Human Rights Commission: Guy Entering Women's Bathroom in Seattle Was "Absolutel

[stephaniec]

Human Rights Commission: Guy Entering Women's Bathroom in Seattle Was "Absolutely Not Protected Under the Law"

https://www.thestranger.com/slog/2016/02/26/23627451/human-rights-commission-guy-entering-womens-bathroom-in-seattle-was-absolutely-not-protected-under-the-law

The Stranger/by Sydney Brownstone •  Feb 26, 2016 at 3:28 pm

"The Washington State Human Rights Commission has some news for the man who entered a woman's locker room in Seattle claiming that he was allowed to be there under the state antidiscrimination law that protects transgender people
"His behavior is inexcusable and reprehensible," the commission's statement reads. "And it is absolutely not protected under the law.""

[suzifrommd]

From the article:

He did not express a female gender identity through voice, dress, or mannerisms.

Anyone else trouble by this? That we have to have feminine mannerisms, voice, or dress to be considered women?

[AnonyMs]

From the article:

Anyone else trouble by this? That we have to have feminine mannerisms, voice, or dress to be considered women?

But how do we draw the line? There's got to be one.

[Serenation]

From the article:

Anyone else trouble by this? That we have to have feminine mannerisms, voice, or dress to be considered women?

It just means presenting as female, even if you don't and are asked to leave you are still protected by the law if it turns out you are trans.

[Deborah]

Personally, unless one is presenting female in at least some way, I don't understand the aversion to using the other bathroom. 

One's personal identity doesn't rest on which room you pee in.


Sapere Aude

[KarlMars]

What if he had been a transman that had female parts but looked convincingly like a man?

[MelloYellowSurge]

What if he had been a transman that had female parts but looked convincingly like a man?

Then he still should have used the men's locker room. While the law certainly doesn't allow it everywhere, this situation dictated that the men's locker room was the place for him to be. End of story.

[itsApril]

I think the Commission is 100% right in issuing this clarification.  This guy was not transgender.  He didn't even claim to be.  He was trolling to discredit the Commission's correct guidance that trans people should be able to use the restrooms that correspond to their gender identity.

This guy was just an anti-trans ->-bleeped-<-, who thought he could discredit the Commission's guidance by barging into a women's locker room with the express purpose of making the women there uncomfortable.  It's a stupid fratboy move, and he was rightly kicked off the premises.  The Commission is right!

[JustASeq]

Personally, unless one is presenting female in at least some way, I don't understand the aversion to using the other bathroom. 

I agree with this... When I was presenting as male I felt comfortable in the men's room. However when I made the choice to move my internal feelings outwardly, it became a safety risk to use the men's room. Kinda split on this too since there are trans folks out there that cannot present and may be in an unsafe and uncomfortable position using the restroom or locker room they align with.

[kaitylynn]

I have had several scary experiences using the "men's room" while attempting to present as "male" and while I get sir'd all the time, other restroom users had very different thoughts.  What is required, 2 pieces of clothing?  Hair? Nail polish?  Voice? I had never felt the safety issue before being on HRT for another few months and things began to be unhidden.

In the end, I would actually feel way more comfortable with a gender neutral restroom to use and I seek those out or hold it.  There is not going to be any sort of resolution to this as we are fighting the binary only crowd and have no options other than the options they allow us to have in bathroom choice.