Susan's Place Transgender Resources

Dominic Holden, BuzzFeed
February 5, 2015

A bill introduced Wednesday in the Florida Legislature by Representative Frank Artiles of Miami would make it a crime for transgender people to use single-sex public facilities — including restrooms in businesses that are open to the public, workplaces, and schools — that correspond with their gender identity.

Violators would be guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by up to a year in jail or a $1,000 fine.

The bill would also empower people in a single-sex restroom during any "unlawful entry" to sue the alleged interloper and owner of the facility for attorneys fees and damages.

More: http://www.buzzfeed.com/dominicholden/florida-bill-would-criminalize-transgender-people-using-sing#.anXz7RNv6 (http://www.buzzfeed.com/dominicholden/florida-bill-would-criminalize-transgender-people-using-sing#.anXz7RNv6)

This is a job for Buck Angel. >:-)

Dumbest thing I've ever heard.   They've invented a problem that doesn't exist.  If you look at statistics, are transfolk more likely to be the perpetrator or victim in a public bathroom?

I can see it now...a cis-woman complains "OMG LOOK LOOOK!! THERE'S A MAN IN HERE!!!"  >:(

Police are called, security, medivac, etc...and we find out the "man" is in fact a hirsute cis-woman, who is not blessed with an overly feminine face...  :embarrassed:

Well, *NOW*...who's going to get sued?  >:-)

Its the same old bathroom bill fear.

You know we are all pervs in the eyes of the extreme right.

Wonder what that senators would do if his wife was in the ladies room and my husband walked in.

Hmm maybe that's what's needed a national bathroom activism day.

Super palm face.

Now I'm confused, a customer at Starbucks told me to use the ladies room when I was going in the men's room.

I think the reason that we are seeing a flurry of these kinds of bills lately is that politicians want to be seen as "doing something" to help their constituents and proposing these kinds of bills represents almost no political risk to them whatsoever - it's seen as low hanging fruit, and something that is expected to greeted with enthusiasm by their conservative voter base. They see other politicians proposing such bills and think that they need to jump on the bandwagon too - after all, we have to protect the children from these perverts!

It's preying on people's ignorance and irrational fears in search of votes.

We are such a small demographic that we are seen as no threat to their careers, and the fact that they would be trampling on our rights just doesn't enter their minds, or if it does they just don't care.

I don't know how we stop it; perhaps some favorable rulings from SCOTUS might help (?)

So what bathroom are intersex people supposed to use?  *le facepalm*

I'd be more worried about sharing a bathroom with your politicians, definitely wouldn't feel safe.

Quote from: Cindy on February 06, 2015, 01:27:42 AM
I'd be more worried about sharing a bathroom with your politicians, definitely wouldn't feel safe.

Like that homophobe guy, Tappy McWidestance?

I did sort of laugh at this whole idea today. At work I often ride my bike as do several other woman. Since stalls are too small to change in, we stand around outside of the stalls strip off and put on either work clothes or bike clothes, depending on the time of day. So there we are in bra and knickers chatting away. The all know I'm TG, no one gives a damn.


Why should they!!! :laugh:

Quote from: Jill F on February 06, 2015, 01:22:46 AM
So what bathroom are intersex people supposed to use?  *le facepalm*

if this goes through then every business will have to put in 2 extra bathrooms.....3 for intersex individuals

Quote from: ScottAnthony407 on February 06, 2015, 01:39:18 AM
if this goes through then every business will have to put in 2 extra bathrooms.....3 for intersex individuals

So I had these underdeveloped vestigial "girl parts" removed when I was 12.  Which one is for me?

Yeah, this bill is going to clearly solve more problems than it will create.  /sarc

This whole thing is so completely nuts. It seems to me the whole issue with these legislators is not just transphobia but severe ignorance.

For me, being able to use the female restrooms makes me feel so less stressed it's amazing. It's not like I go out of my way to use them but when you gotta go you gotta go. I was out and about a lot today and needed to use public restrooms no less than four times (stupid bladder!!) - I felt 100% comfortable and unlike using the "men's" I felt safe.

Quote from: Jill F on February 06, 2015, 01:43:25 AM
So I had these underdeveloped vestigial "girl parts" removed when I was 12.  Which one is for me?

Yeah, this bill is going to clearly solve more problems than it will create.  /sarc

yes it will...i dont see this bill going up and being voted for at all, although with how this world is i wouldnt be surprised if someone from some where actually voted on it.....like say a republican....

Quote from: Beth Andrea on February 05, 2015, 07:56:46 PM
I can see it now...a cis-woman complains "OMG LOOK LOOOK!! THERE'S A MAN IN HERE!!!"  >:(

Police are called, security, medivac, etc...and we find out the "man" is in fact a hirsute cis-woman, who is not blessed with an overly feminine face...  :embarrassed:

Well, *NOW*...who's going to get sued?  >:-)

Yes. To avoid possible sue, a doctor or an inspector should be in every bathroom for 24 hours to check the sex chromosomes of every visitor. And then, what are they going to do on intersex people?

barbie~~

Quote from: ScottAnthony407 on February 06, 2015, 02:35:36 AM
yes it will...i dont see this bill going up and being voted for at all, although with how this world is i wouldnt be surprised if someone from some where actually voted on it.....like say a republican....

Actually think some public debate on this bill wouldn't be a bad thing. Most people, when they really think about it, quickly come to the conclusion that allowing us to use the correct bathroom is the *only* way it can work. Problem is, most people haven't thought about it.

I'll also say that the fact that this comes up at all points to what a TERRIBLE job our community has done of educating the public why we need to do what we do. We've outsourced that job to the media, and we know what responsible citizens they are.

Yep I saw this here:

http://www.buzzfeed.com/dominicholden/florida-bill-would-criminalize-transgender-people-using-sing#.owzPZPzen

Thank heavens I live in the UK although there are parts of the Gender Recognition Act that discriminate and were not thought through properly.

I am glad that we have GIRES trying to sort them out.  See: http://www.gires.org.uk/

If the right wing Tories had their way, this Act would never have come into force.

What is happening to the USA right now scares me rigid and I worry for my sisters there that I visit quite often.

Florida's Vicious Anti-Trans Bathroom Bill Easily Survives Its First Vote

http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2015/03/05/florida_trans_bathroom_bill_easily_survives_first_vote.html

by Mark Joseph Stern, Slate
March 5, 2015

Florida's stunningly malicious anti-trans bill passed its first major legislative hurdle on Wednesday, sailing out of the House Civil Rights Subcommittee with a 9-to-4 vote. (Yes, a subcommittee with that name actually approved this thing.)

Republicans unanimously and enthusiastically supported the bill; Democrats unanimously and vigorously opposed it. When I first wrote about the proposed measure in February, a number of Floridians wrote me predicting it would quietly die in subcommittee without ever receiving a vote. After Wednesday's vote, the bill's passage into law suddenly seems like a distinct possibility.

So this MUST mean they will have an attendant at the door, and make you prove your gender???  Politicians are just getting stupider and stupider!

The wording on the bill has been amended to allow us to use the facilities of the gender on our driver license or passport.  It's still an absolutely horrific bill, but hopefully this helps some of us in case it passes.

http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/Sections/Documents/loaddoc.aspx?FileName=_h0583c1.docx&DocumentType=Bill&BillNumber=0583&Session=2015 (http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/Sections/Documents/loaddoc.aspx?FileName=_h0583c1.docx&DocumentType=Bill&BillNumber=0583&Session=2015)

760.55(a) "Female" means a biological female or a person who has a valid driver license or United States passport that describes the person as female on the license or passport.

760.55(b) "Male" means a biological male or a person who has a valid driver license or United States passport that describes the person as male on the license or passport.

Let's keep watching how this interesting story unfolds.

Barbie~~

Quote from: Eveline on March 11, 2015, 12:59:35 PM
Republicans unanimously and enthusiastically supported the bill; Democrats unanimously and vigorously opposed it.

I weep for this country now that it appears the health and safety of transgender citizens is now a partisan issue, with the dominant party coming out opposed.

Don't we have anyone in Florida willing to speak out about how horrible this is? We need to educate people what it is like to be part time and go out as a woman in public. It's hard enough without fear you'll have to choose between putting your life in danger, being arrested for using the wrong restroom, or having it all come dribbling out onto your clothing and the floor while you're standing there trying to decide.

Our community is now tasting the bitter fruits of our unwillingness to educate the public about who we are.

Quote from: suzifrommd on March 11, 2015, 01:33:08 PM


Our community is now tasting the bitter fruits of our unwillingness to educate the public about who we are.

I cannot agree with your statement more!  So very true

The reason we need to push for federal non discrimination act to pass. Need to get after the politicians.

Only way to have uniformity through out the states.

We are dealing with this stupid crap here in Canada also. bathroom bill splash over.

I posted last night the Vice presidents speech to the HRC need to pass this on, now is the time.

Criminalizing behavior in which no harm is done is in itself criminal.

How about just going after people who actually commit criminal acts in bathrooms? 

Of these people who do perpetrate actual crimes in bathrooms, what percentage are transgender?   

Now what percentage are elected officials or clergy?  I can find all sorts of stories about elected officials and clergy doing things they shouldn't in public restrooms, but none about transgender people that weren't later found to be fabrications.

Maybe we should ban politicians and clergy from public restrooms?  Ridiculous as that sounds, at least we have better statistics on our side.

*chucks mic on ground*

Waiting to see a cis person with no ID, too butch for the ladie's and too fem for the men's, preferably at Disney on a busy holiday weekend.

I recieved this from Buck Angel. He asked me to share. I know Buck from when he came to Adelaide. Nice guy and proudly says he is a man with a vagina.

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpt1/v/t1.0-9/10305051_10152736490516463_1978643686531141285_n.jpg?oh=bd1c1ec04cfa6ecd4b3e834e105afbe6&oe=557216B0&__gda__=1433482681_fbb60d464e1546bd57d37b83f74b0458 (https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpt1/v/t1.0-9/10305051_10152736490516463_1978643686531141285_n.jpg?oh=bd1c1ec04cfa6ecd4b3e834e105afbe6&oe=557216B0&__gda__=1433482681_fbb60d464e1546bd57d37b83f74b0458)

Quote from: Cindy on March 12, 2015, 02:34:59 AM
I recieved this from Buck Angel. He asked me to share. I know Buck from when he came to Adelaide. Nice guy and proudly says he is a man with a vagina.

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpt1/v/t1.0-9/10305051_10152736490516463_1978643686531141285_n.jpg?oh=bd1c1ec04cfa6ecd4b3e834e105afbe6&oe=557216B0&__gda__=1433482681_fbb60d464e1546bd57d37b83f74b0458 (https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpt1/v/t1.0-9/10305051_10152736490516463_1978643686531141285_n.jpg?oh=bd1c1ec04cfa6ecd4b3e834e105afbe6&oe=557216B0&__gda__=1433482681_fbb60d464e1546bd57d37b83f74b0458)

So. Awesome.

I love that guy!

He is an absolute gentleman from when I met him. There was a young man who was transitioning and Buck was his hero. Buck had T-shirts and everything for him and they sat and laughed and sang together all night. For a 9 yr old boy it made his day and many to come.

The pic is obvious 'hard case' he is charming in real life.

Here's the question then, what happens when you're full fledged female and you walk into a men's bathroom? 

Or

If you are full fledged man, and walk into a woman's restroom?

How comfortable these people going to FEEL when the cops are called then find out their body bits do actually match the sign on the door.  WHO IS GETTING SUED NOW??????

Regardless, I am having my gender marker changed in May... thank god for small favors of changing gender markers.

#Occupotty: Rochester man stands up to anti-transgender laws


Posted: Mar 12, 2015 7:29 PM EDT
By Devin Bartolotta

http://www.kttc.com/story/28416840/2015/03/12/occupotty-rochester-man-stands-up-to-anti-transgender-laws#.VQJEmli-p6Y.facebook
(http://www.kttc.com/story/28416840/2015/03/12/occupotty-rochester-man-stands-up-to-anti-transgender-laws#.VQJEmli-p6Y.facebook)

ROCHESTER, Minn. (KTTC) – Minnesota lawmakers introduced legislation that would require high school students to use the locker rooms and restrooms determined by their birth sex. Now, local transgender advocates are fighting back and the response is going viral.

========
Lots of trans guys are doing selfies of themselves in woman's rooms.
I'm afraid I'm not too muscly, but here goes some I've seen.

--Jay

Formatted to conform to news post guidelines

I'm going to take a Twitter #WeJustNeedToPee selfie in a public men's room tomorrow, with my brother-in-law there as a safety net.

Wish me luck!

As I've said:

We will end up with our own Rosa Parks. Won't it be cute if her name actually was Rosa Parks.

We will also have our million trans march.

They are pushing us in that direction.

This is just another reason why all public restrooms should be multi-user unisex with adequately private stalls and no open urinals. 

Sorry if this is yucky but just thinking, while our brother FtMs wear STPs, MtF don't, so just walk to the urinal. lift your dress, step out of your knickers and let fly, as it were! Could be interesting? Sure we should use the male loo!

Quote from: Cindy on March 13, 2015, 12:11:21 PM
Sorry if this is yucky but just thinking, while our brother FtMs wear STPs, MtF don't, so just walk to the urinal. lift your dress, step out of your knickers and let fly, as it were! Could be interesting? Sure we should use the male loo!

After having SRS it might be possible (but messy) if you were wearing a dress or skirt. However, what if you were wearing trousers?

I guess that open urinals could be possible if you didn't mind displaying everything to everybody and they didn't mind seeing it.

Quote from: mac1 on March 13, 2015, 12:40:51 PM
After having SRS it might be possible (but messy) if you were wearing a dress or skirt. However, what if you were wearing trousers?

You could always use an stp as well, just not a wearable one. Then take your time washing it out in the sink, lol.

Quote from: Eveline on March 13, 2015, 07:03:05 AM
I'm going to take a Twitter #WeJustNeedToPee selfie in a public men's room tomorrow, with my brother-in-law there as a safety net.

Wish me luck!

You go!

Quote from: mac1 on March 13, 2015, 12:40:51 PM

Quote from: Cindy on March 13, 2015, 12:11:21 PM
Sorry if this is yucky but just thinking, while our brother FtMs wear STPs, MtF don't, so just walk to the urinal. lift your dress, step out of your knickers and let fly, as it were! Could be interesting? Sure we should use the male loo!

After having SRS it might be possible (but messy) if you were wearing a dress or skirt. However, what if you were wearing trousers?

I guess that open urinals could be possible if you didn't mind displaying everything to everybody and they didn't mind seeing it.

Sorry, I was being evil about the impracticability of post op women using a urinal. If they think I'm a man deal with the issue of my anatomy.

Quote from: mac1 on March 13, 2015, 11:26:43 AM
This is just another reason why all public restrooms should be multi-user unisex with adequately private stalls and no open urinals.

Urinals should go the way of the dinosaur anyway.  I haven't used one in years now, but why on earth do they seem to make them perfectly parabolic so that no matter what angle you hit them at, it splashes right back on you.   It's worse when the guy next to you is the one splashing on your feet.   It's even worse yet when the guy next door splashing on you is also checking out your junk.

It's better to be pissed off than pissed on.

Quote from: Jill F on March 13, 2015, 03:41:48 PM
Urinals should go the way of the dinosaur anyway.  I haven't used one in years now, but why on earth do they seem to make them perfectly parabolic so that no matter what angle you hit them at, it splashes right back on you.   It's worse when the guy next to you is the one splashing on your feet.   It's even worse yet when the guy next door splashing on you is also checking out your junk.

It's better to be pissed off than pissed on.

Can't say I agree. They let one get in and out very quickly. One of the things I'm going to miss is being able to use one (but I've stopped using them now anyway). Today I passed the line by the men's and ladies in port authority bus terminal. The men's line was about half as long as the women's. It also moved faster.

Quote from: mac1 on March 13, 2015, 11:26:43 AM
This is just another reason why all public restrooms should be multi-user unisex with adequately private stalls and no open urinals.

I'm not sure I would like that. Using the proper restroom is somewhat affirming to me and I would hate to have a bunch of men dirty up the restroom that I have to use. Besides the restroom can often be a social experience (for women anyway).

Quote from: Jill F on March 13, 2015, 03:41:48 PM
Urinals should go the way of the dinosaur anyway.  I haven't used one in years now, but why on earth do they seem to make them perfectly parabolic so that no matter what angle you hit them at, it splashes right back on you.   It's worse when the guy next to you is the one splashing on your feet.   It's even worse yet when the guy next door splashing on you is also checking out your junk.

It's better to be pissed off than pissed on.

I never liked urinals but I felt for several years that I was being forced to use them. The last tine I used one was in 1997 and I don't miss doing so.

It's now on the agenda for the Government Operations Subcommittee for Tuesday March 17 at 8AM.  I'm guessing there will be another protest for that vote, but I'm not sure who is organizing it.

For those that are not familiar with the lawmaking process in Florida, there are 3 components involved: the House, the Senate, and the Governor.  This bill was drafted in the House, and requires a majority vote in 3 subcommittees before being voted on by the entire assembly.  Currently, it has passed the first of the three and will be voted upon by the second this week.  There is a companion bill in the Senate that also requires being passed by 3 subcommittees there before being voted upon by the full Senate assembly.  If the bill garners a majority passing vote in the Senate and the House, it will proceed to the Governor to be made into law.  The Governor has the option to veto the bill, but it can still be made into law by a two thirds majority vote in both the House and the Senate.

The issue that comes up is that currently, it appears that the votes are largely partisan with the Republicans voting for the bill, and the Democrats voting against it.  The Republicans hold a large majority in both the House (80-39) and the Senate (25-14), and the Governor is Republican as well.

Fear mongering has always been a successful tactic in getting the lazy and the lost to follow the leader.  And fear has been a greater motivator in getting the people to the polls. 

Floridians elected a governor who prefers to silence those who say things he doesn't want to hear (like "global warming") and has forbidden the use of certain terms by government employees.  Censorship, maybe?  Where's the outrage from the citizens?  If the masses don't find problems with a governor who orders silence as a means to get what he wants, why would anyone expect those same citizens to care about the human rights of minorities?

But as same sex marriage was being passed in many states, the backward states "fought back" and began passing anti-gay laws.  I see the same thing happening here.  With same sex marriages, the anti-gay legislation seems to have backfired.  Instead of quietly suppressing equal rights and prolonging discrimination, as they had been doing, their blatant ant-gay legislation seems to quickly be bringing to an end to the very thing they didn't want.  Let's hope this blatant effort to discriminate against trans people sees a similar demise.   

Update on taking my #WeJustNeedToPee selfie:

My sis and I drove around this morning trying to find a local business that has a lockable men's room with a urinal, so I could take that selfie in complete safety (and with the urinal in the background).  ;)

We couldn't find one!

We tried two banks, a health food store, an office supply store and couple other businesses - all were lockable, and all sans urinals. Who knew.

Next we're going to try my ex-brother in law's restaurant, after hours. If he's game. :)

Urinals are disgusting. What was your purpose in having one?

Quote from: Eveline on March 14, 2015, 10:06:23 AM
Update on taking my #WeJustNeedToPee selfie:

My sis and I drove around this morning trying to find a local business that has a lockable men's room with a urinal, so I could take that selfie in complete safety (and with the urinal in the background).  ;)

We couldn't find one!

We tried two banks, a health food store, an office supply store and couple other businesses - all were lockable, and all sans urinals. Who knew.

Next we're going to try my ex-brother in law's restaurant, after hours. If he's game. :)

Quote from: mac1 on March 15, 2015, 09:53:02 PM
Urinals are disgusting. What was your purpose in having one?

It's a feature of a men's restroom.

I don't really hate them either if they are kept clean. They help move the line.

Quote from: ImagineKate on March 16, 2015, 05:07:04 PM
It's a feature of a men's restroom.

I don't really hate them either if they are kept clean. They help move the line.

But for you, a woman, they don't serve any purpose.

Quote from: mac1 on March 16, 2015, 05:15:28 PM
But for you, a woman, they don't serve any purpose.

of course

The point was to show women don't belong in a men's restroom and what says men's restroom other than a urinal?

Isn't it kind of sexist to say that a woman can't use a urinal just because she's a woman? 

For more on the #WeJustNeedToPee Twitter campaign, there's good info in this Huffington Post article (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/12/trans-bathroom-selfie-campaign_n_6855430.html). Should answer most "why" questions...

Just a fyi this is getting real close to locking. Few posts are in the right field

It would be a shame to have it locked for silly out of topic posts.

Keep inside the original post content of transgender bathroom bill in Florida.

Sign banning boys over 6 from ladies' room sparks debate

http://www.today.com/parents/sign-banning-boys-over-6-ladies-room-sparks-debate-2D80545254

A. Pawlowski TODAY contributor |March 12, 2015

"Restroom stops often present a dilemma for moms out and about with their young sons: When is it OK to let a boy tag along inside the ladies' room and when is he too old for that practice?"

"A sign posted outside a restroom at a mall in Oklahoma declaring that boys older than 6 should use the men's room is sparking a debate among families".

===========================
I saw something about someone posting a sign in a mall saying boys over 6 years old must use the men's restroom.

Um, no and go ahead and try to make me. I am not letting my little son go all alone in a public men's restroom and I'm certainly not going in one with him...

edited by news staff for content per publishing rules

Quote from: ImagineKate on March 17, 2015, 10:02:22 AM
Sign banning boys over 6 from ladies' room sparks debate

http://www.today.com/parents/sign-banning-boys-over-6-ladies-room-sparks-debate-2D80545254

A. Pawlowski TODAY contributor |March 12, 2015

"Restroom stops often present a dilemma for moms out and about with their young sons: When is it OK to let a boy tag along inside the ladies' room and when is he too old for that practice?"

"A sign posted outside a restroom at a mall in Oklahoma declaring that boys older than 6 should use the men's room is sparking a debate among families".

===========================
I saw something about someone posting a sign in a mall saying boys over 6 years old must use the men's restroom.

Um, no and go ahead and try to make me. I am not letting my little son go all alone in a public men's restroom and I'm certainly not going in one with him...

Yes, because some idiot randomly posts a sign like that, it must be legally binding.  Makes me wonder about the real intentions of the sign poster, quite frankly.

Quote from: ImagineKate on March 17, 2015, 10:02:22 AM
Sign banning boys over 6 from ladies' room sparks debate

http://www.today.com/parents/sign-banning-boys-over-6-ladies-room-sparks-debate-2D80545254

A. Pawlowski TODAY contributor |March 12, 2015

"Restroom stops often present a dilemma for moms out and about with their young sons: When is it OK to let a boy tag along inside the ladies' room and when is he too old for that practice?"

"A sign posted outside a restroom at a mall in Oklahoma declaring that boys older than 6 should use the men's room is sparking a debate among families".

===========================
I saw something about someone posting a sign in a mall saying boys over 6 years old must use the men's restroom.

Um, no and go ahead and try to make me. I am not letting my little son go all alone in a public men's restroom and I'm certainly not going in one with him...

Kate,

I still say that the question of restroom usage would be eliminated if all public restrooms were multi-user unisex. It would also: save space; save duplication; reduce cost; eliminate the need for separate single-user family restrooms; and be safer for everybody as you would be less likely to be alone and subject to encountering a predator.

Quote from: mac1 on March 17, 2015, 11:22:11 AM
Kate,

I still say that the question of restroom usage would be eliminated if all public restrooms were multi-user unisex. It would also: save space; save duplication; reduce cost; eliminate the need for separate single-user family restrooms; and be safer for everybody as you would be less likely to be alone and subject to encountering a predator.

I would still feel safer if each stall had a "panic button" in this case.  Real predatory creeps do exist, and a unisex bathroom sort of sounds like a potential proverbial barrel in which to shoot fish.

Quote from: mac1 on March 17, 2015, 11:22:11 AM
Kate,

I still say that the question of restroom usage would be eliminated if all public restrooms were multi-user unisex. It would also: save space; save duplication; reduce cost; eliminate the need for separate single-user family restrooms; and be safer for everybody as you would be less likely to be alone and subject to encountering a predator.

Sounds coercive to me. 90+% of the population does not WANT to share a restroom with people of the opposite gender. I would be very uncomfortable with any solution that forces that number of people to do something they don't want.

Agree with Suzi. The family restroom for kids is a solution that works as well as allowing parents to go with them to their restroom

Maybe it will end up being signed into law that all bathrooms will be locked and you have to see an attendant (bathroom police) for a key that is attached via a chain to a cement block.

That way someone is always making the decisions for everyone hence will keep public safe.

Quote from: Jill F on March 17, 2015, 11:30:20 AM
I would still feel safer if each stall had a "panic button" in this case.  Real predatory creeps do exist, and a unisex bathroom sort of sounds like a potential proverbial barrel in which to shoot fish.

They will prevail especially in single sex women's restrooms where you are likely to encounter fewer people and less chance of resistance. The "F" on the door has not stopped them.

Quote from: ImagineKate on March 17, 2015, 10:02:22 AM
Sign banning boys over 6 from ladies' room sparks debate

.....................

"Restroom stops often present a dilemma for moms out and about with their young sons: When is it OK to let a boy tag along inside the ladies' room and when is he too old for that practice?"

"A sign posted outside a restroom at a mall in Oklahoma declaring that boys older than 6 should use the men's room is sparking a debate among families".
........................

What about girls using the men's restroom with their dads? Recently I have seen that on occasion and nobody seems to object.

Also, I have seen adult women using the men's restroom and nobody seems to object.

Why should it be any different for boys or men using the women's restroom? Why the different standard?

Sadly, the bill passed the House Government Operations Committee today, 7-4 with 2 members absent.  It was mostly a partisan vote again, with Ken Roberson(R) the only Republican to vote nay.  If the bill passes the next subcommittee, it will be voted on by the general assembly.  I suspect that the bill will get through the House pretty easily.  Our best chance to stop it is probably in the Senate.

Quote from: mac1 on March 17, 2015, 03:03:06 PM
What about girls using the men's restroom with their dads? Recently I have seen that on occasion and nobody seems to object.

Also, I have seen adult women using the men's restroom and nobody seems to object.

Why should it be any different for boys or men using the women's restroom? Why the different standard?

I've carried my daughters to the men's (I don't go to the men's anymore though). Nobody really cared.

The bill has been changed so that the punishment is a misdemeanor in the second degree instead of the first degree.  So instead of a maximum 1 year jail sentence and a $1000 fine, the maximums are now a 60-day jail sentence and a $500 fine.

I thought for sure it was going to get knocked down today, Our brothers and sisters put up a much better response to it than in the Civil Justice Subcommittee, particularly the abundance of well built bearded trans men pointing out they would be in the woman's room as their ID was F.  I think even Artiles thought he was loosing at the end as his final closing was particularly nasty, attacking someone who suggested it was all reminiscent of Nazi Germany. So if any of the boys and girls who were there today are reading this, well done, you may not have won, but you put up a reasoned and good debate as opposed to the bigotry and hired guns brought in by the other side. Sadly the ones behind the bench were not listening.

Given the way this is going i think it is quite likely to get thorough on a partisan basis, maybe our best bet is to try and get the gender identity wording out of HB33 inserted, it wont stop the potential for bathroom police but will include the majority of our community whilst excluding what Artiles claims he is trying to prevent.  On Monday I emailed all the committee representatives with this along with some other thoughts from across the pond but along with my brothers and sisters in the room it seems it all fell on deaf ears.  We can but try though.

Maybe someone with a better legal background than me can confirm but i think HB 33 which looks bipartisan may actually fix this by including us in the anti discrimination laws, as us not being protected is being relied upon with HB583, HB 33 currently reads as below and i think c) should include most of us and exclude what Artiles claims to want.  It just needs to make it into law

(8) "Gender identity or expression" means gender related identity, appearance, or behavior, whether such gender related identity, appearance, or behavior is different from that traditionally associated with the person's physiology or assigned sex at birth, which gender related identity can be shown by providing evidence, including, but not limited to:
(a) Medical history, care, or treatment of the gender related identity;
(b) Consistent and uniform assertion of the gender related identity; or
(c) Other evidence that the gender related identity is a sincerely held part of a person's core identity and is not being asserted for an improper purpose.


But then i don't hold out much hope with FL, after all this is the state that made a law a couple of years ago that required UK citizens to be in possession of an international driving permit with English translation of our English driving licenses!

What I fear is this happening:

Transman in men's room (passing well): no problem.
Transman in men's room (not passing well): possible hassle/probably no charges filed.
Transman in ladies' room (passing well): hassle/no charges filed. 
Transman in ladies' room (not passing well): possible hassle/no charges filed.
Transwoman in men's room (passing well): hassle/harassment/possible assault.
Transwoman in men's room (not passing well): hassle/harassment/possible assault.
Transwoman in ladies' room (passing well): no hassle nor charges filed unless they are "outed".
Transwoman in ladies' room (not passing well): hassle/charges filed.

I predict that this bill will cause a lot of problems while solving none, and that transwomen who do not pass well will be targeted disproportionally by a wide margin.   The amount of taxpayer funds that will be spent prosecuting innocent people and defending the backlash lawsuits will shortly prove the shortsightedness of this bill. 

Quote from: Beth Andrea on February 05, 2015, 07:56:46 PM
I can see it now...a cis-woman complains "OMG LOOK LOOOK!! THERE'S A MAN IN HERE!!!"  >:(

Police are called, security, medivac, etc...and we find out the "man" is in fact a hirsute cis-woman, who is not blessed with an overly feminine face...  :embarrassed:

Well, *NOW*...who's going to get sued?  >:-)

This! :D

Quote from: Jill F on March 17, 2015, 04:55:19 PM
What I fear is this happening:

Transman in men's room (passing well): no problem.
Transman in men's room (not passing well): possible hassle/probably no charges filed.
Transman in ladies' room (passing well): hassle/no charges filed. 
Transman in ladies' room (not passing well): possible hassle/no charges filed.
Transwoman in men's room (passing well): hassle/harassment/possible assault.
Transwoman in men's room (not passing well): hassle/harassment/possible assault.
Transwoman in ladies' room (passing well): no hassle nor charges filed unless they are "outed".
Transwoman in ladies' room (not passing well): hassle/charges filed.

I predict that this bill will cause a lot of problems while solving none, and that transwomen who do not pass well will be targeted disproportionally by a wide margin.   The amount of taxpayer funds that will be spent prosecuting innocent people and defending the backlash lawsuits will shortly prove the shortsightedness of this bill.

Exactly my thoughts but I think we can short circuit this with some good old fashioned civil disobedience. I like the  idea of the selfies but it needs to go much much larger. FTMs showing up  in women's restrooms en masse should drive it straight home.

The last update I've hear is that they will be going by your gender marker on you DL or Passport and they are considering that charges would not be pressed if you could prove that your medically transitioning. Still it's a horrible bill and doesn't do anything to protect anyone. There are already many laws that are strict if anyone is assaulted or harassed in the bathroom. It creates more problems than anything else for everyone, including cis-woman who look masculine. It just puts everyone up for scrutiny.

Quote from: Sydney_NYC on March 17, 2015, 11:11:50 PM
The last update I've hear is that they will be going by your gender marker on you DL or Passport and they are considering that charges would not be pressed if you could prove that your medically transitioning. Still it's a horrible bill and doesn't do anything to protect anyone. There are already many laws that are strict if anyone is assaulted or harassed in the bathroom. It creates more problems than anything else for everyone, including cis-woman who look masculine. It just puts everyone up for scrutiny.

And it still discriminates against those who can't afford nor opt not to have medical treatment for being transgender. 

Cisgender people don't need rubber stamps to use a toilet and neither should we.

The biggest thing for me is that I don't see a purpose for this bill other than to oppress transgender people. Remember I'm a libertarian so I believe in as little government as possible, and this is the very definition of Government overreach.

Quote from: Jill F on March 17, 2015, 04:55:19 PM
What I fear is this happening:

Transman in men's room (passing well): no problem.
Transman in men's room (not passing well): possible hassle/probably no charges filed.
Transman in ladies' room (passing well): hassle/no charges filed. 
Transman in ladies' room (not passing well): possible hassle/no charges filed.
Transwoman in men's room (passing well): hassle/harassment/possible assault.
Transwoman in men's room (not passing well): hassle/harassment/possible assault.
Transwoman in ladies' room (passing well): no hassle nor charges filed unless they are "outed".
Transwoman in ladies' room (not passing well): hassle/charges filed.

I predict that this bill will cause a lot of problems while solving none, and that transwomen who do not pass well will be targeted disproportionally by a wide margin.   The amount of taxpayer funds that will be spent prosecuting innocent people and defending the backlash lawsuits will shortly prove the shortsightedness of this bill.

Jill, I hate to disagree with your analysis, but I feel like the reason why this bill is so horrific is exactly the opposite of what you say.

I don't think it WILL create widespread problems that will be visible to the public. I think Transpeople who pass will continue to use the correct restroom and no one will be the wiser. I think Trans people who are not passable will either correct their documentation or stay away from public restrooms to the detriment of their health but with no impact on the public. Occasionally someone who can't or doesn't update their documentation will be arrested but it will be an infrequent enough event that it will not spark a public outcry. Also occasionally a cisgender person who looks trans will be hassled, but those misunderstandings will be probably be cleared up quickly.

In other words, I think that if it becomes law, it will look to all the world as a successful law. It will be used as a template for other states to create similar laws which are much easier to pass than the current draconian chromosome-based trash. We'll start to see more bathroom bills, and the dominoes will begin to fall.

(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fs3.amazonaws.com%2Frapgenius%2Ffilepicker%252F1Z162Y7fRpef15AKOq18_dominoes_falling.jpg&hash=cc7e6b4c0ab6390526128c7a7e5b04be4035c1b3)

The most vulnerable segments of our community will be seriously harmed. Those who are deciding between suicide and exploring their gender will have no viable bathroom options, and that will drive them indoors. We'll see suicides among people who might otherwise have made it through transition and enjoyed living a life as their true gender. Those are the true victims of this law.

Also it will harm non-passable trans women from other jurisdictions that do not provide correct documentation. They will need to stay away from Florida (if they know what's good for them) which will impact their travel options but also not affect the Floridian public.

We could always give them exactly what they thought they wanted. The post-op trans men can leave the seats up in the women's room and leave the restroom a generally disgusting mess while trans women can take a really long time and post ops can attempt to use the urinal. I believe this is called malicious compliance.

Quote from: rachel89 on March 18, 2015, 10:48:52 AM
We could always give them exactly what they thought they wanted. The post-op trans men can leave the seats up in the women's room and leave the restroom a generally disgusting mess while trans women can take a really long time and post ops can attempt to use the urinal. I believe this is called malicious compliance.

Similar to a "white mutiny" when you do EXACTLY as ordered AND NOTHING ELSE.

Also, by-the-by, I have a cruise out of Florida next October with some Disney and beach time planned. My endo told me yesterday I'm already a Tanner stage 4 and I'm a small C cup already. I intend to hide absolutely nothing. We can't deal with this mess by just avoiding Florida. It'll just follow us home if we do.

Guess I'm glad I didn't change all my documents yet.  Drivers license says F but I still have a US Passport card that says M.

be well
jenifer

Question, and I apologize if I missed this in the thread. Are businesses required to maintain single sex bathrooms by law? Is this a situation that would allow a savvy business owner to make an end run by simply installing unisex signage? Most owners have no interest in running customers off, and those that do will suffer financial consequences.

Hugs, Devlyn

Quote from: suzifrommd on March 18, 2015, 09:04:39 AM
Jill, I hate to disagree with your analysis, but I feel like the reason why this bill is so horrific is exactly the opposite of what you say.

I don't think it WILL create widespread problems that will be visible to the public. I think Transpeople who pass will continue to use the correct restroom and no one will be the wiser. I think Trans people who are not passable will either correct their documentation or stay away from public restrooms to the detriment of their health but with no impact on the public. Occasionally someone who can't or doesn't update their documentation will be arrested but it will be an infrequent enough event that it will not spark a public outcry. Also occasionally a cisgender person who looks trans will be hassled, but those misunderstandings will be probably be cleared up quickly.

In other words, I think that if it becomes law, it will look to all the world as a successful law. It will be used as a template for other states to create similar laws which are much easier to pass than the current draconian chromosome-based trash. We'll start to see more bathroom bills, and the dominoes will begin to fall.

(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fs3.amazonaws.com%2Frapgenius%2Ffilepicker%252F1Z162Y7fRpef15AKOq18_dominoes_falling.jpg&hash=cc7e6b4c0ab6390526128c7a7e5b04be4035c1b3)

The most vulnerable segments of our community will be seriously harmed. Those who are deciding between suicide and exploring their gender will have no viable bathroom options, and that will drive them indoors. We'll see suicides among people who might otherwise have made it through transition and enjoyed living a life as their true gender. Those are the true victims of this law.

Also it will harm non-passable trans women from other jurisdictions that do not provide correct documentation. They will need to stay away from Florida (if they know what's good for them) which will impact their travel options but also not affect the Floridian public.

This is how I see it as well >:(

What a farce... How the hell can these jerks look anyone straight in the face and claim to be for "smaller government", "freedumb" and "individual rights" blahh blahh,  is beyond me ???   Really its scary this has gone as far as it has  >:( ::)  Sadly Ive considered moving down there eventually and starting over in a new life eventually but this makes me seriously reconsider that for sure >:( ::)

NO wonder FL has such a high crime rate, they make everything illegal including using the bathroom.

Quote from: LordKAT on March 18, 2015, 03:27:48 PM
NO wonder FL has such a high crime rate, they make everything illegal including using the bathroom.

But I think you can still marry your first cousin there. Thank goodness they haven't gone after that yet...

Quote from: suzifrommd on March 18, 2015, 09:04:39 AM
Jill, I hate to disagree with your analysis, but I feel like the reason why this bill is so horrific is exactly the opposite of what you say.

I don't think it WILL create widespread problems that will be visible to the public. I think Transpeople who pass will continue to use the correct restroom and no one will be the wiser. I think Trans people who are not passable will either correct their documentation or stay away from public restrooms to the detriment of their health but with no impact on the public. Occasionally someone who can't or doesn't update their documentation will be arrested but it will be an infrequent enough event that it will not spark a public outcry. Also occasionally a cisgender person who looks trans will be hassled, but those misunderstandings will be probably be cleared up quickly.

In other words, I think that if it becomes law, it will look to all the world as a successful law. It will be used as a template for other states to create similar laws which are much easier to pass than the current draconian chromosome-based trash. We'll start to see more bathroom bills, and the dominoes will begin to fall.

<pic snip>

The most vulnerable segments of our community will be seriously harmed. Those who are deciding between suicide and exploring their gender will have no viable bathroom options, and that will drive them indoors. We'll see suicides among people who might otherwise have made it through transition and enjoyed living a life as their true gender. Those are the true victims of this law.

Also it will harm non-passable trans women from other jurisdictions that do not provide correct documentation. They will need to stay away from Florida (if they know what's good for them) which will impact their travel options but also not affect the Floridian public.

That is exactly my thoughts and the basis of what i sent to the committee members on Monday, I may as well post my email below, at least someone will read it then. 

I'm kind of worried that it will get close enough, it does even have the potential to be good for us, and already does provide a legal right for trans people to use the correct rest room, so Artiles is correct and is shouting about it that it does improve the rights of trans people, but only in a perverted and underhand way that could will cause vigilantly ID checks, and leaves out the most venerable. My fear is that it gets good enough for those campaigning against it who are mostly transitioned and correct ID holding people but i hope and suspect they will fight all the way.

Anyway, last Mondays email, i have already started writing something for the Judiciary committee.

Quote from: Debbie spoke to deaf ears

I am writing to you today to bring to your attention two groups of individuals who were under represented during the debate on HB 583 in the Civil Justice Subcommittee.  Whilst the trans people and supporters did a good job in highlighting the problems openly and transitioning trans people suffer, two groups who were barely mentioned were transgendered tourists and early transitioning/questioning transgender people.

The latter of those groups being the most venerable of an already extremely venerable section of society.  Often the point of taking the decision to give up on a lifetime in an unsuccessful gender identity and take the steps to one's real gender identity is at a point of a real choice between life and death.  The suicide rate for pre transition transgender people is shockingly high.

People at this stage of their life may not even identify themselves as transgender, every step of self-acceptance and discovery during early transition is surrounded in intense fear. The first step outside the front door, getting out of the car, opening the mall door and stepping into a store and heaven forbid should they feel the need to use a restroom. Many cannot overcome these fears unable to move forward from fear and unable to live with the mental turmoil of being trans, they often end up adding to those suicide statistics.

If HB 583 is allowed to pass into law, it will make those first steps so much harder, for some it will be enough to stop them from making those first steps; it will be enough to tip the balance from accepting life as a trans person to choosing to end life by their own hand.  Trans people may be at higher risk of violence in everyday life and especially in their birth gender restrooms, but they suffer more from their own minds and at their own hand under the pressure of social discrimination and rejection. HB583 if passed into law will indirectly end the lives of some transgender individuals.

Further to the above comments is another aspect of this bill in relation to transgender tourists, Florida is a tourist state, for many emerging  transgender people the pressure of stepping out for the first time in their home town is too great, but for many that fear can be overcome whilst on vacation and away from home.

Quite separate from all the issues relating to anyone demanding to see gender Identification, all of these people are so early in their gender identity journey that they are not in a position to present government ID with their preferred gender marker, but they are no less transgender than those who have fully transitioned, and all of those who have transitioned have been in the same stage at one time.

Even after taking those steps to transition, appropriate gender identification is far from early in the process, in some countries around the world it simply isn't possible, in others it can take many years to be available, In the UK for example whilst it is easy to change your name and title with a simple self-declaration and transition can be provided for from the National health service, changing gender on identification documents is not possible without a diagnosis and letter from a doctor, The waiting list for first appointments to see a doctor run to 18 months, the letter is then not likely to be available for a further 3-6 months and after spending at least some time presenting as a preferred gender.   During all that time a single visit to a restroom whilst on vacation in Florida would see a possible custodial sentence.

I realize I have rambled on for quite some time, but there is so much to say on this subject and so many words I have left out of this email and I thank you for your time to read it, as a final thought I beg of you not to criminalize this small section of society who is so venerable, if you cannot dispose of this bill to the scrap heap I appeal to you to at least take a look at the gender identity and expression definitions in HB33 "Florida Competitive Workforce Act." As this has a more inclusive definition of gender variant individuals and would even seem to cover Artiles concern of predatory cis males claiming "they feel like a woman".  In fact I will copy it here for ease

(8) "Gender identity or expression" means gender related identity, appearance, or behavior, whether such gender related identity, appearance, or behavior is different from that traditionally associated with the person's physiology or assigned sex at birth, which gender related identity can be shown by providing evidence, including, but not limited to:
(a) Medical history, care, or treatment of the gender related identity;
(b) Consistent and uniform assertion of the gender related identity; or
(c) Other evidence that the gender related identity is a sincerely held part of a person's core identity and is not being asserted for an improper purpose.

In the interests of full disclosure a little about myself.  I am a transgender woman from the United Kingdom. Legally I am gendered male.  My interest in Florida is as a tourist and I have visited the beaches of Pinellas County for over 20 years and for many of them I have spent up to two months in your state on vacation.   Please make no mistake; the world really is watching Florida. Artiles stated in his closing to the Civil Justice subcommittee that "we are a family oriented state, not a progressive state".  Please realize you can be both.

Thank you

Quote from: Devlyn Marie on March 18, 2015, 01:01:57 PM
Question, and I apologize if I missed this in the thread. Are businesses required to maintain single sex bathrooms by law? Is this a situation that would allow a savvy business owner to make an end run by simply installing unisex signage? Most owners have no interest in running customers off, and those that do will suffer financial consequences.

Hugs, Devlyn

How about if the business had only one (or possibly two) single-user restroom/s marked as unisex?

Let's try to look at the positives. This will create jobs. Every restaurant is going to have to hire someone to direct people to the proper restroom, the Maître Pee.

What about a male appearing individual with an "M" on the driver's license and no penis or testicles: would it be acceptable to use the woman's restroom?

Quote from: mac1 on March 18, 2015, 05:51:16 PM
What about a male appearing individual with an "M" on the driver's license and no penis or testicles: would it be acceptable to use the woman's restroom?

What if you live in one of the states where you can't change a driver's license gender marker without first amending your birth certificate? 
Some states allow a birth certificate amendment without surgery, others do not.
Some states (TN,OH,ID, I believe) will not change a birth certificate gender marker no matter what.

I have a friend who had to move to a more liberal state to get an ID with an "F" on it for these reasons.   In CA, my DL says "F" on it.  I have not had GRS.

So I still have a penis and don't get in any trouble, but a post-op from Ohio is totally screwed?

This is why we need a Transgender Civil Rights Act- nationwide protections from laws fueled by bigotry and ignorance.

Normally I would have merged this https://www.susans.org/forums/index.php/topic,184275.0.html
To this on going topic. I decided to keep it separate being it is more of activism mixed with this topic.

So being I kept separate I wanted it to be seen here also. Please if you have not go to the link and help if you feel the need.

Thanks

Mrs. Izzy

Signed

Quote from: Jill F on March 18, 2015, 07:08:23 PM
This is why we need a Transgender Civil Rights Act- nationwide protections from laws fueled by bigotry and ignorance.

Oh if only we could make that happen. All it takes is resources, time, money, energy, knowledge, will, determination, endurance, not saying oh I can do it but I'm sure someone else will do it (there fore never happens because everyone is saying and doing that), signatures, people and support and so on.

The thing I do not get is Obama made it so people working for the Gov. cannot be discriminated against even on the basis of being transgender because that falls into sex discrimination yet why not everyone? Why only Gov.? Oh if only he would make it for everyone everywhere in the US of A. (I'd say world but I doubt he has THAT much influence...)

Quote from: Shana-chan on March 21, 2015, 10:58:39 AM
Oh if only we could make that happen. All it takes is resources, time, money, energy, knowledge, will, determination, endurance, not saying oh I can do it but I'm sure someone else will do it (there fore never happens because everyone is saying and doing that), signatures, people and support and so on.

It would also require a different Congress. This Congress is far more likely to pass an anti-trans bill.

Quote from: Shana-chan on March 21, 2015, 10:58:39 AM
The thing I do not get is Obama made it so people working for the Gov. cannot be discriminated against even on the basis of being transgender because that falls into sex discrimination yet why not everyone? Why only Gov.? Oh if only he would make it for everyone everywhere in the US of A. (I'd say world but I doubt he has THAT much influence...)

Making rules for federal employees is the limit of executive power. He cannot issue executive actions for the private sector, only the legislative branch can create laws for that.

Quote from: Shana-chan on March 21, 2015, 10:58:39 AM
Oh if only we could make that happen. All it takes is resources, time, money, energy, knowledge, will, determination, endurance, not saying oh I can do it but I'm sure someone else will do it (there fore never happens because everyone is saying and doing that), signatures, people and support and so on.

The thing I do not get is Obama made it so people working for the Gov. cannot be discriminated against even on the basis of being transgender because that falls into sex discrimination yet why not everyone? Why only Gov.? Oh if only he would make it for everyone everywhere in the US of A. (I'd say world but I doubt he has THAT much influence...)

As long as Republicans are in control of the House and Senate this will never happen.  Democrats would only do it if they thought it would score major points.  Once Same Sex Marriage is legal, trans rights will be the next big legal battle/movement.  I would say from our past history that things will get a bit worse before they get better.

Quote from: chefskenzie on March 21, 2015, 12:02:26 PM
As long as Republicans are in control of the House and Senate this will never happen.  Democrats would only do it if they thought it would score major points.  Once Same Sex Marriage is legal, trans rights will be the next big legal battle/movement.  I would say from our past history that things will get a bit worse before they get better.

Don't pin your hope on dems either. Barney Frank gutted the trans provisions from ENDA and basically told us we have to fight for it. Even some of the LGBT organizations have been treating us like dirt. Now they seem to be coming around but we need to fight for ourselves.

I have been doing a lot of reading of other people's thoughts and view points on this subject. I know as someone starting the path of transitioning that I have many hurdles to come. I also know that when I have been out as my self that I have felt much more comfortable being able to enter the Ladies room rather than the men's. I live in Oklahoma which I know is close one of the worst to be in as one to transition. What I have begun to do when I am out is to know what location allows for either me to enter the restroom that I prefer or I do not go and just hold it. Holding it wil cause me more medical issues in the future most likely. I have found that malls that have family restrooms are the safest places to go as they are lockable and only one person goes in. The other option is going the LGBT friendly establishments where I am told by the staff that I must use the ladies room.

My biggest fear in anything is that Oklahoma has an open carry law where you can legally carry a firearm into most public facilities. If I was to be forced into using the men's room then I am at a significant fear for my life. The mindset of the males here are very strong in the discrimination aspect. I know that Oklahoma is talking about passing laws that will discriminate and allow for businesses to allow the right to refuse servicing anyone based on religious beliefs of the store. That also now means you are once again being told you can not only not shop but can not use the restrooms either.

One of my thoughts is that all of trans women should take off our tops wearing just a skirt and go in and walk around the stores. If they are to say that we have to put our tops on then we should be allowed to use the ladies room. The one negative is that most of us would not feel comfortable going topless in this aspect. I just see it as a way to show that we should not be judged as it is hard to say what is best route to go.

In comments to the sign saying any boy over 6 is not allowed in the ladies room is showing a strong possibility for a predator to now cause harm to the child. I am curious if there was a sign saying that if the girl is over 6 she must use the ladies. If it does not then there is a significant bias aspect there.

In regards to the picture of Buck Angel I think that would be perfect as many of our brothers should be in big parts to make this something that puts major discomfort on people as they walk in with there facial,hair, chiseled bodies, and hairy bodies. The only thing that can be done is you have to let the, and then the dis females will complain there. This could raise attention to many people.

I really see that those such as Gigi Gorgeous, Kayla Ward, and Carmen Carerra being the ones who will be in a very bad spot with the restroom inspectors. These girls do a lot of traveling compared to some of us so they are more likely to walk into a Florida restroom. I do not know there ID situation but I am sure that people will have lots to think on.

I really hope that we can make it to where we become protected under discrimination laws to just let us be who we are and pee where we need. If politicians can break laws and do wrong why can we not be allowe to do what is right and not be harrasement.

Quote from: Allison_andrea on March 24, 2015, 11:44:21 PM

My biggest fear in anything is that Oklahoma has an open carry law where you can legally carry a firearm into most public facilities. If I was to be forced into using the men's room then I am at a significant fear for my life.

Maybe because I've been carrying for years I never really got this fear. Legal gun owners are the last ones you should be afraid of. Especially those that carry openly. It's the illegal ones who hide their guns and use them to commit crimes you should be afraid of. And understand that pointing your gun at someone without a valid reason (which is nearly always fearing for your life) is a serious felony in most places. Even brandishing the gun in a confrontation is a one way ticket to jail.

I've carried all over the US and even when traveling as an out of place minority in the Deep South nobody has pointed a gun at me. Even getting into stupid road rage with people. I'm not saying it doesn't happen but it's not the Wild West FUD that you keep hearing.

In fact the only places where people have pointed a gun at me was in the NE, specificAlly NYC, philly and Bridgeport CT. I would feel less safe in Newark after dark than I would in Oklahoma.

Really it's fine.

I wonder how this will turn out. I've been told that I am not allowed to use the bathroom until I get surgery. Now....I'm OPEN to the concept of surgery in the future however not at this point in time for various reasons. Already, I 'pass' and I just got a haircut and some male clothing. If I start taking T and begin to  undergo its effects, what then?

This is a damned if you do, damned if you don't type of thing. If we follow the law to make a statement that sometimes it's not always obvious who is trans, someone could get hurt. If we don't, it just looks bad on us and...well again, someone could get hurt. I hate my state.  >:(

Quote from: BenKenobi on April 09, 2015, 04:23:56 PM
I wonder how this will turn out. I've been told that I am not allowed to use the bathroom until I get surgery. Now....I'm OPEN to the concept of surgery in the future however not at this point in time for various reasons. Already, I 'pass' and I just got a haircut and some male clothing. If I start taking T and begin to  undergo its effects, what then?

This is a damned if you do, damned if you don't type of thing. If we follow the law to make a statement that sometimes it's not always obvious who is trans, someone could get hurt. If we don't, it just looks bad on us and...well again, someone could get hurt. I hate my state.  >:(

That's incorrect.  The current version of the bill allows you to use the right bathroom if you have your ID changed.  Changing the gender on your Florida ID only requires a letter from your doctor.

The bill has currently passed 2 of the 3 subcommittees necessary for a full house vote.  The 3rd subcommittee has yet to put it on the schedule and has to vote on it in the next couple of weeks or the bill is essentially dead until next year.

Quote from: DrummerGirl on April 09, 2015, 04:57:04 PM
That's incorrect.  The current version of the bill allows you to use the right bathroom if you have your ID changed.  Changing the gender on your Florida ID only requires a letter from your doctor.

The bill has currently passed 2 of the 3 subcommittees necessary for a full house vote.  The 3rd subcommittee has yet to put it on the schedule and has to vote on it in the next couple of weeks or the bill is essentially dead until next year.

Good to know! I knew I read something that surgery wasn't a requirement anymore but I wasn't completely sure. I was gonna give the benefit of the doubt since it looks like it changed in 2013.
Though...store policies don't supersede laws do they? Like if the company I work for is like "oh, well WE want you to have surgery before you can use the correct potty", that's covered under sex discrimination, hopefully?

As for the bill, I don't have faith in Florida to not take something like this and put it on the front lines as opposed to something actually important. I really hope I'm proven wrong and it just dies and, God willing, it never gets back up.

Quote from: BenKenobi on April 09, 2015, 05:15:33 PM
Good to know! I knew I read something that surgery wasn't a requirement anymore but I wasn't completely sure. I was gonna give the benefit of the doubt since it looks like it changed in 2013.
Though...store policies don't supersede laws do they? Like if the company I work for is like "oh, well WE want you to have surgery before you can use the correct potty", that's covered under sex discrimination, hopefully?

As for the bill, I don't have faith in Florida to not take something like this and put it on the front lines as opposed to something actually important. I really hope I'm proven wrong and it just dies and, God willing, it never gets back up.

Store policies do not supersede laws.  Check to see if you are in a municipality that has a local ordinance against bathroom discrimination (there are around 30 in Florida).

As for the bill, with a vast majority in the state House and Senate, as well as a Republican governor,  the Republican Party already knows whether they want this to pass or not and if they don't want it to pass, exactly where they want it to die.  They have pretty much maximized the positive (for them) to negative ratio from a PR standpoint so letting the bill die at this point would still be a win in a sense for them.  In essence they have let their conservative base know that the GOP is looking out for their "moral" interests in order to maintain votes in the next election.  If they push this forward to an actual House vote, the media backlash is going to be tremendous and might backfire for them.  It's really messed up because they are playing games with people's lives, but sadly that's the way things are right now.  It's pretty clear that the Republicans are the anti-transgender party and I hope things go very, very badly for them in future elections because of that.

Also, you username is awesome!

Quote from: DrummerGirl on April 09, 2015, 05:32:45 PM
Store policies do not supersede laws.

Well, yes and no. There have been court decisions that companies have an obligation to obey their own internal policies.

What would happen if a business (any business public, private, retail, etc.) would have just multi-user unisex restrooms. There would be no case for discrimination or violation of the law.

The EEOC just came down with a decision saying that an employer requiring trans* people to use the wrong restroom is a violation of Title VII.

Quote from: mac1 on April 10, 2015, 12:15:46 PM
What would happen if a business (any business public, private, retail, etc.) would have just multi-user unisex restrooms. There would be no case for discrimination or violation of the law.

Many governments have laws in place requiring a male and a female restroom, some even if it's single user. America, at least, is nowhere near ready for that step. We have a good deal of growing up to do, first. Think about it, the argument against us, stupid as it is, is that some men will pretend to be us to get access to female children. Do you honestly think people that think like that are going to go for ALL men having to use the same bathrooms as women do?

Quote from: Dee Walker on April 10, 2015, 12:41:38 PM
Many governments have laws in place requiring a male and a female restroom, some even if it's single user. America, at least, is nowhere near ready for that step. We have a good deal of growing up to do, first. Think about it, the argument against us, stupid as it is, is that some men will pretend to be us to get access to female children. Do you honestly think people that think like that are going to go for ALL men having to use the same bathrooms as women do?

I believe that it would be even less of a problem with multi-user unisex restrooms than with sex specific multi-user restrooms.
You would tend to have more people in the restroom at any time and the chance of a predator being alone with any vulnerable
individual (woman, small man, child) would be less likely.

Any predator who desires to attack women or girls in the restroom will not be stopped by a single sex women's restroom and
the women will be more likely to be alone.  Also, what about young boys and small men being alone with a predator in the
men's restroom?

You never hear much concern about women sexual predators attacking either men or other women.  They do exist
but nobody seems to be concerned.

Also, you occasionally see women using the men's restroom and nothing is ever done about that.

Quote from: mac1 on April 10, 2015, 01:00:17 PM
I believe that it would be even less of a problem with multi-user unisex restrooms than with sex specific multi-user restrooms.

Logic doesn't matter with this topic. There is no way the majority of Americans wouldn't balk at the idea.

Quote from: mac1 on April 10, 2015, 01:00:17 PM
I believe that it would be even less of a problem with multi-user unisex restrooms than with sex specific multi-user restrooms.

Quote from: skin on April 10, 2015, 01:26:47 PM
Logic doesn't matter with this topic. There is no way the majority of Americans wouldn't balk at the idea.

I think that they would adjust to it and possibly prefer it.  Possibly it could begin as an option and be expanded from there.
Nobody seems to have a problem with women using the men's restroom. Why should it not be the same for men using the women's restroom?

The multi-user unisex option would accommodate everybody without exception and result in lower space requirements, elimination of specialized and duplicated facilities, reduced costs, equality in number of facilities, concern about caring for young children and others requiring assistance, equalized wait times, etc.

The thing is that requires money and most places really aren't willing to shell out that much for such a minority of people. I mean, dang, they barely take care of the current restrooms.

Quote from: mac1 on April 10, 2015, 04:01:30 PM
I think that they would adjust to it and possibly prefer it. 

Maybe. The principal impediment is that few have that much comfort with telling people what they should want and imposing it on them.

Really good news everyone!  Apparently, this bill is very close to being dead.  The Judiciary Committee never put this bill on their agenda for the past two sessions, and they have no plans to have any more.  That essentially means that unless they call a special session or the contents of this bill get amended to another bill, it is pretty much dead.  There have been a lot of rumors the past month that this bill would have been voted down by the Senate had it gotten that far, and that is the reason the Judiciary Committee Chair gave for not allowing it on the agenda.

Huzzah! The power of procrastination triumphs once more!

Quote from: DrummerGirl on April 16, 2015, 09:56:45 AM
Really good news everyone!  Apparently, this bill is very close to being dead.  The Judiciary Committee never put this bill on their agenda for the past two sessions, and they have no plans to have any more.  That essentially means that unless they call a special session or the contents of this bill get amended to another bill, it is pretty much dead.  There have been a lot of rumors the past month that this bill would have been voted down by the Senate had it gotten that far, and that is the reason the Judiciary Committee Chair gave for not allowing it on the agenda.

Isn't that how government passes all our bills? Hides a bunch of small bills inside of the big one. That way politicians can be sneaky and lazy and get paid a bunch of money all at the same time?

Quote from: Kova V on April 20, 2015, 08:45:59 PM
Isn't that how government passes all our bills? Hides a bunch of small bills inside of the big one. That way politicians can be sneaky and lazy and get paid a bunch of money all at the same time?

The bathroom bill would have to be attached to another bill that deals with the same chapter of law, but supposedly there is only one realistic choice and the sponsor of that bill has publicly stated that she would not accept amending the bathroom bill to her's.  I won't post a link due to TOS, but the Capital News Service has a nice blog on the subject.

Quote from: mac1 on April 10, 2015, 04:01:30 PM
I think that they would adjust to it and possibly prefer it.  Possibly it could begin as an option and be expanded from there.
Nobody seems to have a problem with women using the men's restroom. Why should it not be the same for men using the women's restroom?

The multi-user unisex option would accommodate everybody without exception and result in lower space requirements, elimination of specialized and duplicated facilities, reduced costs, equality in number of facilities, concern about caring for young children and others requiring assistance, equalized wait times, etc.

I think it should be an option but I don't like the idea of a mixed gender restroom being the only one available.

Let's face it, men's restrooms are disgusting. Men stand up to pee. Men pee on the floor. They pee on the seat. Male pee smells. It's the testosterone and is probably that way to mark territory.

In our men's restroom at work, men will leave perfectly good urinals to go pee in the stalls. Standing up. I kid you not. They then pee up on the seats. It's disgusting.

This, I believe is the major reason for restroom segregation by gender. It really has nothing to do with sexual predators. It has everything to do with bathroom habits and cleanliness.

Every women's restroom I've been in has been cleaner than the men's, in places where I've had the opportunity to see both. The one exception is Jo-Ann craft store, but that's because men typically don't go in that store! The only bad thing I've seen in a women's restroom is used pads and tampons, as well as used pregnancy tests being flushed down the toilet and clogging it up. Otherwise give me a women's only restroom any day.

Of course, I think there should be an option for a genderless restroom, for family and non-binary people who prefer to use them.

Are transsexuals really Florida's biggest problem. If they had any concern about public safety they would ban creepy guys from owning windowless vans ;)

Quote from: rachel89 on April 23, 2015, 09:19:02 PM
Are transsexuals really Florida's biggest problem. If they had any concern about public safety they would ban creepy guys from owning windowless vans ;)

This is assuming that their concern is "safety" and not "ew I don't wanna share a potty with 'THEM'"

According to an article on advocate.com, State Rep. Frank Artiles (author of the HB583 bathroom bill) confirmed that the bill is dead.  IT'S DEAD!!!!! Well done everyone!

Quote from: BenKenobi on April 23, 2015, 11:25:46 PM
This is assuming that their concern is "safety" and not "ew I don't wanna share a potty with 'THEM'"

Safety doesn't come through separation or segregation. It can be increased with a increase in numbers as the likelihood of being alone with a pervert would be lessened. Just a case for multi-user unisex public restrooms, changing rooms, etc.

Quote from: mac1 on May 05, 2015, 09:00:31 PM
Safety doesn't come through separation or segregation. It can be increased with a increase in numbers as the likelihood of being alone with a pervert would be lessened. Just a case for multi-user unisex public restrooms, changing rooms, etc.

That's not the context of the response