Police remove woman from woman's bathroom.

[Underhill]

Make mine a chocolate chip.

We offer it in 56 fashionable colors. For an extra $29.99 you can even get a custom painted model with sprinkles.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

But this part that can't be stressed enough is the tricky part when using the exact wording you are using. I feel like without mincing words, we are saying that anyone can use any bathroom. To the degree you disagree, please present the case where a person, in your mind, can not use the restroom among a set of two bathrooms that are segregated by gender. Let me know / understand how that looks for you.

If someone is minding their own business and not causing a disturbance, it really doesn't matter to me. It's not like many people accidentally or intentionally use the "wrong one" without causing a scene or disturbance.

For my getting used to the idea of a female appearing person coming into the male bathroom, it is the same.

What if he just happens to look feminine? It happens, and it isn't something that should be held against him.

 

[Revoltingest]

We offer it in 56 fashionable colors. For an extra $29.99 you can even get a custom painted model with sprinkles.

With Mr Spinkles?

 

[Acim]

If someone is minding their own business and not causing a disturbance, it really doesn't matter to me. It's not like many people accidentally or intentionally use the "wrong one" without causing a scene or disturbance.

I agree with this, but it doesn't really address the tricky part. The tricky part is that we all agree going forward that in a world where gender segregation of restrooms is no longer necessary, there will never be a reason for disturbances, and everyone will just be minding their business.

If this were already anticipated to be the case, then I would wonder why we have any issues (at all) outside of bathrooms.

What if he just happens to look feminine? It happens, and it isn't something that should be held against him.

I don't believe I indicated that it would be held against them (by me). Still doesn't mean I'm used to the notion of it being the accepted norm. For all I know, I'm the feminine looking male entering the male bathroom. I don't think I am, but am willing to consider the idea that I am that person and that my normal everyday look shouldn't be held against me as if it is inherently offensive to another person.

But I do think there is a fairly well known type of person we are (or perhaps just I am) saying could be the source of many disturbances going forward with the notion that males and females are now in the same room doing their private business, simultaneously. I think some / most of these types would see restrooms as 'the best place to pick up chicks.'

 

[SkepticThinker]

I agree with this, but it doesn't really address the tricky part. The tricky part is that we all agree going forward that in a world where gender segregation of restrooms is no longer necessary, there will never be a reason for disturbances, and everyone will just be minding their business.

If this were already anticipated to be the case, then I would wonder why we have any issues (at all) outside of bathrooms.



I don't believe I indicated that it would be held against them (by me). Still doesn't mean I'm used to the notion of it being the accepted norm. For all I know, I'm the feminine looking male entering the male bathroom. I don't think I am, but am willing to consider the idea that I am that person and that my normal everyday look shouldn't be held against me as if it is inherently offensive to another person.

But I do think there is a fairly well known type of person we are (or perhaps just I am) saying could be the source of many disturbances going forward with the notion that males and females are now in the same room doing their private business, simultaneously. I think some / most of these types would see restrooms as 'the best place to pick up chicks.'

It's the "worst place to pick up chicks," if you ask me. (I am a chick.)

 

[Acim]

It's the "worst place to pick up chicks," if you ask me. (I am a chick.)

How you doin'?

 

[Revoltingest]

I wonder.....what would've happened if the gal said......
"OK, will you let me use the men's room instead?"
Possible response.....
"Sorry, honey...only men allowed in there."

Danged if'n you are....danged if'n you ain't!

I have some simple rules for bathroom behavior.....
1) Keep your feet in your own stall. I don't care how wide your stance is.
2) Don't ask for singles as change for a fiver. Check to see if you have TP before dropping the kids off at the pool.
3) Always select a urinal with maximum distance from another customer.
4) Don't be eager to chat.
5) Mind yer own g*****n business!

 

[George-ananda]

I like this post for this assertion (the final statement). It is the tricky part and what I think is the real problem as it stands now.

Thank you for acknowledging that. I have no real problem with a transgender person using whatever restroom. My point has been that any attempt to implement this freedom is going to cause other practical problems that some people here don't want to see because they are so focused on sympathizing with transgender people.

 

[Revoltingest]

Thank you for acknowledging that. I have no real problem with a transgender person using whatever restroom. My point has been that any attempt to implement this freedom is going to cause other practical problems that some people here don't want to see because they are so focused on sympathizing with transgender people.

Imagine the problems caused if a trans person can't legally qualify to use either gendered lavatory.
No doubt the tortured wording of any law as enforced by some mouth breather of a cop
could send a desperate user to the bushes.....& thereupon face Johnny Law once again.

 

[George-ananda]

Imagine the problems caused if a trans person can't legally qualify to use either gendered lavatory.

I know this is meant in humor, but I think the 'Sex' field on legal ID has only two options M/F so that is what they would have to go by.

No doubt the tortured wording of any law as enforced by some mouth breather of a cop
could send a desperate user to the bushes.....& thereupon face Johnny Law once again.

But then which side of the jail would they 'lock'em up' in?

 

[Revoltingest]

I know this is meant in humor, but I think the 'Sex' field on legal ID has only two options M/F so that is what they would have to go by.

I wasn't joking this time.
I truly expect confusion & ham fisted enforcement in some cases.

But then which side of the jail would they 'lock'em up' in?

Whichever would be the most abusive....prolly the men's cell.
(Men are such louts, ya know.)

 

[Skwim]

Just came upon this thread, and not wanting to wade through all the posts to see if this has been already addressed, my opinion is that if you're going to purposely look like someone of the opposite sex yet still want to use the facilities of your sex then you'd better have ID to prove it.


.

 

[Revoltingest]

Just came upon this thread, and not wanting to wade through all the posts to see if this has been already addressed, my opinion is that if you're going to purposely look like some of the opposite sex yet still want to use the facilities of your sex then you'd better have ID to prove it.
.

I say this is an unreasonable imposition upon the customer.
I'll wager this sort of thing doesn't happen often......yet.
And it makes for good youtube videos.

 

[Skwim]

I say this is an unreasonable imposition upon the customer.
I'll wager this sort of thing doesn't happen often......yet.
And it makes for good youtube videos.

Why unreasonable? Doesn't almost everyone carry ID on them? And how much bother is it to produce it upon request? And, even if they don't normally carry ID it should be apparent why they should, just as it's apparent why one should carry their drivers license when driving.


.

 

[Revoltingest]

Why unreasonable? Doesn't almost everyone carry ID on them? And how much bother is it to produce it upon request? .

I resist the notion that we must show our papers to Mr Charlie in order to go about our business.
The demand to do so without real need is one way to bully citizens.
Cops shouldn't be monitoring lavatories.
Criminy....we don't even need ID to vote, so we shouldn't need one to take a dump or a whiz.

 

[Skwim]

I resist the notion that we must show our papers to Mr Charlie in order to go about our business.
The demand to do so without real need is one way to bully citizens.

I agree; however, I believe women commonly feel that men should not be allowed to use women's restrooms, and toward this purpose there is a need to differentiate between males and females. And if this differentiation proves impossible to ascertain then other means are necessary; in this case proof of gender. If you want to walk and talk like a duck be prepared to prove you're not a duck.

Cops shouldn't be monitoring lavatories.

I agree, but I have no problem with security personnel doing so.

Criminy....we don't even need ID to vote, so we shouldn't need one to take a dump or a whiz.

Nor do we need ID to buy tuna fish. So what?


.

 

[GoodbyeDave]

Just came upon this thread, and not wanting to wade through all the posts to see if this has been already addressed, my opinion is that if you're going to purposely look like some of the opposite sex yet still want to use the facilities of your sex then you'd better have ID to prove it.

What constitutes purposely looking like the opposite sex? Women in trousers? Men in kilts?

 

[Curious George]

He's 28 and married, LOL. I was really describing a hypothetical situation.

That sounds about right to me.

You confused me with that complicated wording. I have no problem with children under six going into the bathroom of their assister's sex. Why does police escort have to come into the question?

I think women have a problem with men going into their restroom; just try it sometime. Security or police does get put involved in these cases.

All in all. I don't understand where we disagree. I think people are conflating two different issues. The question I have been addressing is how security should respond to complaints of a man in the women's bathroom. The question I have not addressed is this recent controversy over LGBT use of gender restroom which is the hot button topic people want to get into.

My point is even if we go the liberal way on the LGBT bathroom question, that is going to raise problems for security in addressing men in the women's bathroom complaints. I don't think society wants to tell women they can't ever complain about men in their restroom.

No, no...I wasn't addressing anything of the sort. I was addressing a six year old boy in the women's restroom. Should the cops come to get him out because he is supposed to be in the men's? My point was that we should assume that whatever person is in a bathroom is supposed to be there unless they are indicating otherwise.

So, if you have a six year old boy in the women's room, I will assume he is still five, and if a masculine looking person goes in the women's room, I will assume it is because she is supposed to go there. If however, the person is acting abnormal I would then suggest there is a reason to alert security or for security to involve themselves.

 

[fantome profane]

What constitutes purposely looking like the opposite sex? Women in trousers? Men in kilts?

Send in the fashion police. Literally.

 

[George-ananda]

No, no...I wasn't addressing anything of the sort. I was addressing a six year old boy in the women's restroom.

If he's alone he should use the men's room. Very weird if he doesn't.

Should the cops come to get him out because he is supposed to be in the men's?

Theoretically yes, but I doubt it would ever get to that point. He might get told by the ladies though that he should be using the men's room.

My point was that we should assume that whatever person is in a bathroom is supposed to be there unless they are indicating otherwise.

I think many women would have an issue with grown men in their restroom.

So, if you have a six year old boy in the women's room, I will assume he is still five, and if a masculine looking person goes in the women's room, I will assume it is because she is supposed to go there. If however, the person is acting abnormal I would then suggest there is a reason to alert security or for security to involve themselves.

So if a woman sees a man in the ladies room she is supposed to do or say nothing unless he's acting abnormally? Same issue with public locker rooms? I understand your empathy for transgender people but you are not fully thinking out all the ramifications of a free-choice system.