women’s stalls.
Are you really suggesting that the addition of a urinal to a non-gender specific toilet would make it smell better ?
I’m aware that I’m not the one you’re talking with, but not necesarilly, you’re making a straw man fallacy and a non sequitur fallacy.
The fact that he, with his empirical experience, noticed that most messes were on female toilets, don’t automatically mean that adding urinals is “less smelly”. You’re just mixing pears with apples, as they’re independent variables that, at much, will stack one on top of another, not cancel with each other.
If they are cleaned regularly, I don’t think it’s a problem, but auto flushers would be a solid choice. Bathrooms in the smaller gas stations along the interstate, not the truck stops, often have the worst bathrooms. You’ll smell stale pee when you walk in, and it may be from the urinal, but it also could be from any other surface in there. But really, a light auto flush and regular cleaning will mitigate any stink, and if it didn’t, the smell is still probably better than the aforementioned piss covered toilet seats.
I go snowboarding in Colorado every year, and in the lodge at the top of Keystone I think, they don’t have flushers. Not sure how it works, but they don’t stink. Somehow they’re engineered to be okay without them. I’ve also seen some bats will just dump a bucket of ice in the urinals that melts over time.
A school did this. They converted a gendered restroom into several private, non-gendered toilet areas, by installing full-height walls and doors around the toilets. The law in the state said that if the hand washing area was considered a private space, it was a “changing area”, and must be segregated by gender. But, if this space was not “private”, it was only a hand washing area and not a “changing area”.
So they ensured the hand washing area was considered “public” by cutting a hole in the wall between the hand washing area and the hallway.
And they pissed off pretty much everyone on every side of the issue.
Nah put handwash inside stalls pls. Saved my life at new job where i got dog poo on my shoes and could clean it privately.
It’s probably too expensive to put the plumbing for that in the walls of the stalls. Usually there’s already a lot less washbasins than toilets, I don’t think that’s ever going to change.
When they do have in stall sinks they’re that tiny one. It’s okay but still takes up more space and has a larger carbon footprint.
Like is really the end of the world if you have to wait a second to wash your hands?
Plus the communal sink is easier to keep clean. Just keep all the filth in the toilet rooms.
In Japan there are toilets that run a faucet that fills the tank on the toilet. Wash your hands as it flushes and fills. It’s not like it’s that hard it’s just that the ones with the checkbook want to pocket the budget instead of provide a decent quality of life
Japanese people don’t need to be publicly shamed into washing their hands tho
How does that work, doesn’t that mean you have poop from handwashing flowing into the toilet tank?
This could be a problem if you do in fact drink from the toilet but I would advise against that regardless of where you are.
Drinking from the tank is actually a recommendation in emergencies when water is cut off. The tank has clean water in it by default and should be full at all times.
Even then, it sounds like it would lead to filth accumulation in the tank over time unless cleaned. One more space for bacteria to fester.
There are many toilets that run on gray water. They just usually aren’t this direct. It shouldn’t be an issue. You’re already shitting in the toilet. Who cares if the water coming in to flush is slightly contaminated?
I’m more concerned about the tank getting more and more filthy over time as filth accumulates. I’m not sure whether there’s any actual practical impact from that.
I like the Japanese style all in one designs. Ie. The sink drains into the toilet. Even if it’s just a rinse station it’d be nice and proper sink in common area. Though I haven’t seen a public restroom based on this just residential toliets
I would call this a shared genderless restroom with stalls, but yes, I think that is the ideal. Red Rock Amphitheatre has a restroom like this. The stalls are all nice full concrete stalls, not the common ones in the US with huge gaps, but everyone stands in line together and takes whatever stall opens, and I haven’t seen an issue in the few times I’ve been there. Not only does it remove any gender issues with assigning restrooms, but it also evens out the lines between men and women, where the men’s restrooms basically never have lines.
Same, but I’d also offer a second mint to folks who show initiative and restock the toilet paper when it runs low.
Add a 2nd room that’s just urinals and no gender requirements.
bathrooms would be single rooms with nothing but a toilet
Hope you’re ready to wait in a hella-long line.
If were gonna police anything in the bathrooms it should be hand washing.
angry libertarian noises
You do realize they can put the same number of toilets as any other bathroom setup right? I don’t even know how you got to that conclusion.
I guarantee you can fight more people around one of those pee-troughs at a baseball stadium than you can fit individual toilets separated by walls and doors.
Hell, the entire appeal of the standing urinal is to conserve space.
lmao a piss trough in a baseball stadium is quite the strawman my dude. Nevermind that you’re forgetting about poop.
But sure lets set the bar as low as possible. ‘Tis the libertarian way I guess. That and eating popcorn with other dudes’ piss all over your hands.
Not gonna yuk your yum but microdosing golden showers is not something most people are into.
If anyone here has never shat in the piss trough in a movement of desperation then I will eat my hat.
lmao a piss trough in a baseball stadium is quite the strawman my dude.
I don’t think you know what a strawman is. But this need to hide people from one another while they piss and poop is a big part of what feeds the anti-trans hysteria.
Not gonna yuk your yum but microdosing golden showers is not something most people are into.
This is why people traditionally wash their hands after using the toilet.
But this need to hide people from one another while they piss and poop is a big part of what feeds the anti-trans hysteria.
I don’t know why you’re trying to use that as part of an argument for why we ought not to have a whole bunch of separate cubicles. No one sees anyone peeing or pooping then, at all. No problem.
I’ve been to Red Rock Amphitheatre twice, and they have a restroom exactly like described (minus the mints sadly). It functions perfectly well. I used it a good number of times. And yes, there is a line, but it’s no longer than the gender segregated ones on average. There’s a ton of people, and most of them are drinking, so it has to function well, and it does. It’s probably the “main” restroom, as it’s the one closest to the front stage.
I guarantee you can fight more people around one of those pee-troughs at a baseball stadium than you can fit individual toilets separated by walls and doors.
odd i didnt know female (the majority of the population) bathrooms had pee troughs… fun fact: if you switched to unisex you’d actually have less lines due to queuing theory removing the gendered spikes at any given point due to larger total availability per gender. right now you have 1/2 of the total availability for women and 1/4 the total availability for men vs a non-gendered setup.
odd i didnt know female (the majority of the population) bathrooms had pee troughs…
Women’s restrooms regularly overcrowd because they don’t
take your time, think it through. maybe you’ll figure out the point.
Modern Libertarians are anti-LGBT and have completely lost their way. They hated their own 2024 presidential candidate Chase Oliver so much for being gay that there was an attempt by many in the party to replace him with Trump, and there were letters pleading for party members to vote for him despite him being gay. It was all super lame and I left. Libertarians used to be at the forefront of individuality and personal liberties, but not anymore. The official website might claim otherwise, but that’s just PR.
They hated their own 2024 presidential candidate Chase Oliver so much for being gay that there was an attempt by many in the party to replace him with Trump
I’m intimately familiar with Texas Libertarians, having family who are actively involved in the state party. They were woo’d by Trump pretty much day one of his campaign. So much of modern southern libertarianism is just a mask over the Neo-Confederate ideology that went out of style under Bush Jr.
Chase Oliver only won the nomination in 2024, because so many self-proclaimed libertarians had defected back to the GOP already. The folks whining about the nomination wanted to have their GOP affiliation and eat their Libertarian cake, too. And while he took a ton of cheap heat for his sexual orientation, the real thing that made Chase a target for ire is that he wasn’t a closed borders militant white supremacist psycho.
Libertarians used to be at the forefront of individuality and personal liberties
The party has always worn two faces. One face pointed towards the liberals, which promised weed and free love and no more wars. Another face towards the Dixiecrat south, which promised Jim Crow and indentured servitude and CSAM.
Love my NORML libertarians, but I quickly recognized this group was not for me when I spent a weekend at the state convention way back in 2012.
…the real thing that made Chase a target for ire is that he wasn’t a closed borders militant white supremacist psycho.
This is how you know Libertarians are dumb. Libertarianism would be against the borders. Left-Libertarian (Anarchism) largely is. Right-Libertarian only cares about letting companies take advantage of people, and doesn’t care about people at all.
angry libertarian noises
What’s next, requiring a licence to not wash my hands after using a public bathroom?
You’d need a note from a senator, your doctor, or your preacher.
Beginning to suspect these laws exist to criminals the existence of transgender people.
That’s the entire point. One of the goals of the heritage foundation is to criminalize trans people and this is one way they’re trying to do it.
Not just transgender – anybody who doesn’t quite conform to gender norms.
A cis man who looks too feminine or a cis woman who looks too masculine will also be a victim of these laws, because people ‘suspect’ them of being trans.
It ultimately boils down to ‘conservatives’ trying to enforce gender norms, as they always have: at the point of a gun.
I can kind of understand why places like women’s domestic violence shelters and women’s prisons need a legal definition of “woman” in order to define who is allowed in them (and have no opinion on what it should be). Places where there is actual physical or logistical infrastructure in place to make sure men don’t enter them…
But bathrooms? Someone wanting to commit sex crimes (or similar) against women in bathrooms is just going to walk into them and do exactly that, they aren’t going to change their legal gender just to do that because that doesn’t make it either easier or harder to physically get in there.
I can kind of understand why places like women’s domestic violence shelters and women’s prisons need a legal definition of “woman” in order to define who is allowed in them
I’ve found that a lot of these policies are a legacy of affirmative action in response to the historic gulf in wealth between women and men.
They don’t exist to keep men out. They exist to give women in abusive relationships a place to go without facing homelessness.
One might argue that gay men and trans-people can find themselves in exactly the same kind of relationships, for exactly the same reasons.
Yeah as a trans woman if I were in a DV situation I wouldn’t even think I could go to a shelter. To my knowledge when we flee such situations we generally rely on friends (we’re less likely to have family we can stay with).
Though tbh in the modern day we need shelters that can accommodate anyone, because anyone can be victims of financial abuse alongside DV. Additionally the problems associate with abusive men entering a shelter are still faced by women fleeing DV by a female partner.
One might argue that gay men and trans-people can find themselves in exactly the same kind of relationships, for exactly the same reasons.
Straight cis men can also be the victim of an abusive relationship. Maybe not quite as frequently, but it happens.
Yeah but I make more money, and am bigger/stronger/ less physically vulnerable if I was stuck in a bad place late at night
All things being equal, it still isn’t equal
Well that’s good for you, but irrelevant to the point. Unless you’re saying all men are your equal in every way. Which is philosophically nice, but realistically wrong.
I’m saying that statistically, CIS straight women are still worse off than any man.
Yes, I’m not arguing against this, but it’s irrelevant to my point, because it ignores the people who are statistically unlikely to need help, and yet still do. I understood the whole point to be “We need more shelters accepting of everyone,” because a HUGE number of shelters specify they are for women and children only. Which, simply put, is just saying, “No men above 18 allowed.”
Don’t get me wrong, I understand the reason. I’m very aware of the bear analogy. But that doesn’t make the lives of those excluded any easier
Except then you end up with trans people barred from all domestic violence shelters. The trans woman will be barred from the women’s shelter because they assume she has a certain kind of anatomy and physical strength and judge her a threat accordingly. Most cis people are comically ignorant about trans people’s bodies and believe garbage stereotypes about trans women just being “men in dresses.” In reality most trans women are biologically female. When she tries to go to the men’s shelter, she will be told she’s not safe there. And really, she wouldn’t be. Meanwhile trans women face violence and abuse at rates far far higher than cis women.
Not necessarily, a legal definition of woman could include trans women too, the question is then how do you get recognized as such… fortunately I am not a politician and don’t have to have an opinion on everything…
Given the insane amount of bureaucracy and red tape we have to go through just to get meds, it wouldn’t be too hard. The nuance is in finding a way to include those who only seek to transition socially, not medically. Honestly a therapist’s letter might suffice.
I’ve been on HRT for 12 years, and I still struggle obtaining refills sometimes
You could do it in a way similar to how name changes are. My name change wasn’t terribly expensive, but it was kinda a pain in the ass. Hell you could make it an optional part of the name change process as well.
Ideally you won’t have to publish it in a newspaper (archaic bullshit I had to do), but other than that the whole having to schedule with a judge and go on public record and under oath saying “this is what I’m doing, I’m not trying to do anything nefarious, this is just how I’d prefer to live my life”.
But yeah, the therapist (or social worker) thing also works, I know some US states allow for them to sign off gender marker changes.
And yeah, any time I move or change insurance getting hormones is a pain in the ass, even when I can just tell a Dr what dose I’ve been on since bottom surgery
I had to do a similar thing for my US name change. When I changed my name in my home country, I just had to sign an affidavit stating it’s for trans related reasons.
There’s plenty of ways to go about it, we just need legal recognition but apparently that’s too much to ask for
Sure. But context matters. No one who wants cares enough about a non-existent problem to create a formal and enforced definition of “woman” is going to do so in a trans-inclusive way.
It is a problem in prisons, where lots of men are in women’s prisons because they start identifying as a woman
Ah, I see. So the solution is to abolish prisons. Got it.
There’s also V-coding as an explicit and intentional practice
They do, its being pushed in the UK a fair bit lately.
I too enjoy a bit of malicious compliance.
Allies and the community never really talk about how trans masculine people in general get targeted. Apparently we aren’t worth mentioning until it’s too late
I was waiting for this to happen.
Props to the brave boys for sticking their necks out, when no one would have cared if they used the men’s room.Then again, no one cares what goes on in there :'(
There was so much harassment/assault happening in the boys room in my elementary/middle school my baby trans ass thought trans men and trans women all used the women’s room for safety.
We need only 2 bathrooms: 1 to sit down and 1 to stand up
I have issues with the term “transgender”, if you clearly look like male as a biological male, and just for the sake call yourself woman to enter a woman’s bathroom.This looks like it was just a stunt to annoy people and unfortunately, actions like these, will lower the tolerance of the general public towards transgenders.Edit: Sleep deprived me read something totally different. Never mind.
Did you fail to understand the article? A law was passed requiring trans men to use women’s bathrooms. This wasn’t a stunt to annoy people, it was malicious compliance. By organising a group of trans men to all use women’s bathrooms in different places at the same time, it became obvious from the reactions that the law was ridiculous.
Again. If you call yourself a transwoman and clearly have a full beard, I understand that the public gets upset.
What are you talking about? There are no trans women with beards in this post or thread.
I should definitely sleep. I totally read something different and I don’t know why. Now I can see that it is about trans-men being forced to use the woman’s bathroom. That’s stupid.
Sorry for my confusing comment. Will edit it.
transwoman
It’s trans woman. “Transwoman”/“transman” is a way TERFs refer to trans people to “other” them.
You are fundamentally misunderstanding.
Trans people, men or women, present the way they feel. And, until this bullshit bathroom law, would do exactly as you are saying, they would use the restrooms that matched the gender they present as. But this law makes that illegal. Now they are told to use the bathrooms that match their birth gender.
Now they comply and the cops still get called.
All of this was called out when these dipshit bills were being passed too. And let’s be real, some women look butch and some men can have slighter features. They also get caught up in this trans panic bullshit.
These laws were made to remove certain people from public spaces. Trans people can’t legally go to the bathroom if it doesn’t match their birth gender, and when they do they still get chased out because they do not look like their birth gender anymore.
Millions of dollars focused on specific genitals pissing and shitting in specific toilets.
Yep, which is why I edited my comment 10 minutes ago.
Word. Edit wasn’t up when I got here. 👍
EDIT: Rock a bye baby, turn the phone off. Sleep and resty.
These are trans men. They did not hurt our cause, they showed people like you how fucking stupid anti-trans legislation and bathroom bans are. I agree, those men should use the men’s bathroom. Unfortunately they are breaking Kansas law if they do. Their licenses have even have been forcibly changed back to “female” since that was their birth sex.Introspect if you think minorities protesting their erasure and genocide are “annoying” or “hurting their cause”. If you were alive during the civil rights movement, would you have said the same of Rosa Parks?I appreciate you clarifying you were tired and misread or misunderstood what this was about.
Why does everyone wants to go into the women’s bathrooms? Transwomen and transmen? I see people upset about transwomen not being able to go to women’s bathrooms, fine, but shouldn’t those same people
askask transmen go to men’s bathrooms? Aren’t they men? Just like how transwomen are women?Trans men don’t want to go to the women’s bathroom, but they’re legally required to do so under Kansas law. This is a protest where they follow the law-as-written to draw attention to how stupid it is. I can guarantee you that these dudes (even the ones who didn’t get the cops called on them) were humiliated by using the women’s bathroom, but they overcame that to raise awareness for trans rights.
That makes sense. Thanks. I just wanted some context. I didn’t actually know there was a difference between saying transmen and trans men. Today I learned.
The context is that Republicans are a combination of incredibly cruel and apocalyptically stupid.
transmen and trans men.
There isn’t really, except I don’t think transmen is actually a word.
What did you learn? Edit: oh about two words
Nobody cares about who goes into the men’s room. They only care about women’s restrooms because of moral panic bullshit.
Unisex bathrooms everywhere is the real solution, but then there wouldn’t be an opportunity to harm marginalized people.
I like the idea of unisex bathrooms. I feel like it would solve so many problems.
Just like the ones in our homes.
You have very poor reading comprehension.
Ok
It’s not transwomen or transmen, it’s trans women or trans men. Just like it’s not tallmen or shortwomen, trans is just an adjective.
With the exception of some non binary people, most of the opeople who want to use the women’s bathrooms are typically women, cis women or trans women. These trans men are using the women’s bathroom because the law dictates that is the bathroom they are required to use, not because it is the bathroom they want to use.
transwomen transmen
Trans is short for “transgender”. TERFs combine “trans” and “women”/“men” usually to other trans people. You’re saying trangenderman and transgenderwoman.
“I’m a woman unlike that tallwoman over there.” - most TERFs apparently
