Quote from: kyril on January 26, 2011, 09:35:21 PM

To the poster arguing that it's "patriarchal privilege" to use the ladies' room as a visible male: Quite the contrary.

You misunderstood me. I did not say that they did not have a right to use the ladies room. I said they should act like a lady when doing so and that by not acting like a lady they are abusing their male privilege, or more likely being completely unaware of it.

I should amend my request to ask them to leave, to "use the facilities and then leave" (ie, don't hang around talking!)

Quote from: Ruby on January 26, 2011, 10:07:40 PM
Yes, it can be difficult. But how difficult is it to not speak if you simply need to take a pee? It's fine to use the restroom, but don't they might be treating it like it is their personal parlour.

This post makes it obvious that you've never experienced any terror, awkwardness or worry over the simple act of peeing in the women's facilities.
You're trying to assert your normalised cis experiences of using the bathroom onto trans women's use of the bathroom.
You have no idea of the psychological makeup of the person you're potentially blackballing for daring to speak in the women's facilities. She could be nervous/scared to all hell due to presenting as a woman for the first time and speaking is a coping mechanism to alleviate stress.
Your privilege is showing.

Quote from: Ruby on January 26, 2011, 10:14:52 PM
You misunderstood me. I did not say that they did not have a right to use the ladies room. I said they should act like a lady when doing so and that by not acting like a lady they are abusing their male privilege, or more likely being completely unaware of it.

Do we also get to kick out cis women who don't act like a 'lady'?

Nice try, but F.  There is no right to rape, or beat, or kill people (except for The State - and they only get to beat and kill - and I'd even disagree with that one).  That's a poor argument that totally misses the point.

As for the Patriarchy, that's just feminist talk, jive really, for avoiding the real point, which in the US is not about gender at all, it's all about social class.  But most feminists HATE talking about class, because most of them are privileged by that to begin with.  That is their empowerment, the colleges and university educations that cost $38,640 a year.^*  To wit:

{ed. note: these statistics are for the USA only, they might differ in other places in the world, if we even realized that there were other places in the world.}

In the US, women are more likely to finish high school.  Hence they are more likely to be employed in higher paying jobs.  Don't believe me?  Of course not, so here are the latest numbers.

Women make up 51% of the workforce and hold the majority of management jobs. In major cities young women make 17% more than their male counterparts (for single childless persons of the age 22-30, if you want to be filled with baby sauce every year or so, that's your own fault).  Two-thirds of advanced degrees go to women, and women now earn 60% of all Bachelor's degrees The steady decrease of manufacturing jobs in the United States disproportionately affects male workers.  So that women are now earning as much as men are.

A female friend of mine told me once that the problem was that a great deal of the Feminist movement had become so aimless and concerned exclusively with gender bashing that it's driving away women who are legitimately concerned with equal treatment by the law, better jobs and educational opportunities and are willing to work together with men AS EQUALS.  And to the degree that people keep up the patriarchal argument, they are not advancing anything, save class privilege, which perhaps, was the real goal after all.

To speak of patriarchal privileges in the US, with out talking about social and economic class is like Rock without the Roll.

* - Smith, but look up the other Seven Sisters and you'll find comparative amounts of tuition.

That's all very interesting; but why don't you quote us the stats for the numbers of female senators, politicians, CEOs and big business owners?
Damn, there's that pesky 'glass ceiling' getting in the way again.

Oh I don't know, seems to me the last two major Republican candidates for public office in California were both ex-CEOs.  And 17 senators, including both of the ones from California.

Thanks for everyone's replies. First, I am going to take a conservative and libertarian approach to this. The libertarian in me basically says people should be able to do whatever they want. The conservative in me says that people should and should not do certain things. In other words just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. Let's start with addressing unisex bathrooms:

I do not feel comfortable using a restroom designed for multiple people at once consisting of both men and women in the same room. Several posts here have already started talking about the dangers of someone presenting female using a man's restroom. Putting men and women together is likely going to cause the situation to go from bad to worse. Maybe it does work in parts of Europe. I'm talking about the U.S. anyway where the culture just isn't the same. Now if a building wants to have a man's room, woman's room, AND unisex room then that is fine. When a building is constructed, bathrooms are planned by anticipated need. It may not be feasible to have unisex bathrooms in all buildings. I do not support unisex-only bathrooms as I think women and men should be entitled to their own spaces.

Second, I don't exactly approve of the finger pointing done not only against me but also the cis woman on this board. Too often minority groups like to blame the majority for their problems. While technically that may be true it doesn't garner acceptance. I routinely hear in GLBT and non-white circles the term "straight white male" used as if these people are the cause of their problems. People have to understand that when you live in a society you have to some degree learn to work with that society. Society is predominately cis, white, and straight. Equal rights does not come about by turning around and routinely scapegoating the majority class when many members of that class are already supportive of the minority's need or are making an attempt to be. Different groups have their own culture. There is a majority culture, however. I believe in multiculturalism but I do not believe in completely deconstructing a majority culture just because of a minority group that is different. So I'm trans, big deal, but I am living in a cis society and always will. I will fight for my rights but without trying to change an entire culture. In this case we are talking about the culture of gender.

Third, the point about TG and TS. Well again I take a libertarian approach on this. It is up to the individual. I have always been about the rights of individuals. Everyone has free speech and can label themselves or others however they like. People can associate or not associate. It is freedom. There is something unique about TS that doesn't generally apply to the other types of TG though. For the purposes of my argument I'm defining TS as the medical definition of having a brain of one sex and a body of the other. If you identify as a TV, CD, or GQ for instance or are simply questioning then you may identify under the TG umbrella. You are either identifying as genderless, a third gender, questioning gender, or transcending gender lines. So you may call yourself TG or find a fit under the umbrella. Now if you are say an MTF TS and you go from being of the male sex to transitioning to the female sex (with or without surgery) then you will generally go one of two routes. One route is to always identify as TS acknowledging your pre-transition, transition, and post-transition and therefore will consider yourself part of TG. The other track is like strictly crossing an ocean in an airplane. There was a time you were on the male side of the ocean then you realized you were transsexual. You identified as TS and therefore TG while you were crossing that ocean. Once you became socialized as a woman (and perhaps legally and medically as well) you then simply identify as a woman, not a transsexual and therefore not transgendered at all. It was a temporary state and a temporary identity.

It should therefore be no surprise why so many people on this forum once they get SRS are never seen or heard from again. They moved on. It is a personal decision and that is how it should remain. What I will always speak out against is any kind of forced inclusion. I do not believe that a TS should be forced to be tied to the TG label and identity. As my therapist said "trans" is short for "transition." It is crossing from one place to the next. But again I take a libertarian approach. I'm not going to tell anyone what they can and cannot call themselves but at the same time I am not going to support social engineering designed to force or blend different groups together when individuals within them would prefer to retain their own separate identities.

Quote from: tekla on January 26, 2011, 11:41:29 PM
Oh I don't know, seems to me the last two major Republican candidates for public office in California were both ex-CEOs.  And 17 senators, including both of the ones from California.

That's nice, as compared to how many males, total? 
What is the ratio of female CEOs to male CEOs? What is the ratio of women senators to male senators?
I recall quoting you the stats on America's woeful representation of women in power just last month in fact. IIRC it was something like 16% - worse than Khazakstan.
Humour me here, how many female presidents have you had?

Since this thread has become a multi-topic discussion, I would like to reiterate the points on practical problems of gendered bathrooms which I do not believe have been adequately addressed by the people promoting the enforcement of certain behaviors in gendered bathrooms.

These questions have not been properly answered:

Quote from: VexingSo if a FTM sits to pee and speaks in a non-masculine voice, is he 'NOT presenting as male'?

Quote from: VexingMore to the point; should all MTFs with deep voices and an aversion to touching dirty toilet seats with their buttocks be forced to use the male toilets?

Quote from: VexingDo we also get to kick out cis women who don't act like a 'lady'?

I have an issue with the opposition completely ignoring this particular question, as I know a cis woman who hates acting "like a lady" and has always hated acting "like a lady" ever since she started calling herself a Tomboy back in her school days.  She likes to act masculine, and she wears men's clothes as much as she can.

Do we get to kick her out of the women's room for wearing guy clothes and acting masculine?  And if so, which restroom does she get to use, seeing as how she will most likely not pass for a male if she were to try to use the men's room?  If she did try to use the men's room (which I'm sure she absolutely would not want to do) she would probably get kicked out of that room as well.  If both the men and the women do not accept her, then logically she deserves to use neither the men's nor the women's room.  She just has to hold it until she finds a unisex room (which are almost non-existent around here).  Am I correct?  Have I missed something here?  Is it morally justified that she should be forced to hold it until she ->-bleeped-<-s her pants?  This seems to be what Ruby and others are saying.  If she is violating both gender norms, then she should not be allowed to use any restroom.

I think Vexing and myself deserve an answer to the question of which bathroom she should be forced to use.

Quote from: kyrilI think something else that's missing here is that people dressed in women's clothing, whatever their anatomy, are completely justified in thinking that it may be unsafe to use the men's room. This includes crossdressers and drag queens, even if they're not fully passable or intending to pass.

To the poster arguing that it's "patriarchal privilege" to use the ladies' room as a visible male: Quite the contrary. It's a result of patriarchal privilege and hetero cis male normativity that these visible males feel compelled to use the ladies' room.

I agree with Kyril's interpretation of male privilege over Ruby's.  It is precisely because of the idea of male privilege that makes anyone who doesn't think they will pass as male want to use a different bathroom.  And since most places don't have a unisex room, then the women's bathroom is the only other bathroom that they can possibly use.

@ Ruby and Britney_413
Some people clearly do not pass as either male or female (people in drag who are not trying to pass are a good example).  Did it ever occur to you that guys will probably kick them out of the men's room as quickly as you dismiss them out of the women's room?  Which bathroom exactly are they supposed to use?  They will face discrimination no matter which bathroom they try to use.  Why should they have any more reason to use the men's room than the women's room, and why should they allow themselves to get kicked out of one room only to get kicked out of the next?  What motive do these people have to leave the women's room, and what reasonable justification do they have for leaving if they will face the exact same treatment in the men's room?

Just to add some anecdata to this discussion:

Roughly 3 years before I transitioned, I went to a 'School Disco' themed part at the Black Harp pub in Wellington, New Zealand.
Because I relished the opportunity to cross-dress, I went in school girl drag (I have the pictures at home somewhere; I'll post one later). Most people were cool with me. Some people were not. I overheard a couple of aggressive males stating that they would 'get the ->-bleeped-<-got' when I went to the bathroom and they kept a watch over me until I needed to go.
I was at the disco with my pal Pixie (a cis woman) and she simply said "Use the chick's bathroom with me."
So she escorted me to the women's bathroom, we peed, then I checked my makeup in the mirror and answered a couple of questions that Pix asked me. I heard from one stall "Is that's a man's voice in here?" and Pix replied "She's with me", which seemed to resolve the situation.

Now, I could have followed Ruby's suggestion and used the men's room.
Ruby, would you take responsibility for the ->-bleeped-<--kicking and medical bills resulting from me using the male facilities while dressed as a school girl?
Or is the HORROR of hearing a male voice in the female toilets reason enough for grievous bodily harm?

Interesting story.  Did you sit down to pee?

Quote from: japple on January 23, 2011, 03:30:28 AM
While different than you, those people who are clowning around with drag are not your enemies.

I think they are our enemies.  That's the sentiment expressed in the movie Better than Chocolate, in the song I'm Not a Fuc&ing Drag Queen.  I don't care if they are doing it in the Denny's bathroom or on stage in a club.  People equate this with that, and it messes us up.

Drag needs to go the way of Blackface.  It's archaic, obsolete and insulting.  Except on Halloween.

Quote from: VeryGnawty on January 25, 2011, 08:41:03 AM
I agree.  I see very little advantage over having two segregated restrooms, versus one very larger unisex room with double the facilities.

Where do you live?  Here in the States, men and women seem to have substantially different standards of bathroom cleanliness.

There is a reasonable limit to inclusiveness.  Just because it's a restroom, I don't want dogs to come in an pee on the floor.  I don't need drunken, careless men doing it either; or to open a stall door and find piss all over the seat.  Or a guy in the next stall crapping out a half a side of beef.

Quote from: ▼Ξ✖ on January 26, 2011, 09:17:16 PM
More to the point; should all MTFs with deep voices and an aversion to touching dirty toilet seats with their buttocks be forced to use the male toilets?

I am going with yes on the sit part, because women have to do it.  Carry some seat liners in your purse if you want.

Now, the voice thing, I can't see getting upset about that.  No matter what voice you have, if you're speaking like a woman, that should not be overly alarming to a cisgender woman who might be in there.

Quote from: GinaDouglas on January 27, 2011, 06:05:36 PM
I am going with yes on the sit part, because women have to do it.  Carry some seat liners in your purse if you want.

And so trans guys must part their flaps and piss at the urinal?

I was discussing womens' room etiquette.  I don't much care what transmen do in the mens' room.

Quote from: GinaDouglas on January 27, 2011, 06:39:53 PM
I don't much care what transmen do in the mens' room.

Clearly.

I am locking this thread, at least temporarily, because it is devolving into petty bickering and sniping. If y'all can't disagree and still maintain a modicum of civility, then I suggest that you take a break and do something else for a little while.

Thread unlocked.

I would like to point out that lots of people use women's restrooms who don't act like stereotypical "ladies."

And a few stand up to pee because they are more comfortable that way.

Quite a few men use the men's room and sit down to pee.

I feel that it's nobody's business how other people do their "business."

I suspect that universal unisex toilets are a long way off, in the U.S., at least.

Quote from: tekla on January 25, 2011, 09:09:02 AM
I have been a janitor before for a short stint.
Most the time the ladies is much more gross than the mens.

Word.

I worked and ran maintenance crews for clubs and theaters and the women's room was almost (not 100%, but in the 90%s) far messier than the men's room is.  Furthermore its a class deal, the more lower class the mens room patrons were the more diminished the ability or will to aim, but the more upper class the women were, look out!

Hovergirls. Pee all over everything!