I just want to clarify what I've said in this thread, then I'm taking my toys and heading home.
Looking at the thread title, the issue here is WOMENS rooms (locker and restrooms); i.e., rooms with the sign WOMEN on the door. The owner of the building put that sign there because he intended it for use by WOMEN only, regardless of what our *personal* opinions are on the validity of segregating by sex may be.
The question here is "how do we expand the legal definition of WOMEN to include more than just genetic females?" The law prompting this thread is NOT about abolishing the men/women system altogether, it's about expanding the interpretation of men and women. If some of you want to lobby the business owners to have only UNISEX bathrooms, that's fine... but until then, we're discussing rooms marked and intended for WOMEN ONLY.
Some people are going off on *personal* tangents about how the entire men/women system is bigoted and should be abolished, implying that since THEY don't agree with it, they also don't have to respect it. Others are insisting that since THEY don't mind sharing facilities with men, no one else should mind either, and again... that they and no one else has to respect the WOMENS sign. And frankly, it's those people and that "I'm right and the hell with everyone else's feelings" attitude that scares me FAR more than sharing a stall with the most sex-obsessed fetishistic crossdresser. Crossdressers are harmless. It's people who don't recognize, let alone respect that it's OK for people to have different comfort levels than themselves that scare the heck out of me.
So when I say, "only transitioning transsexuals should be allowed in women's rooms," I'm thinking from a *legal*, not personal perspective. I've come to learn that many people can't even grasp the concept of separating the two, but I want to be on record for saying it at least. I'm trying to come up with an official law that expands the definition to include non-GGs while still respecting the expectations of anyone walking into a room marked WOMEN ONLY. And those expectations are that only other women will be in that room.
And it's not prompted from a paranoid fear that all men (including crossdressers) are evil rapists, but simply because many women would rather not share a room with men where they're doing rather intimate and private things, whether behind stall doors or not. Personally, I'd rather not get undressed in the same room as a man I don't know, even if he promises to not look or stands behind a partition. It's not that he's sick or scary, it's just that... I dunno... I'd feel vulnerable? Exposed? Maybe some people can't understand that feeling for whatever reason, but it's how I and many other women DO feel, and why many of us want a room to ourselves.
Still, that's my *personal* opinion, and I realize that if I walk into a room marked UNISEX, I'll just have to deal with my discomfort. But as long as that sign says WOMEN, I shouldn't have to worry about it. I realize that puts crossdressers in a bind, and again I *personally* don't think crossdressers are "dangerous" or more prone to assault women than anyone else. But they're STILL men in identity, regardless of their appearance, and thus it's difficult to argue that they should *legally* be allowed access to rooms marked WOMEN ONLY.
~Kate~
