No, that’s not my assumption and I don’t oppose transgender rights. Read the thread title.
Is there any man who would assault a woman in a public restroom who wouldn’t assault her somewhere else as well? Bathrooms might be special for being dead-ends but there are other dead-ends in the world. If we could successfully pass laws that criminalized a man merely being in a woman’s restroom to the extent that we drove out all the would-be assailants, at whatever cost to transgendered people, are we really going to stop assaults or are assailants just going to find some other place, while in the meantime, we have made life pretty tough for transgendered people?
Across the board, absolutely. In NC, where HB2 was passed, there are ~10,000 transgender folks, give or take a few thousand. The law affects them every day.
So my question is, how often do cis men chase women into women’s bathrooms in order to commit violent assault on them?
The point is that passing laws that would keep a transwoman from using the woman’s restroom does nothing to protect “helpless females” in those restrooms, because the commission of assault, in those restrooms or anywhere else, is already illegal.
Passing such laws does not ‘drive out all the would-be assailants.’ If a would-be assailant is interested in committing assault, a law saying “no one with Male on their birth certificate may enter” is NOT going to stop him from entering. And if he does enter and commit an assault, the presence OR absence of a law saying “no one with Male on their birth certificate may enter” will make no difference whatsoever to his prosecution for assault.
If such a law exists, he will still be prosecuted for assault. If no such law exists, he will still be prosecuted for assault. The presence of such laws is just like the absence of such laws in that neither condition provides the assaulter with a defense. And neither the presence of such laws nor the absence of such laws will deter a man who is determined to commit assault.
As I said before: the idea that such laws would protect those Helpless women and girls is fallacious.
Men who assault women look for easy targets and opportunities. Public restrooms are obviously one of those. Making it easier for assailants to find hunting grounds is detrimental to women’s safety.
And yet, I’ve never heard a public outcry for individual single-occupant locker rooms, or the like, to solve this “problem”.
EDIT: ZPG Zealot, if the issue is how easy it is for men to find these places, then I guess the solution is to remove the signs for restrooms. Those do, after all, “make it easier for assailants to find hunting grounds”, unlike the laws in question.
Welcome to the board. Please bear in mind that Lefty was replying to someone who insists that simply shaking hands with the opposite sex is rape.
That’s not obvious to me at all. A public restroom has only one exit, and it’s unpredictable when someone else will come in.
But maybe you’re right. Are you basing your beliefs on facts, or on theories? If the latter, I’ve got a competing theory, and there’s no real way forward. If you’re basing your beliefs on facts, what are the facts? How many sexual assaults do we see in public multiple-stall restrooms, committed by cisgender men on women?
Edit: Here are some domestic/sexual violence groups objecting to this sort of law, but I’m unable to find the statistics for the sort of crime you’re describing. Again, we’re talking about sexual assaults committed by cisgender men on women in multiple-stall public restrooms.
It’s not just about attacks, but people not wanting to be “checked out”. But that’s silly too, because gay males and females use the bathroom with you as well.
The funny thing about this whole controversy is that it’s not even really about the transgendered. Its’ about straight males, who society deems uniquely dangerous.
…well. I’m a straight male myself, so I don’t want to cast aspersions on us, and #notallmen and all, but overwhelmingly the folks who commit sexual assault are straight men. If we’re trying to figure out which group needs special supervision and special education to prevent sexual assault, straight men might be a good place to start.
But that’s going a bit afield.
Definitely the greatest sexual assault threat for women, sure, since gay men aren’t going to be assaulting women much.
But I think the main practical fear people have is straight men just waltzing into women’s locker rooms and checking them out. Except that’s not really a threat in any real sense, since chances are in any women’s locker room there are already gay women checking them out as well.
Seriously? In my observation mothers rarely let little boys under the age of 7 or 8 or so go to the mens room all by themselves. They either send them into the mens room with their dads or older brothers, or drag the poor little guys into the ladies room (which lots of people talk about!). I really don’t think they’re worried that the boys are going to make a mess or break something in the mens room if they’re in there unsupervised…
You’re quite right that ‘women disliking being checked out by someone they don’t fancy’ has been possible in restrooms and locker rooms all along.
But–and this is to the thread in general–we might all take notice of the fact that the Obama Administration letter telling schools they must let transgender students use the restroom of their choice was issued back in MAY of last year. And it was very, very, very well-publicized.
It’s not just newspapers and cable news shows that covered it–it was mentioned everywhere. Late-night talk show comics noted it; it was all over Facebook and Twitter. It was not what you’d call a secret.
In short: any men who might have seen the Obama letter as a green light to enter restrooms and locker rooms for the purpose of ogling have had MORE THAN NINE MONTHS to do their ogling.
So…where are the news stories about men walking into women’s restrooms and locker rooms and gawking at them?
That was essentially my point.
Allowing people to use the restroom of their identity does not make it so easy for a person who was born with a penis, looks like a man, and identifies unambiguously as a man to walk into a woman’s restroom that we are going to stop assaults by preventing trans women from using them-- especially post-op women, and I can’t believe I have to add that.
If we criminalize simply walking into a women’s bathroom with a penis (as opposed to actually committing an assault in one, which BTW, is illegal for women as well), then men with assault on the mind will just go someplace else. Or if the man has a serious fetish for committing assault in a bathroom, he’s going to go in no matter what the law says. But really, how common is that very specific fetish?
Short Version- I agree with Una Persson and Chronos
Personally, I loathe using public restrooms. But, as a cis man who presents male I don’t get hassled for using the men’s room.
If we say ‘use the bathroom based on your birth certificate’, we end up with Buck Angel (who is far more manly and macho than I am) in the women’s room and Laverne Cox in the men’s room.
If we say ‘use the bathroom you present as’ we end up with het cis women who look ‘butch’ getting hassled for using the women’s room and effeminate het cis men being hassled for using the men’s room.
RE This too minor a situation to be worth fighting over
What’s the threshold? At what point is a minority too minor to protect?
Sticking with the thread topic for a sec here, I’d draw the line at men who clearly look like men going into women’s restrooms. If they’re not more interested in it than that then use the stall in the men’s room and call it a day. I want to be left the hell alone when I do MY business and feel a bit vulnerable with my pants down in a semi-private yet public place. I don’t care much about it beyond that or the endless micro-hair splitting over the possibility of one person in a million actually being inconvenienced by the fact that life can not always be perfectly fair to us down to the last percentage, regardless of it being the great big hot topic of the day, sorry. I feel like if anything, zeroing in so very very minutely and detailed on every possible exception about restrooms takes away from the more serious issues that transpeople probably face. Just my opinion, though.
I can say for Europe at large, but over here specifically, unless the place is too small to have more than one bathroom with one stall, you will normally find separate women’s and men’s restrooms.
However, not unfrequently, people will use the other gender restroom when they can’t use the one they’re assigned (all stalls, or the only stall, already in use for instance). I see that happening regularly (and do it myself) and I’m yet to hear someone making a fuss over this.
Yup, I could go for that, exactly.
He must be bigger than Jesus then.
More accurately, Trump just doesn’t care about genders. He’s gonna fuck us all the same.