Post to someone arguing about transgender bathroom access
http://www.rhjunior.com/nip-and-tuck-58/
http://www.rhjunior.com/nip-and-tuck-59/
See comments on second cartoon. But please, don't pile on, from previous experience it'll take careful arguing to *possibly* make a change in his position. Pushing hard will translate int "I'm being persecuted" which helps nobody.
Ok, let's start out simple. People *do* have the legal right to wear whatever they want subject to laws regarding indecent exposure/public indecency.
So. Women can legally wear "mens" clothing. That's been established for most of a century.
Men can legally wear "womens" clothing. that hasn't been established quite as long in some places, but it's still been legal for decades.
This is *settled* law. Not something that is likely to change no matter how loud folks protest.
Now consider the question of bathrooms. Under the law people *do* have the right to use public bathrooms (and that includes the non-employee bathrooms in businesses and schools, etc). Again, very much settled law.
So, If you have someone cross-dressed (be it a woman in mens clothes, a Female-to-Male transsexual,, a male cross-dresser, or a Male-to-Female transsexual) which bathroom do they use?
Or let's make this simpler. Can anyone born female use the women's restroom? Can anyone born male use the mens room?
Well, the first "bathroom bill" in the country was a result on an incident in Orange County, California in the 1980s. A female (born female) body builder was arrested and thrown in jail because she "looked like a man" to someone. And, of course, there are the women with beards (sometimes a hormone problem, sometimes a genetic thing.
And guys who "look like a girl" have been assaulted for using mens rooms.
So we already have a problem even if you *exclude* crossdressers and transsexuals from things.
Now let's consider *their* safety. They have a right to use a bathroom. that's not subject to dispute, no matter how much some folks would like to. So which is safer for *them*? We'll get to safer for other folks in a minute.
Someone dressed as a woman going into a mens room is going to be big trouble. *Especially* if they pass well, but not passing well will be bad too.
Someone dressed as a man and *looking* like one will cause al sorts of problems for *everyone* in the women's room.
Someone dressed as the "appropriate" gender is lkikely safer in the bathroom for that gender.
Now, a person dressed female but looking male is going to worry or upset some folks in the women's room. But that is true whether they are actually female or not! Remember the female body builder?
Someone dressed male, but not looking very male in the mens room may cause a bit of comment, but they are more likely to be taken as "gay" (not that that isn't dangerous in and of itself).
So short of a strip search, you may suspect but you can't *know*.
Oh yes, the "big argument" you hear every time trans rights come up. "Men will use this to get into the women's room and attack them" Funny thing. that gets claimed a lot. But in the *decades* these laws have existed in some states, you'd think these opponents would be able to point to some actual incidents, wouldn't you?
And don't fool yourself. There are female abusers who can get into the womens bathrooms anyway, even if you don't pass the trans rights laws. Just like male oines can get into the mens room.
*All* of the "bad things" people claim to be worried about are things that are already illegal. "Peeping tom" type stuff isn't easy to do in a bathroom anyway, and you're at least as much at risk from gay members of your own sex as you are from trans folks and crossderessers.
So, in the final analysis, the best place for folks to go is the restroom for folks dressed the way they are. Won't make everybody happy, but it'll cause the fewest problems.
Oh yeah. Many transfolk and crossdressers will use those single person bathrooms with the locking doors if they are available because *they* would rather not get hassled.
Really, all of those should be labeled as unisex restrooms anyway.
Now, as to your comments about gender dysphoria and mental illness, it *is* listed in the DSM. But that's mostly because there needs to be something in there so there's a category to listed things under for *insurance*. Yes, that's all the DSM really is, a list of things to put down on forms so the insurance will cover things. and the identifying criteria are so the insurance company can't wiggle out of it as easily.
Properly, gender dysphoria isn't a "mental illness". More and more evidence suggests it's just another of the many conditions where something resulted in not all of someone's body agreeing as to what sex they are. It's actually fairly common (1 in a thousand or better have some form of intersex condition).
While not yet conclusive (mostly because the tests can't currently be done while you are alive) there's mounting evidence that folks with gender dysphoria actually have brain structure of the "opposite" sex. So it's not some sort of delusion, it's a real thing. and the only known treatment is trying to make the body match the brain.
BTW, the study that claimed to "prove" that you could affect gender identity by how you raised the kid (by a Dr. Money) has been discredited. When the "girl" (a boy who'd lost his penis in s circumcision accident) became an adult *he* raised hell very publically and showed that the doctor had been lying thru his teeth about how well raising him as a "girl" had gone.
So trying to "change" somebody's gender identity is a non-starter.
Don't forget that there's a *long* history of people identifying as the "other" sex, or even as neither. Goes back thousands of years in history, and there's lots of it in oral traditions in cultures without written history.
Seems that a lot of cultures start stomping it out when they get to the stage of written records and espescialy things like forced service in the army. Likely a matter of not wanting people to use it as an "excuse" to avoid serving.
In any case, besides the number of cultures that recognized (or still do!) 3 or even 5 genders, there's also the matter that biological sex isn't simply male/female. That's the most *common*, but it's far from exclusive. just with the so-called "sex" chromosomes, besides XY and XX, there are more than a dozen other possibilities: XO, XYY, XXY XXY and more.
Then there are other chromosomes that affect sexual development. CAIS & PAIS involve the body not reacting to androgens (male hormones) with the result that the fetus develops mostly female. Unless genetic studies or very *very* close physical exams are done on the infant the first clue is when the "girl" doesn't start having periods. Further checking reveals that there's no uterus. They do devolop breasts and a female body shape (even male bodies produce some estrogen), but they are sort of "elfin". Jamie Lee Curtis has the sort of body type you'd expect from an adult with CAIS or PAIS. Not saying she is one, but she's got the body type.
Then there's the one common in the Dominican Republic and a few other places: they call it guevodoces. Basically, the kid looks like a girl until around age 12. Then their balls descend, what looked like a clitoris enlarges and they art going through a male puberty.
There are all sorts of things that cause the external genitals to develop oddly too. I've got a picture from a medical site that shows a young girl with a clitoris that looks just like the penis of a boy her age. Not that uncommon, nor are boys with "micropenis". You don't hear much about either because doctor usually operate to "correct" these things (in the case of micropenis, by making the baby into "girl" much the same way yoiu would with an adult MtF transsexual. In the case of ypertrophied clitoris, thewy "trim it down" no matter what that might do to her sensitivity when she grows up). and often they do this without even *asking* the parents!!!
Heck, there's even a case on record of a person with XY chromosomes ging birth naturally. Yes, inspite of having XY chromosomes, she had a uterus and was fertile. So was her XY daughter!!!
So folks having brain structures of the other sex isn't really that unlikely. Biology is a *lot* odder than we want to admit.
This entry was originally posted at http://kengr.dreamwidth.org/1051020.html. Please comment there using OpenID.
http://www.rhjunior.com/nip-and-tuck-59/
See comments on second cartoon. But please, don't pile on, from previous experience it'll take careful arguing to *possibly* make a change in his position. Pushing hard will translate int "I'm being persecuted" which helps nobody.
Ok, let's start out simple. People *do* have the legal right to wear whatever they want subject to laws regarding indecent exposure/public indecency.
So. Women can legally wear "mens" clothing. That's been established for most of a century.
Men can legally wear "womens" clothing. that hasn't been established quite as long in some places, but it's still been legal for decades.
This is *settled* law. Not something that is likely to change no matter how loud folks protest.
Now consider the question of bathrooms. Under the law people *do* have the right to use public bathrooms (and that includes the non-employee bathrooms in businesses and schools, etc). Again, very much settled law.
So, If you have someone cross-dressed (be it a woman in mens clothes, a Female-to-Male transsexual,, a male cross-dresser, or a Male-to-Female transsexual) which bathroom do they use?
Or let's make this simpler. Can anyone born female use the women's restroom? Can anyone born male use the mens room?
Well, the first "bathroom bill" in the country was a result on an incident in Orange County, California in the 1980s. A female (born female) body builder was arrested and thrown in jail because she "looked like a man" to someone. And, of course, there are the women with beards (sometimes a hormone problem, sometimes a genetic thing.
And guys who "look like a girl" have been assaulted for using mens rooms.
So we already have a problem even if you *exclude* crossdressers and transsexuals from things.
Now let's consider *their* safety. They have a right to use a bathroom. that's not subject to dispute, no matter how much some folks would like to. So which is safer for *them*? We'll get to safer for other folks in a minute.
Someone dressed as a woman going into a mens room is going to be big trouble. *Especially* if they pass well, but not passing well will be bad too.
Someone dressed as a man and *looking* like one will cause al sorts of problems for *everyone* in the women's room.
Someone dressed as the "appropriate" gender is lkikely safer in the bathroom for that gender.
Now, a person dressed female but looking male is going to worry or upset some folks in the women's room. But that is true whether they are actually female or not! Remember the female body builder?
Someone dressed male, but not looking very male in the mens room may cause a bit of comment, but they are more likely to be taken as "gay" (not that that isn't dangerous in and of itself).
So short of a strip search, you may suspect but you can't *know*.
Oh yes, the "big argument" you hear every time trans rights come up. "Men will use this to get into the women's room and attack them" Funny thing. that gets claimed a lot. But in the *decades* these laws have existed in some states, you'd think these opponents would be able to point to some actual incidents, wouldn't you?
And don't fool yourself. There are female abusers who can get into the womens bathrooms anyway, even if you don't pass the trans rights laws. Just like male oines can get into the mens room.
*All* of the "bad things" people claim to be worried about are things that are already illegal. "Peeping tom" type stuff isn't easy to do in a bathroom anyway, and you're at least as much at risk from gay members of your own sex as you are from trans folks and crossderessers.
So, in the final analysis, the best place for folks to go is the restroom for folks dressed the way they are. Won't make everybody happy, but it'll cause the fewest problems.
Oh yeah. Many transfolk and crossdressers will use those single person bathrooms with the locking doors if they are available because *they* would rather not get hassled.
Really, all of those should be labeled as unisex restrooms anyway.
Now, as to your comments about gender dysphoria and mental illness, it *is* listed in the DSM. But that's mostly because there needs to be something in there so there's a category to listed things under for *insurance*. Yes, that's all the DSM really is, a list of things to put down on forms so the insurance will cover things. and the identifying criteria are so the insurance company can't wiggle out of it as easily.
Properly, gender dysphoria isn't a "mental illness". More and more evidence suggests it's just another of the many conditions where something resulted in not all of someone's body agreeing as to what sex they are. It's actually fairly common (1 in a thousand or better have some form of intersex condition).
While not yet conclusive (mostly because the tests can't currently be done while you are alive) there's mounting evidence that folks with gender dysphoria actually have brain structure of the "opposite" sex. So it's not some sort of delusion, it's a real thing. and the only known treatment is trying to make the body match the brain.
BTW, the study that claimed to "prove" that you could affect gender identity by how you raised the kid (by a Dr. Money) has been discredited. When the "girl" (a boy who'd lost his penis in s circumcision accident) became an adult *he* raised hell very publically and showed that the doctor had been lying thru his teeth about how well raising him as a "girl" had gone.
So trying to "change" somebody's gender identity is a non-starter.
Don't forget that there's a *long* history of people identifying as the "other" sex, or even as neither. Goes back thousands of years in history, and there's lots of it in oral traditions in cultures without written history.
Seems that a lot of cultures start stomping it out when they get to the stage of written records and espescialy things like forced service in the army. Likely a matter of not wanting people to use it as an "excuse" to avoid serving.
In any case, besides the number of cultures that recognized (or still do!) 3 or even 5 genders, there's also the matter that biological sex isn't simply male/female. That's the most *common*, but it's far from exclusive. just with the so-called "sex" chromosomes, besides XY and XX, there are more than a dozen other possibilities: XO, XYY, XXY XXY and more.
Then there are other chromosomes that affect sexual development. CAIS & PAIS involve the body not reacting to androgens (male hormones) with the result that the fetus develops mostly female. Unless genetic studies or very *very* close physical exams are done on the infant the first clue is when the "girl" doesn't start having periods. Further checking reveals that there's no uterus. They do devolop breasts and a female body shape (even male bodies produce some estrogen), but they are sort of "elfin". Jamie Lee Curtis has the sort of body type you'd expect from an adult with CAIS or PAIS. Not saying she is one, but she's got the body type.
Then there's the one common in the Dominican Republic and a few other places: they call it guevodoces. Basically, the kid looks like a girl until around age 12. Then their balls descend, what looked like a clitoris enlarges and they art going through a male puberty.
There are all sorts of things that cause the external genitals to develop oddly too. I've got a picture from a medical site that shows a young girl with a clitoris that looks just like the penis of a boy her age. Not that uncommon, nor are boys with "micropenis". You don't hear much about either because doctor usually operate to "correct" these things (in the case of micropenis, by making the baby into "girl" much the same way yoiu would with an adult MtF transsexual. In the case of ypertrophied clitoris, thewy "trim it down" no matter what that might do to her sensitivity when she grows up). and often they do this without even *asking* the parents!!!
Heck, there's even a case on record of a person with XY chromosomes ging birth naturally. Yes, inspite of having XY chromosomes, she had a uterus and was fertile. So was her XY daughter!!!
So folks having brain structures of the other sex isn't really that unlikely. Biology is a *lot* odder than we want to admit.
This entry was originally posted at http://kengr.dreamwidth.org/1051020.html. Please comment there using OpenID.