I don't suppose that's the point tho . . . .

Most majorly public places now do have a unisex/family bathroom or at least the sign outside the bathroom indicating it is not specifically gender oriented.

My Costco has one. So too NFM . . .

(April 11, 2016 at 7:42 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(April 11, 2016 at 7:34 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: CL, if you are a business owner or institution renting space for $30 or more per square foot a third bathroom is useless overhead. It solves an emotional problem for .03 percent of the population at the financial expense of everyone served by that business or institution. Good intentions aren't free.

I still think it would be a good idea to have a small private bathroom. Not only for transgender folks who haven't done reassignment yet, but for people with other difficult circumstances. Like perhaps a mother with a fully grown son who has down syndrome and can't use the bathroom alone.

Doesn't this also create a stigmata? It in a way requires you to announce something that is private. Imagine if before you used the bathroom you had to shout out "I'm Gay!" or something equally invasive? By forcing a group of people to behave differently from you, and from how they see and understand themselves you singling them out for special treatment. Isn't that close to the definition of discrimination?

(April 11, 2016 at 7:42 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(April 11, 2016 at 7:34 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: CL, if you are a business owner or institution renting space for $30 or more per square foot a third bathroom is useless overhead. It solves an emotional problem for .03 percent of the population at the financial expense of everyone served by that business or institution. Good intentions aren't free.

I still think it would be a good idea to have a small private bathroom. Not only for transgender folks who haven't done reassignment yet, but for people with other difficult circumstances. Like perhaps a mother with a fully grown son who has down syndrome and can't use the bathroom alone.

Yes it would but I don't think that's the point of S'S  bathroom legislation,  do you?

(April 11, 2016 at 7:37 pm)Jenny A Wrote:

(April 11, 2016 at 5:44 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I agree that unless you have a penis, you should not go into a woman's bathroom/lockerroom, and vice versa. For one, if we allow anyone to go into any bathroom/lockerromm so long as they say "I identify with this sex", this opens the doors to fakes who are sexual predators. Second, even though bathrooms wouldn't be as big of a deal for me personally, I respect that there are women who understandably are not comfortable with it. As for lockerrooms, I'm sorry but I would not feel comfortable with a man going in there while I'm in there changing/showering/etc... even if he did say he identified as female. I have no problem with a 3rd option of "gender neutral" bathroom/lockerrooms though. 

I do think there is a difference between intervening when someone is upset and trying to hurt themselves, and intervening when someone has gone through therapy and has decided to go under the knife for extensive surgery. At that point I see it as them being under the care of professionals and doctors, and though I may not agree that it's the healthiest course of action, I would not feel like it is in my authority to stop it from happening. 

The point where the lines may get blurred though, is when we are dealing with people who "feel" they should be blind/deaf/legless/armless/etc. There really are people out there who feel they are in the wrong body and that they should be in the body of someone who is blind, or an amputee or something. Should doctors help them out with that by blinding them? Or cutting off their legs? Obviously the answer is no. But then the question is, how is this different then, from a man who feels he should be a woman and wants to get his penis cut off? If we are being completely objective here, how is this different? I think the difference is that a person who undergoes sex change surgery is still able to function completely properly and normally with all their body parts (at least outside of the bedroom, but inside is not our business).... unlike the person who is unable to see because they had their eyes poked out by a doctor or something. Thoughts?

This XX man is required to go to the women's restroom by law.

http://www.advocate.com/sites/advocate.c...e-x400.jpg



 He, and really he is obviously a he, probably does have some kind of a penis.  It's none of our business whether he does or doesnt. But he really doesn't belong in the ladies room  Laws requiring him to use the women's room are either bigoted, ignorant,  or both.  If you want me to share a restroom with him, I'm not exactly frightened  but I can't  figure out why you'd feel safer if if shares a room with us.. He is not comfortablein the ladies, and I cannot see see any man worry about him in the mens.

If he has "some kind of penis" then by all means, use the men's room. 

Of course, we're going to get examples like that. But we're also going to get examples of completely masculine looking folks who are just wearing lipstick and a padded bra. Or maybe, not even that. And I certainly wouldn't feel comfortable changing/showering with them in a lockerroom. There needs to be a line somewhere, and to me, it makes the most sense to make that line after a person has a sex change. 

But again, this is why I said there should be a third bathroom.

(April 11, 2016 at 7:46 pm)Maelstrom Wrote: Most majorly public places now do have a unisex/family bathroom or at least the sign outside the bathroom indicating it is not specifically gender oriented.

Most?  Most? Would that it were so.

Please don't let trannies into the boy's room. They'll be looking at my willy! AHHHH

Personally I'd just be a whole lot more comfortable using which ever bathroom the hot girls use. Thanks for understanding.

(April 11, 2016 at 7:52 pm)Whateverist the White Wrote: Please don't let trannies into the boy's room.  They'll be looking at my willy!  AHHHH

Unless you're using the boy's room at a public park, I would venture a more public setting would be safer.