This state just clarified something pretty obvious about men in women’s bathroom

[mac1]

Clothing styles for women have been expanded to include most traditional men's styles making almost anything acceptable for women. However, the same is not true for men's styles. Clothing alone can't be the defining characteristic.

One way to get around that is to.

One should be dressed to ones gender identity and they should include this in the law.

That way a male who identifies as a man cannot walk into the women's restroom and wearing men's clothes saying he is TG

Or vice versa.

[arice]

Honestly, I think people should be able to use the bathroom they wish (unisex bathrooms make the most sense to me)... if they are going to enforce anything, it should be based on behaviour in the washroom. Using the toilet/urinal/sinks is ok by anyone... assaulting/harassing anyone is not ok by anyone.
I couldn't care less who is using the next stall as long as they are using it for its intended purpose...

Sent from my SM-G870W using Tapatalk

[mac1]

Arice,

I totally agree. Sexual separation in common areas (sinks, etc.) is not necessary.  A restroom area with several private stalls and one common area for sinks, mirrors, etc. would be the most efficient and practical.

[spacial]

I also agree with unisex toilets, since I'm not really sure what anyone would want to do in there that involves anyone else.

But the issue here seems to be that this man undressed.

Now I appreciate that the laws in the US often tend to be literal to the point of silliness, but here in the UK, someone undressing in any place at all for any provocative reason would be guilty of sexual misconduct.

A male, for example, can stand infront of a urinal and use it appropriately. But failing to re-dress himself even with the confines of the enclosed area could be seen as indecent exposure.

That could land him a prison sentence and an almost automatic listing on the sex offender's register.

To take the matter one step further. A woman who breast feeds her baby in any public place would be protected, if not by law, but by the public.

A woman who flashes her breasts in public for provocative reasons, would be guilty of an offence.

Just making those points.

[Peep]

To take the matter one step further. A woman who breast feeds her baby in any public place would be protected, if not by law, but by the public.

Is it not the other way around - it's legal to breastfeed in public but people want women to cover up or hide anyway? Not that I disagree with your post tho

eta: I looked it up, it's protected under the Equality Act 2010, so women are legally allowed to expose breasts to feed babies, but if they were idk drunk and flashing people they'd probably still get arrested

[AnxietyDisord3r]

Obviously his behavior was not normative in the dressing room, in a way we're fumbling to define.

But if a woman were sexually harassing other women in the same space, they wouldn't hesitate to escort her out of there.

Men in our society can take ambiguous actions knowing they're loaded, because everyone knows they have the means to carry them out and quite possibly get away with it to boot. A woman has to be explicit when she is threatening somebody.

[spacial]

Is it not the other way around - it's legal to breastfeed in public but people want women to cover up or hide anyway? Not that I disagree with your post tho

eta: I looked it up, it's protected under the Equality Act 2010, so women are legally allowed to expose breasts to feed babies, but if they were idk drunk and flashing people they'd probably still get arrested

I honestly don't know. It's never bothered me on the few occasions I've even noticed. As for the law itself, I erred on the side of caution, but I have heard of the Equality Act.

But the issue is surely intent. This man was exposing himself with the intent of causing offence and alarm, (to make his point).

Intent is a big part of English law, especially in recent years. I don't know if it is the same or even applies in the US.

[DawnOday]

He should be introduced to Loraina Bobbitt.

[suzifrommd]

A reminder that TOS #9 specifically forbids:

Suggesting or claiming that one segment or sub-segment of our community is more or less legitimate, deserving, or real than any others

Topic locked.