Saturday, June 07, 2008

So, Just What Do They Do In The Washrooms?

[Update 11/06/08]:
I see a few of the more intelligent and self-aware side of the world are pointing out the stupidity of the religious zealots. Well done!
[/Update]

I'm becoming more and more amused by the howls of outrage coming from "Christians" over transgender equality laws, and in particular the whole bathrooms issue.

Consider the following claims:

The rationale for Senate Bill 200 is that transgenders should be able to use the restroom they feel most comfortable using. Apparently, it is not important if others feel uncomfortable having their privacy violated every time they use public facilities.

The lack of privacy is not the only problem. Nobody is going to ask a man if he is trangendered before allowing him into the ladies’ room. This means any man—including a child molester—could simply follow a little girl into the privacy of a public restroom. And, if a man decided to expose himself to a young girl there, who is she going to complain to? After all, restrooms, by definition, are places where one exposes the private parts of one’s body.


Now, this is so laughably stupid it almost makes the Simpsons look like complex humour.

I'm going to take this silliness apart one claim at a time:

1. This means any man—including a child molester—could simply follow a little girl into the privacy of a public restroom.

The inference here is that a MTF transsexual is likely to be a child molester. This claim is ridiculous to begin with, as it confuses gender identity with sexual identity. Lastly, contrary to the delusions of many of these people, such laws will not result in a sudden interest in cross-dressing by child molesters. If that was going to happen, it would have been happening before.

2. others feel uncomfortable having their privacy violated

Okay, washrooms, are places with a certain degree of privacy implied in them. Absolutely true. But consider the scenarios involved.

A MTF (Male to Female) transsexual enters the ladies washroom. She is going to find a stall, close the door and do her business - same as any other woman using the washroom. Invasion of privacy? None. It's not like she's going to be peering in the other stalls any more than other women do. It's a washroom, not a freaking peep show for goodness' sake! (and women often "critique" other women far more thoroughly than men do to men - meaning for the MTF that they are probably going to be all the more cautious about trying to fit into the protocol for using the ladies' room.

In the second possible scenario, a FTM (Female to Male) transsexual enters the men's room. Unless he has had rather expensive phalloplasty, he's going to be using a stall. Again, like most people, he's going to enter, do his business and leave.

Additionally, the writer is ignoring the "don't look, don't see" protocol in men's washrooms and locker rooms. Men don't walk around with it all "hanging out", and other men in the room will work awfully hard NOT to look.

3. After all, restrooms, by definition, are places where one exposes the private parts of one’s body.

Really? What washrooms does the writer go to? The public washrooms I'm used to tend to have doors on the stalls for a reason, and the only "shared" place is the sinks and mirrors - not usually where anything is exposed at all.

4. And, if a man decided to expose himself to a young girl there, who is she going to complain to?

The police, I should think - I believe most jurisdictions have laws on the books about 'indecent exposure'. That would be inappropriate behaviour from an adult of any gender towards a child. Equality and non-discrimination laws do not change the status of such things at all.

The fetid imaginings of the writer of that article suggest that he needs some time with a psychotherapist - it's getting pretty clear that he doesn't know what he's talking about, and worse he's clearly got some pretty strange ideas about what goes on in public bathrooms.

Appalling as this law is, it gets worse. Tom Minnery of Focus on the Family points out, in the Denver Post, that the law also threatens religious liberty: Colorado’s “public accommodations” law includes not only hotels and restaurants, but also any small or home-based business that offers “goods or services” to the public.


Wait a second here - you are complaining because it takes away your "right" to deny people service based on who they are? Hmmm...how fascinating. And just how would these same idiots feel if they walked into a business that refused to serve them because they were Christian, or because of their race? I'm not feeling too sympathetic to someone whining because their sense of entitlement is being infringed upon because they want to deny someone else access to a place to pee! (and just how small a person are you if you would deny another human being the right pee in peace?)

Oh yes, and just to keep it straight stories like this happen semi-frequently - apparently not fitting into someone else's sense of "male" or "female" is good enough reason to get removed from a washroom - regardless of your gender.

3 comments:

Stephanie said...

I'm curious: how many "home-based businesses that offers 'goods or services' to the public" have gendered, multi-stalled washrooms?

Ninja said...

Thanks! That was a great post. People just react. They do not stop to think what kind of bigotry and fear they are revealing.

Stephanie: Excellent point. Europe is full of public washrooms that are actually shared at the same time by all genders. Isn't that fantastic?

Do you know what I do when I am in an establishment (like coffee shops) that have one room for each binary gender. I will absolutely use the free bathroom. I simply could care less and proudly endure the stares of those who give me the evil eye when I emerge. Such misuse actually carries a fine in Toronto, Ont, but again I do care.

Ninja http://www.ninja-radio.com/

Samantha Shanti said...

You know I've been kinda looking at this on and off for a while. This same "objection" comes up in every city and state that work hard towards equlity. The fundy morons scream and yell, spend a small (or large) fortune on fighting it, using these same tried, true and moronic objections and you know what happens?

Nothing. No-thing! The bill gets passed, the fundies move onto the next place to start screaming the same idiocy and life goes on. In five years hundreds of cities, and a large number of states have passed these laws and you know how many Child Molesters "violate" a bathroom? Not one...

I mean what the hell happened? It was supposed to be the end of the frickin world and you no what happened? Again, nothing.

You'd think the news would just figure out these idiots have blown a head gasket and ignore them... And there's the problem.

The so called "Free" press is anything but. Sure it may not be censored by the government, but instead it's censored by companies that are in it to make money. If it bleeds it leads, and is someone hands them ten million dollars for some stupid sensationalist coverage it rolls...

Oy!

About “Forced Treatment” and Homelessness

I need to comment on the political pressure to force people experiencing addiction into treatment. Superficially, it seems to address a prob...