Trans people to be JAILED in Alabama town if they go to "the wrong toilet"

[katmanwho]

Unbelievable. There has been a lot of hate recently in North Carolina with the bathroom bill. But this has got a lot worse. [ www.al.com/news/anniston-gadsden/index.ssf/2016/04/oxford_passes_law_aimed_at_tar.html]

So a transwoman will have to go the male bathroom. A transman in the female one. There's been cases of butch women being hassled already in female toilets.

Oh - and if you're in North Carolina and witness someone who you think is in the wrong bathroom, you can call the hotline.

Meanwhile, a convicted sex offender (who is also Ex Republican House Speaker) is allowed to go the male bathroom with boys.

The only good thing about this bill is that it's made people react to the discrimination and to show that many people think this is discrimination. Just like in the 60s. Apparently trans people are sexual deviants.

This is the real effect of hate.

The trouble is tea with a self declaration of gender it will be difficult to break down crime statistics to reflect that as the crimes would be recorded as female on female violence with no means of distinction between those who self declare with no ill intent and those who do because those who have done so to abuse the process are not going to say "Oh I only said I was a woman so I could attack women" are they? Also by self declaring their gender as female they can be placed in a female prison.

Back in the 1970's Peter Samuel Cook, aka the Cambridge Rapist, dressed as a woman, he was actually caught fleeing the scene of one of his attacks dressed as a woman, he had a shed full of female clothing, wigs, make-up, shoes, etc. It later transpired that it was common knowledge where he lived that he liked to dress as a woman. Nowadays, if this self declaration is made law, he could quite conceivably self declare as a woman and what a can of worms that would open.

It may seem really petty to labour the point about toilets and self declaration but the problem is the law of unintended consequences. There are many laws and pieces of legislation which have been enacted with good intentions that have been totally misused and abused.

Crayon, I'm a feminist too.

Sex is assigned at birth, refers to one’s biological status as either male or female, and is associated primarily with physical attributes such as chromosomes, hormone prevalence, and external and internal anatomy. Gender refers to the socially constructed roles, behaviors, activities, and attributes that a given society considers appropriate for boys and men or girls and women.

So according to that article, Tea, someone who identifies as a woman but has male biology is still a male, but they identify with traditional gender stereotypes attributed to the female gender (by the prevailing social mores, predominantly dictated by men)

Is that right?

Yep, as I understand it We that would be a consequence of removing all meaning from the word woman.

There are many laws and pieces of legislation which have been enacted with good intentions that have been totally misused and abused

The phrase The road to hell is paved with good intentions springs to mind.

Your posting style really reminds me of someone, tea.

I wish I could remember who it is.

I'm a feminist too

Yes, yes, because you see trans women as women and make no distinction therefore you are a feminist.
We get it

Look at how Claire Darbyshire's crimes were reported. Only a passing mention of the fact he's male in the press when he was convicted of murder. Absolutely no mention of it when he was convicted of breaking into his friend's house and 'soiling' her knickers.

It's only a short leap to completely erasing cases of male violence.

OfCrayon So any 'statistics' will be of no use them. As I suspected and Good to know.

I don't think it's fair to anyone to extrapolate fears to a whole class because of one bad experience. It could be sex, but it could also be race, hair colour, whatever.
*
Lweji* I don't think it's fair that you appear to be prescribing appropriate responses for women to react to life-changing trauma...?. Is there a script somewhere that future victims can read so we all know what is and isn't acceptable? Do you think in the aftermath of horror, we sit down and identify the appropriate politically correct psychological response or is it possible that our minds shut down and we just react?

Is it not also possible that that reaction may be a culmination of many many events that we experience because we are women? And isn't it a simple fact that these spaces made safe for women, and the right to refuse men in this instances, has come around because this reaction is pert very common? Are we just going to deny that and leave women exceptionally vulnerable...?

For me, having my head crashed into a wall repeatedly by a man came after growing up with men groping my bum in pubs, boys making lewd jokes in my company etc etc etc - all the crap girls and women have to process in their lives culminating in the ultimate insult, gross violence. Can you not see that it all adds up?

I do not subscribe to the view that it is common practice for black people to go around being violent, so it is unlikely if I was assaulted by a black person that it would drag up a backlog of negative experience. However, the same is not true for male violence towards women, and sexist behaviour towards women, which is common place and a fact of life.

However, hypothetically, if I was assaulted by a black person and I did react in that way, I would hope the black person that I asked not to treat me/counsel me/etc would understand this request was a mental health issue, a response to trauma, not evidence of racism. I would hope they would respond sensitively, in the hope that space would provide the means for recovery. In exactly the same way I know decent good men do not see my request for a female doctor in the aftermath of assault as hard evidence of grotesque sexism against all men.

Rhonda, if your tone were a little friendlier I'd DM you introducing myself. But yes, I've been here since 2004, not every day but on and off, and with a few name changes. I've made some lovely MN friends during that time.

But yes, as I said yesterday, this is a very emotive topic and I am sure that I'm not going to persuade anyone to change their minds. I think that, as WDNS hints, I've said all that I have to say, so I might say goodbye now and leave you to it. This has been an interesting thread to be on, and without wishing to wind anyone up, it has given me an insight into my RL community in which trans people are known, trusted and loved for who they are. Enjoy the rest of the thread! Or go and do something else........

if you want to try and understand why so many people accept trans identities as a real thing: here

I accept that most of MN does not accept this analysis! smile

I accept trans identities as a real thing - most people do on here ime.

I just don't want laws made to suit them without consideration of others in society.

Surely it would be simpler to legally be what you actually are and if you're caught short then use the disabled loo? In all fairness they're usually free, and gender neutral.

Why must trying to defend women's rights always turn into accusations of not liking/ believing/ trusting transgendered people.

It's the lawmakers I don't trust.

It's been great talking to you tea, and from what I've gathered you are coming from a good place.
It's those that wish to exploit the good will of others that I'm concerned about.

"transwomen primarily want to use the toilets that correspond with their identity."

We have been also told on this thread that 'want' and 'need' are different things.

Except when transwomen want to use women's facilities, in which case it is apparently a dire need.

It would depend tea. Sorry to be vague but it really would depend on lots of different factors. Where, type of facility, time of day and what I was doing. At least I would have a choice though if we had men's, women's and gender neutral. If this goes through, the right to choose will be taken away from me.

I have no issue with genuine trans people, I really don't. Giving predatory men, who claim they identify as women, access to women only spaces will not keep trans women safe it will just put biological women in more danger. Believe me, I am no radical feminist but even I can see this is an erosion of women's rights.

However, seen as the majority of the population is not trans, I see little difficulty in creating a space for use by those who do consider themselves trans or non binary.

it has given me an insight into my RL community in which trans people are known, trusted and loved for who they are. Enjoy the rest of the thread!

It's ok, you don't have to introduce yourself. I know how it is now.

We can already see what happens in societies where women don't have safe places for this.

Women in India are campaigning for separate toilet facilities, to save them from at best disease from holding in urine & excrement all day, or never leaving the house; at worse suffering rape, murder

http://www.refinery29.com/2015/12/99116/right-to-pee-india-safe-bathrooms-campaign

And don't think Western men are magically so much safer than those furrin brown ones:
In England & Wales, men commit:

• 88% of crimes against the person
• 98% of sexual offences

Refs: Gov MOJ Stats Table Q4.2 , The Times

We should have a VERY good reason for reducing the safety of 50% of the population - generally the more physically vulnerable 50% - to avoid hurting the feelings of 0.5 % of the biologically male population

• they don't bother lobbying for their own safe spaces, just to take our ones. Male entitlement.

It illustrates yet again the relative value society places on men & women.
I'm almost 60 and I'm so bloody fed up of always being the 2nd class sex. We're going backwards !

tea If you not yet gone, please please be aware that you and women like you, if you are a woman, are being taken advantage of.

Your desire to help and accept others is very admirable but please be aware it won't help trans women if they cannot accept their reality. There are trans women who accept they were born male and are still male, they have a much better understanding of themselves and of women and I think they will have much better mental health outcomes because they have accepted their lives, transitioned to the extend they wish to, made friends and peace with women and they themselves are at odds with the trans activists who would shout that a trans woman is a woman and has always been.

You are being used by those who have no care for women and if you really are a feminist, please please read up on this topic. Not just things that will reinforce your existing beliefs but things that will challenge you. This is what I do. I am sure many of us have come this route and have indeed become aware that these new laws will hurt women and girls, and ultimately will hurt all genuine trans women too. Try asking some genuine questions in real life and see how fast you get shut down.

If you are a feminist please read up, Google terf is a slur. Sorry to say all this, I wish it wasn't't true, but lots of trans activists have zero concern for women, or anyone who disagrees with them. And if you are a feminist you owe it yourself to read up on this. Thank you for reading this. Wishing you all the best.

Hi, yes, Italian, I just checked back now. Thank you for this. I'm not really a trans activist at all - I've read threads on MN about this before but this is the first one I've posted on, as I read much more than I post. I know that there are extremists in all directions, as there always are in life. I will keep reading, thinking and asking questions as I have on this thread. I hope you can do that too!

WDNS, thank you! I have enjoyed being part of this thread.

Rhonda, I don't really know how to respond to that.

I've followed this thread since yesterday and read most of the links and I'm gobsmacked. Until reading this I had no idea about the change in law and it's concerning that this is the case and that the #wejustneedtopee is bandied around by trendy liberals with no thought for what it means for safe spaces.

I'll admit this thread has challenged my perceptions, not only as someone who has shared public (nightclub) toilets with ladies, gentlemen and those who have yet to decide, but also as a woman with a young daughter who doesn't want to share a changing room with someone who transiently identifies as a woman but who is walking around with an erection.

The impact to other safe spaces - refuges, prisons, healthcare - is just astounding.

Cote and tea your opposing viewpoints have been excellently articulated and have been one of the main reasons I've stuck with the thread, and I definitely need to read more into this.

Lweji - you're right, you can't stop anyone abusing anyone else. The most dangerous place for a woman to be is her own home. Can't really stop men entering those spaces, can we? Esp if the woman is married to the man....

In fact, we can very well stop men entering women's homes. There are those things, they are called "locks", and you use them on doors so no one can get in without the consent of the home's owner.

A woman, in the civilised world, can choose to not get married, and not to live with a man, to keep herself safe. Many women do so.

However, no woman has a choice about going to hospital. Or perhaps you have, as you can afford to pay to have a room for yourself in hospital. Many women cannot afford that, and will have to share a room with a male who identified his way in there.

Of course we cannot protect people from getting themselves in dangerous situations. Even if one country were to be completely safe, people could always go abroad.
But they have a choice. That's the difference. What you are in favour of is forcing women into dangerous situations.

Tea thanks for the link but why would you think I haven't read all that before? Why would you think I need to be educated? I am talking about unchangeable chromosomal biological reality. I am talking about sex not gender. I am talking about why I don't want to share a changing room with a 6 foot tall bearded person with a penis, regardless of their "feelings". I have nothing to say that hasn't been said except that you are being used to further an agenda that harms women.

I really don't get how people can even consider letting transwomen into women's changing rooms and the like. Thinking about it, it is completely illogical that transwomen even want access to those spaces.

The only reason why these spaces are separated is biological sex!

Perhaps it was a mistake to start calling it the "Ladies' Room" and so on, thus encouraging the notion that it is about social gender roles. It is not, and has never been, because people do not need separate spaces because of their gender. People need separate spaces because of their sex!

What are those transwomen who want access to women's spaces even thinking? Do they imagine the separation as some kind of apartheid, that was established to oppress women, and in which they want to take part because ... why, exactly? Why would you want to do that?
Rachel Dolezal (the woman who identifies as black, even though she isn't) would, I am rather sure, not demand that there be a separate toilet for black people so that she can use it to validate her "identity" - yet that is exactly what transwomen are doing!

If there weren't so many very sensible reasons based on sex why women need women only spaces, then this separation would be no different from separate toilets for black and white people; it would only be another way to keep the oppressed group separate in order to be able to single them out for oppression. Feminists would have been opposing it!

If transactivists view separate changing rooms, etc, that way, then why do they demand access to women's spaces for biological males, instead of demanding that those separations be abolished?