What if instead of men’s and women’s restrooms, I had penis or no-penis restrooms? Would that be better, worse, or the same in the states/cities that ban restroom segregation against transsexuals?
I put a sign on one door that says P and another with NP. (I’m not putting up the little pictures. 
) My policy is that it doesn’t matter what sex you “identify with”: If you urinate out of a penis, use the P door. Otherwise, the NP door.
It’s a little more complicated than that. Many transgender people don’t ever actually have bottom surgery (more transmen than transwomen, for reasons of the state of the technique…phalloplasty is not terribly advanced yet). So there are a lot of transwomen who urinate through their still-intact penis and a whole lot of transmen who don’t have an actual penis to urinate through (even if/when extending the urethra is an option).
Might also be an issue for those unfortunate people who identify as male but through accident or disease have lost their penis. My apologies to any men who are now crossing their legs and whimpering at the notion, but such things do occur.
And this would be enforced…how?
So a man born without a penis or who loses one in an accident, from an attack, or from cancer is required to announce his condition to the world and use the women’s restroom? Glad to see that conservative support for veterans, by forcing them to announce an embarrassing and private injury to the world? Because, while it doesn’t get talked about much, losing the family jewels has always been one of the most-feared war injuries.
And how do you enforce this - if someone who seems kind of masculine goes into a women’s room, do you have someone at the door to inspect their genital region and confirm what’s there? What if a man has a micropenis or a woman has a large clitoris or either has a lot of fat so that it’s not obvious from a quick visual inspection, does your bathroom handler start fondling their junk?
I don’t think you really thought through this brilliant proposal.
I wonder if Ultravires is going to offer a similar apology to any of the men who have lost a penis from war, cancer, or whatever that he just said aren’t actually men. The unexamined assumptions behind support of these bathroom bills are really pretty ugly.
In any reasonable way the private business owner would like to enforce it. Probably pretty much how it is/has been enforced in the country for years prior to it becoming an issue.
I knew you all would come up with the war veteran who had his penis blown off scenario. Can you think of a scenario where that will present a problem?
Would a male patron of the “penis room” go to the business owner and say, “Hey, I was just in the P restroom and there is a guy in there that I know had his ball sack blown off in Iraq. I’m not sure if the IED got his penis or not, but you might want to check.”
If anyone really thinks that this will cause conflict under my proposal, I will be glad to reevaluate it. My question is more of a legal one, since your side is the one proposing these ordinances like Charlotte’s.
So I am not discriminating based on gender, but on whether one has a penis or not. (And before anyone says it, having a penis is not the same as gender, as the left has well instructed us.)
Why would this be an improvement over gender-segregated bathrooms?
I don’t believe that there is any reasonable way for the private business owner to enforce it, hence the question from me and others. Your idea has not been enforced in the country ever, you just proposed it in this thread, so I’m not sure what you mean by ‘years prior’. Also, arguing that we should ignore a problem because it was handled in a certain way for ‘years prior’ when we’re talking about a civil rights issue is completely absurd. Do you have a real answer about how your proposal would work?
How do they currently enforce people going into the “wrong” bathroom?
Wait…what do you mean about “gender-neutral education”? Do you mean somehow that women are supposed to be educated differently than men? That somehow, we’re not equal?
Honestly, you seem to be wound really, really tight.
Well I certainly think it is! Are these women living in 1989? Someone get these poor souls a make-over, STAT! (Seriously, MOM jeans are an abomination to anyone with a sense of fashion.)
When “they” felt that my transgendered friends weren’t manly enough for the men’s room(after after my friends had been told by the bar’s manager they couldn’t use the women’s room), “they” enforced it by beating the crap out of my friends.
That’s the code of the west.
(Which we should have gotten a bit beyond in more civilized days…)
Assault and battery is illegal in every State.
Gee! Thanks for solving that pesky little problem! I’m going to email a copy of your response to all my friends to let them know that they have absolutely nothing to worry about any more.
Funnily enough, it’s often not prosecuted when the batterers claim self defense against the person trying to use the ‘wrong’ bathroom, if the batterers claim some form of ‘trans panic’ as a defense, if the local justice system just doesn’t like queers like that, or of the trans person is too scared to press charges because of the extreme risks they take when engaging police.
It’s eerily like what would happen to black people before the big civil rights push - technically beating, torturing, or killing them was illegal, but funnily enough white people seemed to be able to do it without being arrested. But of course, they were just uppity negroes when they pushed for laws letting them live their lives.
Yeah, nothing like trying to report a beating to a bigot and winding up in jail for being a pervert - what happened in the “wrong” bathroom is bad enough, but in jail there’s no potential for escape from whatever abuse unsavory characters might decide to dish out.
Well, OBVIOUSLY little girls should be taught to be ladies and little boys should be taught how to be manly. In separate, but totally equal, classes. This will ensure that standards are maintained and this is how we achieve happiness as a society.
But the NP users might be a lot slower. And if they’re not, then what you thought were two bathrooms would turn out to be just one. Better re-think this.
Seriously, though, besides all the other potential problems with this scheme, do we really want to endorse a convention that defines a binary classification of human beings around the presence or absence of a penis? Defining one group in terms of the negation of another group’s characteristic is somewhat problematic.
I’ve heard of the P versus NP problem and how it’s unsolved, but I had no idea!