Reddit: Very Helpful individual wants women punished at work for avoiding ladies' room now used by trans woman

It bothers me that people think it's acceptable to use the disabled toilet as an alternative. Those were hard fought for too.

Women/girls avoiding a female service because males are admitted, may be indirect discrimination. It shouldn't just be tolerated.

This has come up over and over these past ten years at least in the US.
At Evergreen State College some local high school girls swim teams use the pool. The dressing room is open plan. A well known male flasher started identifying as a transwoman and using the facilities the same day and time as the high school girls. So as not to violate the naked transgender persons rights the high school girls were told that they could use a closet to change in. So they did. Then the swim team made other practice arrangements.

And remember the school teacher? Who posted that there was now a male, teenaged pupil allowed to change and shower in the girls' changing room. The school had offered a much smaller room to any girl who felt uncomfortable with this arrangement.

(This is in the context of US schools where pupils undress and shower often in fairly openplan facilities, not individual cubicles with a door.)

None of the girls had complained or made a fuss, but first a few then many had decided to use the alternative facility.

The teacher came on to Reddit what to do about this, as the male pupil wasn't happy with the girls excluding themselves (and couldn't, of course, join them in the room provided just for the female students).

The answers were shocking - the girls should be punished, forced to change and shower with their male classmate, the alternative room should be labelled for transphobes, the girls should be excluded, shunned, publicly reprimanded and on and on.

It didn't matter that the teacher stressed that the girls were otherwise including this male classmate in their spaces and groups and were not being mean.

Self-exclusion is an act of non-compliance. It must not be tolerated.

A couple of years ago there was a very similar thread on reddit's legal discussion board. A young transwoman wanted to know which laws they could use to gain permission to use their college gym's female changing spaces. They were given a lot of advice and it apparently worked.

A few weeks after the first thread the transwoman came back, this time to ask what they could do to force the women to use the female changing spaces with them. Apparently all the biological females had drifted somewhere else and the transwoman wanted to find something in the law that'd bring them back.

The account that started that thread has existed for all of 18 days with very little posting history.

I honestly can't see the reddit thread being true. I think it's designed to cause frothing.

Great post from Chloek90:
I don't get it. A single transwoman feels uneasy in a male bathroom so she uses the female one with the company's blessings. That's fine. Her feelings are valid.
Multiple women feel unsafe in the female bathroom (I'm guessing here, OP never said why they refuse to use the bathroom) and use a unisex disabled bathroom instead. They don't go to hr, they don't ban the transwoman from the bathroom. They basically avoid to share the bathroom. That's not fine, their feelings do not matter, they are all sinister, bigots and passive aggressive.
The transwoman is allowed to feel unsafe or out of place and use whatever bathroom she wants.
The other women should be reported to hr for feeling they can do the same. How is that fair?

Thank you. I like to think so.

Sicaro you are a genius

Sicaro TWAT....I love love love that

It's not about the women avoiding that lavatory per se. It's about them not joining in and validating the person's "femininity performance". The ladies loo is the holy grail of validation, because they imagine all sorts of feminine performance associated with "powdering one's nose" and girl talk in the ladies' room.

TWAT. (Trans women are trans.)

I can't understand why people are saying this is a form of ostrasisation. Like going to the bathroom at work is a social event as opposed to something you do alone and with privacy?

It is a sick microagression that the cis women in your office refuse to use the womens bathroom now.

Ah that was the one I was referring to.

I saw this thread. Clearly the women at this workplace aren't happy sharing a bathroom with this individual. It makes you wonder if there's more to it.

I saw it too and thought exactly the same thing.

I was particularly unimpressed with the response that the women in question were doing something 'sick' in their passive resistance. So they say well if you don't like it leave or don't use the toilets and when women do just that the are 'sick'.

Michelle

I know people refer to 'nativists' these days so it can't be long until someone coins 'natalvists' (and means it).

Has anyone told the OP on Reddit she's a nasty bully yet?

Without the presence of natal women it's just a room.

Precisely. Which when you reach this level, confirms that this is at heart not about a safe space, or a non dysphoric triggering space, this is about a requirement to be with natal women. Whether or not they wish to be consent is irrelevant, and that makes it inevitably a case of wishing to use those women. But not use any part of them such as their minds... feelings... lived experience... thoughts... all of those bits are wholly surplus to requirement. So what bit of natal women is required?

And yes, it's a very ugly thought but when it becomes clear that compulsion to provide physical presence has become a relevant issue, it can't be skated over for the sake of niceness any more. Natal females know about this business of having certain aspects of them seen as property and their consent being irrelevant to the process, it's at the heart of why natal females have sex based rights.

This is the second reason why women's rights are at so much risk; women who throw their own rights away for a chance to turn on other women.

Women exist to validate the beliefs and feelings of men.

Of course someone wants consequences for passive resistance.

Terrifyingly not only may they actually succeed in having the women punished in some way for avoiding the toilet, but it's also clear that the person who is causing them to go elsewhere is not able to empathise with the women who have been displaced.

I feel like I predicted this just a day or two ago. I wonder where our very keen to punish women for failing to provide validation friend lives? Depending on how woke the area is HR may well take it seriously.

@Michelleoftheresistance

It isn't validating if natal women don't use it. Hence the whinging. It isn't enough that they are using a loo with a little silhouette of a woman on the door. Without the presence of natal women it's just a room.

The feelings of one person are more important than the feelings of the many?

Why does that seem wrong? Hmmmm.

I think the employment site in question is in the US — in which case there are likely large gaps between the door and the cubicle walls, possibly as much as 2 inches on each side of the door, large gaps at the bottom, and the walls and door are likely quite short.

In American loos, it’s very easy to peer right in at the person on the toilet. One doesn’t even have to peer really — it can be hard NOT to see, especially in facilities not remodeled in the past 20 years or so.

My guess is these women would rather not be so easily observed by a male colleague while they’re tending to private bodily needs.