Should pre-operative transsexuals be required to use the restroooms associated with their biological, anatomical sex or permitted to use the restroom associated with their psychological sex?
For sake of convenience, I am going to stereotype and discuss individuals who were designated as male at birth based on a traditional genital examination, and who are living as a person of the female sex (this in fact constitutes the majority of transsexuals). They are properly refered to as "female" or "she" throughout.
Transsexuals live as females, are dressed as females (in fact, many of them, you will not know that they are actually males), they have no sexual interest in the females who are also in the restroom, the female restroom is where they feel most comfortable, and in fact, is where they believe that they belong. There is evidence suggesting that transsexualism is not a choice but is biological. There individuals believe that they are females trapped in a male body. It is somewhat cruel to require them to use the male restroom. Most of them are also planning on having the operation and are taking hormones. To a certain extent, they are neither gender, though that is clearly impossible, but you understand what I mean.
Hmm...rather than argue the other side, I'll leave it at this right now and check out other resonses.
s-
*** I would rather die of thirst than drink from the cup of mediocrity. *** A man can't deny what he is. He can convince everybody else he is someone else, but never himself.
I really can't see this topic going anywhere fast.There may be like what,..1% of the population with such a dilemma? If they are worried about it,..use the bathroom at home before going out.
As for it being biological,..once they opt for a sex change it becomes psychological and therefor a choice they must deal with,..leave us out of it.
I prefer to be true to myself, even at the hazard of incurring the ridicule of others, rather than to be false, and to incur my own abhorrence. Douglass, Frederick
Posts: 4943 | Location: my enchanted forest | Registered: 09-14-02
It becomes a major problem in the work force (they can't go before they leave the house if they are at work for the typical 8.5 hours!) So even if it is only 1% of the population, it becomes a major issue in employment law.
Major enough to get before a circuit court (one step below the US Supreme Court) right now. Assuming the employer wins, the employee is already planning on asking for cert to the Supreme Court (probably won't be accepted though.)
The employer required the anatomic male to use the male restroom (she was hired as a woman, the employer had no idea that she was actually a transsexual, but someone knew her from high school, and it exploded from there with the women employees complaining) and she brought a lawsuit under the Americans with Disability Act and Title VII.
s-
*** I would rather die of thirst than drink from the cup of mediocrity. *** A man can't deny what he is. He can convince everybody else he is someone else, but never himself.
I prefer to be true to myself, even at the hazard of incurring the ridicule of others, rather than to be false, and to incur my own abhorrence. Douglass, Frederick
Posts: 4943 | Location: my enchanted forest | Registered: 09-14-02
I believe that an anatomical male, regardless of his psychological state, should have to use the male restrooms until such time as he becomes physically female.
This is one of those situations where when the natural boundary lines are abandoned, where do you stop. Restrooms have a very specific function and are tailored to suit gender specific anatomy. If we are to fudge the rules based on the psychological state of the user, life becomes very unnecessarily complicated.
I would even suggest that tailoring the world to accomodate our psychological problems, is well meaning, but in the long run, is not always the kindest thing to do.
There are always other alternatives to explore in any given situation. A bit of ingenuity is a marvellous thing.
Considering the purpose and nature of restrooms, I would say your anatomy should determine the door you use.
I listen to the wind....to the wind of my soul....Cat Stevens
Posts: 3724 | Location: Brisbane, Australia | Registered: 07-26-02
I think they should be aloud to share the female bathrooms after all as most women know there are bathroom stall doors. In a mens bathroom such things don't exist and hence they may feel uncompertable to have to be in the open. As for employer problems it easy to fix you have a unisex bathroom.
I agree that the biological state should determine the appropriate restroom to use.
And I think a unisex bathroom is so absurd. Funny on Ally McBeal but absurd in real life. Would a woman who is on her menstrual cycle really want to be "taking care of that" with a man in the next stall? I know I wouldn't. I think it would be embarassing and uncomfortable.
Yours Truly, Mel-in-Tex "If we are overcome by the imagined risk of an unlikely death, we may miss the elusive chance to live fully." - Rev. William J. Keene
Honey if you hung around with guys as much as i do it wouldn't bother you. Hell we have a unisex bathroom at my work and i sure as hell don't mind it.
~I told you. You don't love somebody because of their looks or their cloths or thier car. You love them because they sing a song that nobody but you can undrestand. ~L.J. Smith ~Ralph Waldo Emerson said, 'Finish every day and be done with it'
Probably the best solution would be to have multiple unisex bathrooms made for only one person at a time. Slightly longer bathroom lines, but it's not likely that too many people will have to go at the same time and you've eliminated embarrassment completely.
After months of exhaustive research, I have determined that the number one cause of all airplane crashes is gravity. Would anyone be willing to give me a grant for further studies? I'll need an airplane. An expensive one.
Posts: 272 | Location: Somewhere between hope and despair | Registered: 10-31-02
But should the empoyer be required to provide a unisex bathroom? There is an added cost - not only in building (or however they do it) unisex and/or single person bathrooms, if one doesn't currently exist (which it does not at most places of employment) but also in those potential longer bathroom lines - longer lines means more time away from the job. Is it right to require the employer to provide unisex bathrooms?
s-
*** I would rather die of thirst than drink from the cup of mediocrity. *** A man can't deny what he is. He can convince everybody else he is someone else, but never himself.
quote:... Slightly longer bathroom lines, but it's not likely that too many people will have to go at the same time and you've eliminated embarrassment completely.
I worked for a company of about 100 employees and 75% of them were women. You wouldn't believe how many people have to go at the same time. We'd sometimes have little meetings in there. :-) Just kidding. But there were 3 stalls and there was still a line sometimes.
Yours Truly, Mel-in-Tex "If we are overcome by the imagined risk of an unlikely death, we may miss the elusive chance to live fully." - Rev. William J. Keene
quote: Transsexuals live as females, are dressed as females (in fact, many of them, you will not know that they are actually males), they have no sexual interest in the females who are also in the restroom, the female restroom is where they feel most comfortable, and in fact, is where they believe that they belong. There is evidence suggesting that transsexualism is not a choice but is biological.
Then why shouldn't they be allowed to use the women's room - especially if we "will not know that they are actually male". If this definition holds then it's safe to say that there's little chance of seeing a pair of pumps facing the wrong way in the stall next to you - chances are the transexual pees sitting down! It would seem that there would be more discomfort at such an individual traipsing through the men's room, averting her eyes as she walks passed the men at the urinal (or worse, trying to get a good look)!
Many pre-operative transexuals are "pre-operative" because they can't afford the treatments and surgery to finally become "post-operative".
I don't really care whom I share a bathroom with - as long as they clean up after themselves, replace the roll of toilet paper, and respect my privacy. Since there is no exposure in a woman's bathroom, I certainly don't see what the fuss is all about.
Enola/anyone, do you know it it as actually illegal for a "male" to use a "female" restroom (and/or vice-versa)?
I imagine that the law might "generally" purport to cover such things under "public indecency" or other catch-all legislation, but I wonder if it would be an offence for a "male" to walk into a "female" restroom, enter a stall, close the door, attend to the call of nature, zip up, and depart?
If such a law exists, I wonder if it covers all gender-specific restrooms (including those in say workplaces), or only "public" ones?
This is actually a very interesting subject.I've been in the back ground following this with no real opinion.It's really out there for me.
Now then,..Dav comes along and spurs my curiosity with his question,..Is there really laws regarding all this?
I had to look into it and found this to be interesting,....check it out;
Restrooms bring transgender rights to the forefront;
Perhaps the most visceral issue concerning the transgendered community is the bathroom. Indeed, recent arrests, and both current and pending lawsuits concerning restroom usage, have brought the issue of transgenderism to the public fore. However, this location, the most unlikely and private of places, has become the battleground between transgenders and the law.
Recent cases in New York and in Minnesota, illustrate the point.
Dean Spade, a female to male transsexual, was arrested in early February and held for 23 hours for using the men's room in New York City's Grand Central Station. In the incident, police followed him into the men's room, and then physically drug him out of Grand Central Station during the arrest.
When the case appeared in court, the judge dismissed all charges. It seems there is no New York law defining who may and may not use which restroom.
In a pending discrimination suit filed before the New York State Supreme Court by the ACLU, the New York City's Hispanic AIDS Forum charges that it was forced to leave its location after their landlord of 10 years began eviction proceedings for 'improper' restroom use by its transgendered clients. The location in the Jackson Heights section of Queens was in the epicenter of the New York's GLBT Latino community, and critical to the agency's efficacy. Latinos account for 31% of all AIDS cases in New York City.
The landlord was allegedly unwilling to discuss ways to accommodate transgendered people following complaints from other tenants that the Agency's transgendered clients were using 'wrong' restrooms and, instead, began eviction proceedings. As a result, the agency was forced to move to a location further away from the clientele it serves.
Decisions on restroom usage have serious implications for transgenders. The most crucial affects are loss of career and inability to work. Minnesota has two current cases that point in opposite directions.
On the state level, the Minnesota Supreme Court decision in Goins v. West Group ruled that employers may decide which restrooms transsexual employees are allowed to use. When female employees at the workplace expressed displeasure with Goins using the women's room adjacent to her workspace, the company requested she use a specially assigned restroom further away. The Supreme Court's opinion concurred with that approach, overturning a lower court's ruling.
However, a federal court in Minnesota ruled that a transsexual may use the restroom appropriate to the new gender. Minneapolis high school teacher Carla Cruzan complained that allowing school librarian Debra Davis to use the women's bathroom violated Cruzan's religious freedom and created a hostile workplace.
In this case, none of the other co-workers had problems with Davis. The school decided to provide the complainant, Cruzan, with access to several other women's bathrooms, including single-person facilities, and the federal court agreed. Apparently Cruzan sought separate facilities for transgenders only, but found those same facilities unfair for herself. Cruzan is currently appealing the decision to the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals in St. Louis.
Currently, the American public restroom is a confusing scene. Although women feel protected in their ladies room sanctuaries, not all jurisdictions have specific laws regarding who may use which restroom. Still, the cry, "There's a man in the ladies room," is likely to elicit a response from security guards or police, whether legally warranted or not. Yet a bearded man in a dress in the men's restroom risks physical assault. Where does one go when nature calls?
Where should American society draw the line? Might the spread of Transgender rights lead America to the multi-stall unisex restrooms of Europe and the Ally McBeal show? Or will legislators continue running ever faster away from the problems that arise, in order to spare themselves the controversy of the issue?
I prefer to be true to myself, even at the hazard of incurring the ridicule of others, rather than to be false, and to incur my own abhorrence. Douglass, Frederick
Posts: 4943 | Location: my enchanted forest | Registered: 09-14-02
quote:Originally posted by enola_catori: But should the empoyer be required to provide a unisex bathroom? Is it right to require the employer to provide unisex bathrooms?
Imagine the new surge of employment discrimination that would arise from this requirement!
People being obliged to disclose their transexual status.... so that the employer can provide a unisex toilet. This is just another way of inviting judgements on people other than their ability to perform the job. It's niave to think it wouldn't happen this way considering human nature.
I don't consider we have a right as a community to make legal or moral judgements on such a condition. I would have no problem with a transsexual man wearing a dress, using the womans toilets so long as she/he does not make her pychological state the issue.
There is room in our legal system to cope with specific incidences that may arise, without need to alter the law in a general way.
Personally I don't find myself speculating about the anatomy of every woman with a deeper voice or hairier chin who walks into the restroom beside me. But I imagine were transexuals separated from male/female distinction, it would inevitably lead to us speculating on these things far more intently!
I listen to the wind....to the wind of my soul....Cat Stevens
Posts: 3724 | Location: Brisbane, Australia | Registered: 07-26-02
I say if you look like a man go to the mens room and if you look like a woman go to the ladies room.
Its that simple.
Transgender or not.
Just go into the stall and dont use the urinal. . .
Its nobodies business WHAT you are!!
Not intended for illegal purposes, like anthrax and smallpox in surplus to murderers - Big Boi; "In Da Wind" A human being should be able to change a diaper,plan an invasion,butcher a hog,balance accounts,build a wall,set a bone,comfort the dying,take orders,give orders,cooperate, act alone,solve equations,pitch manure,cook a meal,fight efficiently,and die gallantly. Specialization is for insects. ~ Robert A. Heinlein If my answers frighten you Vincent,you should cease asking scary questions.~S.L.Jackson/Jules-Pulp Fiction
I almost skipped this particular topic, then decided to read through - curiosity killed the cat - she said smiling.
Anyway, I can actually tell you a story on this very situation.
We had a situation at work where one of the men, unknown to many of us - openly, was on medication as the preliminaries to undergoing a sex change operation. Once his medication, i.e. hormones et al, was well and truly under way, the staff were openly allerted to the fact that a toilet which was situated within the short distance of three working areas, there being another two on the same level, was to be put over solely for his use, during the time leading up to his surgery, whenceforth he would use the ladies restroom. At the end of the day, he did not in fact, have the surgery - for what reason I don't know, but apparently this is a long drawn out process and psychologically the individual concerned requires to be very well prepared - sure, in other words.
So the ladies used the ladies restroom and the men used the men's restroom, and he used his own. This was a government establishment which perhaps made the difference.
Most of us knowing the guy concerned, knew all along what his intentions were of course, but it was rarely discussed openly. I suppose, it could be said that our senior management knew they should alert the staff to the fact that henceforth the 'other' restroom would be out of bounds. I should perhaps also add that we were also told this did not mean we could not use this restroom, but we may not be alone when we did.
Incidentally, the sign on the door read 'Private'!
I only add this to let you see that there are ways around almost every problem we can conceive of.
I don't actually have an opinion as such, other than to say it is a 'condition' I do not understand.
littera scripta manet the written word remains. (the saying continues: 'The weak word perishes')
what is the point of discussing this subject or, any other subject for that matter, if no one bothers to take up the discussion further.
It seems to me, more and more, that people start a topic but wish not to further pursue this topic. I would like an answer. It puts the subject matter into such a context of insignificance, which I do not believe this one to be, if there is no follow up debate - begging the question as to why this was posed in the first place - others may have a lot of time on their hands - but let me assure you, my time is precious.
Please if you raise a topic, see it through to the end.
littera scripta manet the written word remains. (the saying continues: 'The weak word perishes')
BANGKOK, Thailand (AP) - Snubbed by both men and women, transvestite students at the Chiang Mai Technology School just wanted a restroom to call their own - and were granted their wish.
Dubbed the Pink Lotus Bathroom, the facility is exclusively for the school's 15 transvestite students and features four stalls, but no urinals. On the door hangs a sign with intertwined male and female symbols.
"They would come in the morning and use the women's bathrooms, but the women were annoyed, didn't like it or played pranks on them," said Posaporn Promprakai, registrar of the school in Chiang Mai province, about 360 miles north of Bangkok.
The transvestites - who must wear male attire at school but are allowed to sport girlie hairdos - switched to the men's bathrooms, only to run into more trouble.
"The men teased them, chased them, and they came screaming and in tears again," Posaporn told The Associated Press.
So Posaporn designated a lavatory just for them, telling the vocational school's 1,500 students to just use their own restrooms.
The transvestite bathroom opened last fall, but this week attracted the notice of local media. Gays, cross-dressers and transsexuals are generally accepted in easygoing Thai society.
"We don't support their decision to be transvestites. We are just trying to solve the problems of one group that is unhappy at school," said Posaporn. "They don't get teased in the bathroom anymore. They're much happier."
*** I would rather die of thirst than drink from the cup of mediocrity. *** A man can't deny what he is. He can convince everybody else he is someone else, but never himself.
I think in a world of so many different sexual orientations it is silly to think that a public restroom is 'safe'. Sure it ought to be safe from physical harm, teasing is unacceptable in any place, but safe from looks? Nope sorry that oh-so-obvious-girl next to you just might be a lesbian, or a guy in disguise. Either way the restroom is no place to 'let down your guard'. Good grief, even if she is a girl interested in men she’s checking you out if only to compare, "does she have bigger boobs than me?” "I wonder where that lipstick came from?” "That dress is so out of style". A restroom built just for 15 kids? Hey if the school can afford it, why not. It isn’t like the other 1485 kids will want any better accommodations to match. After all they were oh so mature about the whole thing.
Public means public, all are welcome. Now in a privet building, say a privet school, public restroom doesn't mean quite the same thing. The main argument that never seems to come up about unisex bathrooms is that guys have terrible aim. No girl wants to use a potty after a guy messed all over the floor, left the seat up, and who knows what else! (I know not all of you, but moms please teach your sons better, they will one day be married, or sharing the stalls with a transsexual )
