The Tide Is Turning But In The Wrong Direction: Law Student Women's Group Argues For All-Gender Restrooms

submitted by SophiaLoren from self.GenderCritical

The women's group at a top law school is pushing the school to convert some of its bathrooms to all-gender bathrooms. Among other things, they use the idea of the urinary leash to support the trans agenda, minimize the risk of violence to women, and compare trans hardships to Jim Crow segregation. These women will be the ones shaping law and policy in the near future and carving up women's rights in service of their trans-focused vision of feminism, a vision that clearly sees consent as transferable.

Hi all,

Law Women is writing in support of OUTLaw’s advocacy efforts during Trans Week of Action demanding that NYU Law convert the downstairs bathrooms in Vanderbilt and two bathrooms in Furman into all-gender restrooms. Further, we demand that at least one restroom in Vanderbilt and both restrooms in Furman be made ADA accessible.

As an organization, Law Women’s primary goal is to promote gender equality at the law school and in the legal industry generally. So ensuring that students have equal access to bathrooms regardless of their gender identity is integral to Law Women’s mission. Opponents to nondiscrimination laws regarding equal bathroom access have argued that maintaining single gender restrooms are essential to protect women (read: cis-women). Law Women decisively rejects and condemns this rhetoric. These arguments paint transgender and gender non-conforming (TGNCI) individuals as predatory and violent, even though they are more often the victims of verbal harassment and physical assault in bathrooms rather than perpetrators. TGNCI exclusion from public restrooms is further exacerbated by racism. The Williams Institute conducted a survey of TGNCI people in Washington D.C. in which 87% of Black respondents reported experiencing verbal harassment in bathrooms compared to 63% of white respondents.

Public restrooms have always been a contentious topic. Historically, similar rhetoric has been used to villainize other marginalized groups. Dating back to the 1700s, public restrooms were available only to men because women were not expected to leave the home. Only when women started to venture into the workplace did public restrooms become available to them. Jim Crow laws aimed at promoting racial segregation mandated separate public bathrooms for Black people, operating under a racist premise of white superiority. Starting in the 1950s, gay men were similarly villainized as sexually predatory, prompting campaigns about protecting children from “sexual perversion” in public restrooms. These protectionist arguments are a familiar but misguided tactic -- they perpetuate harm against TGNCI people and offer no benefit to cis-gendered women.

Lastly, women’s rights are often overlooked by opponents to racial, gender, and sexual equality unless they can weaponize them against marginalized groups. Their silence with regard to gendered issues such as reproductive rights, sexual violence, and workplace equality does not go unnoticed. Ultimately, it is not pro-woman to oppose trans rights. Single gender bathrooms perpetuate a gender binary which harms not only TGNCI people, but also anyone who does not fully conform to traditional understandings of masculinity and femininity. Adding all-gender restrooms at NYU Law would not harm cis-gendered women and would provide a feeling of safety and inclusion to TGNCI students, one from which cis-gendered students already benefit. Law Women consequently supports OUTLaw’s advocacy efforts during Trans Week of Action and we urge our membership to sign on to the OUTLaw petition in solidarity.*

all 16 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]Greykittymomma 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

I just want several private unisex bathrooms. They are great for families, new moms, single dads with kids, handicapped (one less extra door to mess with) and could even benefit those trans people who really are "just there to pee".

Let them piss alone behind a locked door. I will take my chances with possibly pissing my pants with fewer public toilets if it means I can have some fucking privacy when I do find one.

What the fuck is with the door gaps???

[–]MarkTwainiac 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

The vertical gaps allow people to see if a stall is actually occupied. They also permit parents/carers/others to see if someone in a stall needs help. The gaps at the bottom allow others to see if someone has passed out and fallen to the floor, and also to crawl underneath if the lock is broken or a child or someone else in the stall can't work the lock.

Private, self-contained loos for use by the two sexes have their own disadvantages. They make it much easier for (male) voyeurs to place spycams in and for (male) predators to push girls, boys and women into and abuse them. Also, males who stand to pee get their urine all over the floors and seats in such loos, which makes them much less pleasant and hygienic for female users.

Some males will also use self-contained, single-user public or communal loos used by both sexes to masturbate in.

Male menstrual fetishists will also constantly raid the sanitary bins in solitary unit mixed-sex toilets to acquire used tampons and pads.

Finally, mixed-sex, self-contained solitary loos will expose female people to many more pathogens. Coz research has shown that male people do not wash their hands after peeing or shitting the way female people customarily do.

[–]Greykittymomma 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I don't want or need people looking in on me I don't really care what your reasoning is, bathrooms aren't like this everywhere.

We aren't guaranteed super clean places to cater to our whims. If a place can clean single sex bathrooms daily they can do this too.

I wash my hands and use paper towels to touch any surface after that and assume all surfaces are contaminated.

As an employee of several stores, restaurants and retail, the women's rooms I cleaned were just as gross if not worse than the men's. Many restaurants and grocery stores already have several family bathrooms and it works well.

Also, I would rather a guy wank alone in the bathroom and not right in the next stall. If they want to steal my tampon I hope they choke on it.

[–]MarkTwainiac 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

It's not necessarily my personal reasoning. I'm just pointing out some of the reasoning behind the setup you dislike, and a few of the issues with the setup you'd prefer. Personally, I see your points and agree with many of them.

But I was trying to get on record some of the rationale for current communal toilet arrangements coz in these convos people often speak about the built environment and public accommodations as if the way things are arranged is entirely arbitrary and came about by happenstance. When, in fact, usually designers, industrial psychologists and others have put a lot of thought into every detail. Their reasoning and solutions might be flawed; in fact, it might be downright wrong, dumb and full of blind spots. But some reasoning is usually there.

[–]Greykittymomma 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I appreciate the response. I've thought about this a lot.

I also hate how they never make working sinks anymore, though I understand why they are designed to be low flow and no touch it still makes it maddening when they don't function.

[–]MarkTwainiac 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I've thought about this a lot too. There are many directions from which to approach it. Yes, there are many maddening aspects to how the built environment, including communal toilets, is/are designed. Traditionally designers have been mostly able-bodied male people who are unaware of the needs and wants of people different to themselves.

The ridiculous norms and "truths" of domestic kitchen design are another one of my pet peeves. Most of the people who came up with the standards for kitchen design that still prevail today (the height of counters & cabinets, the "kitchen triangle" setup) don't cook or bake, shop for groceries or put them away at home, wash dishes/pots, or even know how to use a dishwasher. Many of them are totally clueless about household appliances and what "housekeeping" involves - which is why in the UK it's now customary to put machines for washing and drying clothing in the same room where food is stored and prepared.

This seems to stem from the view that originated in the early 20th century for reasons of practicality in the eyes of home designers, builders and appliance manufacturers. In this view, all plumbed fixtures and appliances naturally go together. Which is why in some countries such as the USA, we've ended up with "bathrooms" that are dedicated to a bunch of very different bodily functions - from shitting & pissing on one end to bathing, cleansing, grooming, shaving and prettifying our bodies, brushing our teeth, looking in mirrors and styling our hair at the other end. Whereas in places like France, excreting waste from our urethras and asses traditionally have been kept separate from bathing, grooming and all the rest.

I think the lesson here is that more people should be consulted during the planning and design phase of toilet facilities. And the more people who have input should be made up of at least 50% female people, and that category should include girls & women of different views, ages, needs, cultures, etc.

[–]GConly 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I had some guy indecently expose himself to me in a ladies loo as a kid. He said, as he walked in dick in hand from the street, "I'm desperate for a pee". I was probably very lucky a family started making noises just behind him to come in, and he zipped up and bailed.

This kind of shit will increase these incidents massively.

"Oopsy, there's my penis".

Let's remember, 1/3 of guys has committed some kind of sex offence. The ladies loo is a favourite lurking spot of sex predators.

Want an all gender bathroom? Convert the gents into it, and have a women only one.

[–]dreamgerms 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

This is a terrible idea, and it’s a clear example of woke ideology and trans activism completely overriding common sense. Since when is a trans person’s endless need for validation more important than the right of girls and women to feel safe?

Lastly, women’s rights are often overlooked by opponents to racial, gender, and sexual equality unless they can weaponize them against marginalized groups. Their silence with regard to gendered issues such as reproductive rights, sexual violence, and workplace equality does not go unnoticed.

I fucking guffawed out loud at this line. What an absolute LOAD coming from these people! They LOVE to appropriate the causes of others and NEVER miss an opportunity to detail conversations about others by making it all about them. These are delusional narcissists who feel entitled to the definition of woman and all of our spaces and to dominate our voices, but oh no, selfish hateful “cis” women are the real problem! The absolute cognitive dissidence that trans activists have is so outrageous it should be studied by scientists.

[–]BEB 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Trans maidens should also be studied by scientists. We know that Woke Beardy Blokes support the gender agenda because it allows them to flaunt their misogyny, but why the F do women go to battle for men's sexual access to other women?

[–]MarkTwainiac 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Also at work here is the hubris of young people at unis and grad schools assuming that no one in the past who advocated for and designed public loos and other provisions had a clue about what they were doing and why.

[–]copenseethe 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Women are people pleasers and virtue signalers. I think socialization and physiology both play a part in this. We apologize when someone steps on our foot. This is a quality parents need to work against cultivating in their female children.

[–]BEB 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It's gotten worse, IMO. 3rd Wave "feminism" seems to me to be a Men's Rights Movement.

[–]BEB 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

OMG, I hope that they're trapped in a bathroom with an autogynephile. I have no sympathy for these idiots.

I'm starting to think we should shut universities down.

[–]WildApples 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

What kills me is how privileged and sheltered they are, and how that is going to be used against less privileged women. They are already saying that women have no good reason to object to mixed bathrooms. If they succeed, they will use the experience as further proof that they are right, not understanding how their elite circumstances protects them. The bathrooms will not be open to the general public; their use will be limited to known people who stand to lose the careers they've invested so much in if they get into any legal trouble. The school will be scandalized if one of its elite law students get assaulted, and there will be security hovering around at all times. And students can always leave to use the bathroom at thr dorm or home.

But I just know they will use their experience to argue that women who do not want to share private spaces with men are behind the times. They won't even think about the women who are in shelters, prisons, or even high schools who do not have the protections they have or the ability to go somewhere else. These are the people who will go to work in politics and give us more bills like the Equality Act or, heaven forbid, who will advance to the courts and interpret laws against women's interests. They will be the ones issuing opinions like the one in the Maya Forstator case that found her continued acknowledgment of sex "not worthy of respect in a democratic society." I weep for the future.

[–]aloris342 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

This seems like another example of very privileged women thinking that the world is the same for everyone else as it is for themselves, so if a particular thing is safe for themselves, then it is safe for everyone.

[–]jarjargabor 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I will say I was pleasantly surprised that the original petition made sure to demand that a male bathroom be converted for every female bathroom converted - however, of course they're choosing the mostly highly-trafficked bathrooms in either building.