# The lance strongarm transgender bathroom and poly marriage extravaganza thread! **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [April 5, 2016, 11:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lance-strongarm-transgender-bathroom-and-poly-marriage-extravaganza-thread/751244 "2016-04-05T11:31:02Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 10
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2016, 10:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lance-strongarm-transgender-bathroom-and-poly-marriage-extravaganza-thread/751244/181 "2016-04-11T22:55:09Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > Cool. There are LOTS of them out there. Mormons, Muslims. I think you probably know that they will tell you they would like equality of marriage too. > > The point is this - IF they tell you they want it, will you live up to your beliefs and support it too? Welcome back! I would definitely listen to their arguments (and the arguments of others) and strongly consider supporting it, depending on my evaluation of what everyone says (and other research, if necessary). ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2016, 11:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lance-strongarm-transgender-bathroom-and-poly-marriage-extravaganza-thread/751244/182 "2016-04-11T23:17:33Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Welcome back! Thanks. > [@](#): > > would definitely listen to their arguments (and the arguments of others) and strongly consider supporting it, depending on my evaluation of what everyone says (and other research, if necessary). I find that to be really waffly, dodgy language. Do you support equality in marriage, or not? What other “evaluation” or “research” do you need? P.S. thanks for naming a thread after me. First time that’s happened (when it’s a good thing). ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2016, 11:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lance-strongarm-transgender-bathroom-and-poly-marriage-extravaganza-thread/751244/183 "2016-04-11T23:21:11Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > Thanks. > > I find that to be really waffly, dodgy language. Do you support equality in marriage, or not? What other “evaluation” or “research” do you need? I support gay marriage. I don’t feel that I know enough about poly marriage, especially from people who are or have been in poly relationships, to make a final and confident determination on poly marriage. Why is uncertainty so wrong? Isn’t it reasonable to hold back judgment if I feel that I don’t know enough about the issue, and especially when I haven’t heard from the people involved (both folks who are in poly relationships and folks who escaped from them)? > [@](#): > > P.S. thanks for naming a thread after me. First time that’s happened (when it’s a good thing). You’re very welcome! ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2016, 11:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lance-strongarm-transgender-bathroom-and-poly-marriage-extravaganza-thread/751244/184 "2016-04-11T23:52:08Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > That’s just rehashing the thread again. > > At the time I made the post about SJWs I don’t think the issue of safety had come up yet, and at any rate my comment about SJWs was in the context of my having laid out the issues as being competing discomfort. > > Subsequent to that post, someone raised the issue of safety and I questioned whether safety was an issue with using birth certificate bathrooms specifically or possibly the risks were the same or greater with using the gender-identity bathrooms, and then UP claimed to have some secret sources that she had posted elsewhere but declined to share here, and the rest is history. > > But again, the comment about SJW was not addressing the safety aspect. Yes, it was. They are one and the same argument. Because the only reason to feel discomfort in this situation is if you feel unsafe. If you do not fear that something bad will happen to you, then there is no discomfort. Someone who is different from you is not discomforting unless you are scared of them. The point is that you have one group that wants to just act like normal people, and not have to be discriminated against. You don’t even ever really have to know they are there. (For all you know, that mannish looking woman with a beard has a testosterone problem.) The other group is scared of people either because of their genitals or because they went through surgery to get them changed. And I know it’s been said already, but, since you brought it up again, I will say this much: It’s not dueling concerns. It’s wanting to forbid discrimination against those who want to mandate it. The government has reasons to get involved in one, but should never get involved in the other. It is not the government’s job to mandate discrimination to make you feel comfortable. It is your job to get the fuck over your innate fear of what is different if you want to participate in society. But it is the government’s job to stop public businesses from discrimination, and has been since the Civil Rights era. The government can make trans/cis/genderqueer status\* a protected class. The parallels to marriage equality (and how people came up with the boogeyman of destroying opposite sex marriage) have already been made quite recently in the thread, so I will leave that out. Sure, both sides have concerns, but only one side’s concerns are legitimate. So they aren’t dueling concerns. Its not like, say, wanting to stay safe from terrorists and wanting to let in refugees. There both sides have valid concerns, and a balance needs to be made–hence extreme background checks. \*I’d argue that genderqueer is already protected by laws against sexual discrimination. And I could see that actually being the way to say that these laws are unconstitutional on a federal level, with trans just being on the gender continuum meaning “Y but assigned X at birth.” Also, anyone know a word for trans/cis status? You know, like how race is used to encompass all races instead of black/white/Asian/Hispanic/etc? ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2016, 1:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lance-strongarm-transgender-bathroom-and-poly-marriage-extravaganza-thread/751244/185 "2016-04-12T13:39:54Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > I support gay marriage. I don’t feel that I know enough about poly marriage, especially from people who are or have been in poly relationships, to make a final and confident determination on poly marriage. > > Why is uncertainty so wrong? Isn’t it reasonable to hold back judgment if I feel that I don’t know enough about the issue, and especially when I haven’t heard from the people involved (both folks who are in poly relationships and folks who escaped from them)? Did you talk to gay people and do lots of research before deciding to support gay marriage? Did you talk to transgender people and do lots of research before deciding to support transgender rights? The larger point is this - someone like you shouldn’t say you support “the right of anyone to marry someone they love” if indeed you go around saying that. If you don’t, never mind. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2016, 1:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lance-strongarm-transgender-bathroom-and-poly-marriage-extravaganza-thread/751244/186 "2016-04-12T13:44:43Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > Did you talk to gay people and do lots of research before deciding to support gay marriage? Did you talk to transgender people and do lots of research before deciding to support transgender rights? Absolutely. > [@](#): > > The larger point is this - someone like you shouldn’t say you support “the right of anyone to marry someone they love” if indeed you go around saying that. If you don’t, never mind. I don’t think I’ve said this. On to transgender folks and bathrooms? 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2016, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lance-strongarm-transgender-bathroom-and-poly-marriage-extravaganza-thread/751244/187 "2016-04-12T16:21:22Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > I’m not sure what you’re saying. I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with moving from injustice to injustice, per se. > > As above, the issue with the SJW as relates to this particular issue is that he will tend to over-weigh the specific injustice that he’s chosen to be a hero about as compared to other considerations involved. > > The part about them moving from one issue to the next simply implies that when the attention of SJWs turns to a given issue then the importance of this particular issue will come to have disproportionate weight that it did not have before SJWs seized on it. Thus the solving of one social injustice will cause another “lucky” social injustice to get magnified in proportion to other injustices, if it happens to be the one that is seized on by SJWs. It seems like you’re saying that these people have some kind of social Munchausen disease where they try to “fix” things that aren’t really broken, and in turn cause other issues that they can then fix. Is that a correct interpretation of what you’re saying? If so, can you give me a few examples where you see this happening? ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2016, 4:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lance-strongarm-transgender-bathroom-and-poly-marriage-extravaganza-thread/751244/188 "2016-04-12T16:43:22Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Absolutely. You did? Can you describe that process please? I can say I read about it, a little, but I didn’t go out and interview gays and transgenders before deciding whether to support their rights. It wasn’t a difficult decision for me. Was it for you\>? > [@](#): > > I don’t think I’ve said this. Okay, but many have. > [@](#): > > On to transgender folks and bathrooms? 🙂 Sure - I recently saw someone elsewhere post that “nobody should care about who the person is next to them when they’re taking a pee.” Okay, but by that standard, couldn’t we tell a transgender person they shouldn’t care who the person is next to them when they pee, so they shouldn’t have a claim on a particular restroom? Let alone the fact that this is an argument for getting rid of gendered restrooms altogether. I just really don’t like lazy thinking and shaky logic, that’s all. I know some of these things are simple slogans, but they matter. When I see someone post “why is the South so backward?” (about the laws restricting transgender access to bathrooms) and then someone who supports those laws coming back with “You’re calling us backward when you think someone with male genitals should use the women’s room,” it matters. Not getting the words right can backfire. ---
**Author:** ![wevets](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9a140/32.png) [@wevets](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wevets)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2016, 4:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lance-strongarm-transgender-bathroom-and-poly-marriage-extravaganza-thread/751244/189 "2016-04-12T16:47:42Z")
The audio chapters here will tell you everything you need to know about the term “Social Justice Warrior” and where people who use it are coming from: > **[“John Scalzi Is Not A Very Popular Author And I Myself Am Quite Popular,” the...](https://whatever.scalzi.com/2015/08/29/john-scalzi-is-not-a-very-popular-author-and-i-myself-am-quite-popular-the-audiobook-read-by-me-john-scalzi/)** > > Quick recap: John Scalzi Is Not A Very Popular Author And I Myself Am Quite Popular is a parody of an ebook by an obnoxious bigot who is obsessed with me, and I said (full details here) that if peo… ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2016, 4:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lance-strongarm-transgender-bathroom-and-poly-marriage-extravaganza-thread/751244/190 "2016-04-12T16:49:47Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > I just really don’t like lazy thinking and shaky logic, that’s all. We’re not thrilled with it either, but you won’t stop posting. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2016, 4:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lance-strongarm-transgender-bathroom-and-poly-marriage-extravaganza-thread/751244/191 "2016-04-12T16:55:03Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > We’re not thrilled with it either, but you won’t stop posting. Well, you won’t stop reading, so… ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2016, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lance-strongarm-transgender-bathroom-and-poly-marriage-extravaganza-thread/751244/192 "2016-04-12T16:58:54Z")
> [@YogSothoth](#): > > It seems like you’re saying that these people have some kind of social Munchausen disease where they try to “fix” things that aren’t really broken, and in turn cause other issues that they can then fix. Is that a correct interpretation of what you’re saying? I wouldn’t say “not really broken”. More like “not as bad as they convince themselves”. If you could rank all the injustices and problems in the world from 1 to 10 in terms of how bad of a problem it is and how unjust, then whatever injustice they happen to seize on will automatically move up in rating by virtue of them having seized on it. The reason is that a person who likes/needs to feel like they are virtuously fighting injustice feels a lot better about themselves if they’re fighting an 8 injustice than if they’re fighting a 3 injustice. So they have a big incentive to convince themselves that the injustices they’re fighting are worse than they actually are. Which is of course not to say that a 3 injustice is not an injustice. But this becomes relevant when - as is frequently the case - the remedy for a given injustice involves infringing on other people or other concerns. If you ranked the injustice a 3, then there’s only so far you might go in rectifying it at the expense of others. If you’ve ranked it an 8, you would go a lot further. So the tendency of SJW to inflate the level of evil they’re fighting has a real impact in terms of extent to which they feel the injustice they’re fighting trumps other concerns. I’ve suggested in this specific instance, that the tendency of many people to see the discomfort of a relatively small number of trans people as trumping the comparable discomfort of a much greater number of cis people could be partly the result of this dynamic. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2016, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lance-strongarm-transgender-bathroom-and-poly-marriage-extravaganza-thread/751244/193 "2016-04-12T17:27:03Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > You did? Can you describe that process please? > > I can say I read about it, a little, but I didn’t go out and interview gays and transgenders before deciding whether to support their rights. It wasn’t a difficult decision for me. Was it for you\>? It wasn’t anything formal – it was happening to talk to gay friends and acquaintances about it, happening to read articles by gay writers, happening to read and hear the opinions of those opposed to it, and the like. Similarly, for transgender issues, it was happening to talk to transgender people (I’ve only known a few that were open), reading articles and advocacy by them, reading and hearing opinions opposed to their rights, etc. I’ve not spoken to poly folks, and I’ve not read articles by poly folks and pro-poly folks, and I’ve not read and heard opinions from those opposed (including women who have escaped from involuntary poly situations), and the like. > [@](#): > > Sure - I recently saw someone elsewhere post that “nobody should care about who the person is next to them when they’re taking a pee.” Okay, but by that standard, couldn’t we tell a transgender person they shouldn’t care who the person is next to them when they pee, so they shouldn’t have a claim on a particular restroom? Let alone the fact that this is an argument for getting rid of gendered restrooms altogether. > > I just really don’t like lazy thinking and shaky logic, that’s all. I know some of these things are simple slogans, but they matter. When I see someone post “why is the South so backward?” (about the laws restricting transgender access to bathrooms) and then someone who supports those laws coming back with “You’re calling us backward when you think someone with male genitals should use the women’s room,” it matters. Not getting the words right can backfire. I think it’s “lazy thinking and shaky logic” to insist that an extremely unlikely path (non-gendered bathrooms) that _no one is asking for_ when _no one is demonstrating harm in the present circumstance of gendered bathroom_ necessarily follows from support for allowing transgender people to use the bathroom that matches their gender identity. If all you’re arguing about is “getting the words right”, then fire away – perhaps more nuance and specificity will lead to more persuasive arguments. But it can be entirely reasonable and consistent to demand that transgender people be allowed to use the bathroom that matches their gender identity while not insisting upon a change from gendered to non-gendered bathrooms. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2016, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lance-strongarm-transgender-bathroom-and-poly-marriage-extravaganza-thread/751244/194 "2016-04-12T17:29:49Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > I’ve suggested in this specific instance, that the tendency of many people to see the discomfort of a relatively small number of trans people as trumping the comparable discomfort of a much greater number of cis people could be partly the result of this dynamic. Has anyone in this thread (or any other) suggested this (that the issue is only about competing discomfort)? ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2016, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lance-strongarm-transgender-bathroom-and-poly-marriage-extravaganza-thread/751244/195 "2016-04-12T17:49:54Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > I wouldn’t say “not really broken”. More like “not as bad as they convince themselves”. > > If you could rank all the injustices and problems in the world from 1 to 10 in terms of how bad of a problem it is and how unjust, then whatever injustice they happen to seize on will automatically move up in rating by virtue of them having seized on it. The reason is that a person who likes/needs to feel like they are virtuously fighting injustice feels a lot better about themselves if they’re fighting an 8 injustice than if they’re fighting a 3 injustice. So they have a big incentive to convince themselves that the injustices they’re fighting are worse than they actually are. > > Which is of course not to say that a 3 injustice is not an injustice. But this becomes relevant when - as is frequently the case - the remedy for a given injustice involves infringing on other people or other concerns. If you ranked the injustice a 3, then there’s only so far you might go in rectifying it at the expense of others. If you’ve ranked it an 8, you would go a lot further. So the tendency of SJW to inflate the level of evil they’re fighting has a real impact in terms of extent to which they feel the injustice they’re fighting trumps other concerns. I think that the impact of trying to fix a certain injustice should be kept as a separate discussion. Whether a given injustice is an 8 or a 3, it still deserves to be fixed, can we agree on that? And whether its an 8 or a 3 differs depending on impact. To you, a situation might be a 3, and to someone else it personally affects, its an 8. Why infer that someone else’s problems aren’t serious simply because its not serious to you? As far as rectifying it at the expense of others, you would agree that lots of what we consider “normal” is just a social construct and that there is no universal normal for many of the things we believe, yes? If so, then getting people to change that social perception isn’t harming them, and over the long run, is worth it even if some people are uncomfortable. It took years for people to be comfortable with interracial marriage, we still have people opposed to it, but it was worth it. So too do I and a lot of SJWs see the worth of getting people to accept certain things that 10 or 20 years ago we wouldn’t have imagined, but 10 or 20 in the future may be as common as interracial marriage. > [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > I’ve suggested in this specific instance, that the tendency of many people to see the discomfort of a relatively small number of trans people as trumping the comparable discomfort of a much greater number of cis people could be partly the result of this dynamic. I wouldn’t equate the two. Discomfort by a cis is different from discomfort as a trans, and one, I think, is a serious problem and the other is a misunderstanding that people can learn to accept. Here’s what I’d like to know: since cis people are uncomfortable now, and if work isn’t being done to educate them and have them accept it, when will it ever be ok to try and fix this? 50 years, 100 years, never? And consider what progress we’ve made on gay rights in these last 10 years, was that worth it? Or should gays have waited even longer? What type of time and environment is ideal to you that an injured minority should wait until fighting for equal rights? ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2016, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lance-strongarm-transgender-bathroom-and-poly-marriage-extravaganza-thread/751244/196 "2016-04-12T18:09:02Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > It wasn’t anything formal – it was happening to talk to gay friends and acquaintances about it, happening to read articles by gay writers, happening to read and hear the opinions of those opposed to it, and the like. Similarly, for transgender issues, it was happening to talk to transgender people (I’ve only known a few that were open), reading articles and advocacy by them, reading and hearing opinions opposed to their rights, etc. > > I’ve not spoken to poly folks, and I’ve not read articles by poly folks and pro-poly folks, and I’ve not read and heard opinions from those opposed (including women who have escaped from involuntary poly situations), and the like. Cool. So I guess you’ll now go do the research and read the articles. > [@](#): > > I think it’s “lazy thinking and shaky logic” to insist that an extremely unlikely path (non-gendered bathrooms) that _no one is asking for_ when _no one is demonstrating harm in the present circumstance of gendered bathroom_ necessarily follows from support for allowing transgender people to use the bathroom that matches their gender identity. No, it’s lazy thinking to say that I can’t point out lazy thinking based on “it’s unlikely.” You don’t know if it is unlikely - it wasn’t long ago that we both would have thought gay marriage and transgender bathroom access laws were unlikely - and it doesn’t matter anyway. If you state a principle, you suppport that principle, or you don’t. > [@](#): > > If all you’re arguing about is “getting the words right”, then fire away – perhaps more nuance and specificity will lead to more persuasive arguments. But it can be entirely reasonable and consistent to demand that transgender people be allowed to use the bathroom that matches their gender identity while not insisting upon a change from gendered to non-gendered bathrooms. Perhaps, but if I don’t push the issue, those who oppose it will, and you should be prepared to answer, and not pretend it’s so easy. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2016, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lance-strongarm-transgender-bathroom-and-poly-marriage-extravaganza-thread/751244/197 "2016-04-12T18:17:16Z")
> [@YogSothoth](#): > > I think that the impact of trying to fix a certain injustice should be kept as a separate discussion. Whether a given injustice is an 8 or a 3, it still deserves to be fixed, can we agree on that? And whether its an 8 or a 3 differs depending on impact. To you, a situation might be a 3, and to someone else it personally affects, its an 8. It’s relevant because - as mentioned - you frequently need to impose on others in order to solve problems. This is generally the case. You can’t always figure out with 100% certainty how big of a problem something is, and as you say it can vary by person, but you do your best. (ISTM that this is a universally accepted approach, as a general rule.) > [@](#): > > As far as rectifying it at the expense of others, you would agree that lots of what we consider “normal” is just a social construct and that there is no universal normal for many of the things we believe, yes? If so, then getting people to change that social perception isn’t harming them, and over the long run, is worth it even if some people are uncomfortable. It took years for people to be comfortable with interracial marriage, we still have people opposed to it, but it was worth it. So too do I and a lot of SJWs see the worth of getting people to accept certain things that 10 or 20 years ago we wouldn’t have imagined, but 10 or 20 in the future may be as common as interracial marriage. Social constructs are real. I don’t think the government should be dismissing or minimizing things just because they’re social constructs. As has been repeatedly noted here, the entire point of having bathrooms which are separate by gender is a social construct. > [@](#): > > Here’s what I’d like to know: since cis people are uncomfortable now, and if work isn’t being done to educate them and have them accept it, when will it ever be ok to try and fix this? 50 years, 100 years, never? > > And consider what progress we’ve made on gay rights in these last 10 years, was that worth it? Or should gays have waited even longer? What type of time and environment is ideal to you that an injured minority should wait until fighting for equal rights? We’re not discussing educating. You can educate to your hearts content any time you want. We’re discussing imposing things by law. (And I don’t see the bathroom issue as being one of “equal rights”.) ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2016, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lance-strongarm-transgender-bathroom-and-poly-marriage-extravaganza-thread/751244/198 "2016-04-12T18:25:53Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > Cool. > > So I guess you’ll now go do the research and read the articles. I certainly will as I come across them, and I look forward to running into and talking to pro and anti-poly folks, and folks both in poly relationships and those who were forced into them and subsequently escaped them. Learning is great, huh? 🙂 > [@](#): > > No, it’s lazy thinking to say that I can’t point out lazy thinking based on “it’s unlikely.” You don’t know if it is unlikely - it wasn’t long ago that we both would have thought gay marriage and transgender bathroom access laws were unlikely - and it doesn’t matter anyway. If you state a principle, you suppport that principle, or you don’t. It’s based on far more than just “unlikely” (the far more important points are that _no one is asking for it_ and _no one has demonstrated (or even complained of) harm from gendered bathrooms_). My principle is that everyone should have the right to use the bathroom without fear of threats or assault, and if gendered bathrooms are in use, then everyone should have the right to use the bathroom associated with their gender identity. > [@](#): > > Perhaps, but if I don’t push the issue, those who oppose it will, and you should be prepared to answer, and not pretend it’s so easy. It’s easy to support the right for transgender people to use the bathroom (since they are being threatened and assaulted for doing so), and it’s easy to not worry about non-gendered bathrooms at this moment, since _no one is asking for them_, and _no one is complaining of harm from gendered bathrooms_. If this changes, then it might not be “so easy”, but in this moment, it is. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2016, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lance-strongarm-transgender-bathroom-and-poly-marriage-extravaganza-thread/751244/199 "2016-04-12T19:09:59Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > It’s based on far more than just “unlikely” (the far more important points are that _no one is asking for it_ and _no one has demonstrated (or even complained of) harm from gendered bathrooms_). Some have complained of harm from using bathrooms with transgender people though. Clearly, harm is not enough for you. I am not saying it’s enough for me either, but harm is problematic. > [@](#): > > everyone should have the right to use the bathroom associated with their gender identity. But then you turn around and say nobody cares about gendered restrooms, or shouldn’t care (as I recall you saying , I could be wrong). You can’t say that transgender people have a right to gendered restrooms if you can’t explain why nobody else does. > [@](#): > > It’s easy to support the right for transgender people to use the bathroom (since they are being threatened and assaulted for doing so), Being assaulted for doing something doesn’t make it a right to do it. > [@](#): > > If this changes, then it might not be “so easy”, but in this moment, it is. I’m glad I’ve prepared you for the future in which people may demand things like poly marriage and non-gendered bathrooms and assert them as civil rights. Good luck in your research. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2016, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lance-strongarm-transgender-bathroom-and-poly-marriage-extravaganza-thread/751244/200 "2016-04-12T19:35:12Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > Some have complained of harm from using bathrooms with transgender people though. Clearly, harm is not enough for you. I am not saying it’s enough for me either, but harm is problematic. They’ve failed to demonstrate harm, from what I can tell. Harm consists of more than just assertions of discomfort – transgender people have demonstrated harm by evidence of threats, assault, and worse. The only thing they’ve (anyone complaining of transgender people using the ‘wrong’ bathroom) demonstrated, that I can see, is intolerance and bigotry. > [@](#): > > But then you turn around and say nobody cares about gendered restrooms, or shouldn’t care (as I recall you saying , I could be wrong). You can’t say that transgender people have a right to gendered restrooms if you can’t explain why nobody else does. Gendered bathrooms are a practice, not a right, in my view, while being allowed to use the bathroom is (or should be) a right. Since transgender people should have this right (as everyone else does) to use the bathroom, if we use the practice of gendered bathrooms, then I think the particular bathroom that fits for everyone (including transgender people) is the one that matches their gender identity. > [@](#): > > Being assaulted for doing something doesn’t make it a right to do it. I think everyone has or should have the right to use the bathroom without being assaulted or threatened. So I’ll add that it’s easy to support this right since _they are humans with bladders and digestive systems_, and since they are sometimes assaulted and threatened and therefore need the right protected. > [@](#): > > I’m glad I’ve prepared you for the future in which people may demand things like poly marriage and non-gendered bathrooms and assert them as civil rights. Good luck in your research. Good luck to you as well! What a great discussion, right? Now, I feel that I was already prepared for these possibilities, but I’m happy to give you some credit for suggesting them, if you like. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lance-strongarm-transgender-bathroom-and-poly-marriage-extravaganza-thread/751244.md?page=9) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-lance-strongarm-transgender-bathroom-and-poly-marriage-extravaganza-thread/751244.md?page=11)