Okay, so you have your point, and I think that unisex bathrooms would invite even more outrage. We can disagree – clearly all “solutions” to this can attract protests.
I don’t have any problem with unisex bathrooms, I just don’t think they are any better of a solution in the short and medium term, especially since most people prefer gendered bathrooms, than protecting trans people while staying with gendered bathrooms.
Ok, we can disagree, no biggie. As I said, convincing strangers on the Internet of a point of view is not high on my list of goals.
And I suspect most people prefer gender bathrooms because that is all there is available at most places. I don’t prefer the men’s room, just that I’m afraid of getting in trouble for not using it.
I’ll await all the protests over the clearly unisex porta potties 
Porta-potties are single-occupant, and thus there won’t be any worries about sharing with men.
Single-user restrooms are a whole different rhinoceros, though (edit: as I somehow didn’t notice that iiandyiiii had already said). We should probably reserve the term “unisex bathrooms” to refer to multi-user restrooms that may be used simultaneously by all genders.
I had one of those in my coed dorm in college, which even included a unisex multi-user shower, so I personally don’t think they’re that big a deal, but I agree with iiandyiiii that most people would resist the concept, even without the shower.
Stalls are single-occupant, and thus there won’t be any worries about sharing with men. And anyway, what’s with the worries of sharing with men?
Were there stalls in the bathroom? Aren’t stalls single user? How can you share with those dirty, rapey men in a single stall? :rolleyes:
They’re not my worries – just the worries of all those people protesting against trans people using the bathroom. Not that they’re legitimate worries, since allowing trans people to use the bathroom has nothing to do with men sharing bathrooms with women.
All these folks seem to be terribly worried about the women and girls in their lives potentially sharing a restroom (even with stalls) with men, at least according to their own words when protesting trans access to bathrooms.
Well, those people are morons.
Yes. AFAIK, pretty much all multi-user restrooms in public places or dorms/workplaces, whether unisex or gender-segregated, have single-user stalls within them for the individual toilets.
Ours also had a single-user urinal discreetly located in an alcove between the wall and the wall of the last stall.
[QUOTE=Slash1972]
How can you share with those dirty, rapey men in a single stall? :rolleyes:
[/QUOTE]
Did you get me mixed up with some other poster, or did you get an early start on your weekend refreshments, or what? What does this absurd trollery have to do with anything I said?
Yes they are!
Sorry, that wasn’t meant at you. That was meant toward people who automatically assume men will just start raping women if ever able to go into women’s room. It may have sounded weird, because yes I did get started on my weekend refreshments (it’s 8 here so it’s not early)
Yay! We agree on something! I’m gonna have a beer to celebrate!
Cool. So stop pretending they don’t.
So which side will you be on in this?
Do you tell the protesters there is no harm to being in unisex bathrooms?
Do you tell them they hate the opposite sex if they don’t want to be in a bathroom with them?
By your definition (AFAICT), all bathrooms in all of human history except those with 100% and failure-free genital checks were unisex, since someone might “slip past” them. I’m pretty sure zero bathrooms ever meet this criteria.
By my definition, gendered bathrooms can ‘survive’ the occasional violation of convention, since the vast majority of the time people will still use the bathroom that matches their gender identity.
In this case, as far as I understand it, on the side of the school, since they seem to be more interested in protecting trans people. But I think this tactic to protect trans people will probably be less successful, in the present, then continuing with gendered bathrooms that respect and protect trans people, since all the “problems” (in case I haven’t made it clear despite repeating it so often – I don’t believe these are real problems) that the anti-trans people complain about seem to be magnified exponentially by unisex bathrooms.
Sure, but I seriously doubt I’ll change anyone’s mind.
???
No, obviously, but why are you asking me such a ridiculous question?
Is protecting trans people the only goal you have?
As for harm, since harm is your only criteria for allowing people to prefer a certain bathroom, wouldn’t you tell those who oppose unisex bathrooms that they are out of luck because there’s no harm if they use them?
Some people claim that the only reason one could oppose allowing transgender access to restrooms of their gender is that they hate transgender people. Hence my question.
Protecting people from harm is certainly the main goal.
What do you mean “allowing people to prefer a certain bathroom”? When have I said anything about what feelings are allowed? Anyone can feel anything they like. I have no interest in policing feelings.
Whatever it is you’re trying to ask, you’ll have to phrase it differently.
Who has said this, and when have I said this? I believe that opposing allowing transgender access to bathrooms is bigoted against trans people, but bigotry doesn’t require hatred (usually it only requires ignorance), but I’m pretty sure I’ve never said anything about hate in this way.
But there’s nobody else who needs protecting…is there?
Are there any other people you feel need protecting from harm by using a gender-segregated restroom?
Exactly.
So you don’t care about gendered restrooms. They’re about nothing but feelings. So just say you don’t care.
If someone asks you to help them in their struggle to pass a law requiring businesses to offer men only and women only restrooms, what would you tell them? Do you think they have a right to it, or not?
Well…
What’s the difference?
Fine, if you want to say “bigoted” instead of “hatred” go with that. Do you think wanting not to pee with members of the opposite sex means someone who opposes unisex restrooms is bigoted?
Not that I can think of.
I’ve said this many, many times. Probably dozens of times. I’m pretty sure you’ve even asked me something like this before and I responded by saying “I’ve said this exact thing many, many times already”. I don’t care if bathrooms are gendered or unisex. I want trans people to be protected, in whatever bathroom system society decides upon.
Sounds like something I have no interest in supporting. I probably wouldn’t care either way. They have a right to advocate for anything they like.
Not necessarily, but believe that transmen are not men, and transwomen are not women, is bigoted against trans people. So not wanting to pee with a transwwman (but being fine with peeing next to a cis woman) is bigoted, in my opinion. That bigotry is likely based on ignorance, and can be corrected with education (like most forms of bigotry), but it’s still bigotry, IMO.