How would you actually implement bathrooms separated by sex?

[blackandredarrow]

I'm actually curious about this. I'm defining sex as the most common combinations of chromosomes and gonads.

How would you enforce that only people with a particular combination uses a particular bathroom? In the case of intersex people, or transgender people who pass well?

The question being posed on the thread is effectively: sex segregation of toilets hasn't in actual fact been absolute in the past so we have to hold the view that it has never actually worked.

It bears more than a passing resemblance to the argument that because there are rare intersex conditions we have to hold the view that sex is a spectrum and cannot be considered to be binary.

Please refer to the Latin roots of prescribe and how they have been carried into English

That is a satisfactory answer for me :)

I wouldn't imagine how you do

Intersex people where only part of my question. What about transgender people?

You say no transgender woman passes. That demans proof. I say, until I see that proof, there is no way of knowing

Then why the joke about "prescribe"?

I am going to bed now. Thanks for all the answers

One thing that's noticeable is that there's been a shift from ploppers shouting "transphobe" to posters who appear to have received the crappest Jesuitical training one can imagine.

who pass as non-transgender women

We actually call them women. Bad luck blackandredarrow, you just outed yourself. So the answer to your REAL question is, no, you won't pass.

Sorry, I'm not transgender. If I use an adjective (transgender) on a noun (women), I need a way to referring to instances of that now to whom that adjective doesn't apply

That was a widely used acceptance of that term. I will try to make my language more informal though.

If I say "tall women", and then want to refer to those "women" who aren't tall, would "non-tall women" not be acceptable?

No, it isn't. If you assert a proposition (no trans woman passes), you are going to be asked for a proof of it. If you cannot provide such proof, then saying "we cannot currently tell whether no trans woman passes" is a fact.

Every transwoman who uses facilities designated for females is pushing past women's boundaries and ignoring their consent. Women may or may not be aware of this at the time. Most are aware, some will not care, and some will care very much and will be impacted badly.

It is a violation.

'Yes, but some are getting away with it so all should be able to' is not a valid position to take.

'Oh but she didn't realise so it's OK' isn't an acceptable defence - it doesn't work to allow rape of a woman whilst unconscious, or theft from people with dementia, or abuse of those who lack capacity.

Unethical acts remain unethical whether they are immediately detected or not. And prioritising personal validation over the consent of women to their own bodily privacy from you, a member of the opposite sex, is unethical and wrong.

I consent to undressing in a changing room with other females, and to cervical smear tests performed by a female, and to security pat downs performed by females.
I refuse my consent to any of those situations with males.

If a male person attempts to breach my consent in those situations it is inexcusable.

Sorry, I think the issue is partly with me not getting the reply to system. The acceptance of "prescribe" was the widely accepted one.