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?

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

That be some crazy thinking, people end up being described as non-Chinesebraziliansouthafricanenglishlatvianpolish etc

You be funny

Ive no clue whats going on so im just gonna sit here and watch for a bit

black

It might be easier to to say what dreadfully 'transphobic' post you would like someone to type...then we can type it and knock off for the night

MAAAAAATE

Do you think your hyperbole is making you sound intelligent?

Because it really really isn't.

By definition, you will only notice as trans trans women who don't pass. You can't really say whether a person who passes as a woman is trans or not, at least not by external visual cues alone

This reminds me of the posts on tumblr of photoshopped transgender identified males that dares all to dispute their ability to pass, and then you see the before photoshop pic and, come on d00d.

I understand the need to feel that one is maintaining when on drugs, and passing when in a woman costume. Truth is that everyone knows and they don't say anything either because they don't care enough about you to tell you the truth or they are afraid you will assault them.

No, people who are being a nuisance cannot safely be challenged.

You could Google for the woman who was kicked down the stairs at a train station for refusing to party with some random sex pest, or ''women who were attacked for saying 'no'', or Patty Lou Hagan.

Before everything kicked off OP, if a transwoman used a female bathroom, the vast majority of women would let them get on with it, if they were going about their business quietly. I still would. I'm not confrontational. If a transwoman really truly passed as female and again, went about their business quietly, then there would be no issue. Women wouldn't feel threatened by that individual. No harm done (except on principle).

Very very very few trans people pass in reality. I don't need to provide proof of that. Humans are very good at discerning sex. That there are exceptions doesn't change the fact that sex segregation is necessary for women's safety and comfort.

You are wasting people's time.

"I don't see any answering my original question to my satisfaction"

Since I suspect 'to your satisfaction' would involve everyone else throwing up their hands in horror and wailing 'Oh no, it can't be done!' - no, I don't see any answering of your original question to your satisfaction either.

'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.

Excellent point Barracker

Let us name the three primary paint colours:
Red, non-Red, and that other non-Red.

Ah yes, I see that makes perfect sense.

The same way it's always been done. It's not hard, no matter how much you try to make it so. The sex of the vast majority of humans is obvious without testing their chromosomes.

I'm out.

it's like trying to have a conversation with AI

Doesn't pass the Turing test.

https://goo.gl/images/jKot86

Let's play Bingo.

There are various threads discussing how people use single sex toilets, and how important many of them find it is to have a single sex space available. Hope these help:

current example:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3243189-Uncomfortable-about-unisex-toilets-at-work

Recent examples:
(Thanks to R0wan for the round up on the other thread)

It has been recently discussed with regards some male students unhappiness here:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3241624-dirty-protest-over-somerville-college-oxford-s-gender-neutral-loos

& some women's unhappiness here:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3237230-NUS-Conference-breaks-down-after-the-UK-Border-Force-Arrive

whilst this thread discussed some of the reasons women use public loos:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3203454-What-do-you-use-the-womens-toilets-for

OP you haven't explained why you want to enforce rigid adherence for bathroom usage. That's a rather unusual stance so it would help if we knew your particular concern.

The point of sex segregation is that if someone is a nuisance you can challenge them or ask for them to be removed.

People using a toilet, washing their hands and fixing their make-up aren't a problem so I'm not sure why you want to enforce sex segregation for that. I suppose it makes the queues a bit longer... Is that what worries you OP? I'm all in favour of more cubicles in women's bathrooms.

Thing is OP, you've been sold a straw man. The definition of which is that none of us actually believe or argue for it. So trying to walk us into saying it just isn't going to happen because it was made up. Try engaging with what we're actually (actually) saying.

It is illegal to drive without a driving licence or without insurance. These laws provide some protection but not absolute protection. This isn't policed at 'point of use'. People are expected to follow the law. Many people get away with this, but they do they get caught when they are involved in an incident.

Same sex provision is the same as this.

Arguments against same sex provision that are based on the difficulties in 'policing them' don't stand up. There are many, many laws where this is the case.

OP wanted someone to mention checking the contents of underwear at the door or badges or bog ID...when no one has ever said any of those

I saw a very tall bloke in low kitten heels and 'women's' accessories the other day who was staggering around shouting "you fucking gaylord" to someone not present, very aggressively the other day. I have no idea how he identifies.

He was obviously a bloke - but maybe he is the sort of person the OP would spend endless hours agonising over whether to believe their own eyes - the ladies accessories simply blast away all markers of sex - just like magic.

Wrt to people with intersex conditions - they go to the right toilets they were raised using. (Screwball adults subscribing to transgenderism should not be teaching children sex confusion and crossing the opposite sex's boundaries - and if they do, said adults should be removed from a position of influence over children or if they are parents, the kids should have a child protection order).

"how would you visually differentiate one from another"

The same way we visually differentiate between dogs & cats, tables & chairs, shoes & gloves etc.

By engaging our eyes and brains.

Blackandredarrow

You seem to be interested in logic, so may I suggest that your arguments fall into the "all or nothing fallacy", as described in the link below.

www.academia.edu/21565174/Fallacy_All_or_Nothing

"When people call for gun regulations after a mass shooting, opponents of such regulations often say that gun regulations are useless and should be avoided, because they cannot stop all gun related crime. No matter how strict gun laws are, criminals will still be able to get guns and commit crimes."

"But this argument employs the all or nothing fallacy in many ways. For one, when it comes to laws and regulations, it’s seldom an all or nothing affair. Lawmakers don’t expect laws to eliminate all the behavior they are trying to restrict, but that doesn’t mean laws shouldn’t exist. Speeding laws aren’t going to keep everyone from speeding, but that doesn’t mean there should be no speed limit. Laws are often merely aimed and lowering the frequency of certain kinds of behavior."

So your question should not be "is it possible to exclude all persons with a functioning penis from spaces where women may be vulnerable to sexual predators?" but rather "Does having legally protected spaces for women contribute to deterring sexual predators and reducing the incidence of sex offenses (which are mainly committed by males)?"

Because for nearly all the women posting here, that is the issue at stake, not any concern over whether we occasionally have transwomen sharing that space without us realising it.

Thank you kestrel, I think that sums it up really well.

Well we have managed it fairly well up until this latest strop from transactivists about how obviously male people should be in the womens and gender matters more than sex

No forced genital checks, no carrying ID, no DNA testing or anything else hyperbolic. Just the way things have always been. Which means that yes, transsexual people will in many cases use the areas associated with the opposite sex. And women will in most cases grant a 'pass' to such people. Its not complicated really. Regardless of however many people try to make out it is.

We've been doing this for years.

It comes down to a difference between a policy and the enforcement of that policy.

There is a law that says you shouldn't swerve or brake for animals when you're driving. Does that means you should plow straight over every cat you see? No. It means that if you swerve and you cause an accident, saving the cat isn't an excuse.

We want sex segregation (chromosomal) as a matter of policy. However no one is advocating for underpants, DNA, or license checks at the door. What we want is that IF we identify someone who is

a) obviously male and
b) creeping us the fuck out

we should have the right to have them ejected on the basis of being the wrong sex. People who are male and intersex such that they appear female, or male and passing, or male and making an effort to pass and are minding their own business, are not going to have anyone running to get security when they use a women's bathroom. This is how it has always worked.

In a change room, yeh, they should probably be using the men's or a neutral stall. The only exception I can think to that is in a small group where every woman who would be there is explicitly comfortable with that specific transwoman in their changeroom.

kesstrel great post.

In the event that some transgender person, albeit putting much effort into it, doesn't pass, wouldn't we be discriminating on the basis of appearance?

Equality Act 2010 already lets us do that, believe it or not.