Bathrooms, Discontinuity and Our Community

[Zooey]

This came up in another thread, and rather than derail the conversation there I'm starting this thread. I've tried to write a similar post in the past, but the way I wrote about it was a bit problematic, and so I'm trying again. Bathroom rights not the main topic here, but it is a useful and widely discussed example to use.

Pretty much everybody on this forum, except for the cisgender women, lives under the trans* umbrella, and is considered to be at a point somewhere on the transgender spectrum. The common narrative is that this spectrum is a continuous one, and that there is some meaningful and infinitely subdivisible progression across it. That is to say, things near each other on the spectrum are functionally similar, and morph smoothly in their nature. This is like the electromagnetic spectrum, where frequency is a continuous function, and is a fundamental characteristic of the wave.

253113

I would suggest that our spectrum is more akin to things like the autism spectrum, which is in fact a collection of conditions and disorders that are lumped together for the purposes of organizing research, and is only made somewhat smooth by using things like "severity" as the variable (rather than any characteristic intrinsic to the thing itself).

There are wild discontinuities in the trans* community. The one that comes up on this forum all the time is the difference between CD men and TS women. I believe strongly that there are some "CDs" who are, in fact, TS women that haven't realized it yet. I also believe there are plenty of people who are "just CDs". All of that is fine.

What I find frustrating, is when people talk simultaneously about how we are the same, while so clearly demonstrating that they come from a fundamentally different place, with fundamentally different motivations for what they do. All of those identities are perfectly great in their own ways, but our spectrum is not continuous, and assuming that there is a smooth continuum of experience within it is simply false.

In recent weeks/months, I have seen a lot of discussion in threads about bathrooms, locker rooms, etc. Here is the particular example that reminded me of this last night. I don't mean to pick particularly on pamela7, as there have been plenty of others who've participated in these discussions - this is just the example I have handy.


...but I'm also curious - would you consider yourself allowed to use the ladies restroom at that point? (in reference to having an orchiectomy)

If you have male genitalia use the male restroom, period. Once you've had it chopped off, use the ladies restroom.

From http://www.crossdressers.com/forums/showthread.php?231238-Students-Protest-Transgendered-Classmates-Use-of-Girl-s-Locker-Room&p=3805806&viewfull=1#post3805806

I'll admit that I'm having a hard time understanding how to square these posts up, especially given that this thread is in the TS forum.


@Zooey, probably. I can hypothesize but I won't know until I face it in the flesh. As a eunuch one is allowed in the harem. Maybe not until the facial hair is gone.

Because of my identity, I simply cannot understand this logic. This is not about pamela's views being invalid or bad, although I certainly disagree with them. Clearly pamela7 does not identify as a woman, and as such is capable of holding radically different views on e.g. my usage of restrooms that I find it impossible to even fathom. I am a woman, so I use the women's restroom. Men are not allowed in the women's restroom. The only way I could see pamela7's side is to acknowledge that I am not a woman, which is literally impossible for me.

What is the definition of a woman, and similarly for a man, for somebody in pamela's position? Is any man who has had testicle removal, perhaps due to cancer treatment, allowed in the women's restroom? Does that make him a woman? Is any woman with, for example, PCOS-induced facial hair growth disallowed? Does that make her a man?

I would say the answer to all of those is clearly "no", but to me, this is the kind of thought process that so clearly marks segments of our community as fundamentally different in nature. We are all transgender, but to say that our identities are all similar and continuous in anything more than a superficial way is just bad science IMO.

[Dana44]

Wow Zooey, I must say that I remember that particular post and the posts around it. Everybody in the trans umbrella agreed that something should be accomplished by the powers to be. Yet, we all agreed and stated that we used the woman's facilities at various places. I think none of us in the MTF forum thinks unkindly of the TS people and hope they don't of us. But yeah a bone headed comment like that hurts and we know that also. It did not reflect how we all thought. My goodness it would be really hard for me in a skirt, heels and totally looking fem to walk in the males bathroom. Talk about danger. wow. In posts I use this rule typically. If you can't say something nice or informative don't say it.

[Rachel Smith]

Great explanation Zooey. I work for the USPS and under their current rules of the work place I am not allowed to use the women's restroom, I am trying to change that but it is a slow process. Nothing makes me more uncomfortable then when I have to go into the men's room. Hell I didn't feel like I "belonged" in there before I transitioned let alone now. That is what most people don't understand for us it is just not natural. They don't/can't understand that we really are women on the inside. I think once they, the cisgenders, have seen you as male to them you will ALWAYS be a male even though we don't now nor have ever felt like one.

[arbon]

Rachel, your transitioned and still requiring you to use mens room? With all the changes in gov. policy on this issue (even mandating that schools cannot do that) that can't be legal for them at the USPS can it?

[becky77]

Heavy stuff!

If only internal identity was clearly visible, it would save so much confusion and arguments.

Using MtF as an example: The vast majority of CDers identity as male, but I imagine many (if stigma was removed), would live and dress as women most of the time.
This doesn't make them TS or have any bearing on their identity but it is a huge part of their personality expression.
I think that's where the confusion of a sliding scale comes into affect.
Because they are led to believe if they desire to live full-time like that they must be TS (or fantasists), which is simply not true.

One day we will all understand a man can desire to look and dress like a woman without his masculinity being called into question, it's a very long way off though.

Us binary TS are much fewer in number in comparison, our need to be who we are is so strong we face the stigma head on regardless and only because of that do we seemingly appear to have greater visibility.

If 1000 red Ants came to the surface but 1 million blue Ants never left the burrows underground, we would think all ants are red.

I find the bathroom/changing room debate to be tricky.

If I walk into a female changing room and so does a male identified crossdresser, visibly how can you tell the difference?
But if the crossdresser removes their clothes they are a man, they think like a man. Therefore there is a man in the woman's changing room. If you think of it like that it's unfair.

I think some crossdressers are so wrapped up in the experience, they are not being respectful of the boundary they just crossed.

If you are a man that likes wearing women's clothes, you are still a man. Maybe you shouldn't be going into a woman's area.

I know that will annoy people but it's the cold hard truth. It's not a game it's people's lives and feelings.

It's this disregard for boundaries that makes genuine TS woman suffer possible discrimination.

[pamela7]

@Zooey, I agree its not a spectrum, nothing like. It's a complex multidimensional vector space of different aspects and personal collectives, ancestral and social influences giving rise to present selves and associated worldviews.

I not worried that my post was taken as example, this is not a bathroom thread. My logic is the same, or close enough, to Becky77's eloquent re-explanation. I respect you think my perception there is a male one. My concern though is I feel, a feminine one; putting the concerns of OTHERS before the concern of the one. If there is a pervert in the ladies restroom, and "he" wears a dress as cover for it, where is the protection and recourse for the ladies under threat? Out of respect of this danger, bathrooms are gendered. The only physical check is the presence of genitalia, and in germany chemical castration is used to allow rapists out of jail, so the Eunuch scenario, with a long history of being allowed in the seraglio, works from my worldview logic. I accept its not universal, politically correct here and perhaps a minority view among the CD males here. Remember men tend to think of themselves first and others maybe, possibly as a distinct afterthought. IMHO who goes where is a matter of caring for the fears of the many.

I'd say don't take the word "spectrum" too literally. An umbrella at least provides a 2D surface of coverage, think more like a many-dimensional umbrella. Happy to discuss this further.

xxx Pamela

[Kaitlyn Michele]

Pamela you consistently throw out some really sexist old school comments...the latest is above

Women care about others, men are selfish... its classic stuff i've heard from many cd's of age...its like being a woman is idyllic and men are pigs...you should talk that out in therapy it might help you understand yourself better... men and women are complex and multidimensional..we are not stereotypes

there are two questions..

1..
should women be able to use women's restrooms??? no matter how they look?? no matter their body parts??
2..
should men be able to use women's restrooms??? in what cases is this reasonable???

its too bad that both sides get caught up in the "Danger" aspect...its a red herring..its not about something bad happening..

the "issue" is that women have a right to womens spaces... its pretty simple...and unless you want to argue there should be no women's space, its really hard to argue there should be special cases where men can invade this space..
its a totally reasonable "right" for a woman to pull down her pants and pee and feel she is in a private woman's space... and the fact a man feels unsafe doesnt mean he can do whatever he wants to feel safe no matter what anybody thinks..

so by conflating two really different issues, its a mess... and we lose... nationally people poll consistently against us...
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/lifestyle/general_lifestyle/november_2015/americans_nix_transgender_use_of_opposite_sex_rest rooms
and a big reason is that they are look at it as question 2...

transsexual women suffer the brunt of it... because we go out every single day, everywhere, all the time...and for us to have a bathroom issue is an existentially relevant moment...its being invalidated in a massive way... being denied or challenged on access to a place that i BELONG IN is different than feeling unsafe in the men's room because of your CHOICE to dress that day..

i can't get worked up with a cd feeling unsafe using the men's room because he's shopping pretty..to me that's a temporary thing, and it seems very reasonable to say the choice to dress as female comes with a potty issue, and what's wrong with using private/family restrooms at public places...there are tons of them...

i didn't read the houston specific ordinance...
in the end its just too much work for people to parse all this out and we are all lumped together...

i frankly don't see any way out of it...if you are ts, you got a problem...you can have your legal documents and still have a problem... and its pathetic....and a big cause of it is the insistent invalidation we get from the crossdresser community that conflates their very real problem with our very real problem even though they are not the same..

[Jennifer-GWN]

I tend to try to simplify things down to the basics and let the beaurcrats and administrators pontificate about policies they all too often have no real understanding of.

If I need to go I'm going in the woman's washroom policy or no policy. On a tangent discussion regarding lines for the woman's and the suggestion to use the male restroom aside today this is a space I'll not enter.

Now if someone wants to debate my need to use the washroom and which washroom it should be and I need to go I'll be quite happy to pee in their shoes on the spot because when I gotta go I gotta go.

Now this may sound like a bold statement...

I'm speaking from experience having pee'd on the spot in a hotel lobby debating with someone the directions to the washroom.

I identify as a woman, there was no question from my clothing I was presenting as a woman, ts/cd/ and other terms aside they are our debates most muggles don't know how to parse the terms at the best of times which brings this back to policy bureaucracy which I'll admit is language tough mainly because it's lawyers and policy driven.

In the end that person at the hotel will likely not want to have that debate again with anyone as my bladder was inordinately FULL at the time and the lobby was a the sole recipient of most of it.

Now back to the debate...apologies for the interruption.

Cheers... Jennifer

[Angela Campbell]

They have to come up with some determining factor for who uses a ladies room. To me it seems simple. Whatever is on the ID should be it. If you are living as a woman, then you use the women's room. Although you should be aware that some etiquette is required such as sitting down and not staring at others

the charts and all are interesting but I am simply not qualified to remark. Perhaps no one is.

[pamela7]

It's a complex multidimensional vector space of different aspects and personal collectives, ancestral and social influences giving rise to present selves and associated worldviews.


@KaitlynMichelle: what part of this does not say we're complex and multidimensional beings? I'll be an old-fashioned sexist bigot just for you though. :-)

[Kaitlyn Michele]

...... I respect you think my perception there is a male one. My concern though is I feel, a feminine one; putting the concerns of OTHERS before the concern of the one ....

this part..

your concerns for others does not make you feminine or female...

[PaulaQ]

If there is a pervert in the ladies restroom, and "he" wears a dress as cover for it, where is the protection and recourse for the ladies under threat? Out of respect of this danger, bathrooms are gendered.

Bathrooms are gendered because we are squeamish about bodily functions, and there's this still present idea that men can't control themselves around women in certain circumstances - if they wear the wrong clothes, are "exposed" (in a stall with a door!) in a restroom, etc. So we segregate. Rape is generally about power, more than sex, so it's unlikely a rapist would crossdress to rape a woman in a restroom. There are an enormous number of ways for creepy, pervy guys to prey on women that are way simpler to accomplish than dressing up and entering a women's room, where women are ensconced in enclosed stalls. (My boyfriend is a cop, and deals with sexual predators at times, unfortunately. Mostly child sexual predators. BTW, if you want to protect vulnerable people in restrooms, disallow straight, middle-aged men from accessing public restrooms, at least based on the guys my boyfriend has dealt with.) There really aren't any known cases of something like that happening - and while probably anything you can imagine does happen SOMEWHERE - it is at most a vanishingly rare problem.

The idea of restricting bathroom access differently between CDs and TSs is just highly impractical. Because when I started my transition, and went fulltime, I had no business being in the men's room. Yeah, I still had a penis, but mostly I passed fairly well, and it would've been disruptive and dangerous to enter a men's room. Indeed, differentiating between me, and a CD, would've been next to impossible. Yeah, I had a letter from a therapist saying I was in transition, and that I HAD to present this way for medical purposes, but it's pretty onerous to make people show papers to pee.

The most practical solution, other than unisex restrooms, is to simply observe that people should use the restroom they are more comfortable with, based on their gender identity and gender presentation. There are CDs who pass better than some trans women. Trying to distinguish between the two would simply result in the criteria for restroom access being "passability", which is incredibly problematical for many of us.

CDs basically have the problems of trans women early in transition. That's why we care which bathrooms CDs are allowed to use.

[pamela7]

you're right Paula. Personally I'd have no signage and unisex facilities, but then i'd be happy with walking round naked and that's yet another social control, huh. I was speaking for the applied logic of society, but really, there's no logic, it's just as it is until we change it.

[Claire Cook]

We seemed to have got away from Zooey's point about the spectrum and got back to the restroom thing. So to carry Zooey's analogy (which I love) a bit further: consider quantum physics: it looks like a continuous spectrum, but individual atoms emit at specific wavelengths, and what we see is a melding of all of that.

Or maybe we should just heed Kermit!

"Someday we'll find it, the rainbow connection..."



.... and oh yes I use the restroom that is appropriate to my presentation....

[Eryn]

The unfortunate fact is that most people are hung up on clearly definable boundaries. Some focus on genitalia, others on documentation and still others on crazy stuff like chromosomes. The fact is that there are many factors that determine our gender and there is no simple litmus test that can be easily applied to all. That is why many of us use the concept of the spectrum to emphasize that there are many different ways that we can be.

I identify as TS, but some think that I'm less than that because I'm not yet full time, haven't had surgery, etc. I move about in public easily as female and am accepted everywhere I go as female, but by the all the above measures many, even some in our community, would force me into the men's room. Doing that immediately outs me and negates my ability to be perceived as female in places where I have previously had no problem.

Whether the spectrum is continuous or has distinct quanta is irrelevant. We're not going to come up with a bunch of different restrooms to accommodate any granularity of the spectrum. We're stuck with two and we pretty much have to determine for ourselves which one fits us best. What is written into the law only affects the ease with which others may persecute us for making the choice that is best for us.

[LeaP]

There is identity and there are restroom rules (law, regulation, custom ... whatever). They are not the same thing. The latter hang on whatever criteria we collectively "agree." I agree with the spirit of Kaitlyn's comments re: women's spaces, but it too is too broad. Access to restrooms - or ANY legally privileged action, for that matter - is not a matter of self-evident action proceeding from definitions or identity. Those are often the starting point, but even that isn't a certainty.

Access to restrooms and locker rooms in places of public accommodation is a question of reasonable persuasion to influence (or pressure) the rule makers, and that's that. In this matter, the so-called spectrum is just another angle to that end.

[Badtranny]

the whole restroom thing is pure paranoia

I'll bet you a dollar that every single one of those concerned gals would have a heart attack if I was hanging out in the Men's room with their husbands.

Bathroom privilege is passing privilege and denying people the right to use the bathroom they feel most comfortable in is basically just mean for the sake of being mean. If a man gets caught preying on women in the restroom than the penalty should be severe. Otherwise, let the people pee in peace.

[Brooklyn]

I'd imagine that those who research transgender people have many intersecting axes to examine, and not just a linear spectrum from say, fetishists on one end to kids like Jazz Jennings on the other. Many of the other trans people I know from my local support group, for example, seem cut from a different cloth than me. Don't you have that experience in the Bay Area, Zooey? Interestingly, the non-binary types often have wildly different views and personalities from the trans-men and trans-women. And good luck telling an early-transitioner that a middle-aged cross-dresser is transgender, because those experiences are so clearly different... right?

As far as restrooms go, there is a big difference in my mind between using individual water-closets and shared changing rooms. But the people who are stripping us of our dignity and rights here in Texas and elsewhere are not going to leave it to my best judgement to navigate which spaces I enter.

[Rogina B]

In the state of Florida,like most states,there is no law that states which bathroom a person must use. It is only a big deal if you make it one. "The bathroom issue" is only brought up by the fear mongers and haters that want genetic women to join their cause by scaring them. Any pushback to T inclusion in Human Rights Ordinances bring on the bathroom issue with no negative facts to back up their fear spreading . Here in Jacksonville Florida we will soon have an HRO up for City Council vote so we deal with the" bathroom myth" daily in our push. Mind your business and pee where you want...

[becky77]

The unfortunate fact is that most people are hung up on clearly definable boundaries.

I'm not saying don't use the female restroom needs must sometimes, I'm saying respect the boundary you just crossed into. Be dignified, sit down to pee etc.

I remember being in a shop and seeing a small group of CDers out for a fun day at the mall, they go into the ladies changing room giggling trying on loads of clothes they had no intention of buying and you could even hear them using their camera.
It's disrespectful, you go in the female changing room to try on something you intend to buy and that's it, it's not a funhouse for their CD kicks.

[Zooey]

I'd imagine that those who research transgender people have many intersecting axes to examine, and not just a linear spectrum from say, fetishists on one end to kids like Jazz Jennings on the other.

I certainly hope so, although what literature I have been exposed to doesn't necessarily suggest that very strongly. I'm not talking about people actually doing science though - I'm talking about the way the community talks about it, and in particular, the way the community here talks about it.


Many of the other trans people I know from my local support group, for example, seem cut from a different cloth than me. Don't you have that experience in the Bay Area, Zooey? Interestingly, the non-binary types often have wildly different views and personalities from the trans-men and trans-women. And good luck telling an early-transitioner that a middle-aged cross-dresser is transgender, because those experiences are so clearly different... right?

The way I would really like to respond to your post requires making a distinction that is disallowed here, and not unreasonably, so instead I'll be careful and respond this way. :)

Yes, I definitely have that experience here in the bay area. Honestly, all else being equal (which admittedly it almost never is) I think that the non-binary folks have it far harder than most folks, because cis people understand what it means to be a man or a woman. They may not agree with our right to be what we are, but they know what it means. They very rarely understand the infinitely variable and unique snowflakes that are non-binary identities. Honestly, I struggle with understanding them in some cases, so I can sympathize. Generally speaking though, I find that the non-binary folks (who do their version of transition and live openly as whatever/whoever they are) tend to have a superset of the understanding of the rest. In the bay area I find that this often comes with a bit of an activist streak, but whatevs.

We all have different opinions on details, but in my experience the dividing line when it comes to fundamental differences in perspective is drawn between people in the community who are transgender by way of asserting an internally-focused gender identity that is out of alignment with their birth sex, and those who are transgender by way of projecting the image of an alternative externally-focused non-aligned gender identity.

There are plenty of people on both sides of that line who try to be understanding of what the other side goes through, because they're good people. At the end of the day though, in my experience, I can say the exact same words to two perfectly nice people on either side of that line, and those will be two very different conversations. Put another way, I've met a bunch of people on my side of the line (the internal identity side) speaking in occasionally difficult to follow accents, but on the other side of the line it all sounds like Welsh to me, and I don't even think Welsh people properly understand each other's Welsh sometimes (both IRL and in my terrible metaphor). :P

The same is true of talking to cis people, of course, but they're not who I'm talking about here. ;)

[Kate T]

I remember being in a shop and seeing a small group of CDers out for a fun day at the mall, they go into the ladies changing room giggling trying on loads of clothes they had no intention of buying and you could even hear them using their camera.
It's disrespectful, you go in the female changing room to try on something you intend to buy and that's it, it's not a funhouse for their CD kicks.

Come on Becky. I've seen this sort of behaviour from girls and women as well. That's not even talking about the women who take a dress, wear it with the tags still on and then return it for a full refund. Ok the second behaviour is just essentially illegal but you get my drift. My wife and I will go clothes shopping and try on a dozen dresses, tops or skirts and not buy any of them mainly because they don't fit / look nothing like they did on the rack. Are you telling me you've NEVER tried on a branded dress (Andrea Crawford or Carla Zampati or similar) just to see what you look like in it? Even though you Know you really can't afford it? Are you / they really hurting anyone?

[Marcelle]

Well . . . having lived the bathroom police recently, I can say it is very disconcerting to have someone question your right to pee in a place you should be able to access as a trans woman. The individual did not differentiate, she did not ask are you CD part-time or TS full time, she just insulted and embarrassed me in front of a crowd. I left, hurt and confused but did go back and set things right as in Ontario, I have the legal right. However it does not stop people from being mean.

For me, I use the women's rest room when I have to because that is who I am . . . a woman. When I felt I was CD and gender fluid, I used the family bathrooms or single seat toilets when out and about because they were available and the women's when an emergency called for it. At work I use the women's restrooms but the one space I am cognizant of is the locker room. I have not and will most likely not request access as I am aware my anatomy could make women very uncomfortable in such a private place (no HRT or surgery). So we have arranged for a private changing area with access to the male shower facilities when needed. A bit awkward but most have adjusted and to be honest all I want to do is work out and go about my day.

Cheers

Marcelle

[Eryn]

I'm not saying don't use the female restroom needs must sometimes, I'm saying respect the boundary you just crossed into. Be dignified, sit down to pee etc.

I've no argument with that, but I've never seen behavior to the contrary by any TG person. Is it worth our effort to worry about a theoretical person who may not exist at all? We're playing into our enemy's hands if we do that.


I remember being in a shop and seeing a small group of CDers out for a fun day at the mall, they go into the ladies changing room giggling trying on loads of clothes they had no intention of buying and you could even hear them using their camera.
It's disrespectful, you go in the female changing room to try on something you intend to buy and that's it, it's not a funhouse for their CD kicks.

I will disagree with that. Stores actively encourage "recreational try-on" of clothing. They know that even if you didn't intend to buy something, the likelihood of making a purchase goes up with time of exposure and number of garments. At many stores, the saleswoman will keep bringing me items to try until I leave the dressing room.

Dressing rooms are not temples, they are places of business and part of the business is amusing the customers. "Try on only those things you intend to buy" is a very male way of thinking!

[becky77]

Dressing rooms are not temples, they are places of business and part of the business is amusing the customers. "Try on only those things you intend to buy" is a very male way of thinking!

I forgot people take everything literally on here. I try on a range of things but the idea is to find something, not treat the shop like fancy dress.

'Male way of thinking' lol, I'm guessing that's intended as an insult.

A couple of my friends love shopping but most find the whole trying on thing a bore, I best tell them they are not adhering to the stereotype.

Please tell me Erin why you seem to take everything personal and start an argument?? I don't know if you do it on purpose or you're just misunderstood.

[Kaitlyn Michele]

I love it ....Throwing an empty stereotype out like its an insult.. it just highlights your own insecurity and old fashioned bias about men and women....
its fascinating that on one level you want to break down barriers, but on other levels you are stuck in an endless loop of what makes a man and woman circa 1955

i hardly ever try stuff on just to see it on me...life is too short...i guess i'm still a man...or perhaps i just know everything i try on is gonna look adorable..heh
my brother in law tries on a billion pairs of pants to pick one...go figure
also i do not clean my house in heels

and the thing about creepiness is not only a theoretical...i once took a cd out for a "girl time" thing where i gave her the guts to walk into the mall etc... we went into the ladies room and the next thing i know the camera pops out, she is in a stall and asking me to take a picture..sorry that's real..its a CD MINDSET.... when the cd is out and about, that is a wonderful keepsake of the femme side and i've probabaly been in more pictures than i care to count of all the times i went out as a cd..those keepsakes are important and valid...but when i saw the camera came out in the bathroom stall, i had a sense of enough is enough...
surely my friend was hurting no one, but its creepy

The world is not perfect.. and its a simple fact...generally speaking, the majority of women don't want men in their private spaces...

What Melissa said about passing priviledge is spot on.
if you are a transsexual woman and you don't look the part, you need your papers and your quality of life is going to be impacted..especiallly is some jerk gets on your case..
...that is unfair and sad to me, but no law, no ordinance or policy is going to change how people feel..

maybe someday an enlightened crowd will go co-ed or just allow public mens and womens spaces to be totally appearance based...but until then you are just gonna have to deal with it.

[becky77]

Are you telling me you've NEVER tried on a branded dress (Andrea Crawford or Carla Zampati or similar) just to see what you look like in it?

No actually. I have a wedding next year, why would I try on an outfit that I may love but then can't afford. I can't see any fun in that if the price tag is beyond me.

Not fitting or looking right is a long way off from, trying on a load of dresses for a giggle, taking selfies and then leaving them for someone else to try and buy.

I'm not talking about Trans woman here. I'm talking about men with a liking for women's clothing that is purely recreational.
Why does a male identified man think putting on a dress gives him carte Blanche access to a woman's only area?

I know we can't tell the two apart, but the male identified CD should have the courtesy to know they don't belong and not take the piss.

[LeaP]

... the "issue" is that women have a right to womens spaces... its pretty simple...

... and the fact a man feels unsafe doesnt mean he can do whatever he wants to feel safe no matter what anybody thinks.
...
i frankly don't see any way out of it...if you are ts, you got a problem...you can have your legal documents and still have a problem... and its pathetic....and a big cause of it is the insistent invalidation we get from the crossdresser community that conflates their very real problem with our very real problem even though they are not the same..

Exactly. I don't know why people can't see the difference between the problems on one hand, and why there is such insistence on only one possible solution on the other.

TS - Problem: Access to women's restrooms. Pre-op and/or pre-documentation change, a practical problem, a legal minefield, and rights no-woman's-land. Post-Op with documentation updated, this reduces to practicalities and passability (at least until someone passes a "birth sex" bill somewhere).

CD - Problem: Safety in the men's room. End of story.

For TSs, there are a variety of potential solutions for the pre-op, pre-doc contingent, depending on location, whether public or private, etc. There will never be a universal solution in my lifetime that works for everyone, everywhere. Access is by right post-op/post-doc in places of public accomodation. People are trying to dispute that, but go to court right now and the challenger loses.

For CDs, access to women's restrooms is one possible solution. The more I consider it, the more problematic it seems, though. It doesn't actually address the problem, which is men's room safety. It creates the potential for confrontations, if not actual violence, over women's restroom use, and it undermines progress and understanding of a fundamental TS need.

****

The OP theme is the misuse or misapplication of the spectrum concept to mask real differences. Or, put another way, different kinds of things. I like the cite of "intensity" as an example of how a descriptor is used in isolation as if it were a proxy for some thing that is real. Semantically, it's akin to the difference between adjectives and nouns. There are beautiful men and beautiful women. Oh wait ... there are beautiful horses and butterflies, too. Some people even think some spiders are breathtakingly beautiful. (Ew) All these things might be conceptually grouped for a variety of reasons, maybe as simple as having a reference picture collection of beautiful things. But you don't treat the elements of such a collection as if they were the SAME thing.

Quick, which is MORE beautiful - that woman ... or that spider? The problem is in the nature of all such qualifiers when we try to quantitatively normalize them across disparities. (Spectra are just one way of doing that.) The next degree of separation from reality is constructing taxonomies across the normalizations. The third is inputing alikeness based on taxonomic semantics. And the last - and it's all too often a goal (or hidden agenda) - is the crushing of difference for someone's (or some group's) benefit. History of the world, my friend.

So very different people get collected under the transgender umbrella. Recognizing some superficially similar patterns (e.g., intensity), a spectrum is imposed and people are roughly mapped into it. In turn, that's sliced and diced into identity categories which seamlessly blend into one another. Lo and behold, we've transformed everyone into a mere manifestation of a theoretical construct that rests, moreover, on a very shaky foundation. That last is rarely a problem for the militant, enthused, and needy, though ... they will go to tautologies or oxymorons every time! The foundation only LOOKS shaky - they are actually quite sound - we just haven't discovered why yet.

Where's the beef? Just as you can follow the money in finance, you can follow the issues and outcomes with things transgender. Most TS will tell you that they lose out, every time. For decades prior to the transgender conception, everything was lumped under homosexuality (usually as sexual inversion). TS had to fight for a place at the table, i.e., their identity, need, and rights, under that regime, despite having set that table at Stonewall. It's the same pattern under the transgender umbrella. And for the record, I'm not under it.

[Kate T]

Quick, which is MORE beautiful - that woman ... or that spider? The problem is in the nature of all such qualifiers when we try to quantitatively normalize them across disparities. (Spectra are just one way of doing that.) The next degree of separation from reality is constructing taxonomies across the normalizations. The third is inputing alikeness based on taxonomic semantics. And the last - and it's all too often a goal (or hidden agenda) - is the crushing of difference for someone's (or some group's) benefit. History of the world, my friend.


Actually I think lots of spiders are really quite amazingly beautiful :) A hangover from watching way to many nature documentaries.

It's curious don't you think, as you have pointed out Lea, that nature celebrates and encourages diversity, yet as humans we always just seem to want to crush it :(

Becky. Consider a CD'er. His wife is DADT, he respects that, he desperately wishes she could understand or see some of how he feels, but she is unable. He lives his life dutifully, fulfils all the socially required responses and responsibilities for his job and family, and yet there is this one thing that can give him an incredible moment of happiness, to stand there looking in a mirror and see himself in a dress and feel just once "I am beautiful". You would truly deny him that simple moment of happiness? Really? There is no way he could ever buy that dress, he has family responsibilities, his children need clothes for school, his wife needs money to get her hair cut and blow dried, the car needs servicing etc. etc. Isn't a little inconvenience worth knowing that you could give that person a moment of happiness, of escape?

[AllieSF]

Becky, It seems that the people that offended you had the store's permission to be in there, or were not prohibited from being in there, and as someone else stated girls and even some women do the same thing. Your complaint should go to the store rather to us here, and based on the rules there in the UK take whatever action is necessary if it is not according to the legal laws of the land. I respect your opinion as just that, your opinion. But, it also seems that you dislike CD's from enjoying the same rights that you have, while in some States here in the USA have been granted us, maybe even in the UK too? I totally disagree with your opinion that a MtF CD "... should know that they do not belong and not take the piss". Did you mean pics? Here where I live it is legally my choice and "I" belong there and go there when presenting as a woman. With regards to "... gives him carte blanche access..", the store or the law gives him that right, just as they give you that same right.

You acknowledge that we can't tell the two apart. Do you also acknowledge that GG's and TS's may also do something similar while in that sacred place, probably when you are not around? Would you complain about them too as you have done here? Life is complicated, and legislating laws and workable rules to allow everyone to live their own true lives is even more complicated. This is a difficult subject for most to understand, but sometimes we get the best that we can get based on what we know and can actually do and enforce. Allowing people access to facilities based on their presentation is a fair and workable law that allows people to be who they are. People like you may get upset, but to me anyway, it sounds more like a complaint about exclusivity than actual human rights and how to enforce those rights.

There are a lot of things in life that that we may dislike, however, when it is legal, we all, including you and me, need to learn to live with it, or go some place else where we do not have problems with it, or lobby with a workable alternative to change the current law. I have learned to live with it, and I seem to live with less insignificant problems and issues.

Regarding this comment "... it's not a funhouse for their CD kicks.", As mentioned above girls and some women do the same thing, so are you saying that these cis-females are also getting their "CD kicks"? It is unnecessary comments like this that creates the "us versus them" situations in good threads like this one. We all have opinions and have the right to express them, but why should a group be denigrated with words such as yours? Why not just say "get their kicks"? Why the CD identifier, when it also applies to cis -women too?

Zooey, you make a good case for a fragmented, my understanding of what you wrote, spectrum, where who one is (motivation and goals) may be the fragmenting factor. Though from my brief experience in this transgender new world of mine, from a broad more distant view it still looks continuous. I know what my roots are on this spectrum but am not quite sure yet where my new experiences and feelings may lead me. To me, it seems like I am moving slowly from one part of the spectrum with no major fragments. Most likely, if and when I get to a point where I may define myself as TS I will truly understand and recognize that difference. I would love to read more in this thread about your concept and less about what facility different parts of the spectrum should use. The latter are always more contentious on both sides of that spectrum.

[Eryn]

Keep hammering those wedges, ladies. Sooner or later you'll figure out what 'ol Ben meant when he said "We must all hang together..."

As for my "male approach" remark, I've spent years convinced that I was a man and many men treat shopping as a search-and-destroy mission. Get in, buy stuff you need, get out. It's not universal, but in many circles it isn't considered manly to spend too much time trying stuff on. It's a habit I had to unlearn when I embraced my female side.

[pamela7]

that's why we are here Eryn, is it not?

[Cheyenne Skye]

Spectrum or not it still comes down to self determination. At least until there is a scientific test to determine who is truly TS and who is not. But then again maybe not. Even among those that transition, there are degrees. Those that seek surgeries to those that don't and every combination in between. Then you start getting into the "trannier than thou" attitudes. Where does it stop?

As to the inclusion in woman's spaces, I have a situation at work. Someone broke the partition to two of the three stalls and the doors no longer latch properly. I have been out at work for a year and a half, had all my documentation amended yet no surgery to date. Yet if I have to go and use the stall without a proper latch, what do you suppose could happen if another woman accidentally opened the door while my panties are down? I'm not just a CDer out for the night. According to my ID, I'm a woman and have every right to use the facility which coincides. But of course hate and fear mongers will not see it that way. They will say I'm a man invading a woman's space just because of my anatomy. Would any of this discussion even matter at that point? (Yes I have legal protections here but there was a fairly famous case here about a trans girl being beaten within an inch of her life by two young women for being in the woman's restroom. I'd like to not become a statistic, thank you.)

[dreamer_2.0]

This thread sure makes one excited for full time....

[becky77]

Becky. Consider a CD'er. His wife is DADT, he respects that, he desperately wishes she could understand or see some of how he feels, but she is unable. He lives his life dutifully, fulfils all the socially required responses and responsibilities for his job and family, and yet there is this one thing that can give him an incredible moment of happiness, to stand there looking in a mirror and see himself in a dress and feel just once "I am beautiful". You would truly deny him that simple moment of happiness? Really? There is no way he could ever buy that dress, he has family responsibilities, his children need clothes for school, his wife needs money to get her hair cut and blow dried, the car needs servicing etc. etc. Isn't a little inconvenience worth knowing that you could give that person a moment of happiness, of escape?
There are plenty of dressing services for that kind of thing? I'm not saying 'OMG how terrible' I'm asking if a man is in a woman's area for the sole purpose of his dressing needs, is that appropriate?


I totally disagree with your opinion that a MtF CD "... should know that they do not belong and not take the piss".
I have said male identified several times, no one seems to quote that bit. I have also not said they can't use the facility. If they know they think like a man and they've gone in to a woman's personal area don't abuse the situation. Be quiet and descreet, don't get a camera out and turn it into a fashion photo shoot. Am I so wrong to ask for respect?

Also, why do people keep quoting me what other women get up to? It's not comparable.
Might be if those women were doing it in the men's changing room.

Why do you think it's ok for a man (I say man as in how they think not birth gender, I hoped that was obvious), can wear a dress and walk into any female only area?
We need to understand the very real difference between a man that dresses as a woman vs a Trans woman.
Nothing to do with exclusivity, that word pops up so often and is nearly always used in the wrong context.

I remember in the early days going to Trans clubs and struggling to fit in, after a while it clicked.
(Nearly all MtF), there are all these 'women' some looking amazing yet despite the female attire they are sitting at the bar chatting sports and women and I'm sorry to say usually sexual fantasy, I'm generalising a bit not all were like this but most were.
You take away the dressing needs and the vast majority were typical guys albeit with a secret.
If we forget temporarily about the dressing aspect, you have a typical man that thinks he has the right to use woman only areas because he may don a wig and skirt.

It's an interesting debate.

[Eryn]

I have a situation at work. Someone broke the partition to two of the three stalls and the doors no longer latch properly. I have been out at work for a year and a half, had all my documentation amended yet no surgery to date. Yet if I have to go and use the stall without a proper latch, what do you suppose could happen if another woman accidentally opened the door while my panties are down?

1. Tell the person in charge of facilities that the bathroom stall doors need repair and you are uncomfortable using the bathroom with defective doors.

2. In the interim, how much time do you spend in the stall waving your stuff around? When you're sitting nothing is apparent, so you have two small windows of exposure. Just be sure that other people aren't in the room during those times of exposure.

[Jennifer-GWN]

I'm curious... I know none of us want to be the victim of violence however, how often does this really happen? Is it a 1:10 1:100 or is my chances of being struck by lightening better? Seems we might be overly caught up in corner cases or should one expect an altercation more often then not?

Terms and definitions aside and assuming that lumberjack bill doesn't just dawn a dress and stroll into the women's washroom. I'd hope that appropriately presenting you'd be fine. No? If not then I'll adjust and hope like hell I make it back to my hotel room bathroom and not have to again pee on the floor.

Becky I'm with you on looking at this from the side of practicality. Maybe I'm wrong and my mindset has moved on from a transition perspective or maybe a dose of reality check is needed.

[Zooey]

I remember in the early days going to Trans clubs and struggling to fit in, after a while it clicked.
(Nearly all MtF), there are all these 'women' some looking amazing yet despite the female attire they are sitting at the bar chatting sports and women and I'm sorry to say usually sexual fantasy, I'm generalising a bit not all were like this but most were.
You take away the dressing needs and the vast majority were typical guys albeit with a secret.
If we forget temporarily about the dressing aspect, you have a typical man that thinks he has the right to use woman only areas because he may don a wig and skirt.

I relate so much to this that it hurts. This is the kind of fundamental difference in perspective that I was talking about. I don't believe it's possible, much less advisable, to attempt to judge a book by its cover. That's why things like bathroom debates are tough - nobody wants the kind of policing it would take to enforce any meaningful rules, so people just need to get comfortable being tolerant.

That said, once you start reading a book, it becomes obvious pretty quickly whether you are reading a novel or the dictionary. Those are fundamentally different books, no matter how similar the covers look.

[Kate T]

That said, once you start reading a book, it becomes obvious pretty quickly whether you are reading a novel or the dictionary. Those are fundamentally different books, no matter how similar the covers look.

And yet both "books" belong on the bookshelf, both have their purposes and reasons and stories to tell, albeit quite different stories.

I think Zo and Bec what you are asking for is respect, that a CD should respect that the women's toilet is not an "experience", the change rooms are not a place to go for a cheap thrill. In that I agree. I think though we must be careful that we also return that respect such that we don't automatically assume that just because someone is CD they don't understand and respect the feelings and privacy of others. Honestly I have met a number of CD's who are far more respectful of others than a number of TS I have met. It's about the person, not the label.

[flatlander_48]

Regarding the Spectrum...
Personally, I think there is a spectrum. I think if you have a large enough of a sample, it will appar to be essentially a continuous curve. I think there are too many variables, each with a possible 0% to 100% rating, for the curve to not eventually fill in. Now it could be that natural clusters in the data will form, but all that says it that certain data points are more prevalent than others.

One thing to note is that in this discussion, the thought process has basically concerned itself with crossdressers and transsexuals with little or no thought given to what's in between those poles. I fall into that midrange known as transgender (regardless of what the popular press says). Someone with little or no alignment between the physical and emotional is a candidate to become a transsexual. At the other end of that arc is where I fall: mostly male-identified but distinctly not completely. Many have talked about the shame, guilt and remorse brought on by their dressing and how those feelings have lasted for a long time. Over maybe 10 years, the total for me in that mode would be like one work day or less. It is just not a burden that I have carried for any significant time. Someone asked me recently if it is difficult for me to wear male clothing. My answer was no, it isn't. I'm used to it and there isn't any particular negative aspect. When I dress, it feels good. I started out being fairly comfortable with the idea of being dressed and it has only gotten better. It really feels like I am representing this other facet of my personality in keeping with where this sits for me. That said, I do worry about certain situations and try to avoid them. That has nothing to do with how I feel inside and everything to do with protecting myself.

So, being easily comfortable with myself when dressed and never really having the shame-guilt-remorse-purging-depression deal leads me to believe that I am transgender. But, and this is significant, my degree of misalignment is nowhere near enough to warrant thinking about transitioning.

Somewhere here there was a comment about what male-identified crossdressers talk about. I'll confess that this surprised me. I expected discussion about clothes, sales, stores, etc. but most of the discussion was around work (and not from a transitioning perspective). Go figure. Every now and then I get compliments related to my outfit (and yes, I do look good!), but that never seems to spark further discussion. Curious.

Regarding Restrooms...
Laws work after the fact. Until something happens, there are no consequences. The technology of the Minority Report doesn't exist. It would appear that in order to get existing laws to be changed, someone has to be sacrificed. Personally I have no intention of going into a men's restroom while dressed.

I have been in a few women's resrooms and I try to be as unobtrusive as possible and focus on what I need to do. I do everything I can to minimize my time in the restroom short of thrashing around as that attracts attention.

Good Luck and let's be Safe out there,

DeeAnn

[ReineD]

Historically, the sexual segregation of men and women was done to protect women from men. This may not be such an issue in the modern Western world, but it still is an issue in other cultures, the middle east for example. Women are generally less physically strong than any man who might want to take advantage of them. And even in our society there are still men who do rape women. I suspect the segregation of the sexes occurred historically for the same reason as the institution of marriage, to protect inheritance, in the process also protecting a woman's sense of security.

In any case, the ultimate way to tell the sex of a person is by their genitals. It doesn’t matter if a female is big, strong and hairy or a male has a micropenis and is 5’ tall. Same sexes cannot procreate. If historically the rules had been written to be flexible, to examine each person in any given society annually to determine if they fell in a gray area that would require a decision as to what side of segregated spaces they belonged to, it would have taken an enormous amount of resources and manpower. Hence the black and white laws, which were easy to enforce because universally, the hormones that create gonads also create other visible gender cues.

The knowledge that a small percentage of people have gender IDs that do not match their sexual characteristics has only surfaced in the last century or so. And to give credit, there is enough research now and corroboration from transsexuals to warrant debate and slowly begin to change the laws or at least provide private rooms for MtFs so they are not forced to use men’s rooms. But when it comes to using women’s rooms, the issue is that no one can tell a person’s gender ID; this is not something that can be outwardly measured in any way (for someone who is still read as a male), save for the physical changes a person has undergone such as HRT and/or SRS. If a substantial number of individuals in the TG community, who are not transitioning and who do not plan on reducing their testosterone/increasing their estrogen to female levels, nor are they removing their physical ability to procreate with women, insist on using women’s rooms, how can people possibly know their intent? And in an ideal world, HRT would also remove other visible male gender cues (MtF TSs would not be read as men), but this does not always happen and so how do people know that the TS is in fact a woman. Hairstyle, makeup and clothing alone are not enough to determine this, given the amount of MtFs who wear these items and who are still men.

It’s not fair to TSs. I’m not up on the laws, but maybe in some states/countries transitioners can use the ladies’ bathroom?

But, there is hope for the future. If it comes to pass that there will be a personal database attached to all our fingerprints, I can see having all public bathrooms/changing rooms accessible with a finger-reader to anyone who is legally female, regardless of her birth sex. And out of respect for men who have an emotional need to dress, I think it would be wonderful for society to recognize this and provide more individual bathrooms so they wouldn't have to use the men's rooms.

I hope I haven't offended anyone.

[Nadine Spirit]

I love how people just state, here is why we have segregated bathrooms, and then offer up their opinion on the matter as if it were fact.

https://reason.com/archives/2014/04/11/gender-neutral-bathrooms-building-codes

[Claire Cook]

I'll bet you a dollar that every single one of those concerned gals would have a heart attack if I was hanging out in the Men's room with their husbands.



Thanks Melissa -- we needed a touch of humor here.

[STACY B]

I think this whole Bathroom ordeal is for people that are in close personal places,, Like schools,, Jobs, Where they KNOW the other is Trans, I really don't think this is your run of the mill Public restroom problem? If you were out in a public place and there was just a chance that you looked the part and wasn't doing anything weird and minding your bizz I really don't think it would matter at all.

Like I said places where people are SURE that someone is Trans like school, Work, An it has been announced that they are that's where the whole big problem starts, When they knew them as one gender and they switched to another and they can't handle the change. Millions of different situations I'll bet,, JUST SAYING.

[Rianna Humble]

I love how people just state, here is why we have segregated bathrooms, and then offer up their opinion on the matter
Nadine, your link does not provide any useful input for those of us who live outside of the area referred to. Also, I'm not sure how your link advances the discussion about whether there is a continuum between CD and TS, or a series of distinct identities lumped under one umbrella?

Moderator's note:
The OP said this thread is not about the bathroom debate, so let's get the thread back on track. No more bathroom debate please folks.

[Nadine Spirit]

My link was just an article that, while based on building codes, gave some sort of brief history and geographic overview of segregated bathrooms in general. It was an attempt to dispute the myth that segregated bathrooms came about from a need to protect women and make sure they have a safe space from potentially rapist men.

Though I do agree fully that this thread should not be focused on the never ending unsolvable bathroom debate and I am sorry that some of the comments regarding that have ruffled my feathers and I felt a need to dispute certain comments regarding that.

[Zooey]

And yet both "books" belong on the bookshelf, both have their purposes and reasons and stories to tell, albeit quite different stories.

Yes, insofar as when you organize books by author name, you can end up with cookbooks next to auto repair guides. The library is great, because there are lots of books, of all different sorts. We categorize things there too, because otherwise it's too difficult to find what you're looking for. If your library had one shelf called "All The Books", you would probably find that odd.

[flatlander_48]

Odd is splintering a constituency. I have yet to see a useful purpose come from that.

DeeAnn

[Kaitlyn Michele]

what constinuency?? the men using women's bathroom lobby??

[flatlander_48]

That's a joke, right?

DeeAnn

[LeaP]

If the point in question is *splitting* a constituency, it has to be wider than men using women restrooms. Presumably it's everyone under the umbrella, or perhaps on the spectrum (it wasn't specified). It's a perfect example of deriving an identity (the constituency) from a theoretical construct (the spectrum or umbrella). It also illustrates my conclusion ... that someone loses. In this case, it's transsexuals.

Back to the spectrum itself. What, exactly, is the subject of the spectrum? Gender feelings? Transition need? Homosexual leanings (in the original sexual inversion sense ... which is the great progenitor of the spectrum notion behind the gender spectrum)? Disorder? Dressing urgency? Age? Passability? Femininity/Masculinity? Behavior? Attitudes? Stereotype conformity?

Oh, you say, gender IDENTITY! As if THAT'S crystal clear ... (not) Let's start with the idea of gender as opposed to sex. It's an academic invention. That it is constantly conflated and confused with one's inner sense of SEX doesn't help. The transsexual dilemma is the conflict between their actual sex and what they are biologically geared to expect. In a MtF context, a male expects to see and experience a female body. It's a body mapping issue. That's it. It may manifest as conflict and dysphoria ... or not. It may manifest as pschological symptoms masking or substituting for the actual issue ... or not. It makes some suicidal ... and some not. But they all share the same issue. And they may experience it in terms of gender in the sociological sense ... or not.

In short, the spectrum idea doesn't help. It obfuscates complex phenomena via overgeneralization, to put it mildly. Beyond the overgeneralization, though, is the biggest swamp of all - that the spectrum is always ultimately plotted on a male to female axis. You can't reduce individual identity to such a scale, even if the scale's plot has some population-level validity. To do so is to make the most common mistake in practical statistics. Even if you use proper plots - and they are rarely linear anyway - if an individual falls so far outside its bounds that it's unmeasurable, it STILL doesn't force the conclusion (i.e., in this case that one is or isn't a woman or a man or something else). It's rubbish at the individual level. It's usability lies elsewhere, which is another topic. BTW, the same comments apply to multi-dimensional approaches.

[flatlander_48]

LP:

In the sense that we are ALL gender outlaws in one way or another, there is strength in numbers. Society at large tends to lump us all together, yet we have little cohesiveness. If you and I are walking together and we're accosted by someone, is it logical to assume that a distinction between us will be made? No, of course not. That's why, regardless of where we fall on the spectrum, we need to be united. We need to be allies for each other. At the very least, we each have some of the narrative for the other.

DeeAnn

[LeaP]

Only if we are advocating for the same things, have the same or compatible goals and timelines, or are advocating for one another. We are not. (Collective sense.)

[flatlander_48]

We are not.

And that would be the problem.

DeeAnn

[Eryn]

Only if we are advocating for the same things, have the same or compatible goals and timelines, or are advocating for one another. We are not. (Collective sense.)

Maybe you are not, but you don't speak for others, including me.

We're all under attack by the fundies and emphasizing divisions within our community only helps their cause of hatred.

[Kate T]

Yes, insofar as when you organize books by author name, you can end up with cookbooks next to auto repair guides. The library is great, because there are lots of books, of all different sorts. We categorize things there too, because otherwise it's too difficult to find what you're looking for. If your library had one shelf called "All The Books", you would probably find that odd.

Extending the metaphor yes and no Zoe. Yes if you are researching a particular topic then having all the books together under the Dewy decimal system or similar can be helpful. BUT I actually find it far more fascinating going in to peoples libraries that aren't organised and just having a look at the shelf, and you will see all sorts of fascinating and interesting books and stories that you may never have found if you had just been perusing Dewy decimal section 306-307 in a library. AND believe me, having spent 5 + years in university libraries researching, sometimes the most important information actually comes from outside the section you expect to find it in.

[Badtranny]

Let's not forget that this is the TS forum and MOST of the girls that hang out here have stepped into the light. We have no dark corners to hide in anymore. There was a time in my transition when I was very obviously transitioning and therefore indistinguishable from a crossdresser. That time has thankfully passed for me and bathrooms are no longer an issue.

It definitely used to be though, and I would choose either based on how passable I felt that day. If I had no makeup on and I was feeling particularly butch, I would use the men's because I just didn't want to deal with the drama. There were some days when I would rather be an obvious tranny in the men's room than the same thing in the ladies room. Transition is a long weird road and I truly don't recommend it but this is my life and I have earned my passing privilege.

I have made the sacrifices. I have walked the walk through the fire of transition and my reward is unfettered access to the ladies toilet. ...totally worth it right?

The oddest thing about this particular thread is the idea that CD's who are admitted men, in fact many of them have said that they are "all man" feel entitled to use women's restrooms simply because they are 'dressed'. Personally I'm cool with it, because I don't think women are precious or delicate and I don't romanticize bathrooms, but does anyone who has not been through the rigors of a public gender transition have the ability to recognize the difference?

[LeaP]

Maybe you are not, but you don't speak for others, including me.

Nope. Don't want to, either. My sweeping generalization ("we") referred to what I see as the majority TS view. It was not an arrogation of representation.


We're all under attack by the fundies and emphasizing divisions within our community only helps their cause of hatred.

Please see my comments on TS losses elsewhere in the thread. I would say the "community" is inflaming the situation, among other problems.

[Rianna Humble]

Only if we are advocating for the same things, have the same or compatible goals and timelines, or are advocating for one another. We are not. (Collective sense.)

Maybe you are not, but you don't speak for others, including me.

That is a perfect illustration of what LeaP is saying! Collectively, we don't speak with the same voice and don't advocate the same thing. By distancing yourself from what she says, you confirm that we don't speak with the same voice.


We're all under attack by the fundies and emphasizing divisions within our community only helps their cause of hatred.

Unfortunately, the division is not diminished when it is perpetuated by people who claim "we are all the same" but rush to condemn transsexuals as has happened repeatedly in the Media section over recent months. If they do it in the relative privacy of a safe space such as this, what do you think they are saying in public?

[becky77]

The sliding scale spectrum/Umbrella idea only works if the entrance criteria is people that dress as the opposite sex, be it crossdressers or Drag queen or TG.
If you include Gender issues that rules out most Drag and male or female identified CDers, these people don't have GD issues in the majority.

So removing GD or identity from the umbrella, you are left with those who dress as the opposite sex again, this is fundamentally flawed for TS people because their clothes match their internal Gender identity, therefore not Crossdressing.

This is why a lot of TS don't want to be included, if you include us you are by default saying we are closer to a recreational dresser or Drag queen than we are to being a real woman/man.
It's totally invalidating and counter productive.

When I was 5 and born a boy I started to realise I preferred Girls things, probably a similar story for many Crossdressers, in those early years we share a similarly.
But then our paths (due to Identity) start to diverge so drastically that we become nothing alike.
Put me in a group of Crossdressers and I won't fit in, put me in a group of women and it feels normal.
Then someone comes along and says 'excuse me you don't belong with those women, you belong with those men in dresses' great, thanks very much for trying to alienate me!

You can keep your Umbrella I'd rather get wet.

[Zooey]

Odd is splintering a constituency. I have yet to see a useful purpose come from that.


Extending the metaphor yes and no Zoe. Yes if you are researching a particular topic then having all the books together under the Dewy decimal system or similar can be helpful. BUT I actually find it far more fascinating going in to peoples libraries that aren't organised and just having a look at the shelf, and you will see all sorts of fascinating and interesting books and stories that you may never have found if you had just been perusing Dewy decimal section 306-307 in a library. AND believe me, having spent 5 + years in university libraries researching, sometimes the most important information actually comes from outside the section you expect to find it in.

Ugh, okay, I'm clearly failing to make my point here.

I value diversity in life. I AM an ally to all sorts of gender-variant or nonconforming people. I know many of them, and I think most of them are just great. Being an ally to each other does not mean we're all the same, and I think it's damaging when people try to assert that we are. I believe that, to the extent that we actually have a broader community/"constituency", we present a stronger vision of peace and tolerance by acknowledging, respecting, and embracing differences rather than trying to deny them.

[flatlander_48]

Z:

I NEVER said that we are all the same. We clearly are not. What I said was that society tends to lump us together. However, the point is that if it isn't safe for you, it is not safe for me. If it is not safe for me, it is not safe for you. People don't go around saying "Those transgender folks are OK, it's those damned transsexuals I hate.".

DeeAnn

[becky77]

I'm not opposed to the Umbrella idea, I just don't think everyone fits into it and our goals are different, therefore it creates more friction than good.
It tries to be too all encompassing.

Just going back to using female/male only facilities.
As a TS person I want the right to be treated as a woman and therefore use the female facilities.
A TG person perhaps Gender fluid, should be fighting for either Genderless toilets or a separate toilet.

There isn't enough recognition for all the inbetweeners, their day will come but they won't get the help they need while grouping together with TS people, similar fight but not the same.

Personally I haven't got an issue with mixed changing rooms, but some body conscious woman may have.
Toilets I have got an issue, women's toilets are far cleaner on average. It was hard to find a cubicle in the men's that didn't have urine splashed all over it.
It's lovely using toilets that men can't splash all over, I don't really want that to change sorry.
There are always exceptions but most of the time the ladies are a lot cleaner.

Contrary to how my posts probably sound I haven't got anything against CDers, I'm just fiercely defensive of my own identity.

Returning to the Umbrella, what are we all aiming for?
I want to be treated as a woman
Does a Crossdresser, truly want to be treated as a woman?
I would have thought the ideal for a MtF CD would be to have the freedom to dress as a woman or feminine, without their sexuality or masculinity questioned. To have the right and confidence to be different and not fit into a box.

One fights to break away from the binary, one fights to fit into the binary. That's such a huge difference that it makes a sliding scale pointless and a unified front impossible.

So what does the Umbrella achieve that hasn't already been challenged by TS people, what does a CDer gain by being included?

Cause like it or not TS are the figureheads as they are the most visible, yet what I read on the CD forum most don't want to be associated with being TS.

[pamela7]

As a late-awakener I've been placed, here on this forum in the past, in a whole category of "you're not a real TG/CD cos you didn't do it since you were 4". Thanks! However the fact is we all so stunningly different: 10 billion different humans, sharing a mostly common form with only one head (excepting conjoint ...). Humanity is diverse, we've established that the T world is as diverse as the whole rest of humanity, therefore, the only umbrella is "human" (we even take exception to that one sometimes).

Banging on that restroom door again tho, my daughter's uni went unisex in the union building, they have had rapes in there. Protecting the physically weaker sex is the reason to segregate restrooms in a violent/out-of-control society. Last night I got the tiniest taste of feeling violated, not going into it here, but it confirms to me really why separate is best until society evolves.

[Badtranny]

yet what I read on the CD forum most don't want to be associated with being TS.

Spot on.

They do not identify with us, yet they feel like their bathroom issue is our bathroom issue, except that they can change clothes. What they can't possibly understand is that this issue goes much deeper than presentation. After transition I was forbidden to use the ladies restrooms in my workplace. My presentation did not matter, nor did the 'F' on my driver's license.


Today I work at a rather large university with plenty of restrooms (including gender neutral) spread all over campus. There is one very busy restroom at our main office that should be a little bit bigger for the traffic but everyone is polite and cordial when the stalls are full and we start stacking up at the sink. I ran into one of the gals that was on my interview panel in there one day and we had a great quick conversation. It's kinda funny how it becomes a little meeting place for women that may only run into each other there, since their daily duties are on opposite sides of the building. As I said earlier, my passing game is complete now and though I'm a big gal these days (5'11" 200lbs) all of the work (surgery and otherwise) has paid off and I rarely get a second look anymore. My medical history is known by a few but they are scattered all over the university and as far as I know, they don't talk much about it. Have I finally come to a place where I can relax and begin my new life? Perhaps.

...but I wonder. What will happen when my history becomes common knowledge? My experience so far is that it always does. How will that change the dynamic in the crowded restroom? Will the other women treat me differently? Will any of them complain or say that I make them uncomfortable? Only time will tell, but this is what we live with. If you think passing is the holy grail that makes everything better then you're simply not living the life. Passing used to be the endgame for me, only now do I realize that it's just another step. This whole bathroom issue is simply a way for a certain political and religious segment of the population to claim the 'moral high ground' and I know for sure that people like me aren't the ones getting the stink eye. It's only the obvious 'girls' that arouse their ire. To that I say, I will fight for their right to poop in comfort BUT the CD's need to understand and acknowledge that theirs is fundamentally a different battle.

To those that would dismiss my comments due to my passing privilege I would say this; I only pass today because I made a commitment nearly 5 years ago. When I went fulltime in 2012 I was not exactly passing with flying colors. More like with rainbow colors, but I could sense the work was beginning to pay off. 3 years later I am finally 'invisible', but I've had too many procedures to remember and my body is scarred from various implants and several rounds of lipo sculpting. What you see today is the result of a laser like focus on a goal. I have been lucky but I have also been ruthlessly persistent. My bathroom privilege is possible for most TS women but it starts out from the same place every CD stands. The difference is we come out and do the work. We take the hate right out in the open every day and little by little all of our work starts to catch up with us. The HRT, the hair removal, the procedures, the dieting, etc etc. We make the commitment to change our lives and we are eventually rewarded with a grudging acknowledgement that we belong.

The women's restroom the last frontier of gender equality? Does the weekend CD hurt us or help us?

[Zooey]

I NEVER said that we are all the same. We clearly are not. What I said was that society tends to lump us together.

Let me try again to make my point...

I find myself worried/concerned about, and in some cases annoyed by, these fundamental differences in perspective when they are not acknowledged. A surefire way to perpetuate misunderstanding is to foster a culture where people are having (in some cases) radically different conversations while using exactly the same words. We have to acknowledge what we're actually talking about, which means understanding the context, which means - wait for it - embracing the fact that we have fundamental differences in perspective when crossing certain lines in this community and being honest about it.


However, the point is that if it isn't safe for you, it is not safe for me. If it is not safe for me, it is not safe for you. People don't go around saying "Those transgender folks are OK, it's those damned transsexuals I hate.".

To my point, I disagree with your premise here. My perspective on why I should be/am allowed to use the women's facilities has next to nothing to do with my (also strongly held) belief that e.g CDs should not be forced into the men's room. We are fighting for different things. As Becky said, I am not fighting for the right to choose a bathroom - I am fighting for being acknowledged as the woman I am, which happens to imply a bunch of things.

[Eryn]

As a late-awakener I've been placed, here on this forum in the past, in a whole category of "you're not a real TG/CD cos you didn't do it since you were 4".

I'm right there with you, late blooming Sister! Still, I don't feel like we should build a separate clubhouse because others "can't possible know what it's like to be exactly like us!"

A sense of general empathy along with a lack of hostility is all that should be required to get along.


Cause like it or not TS are the figureheads as they are the most visible, yet what I read on the CD forum most don't want to be associated with being TS.

Could you please post a link to a post where this is expressed? I don't recall a post there stating that CDers want to be disassociated from the TS end of the spectrum.

The only place in the overall community where I've see that attitude is in the old guard of CDing like the original Triess where the goal is "don't scare the wives." This is a very small (and getting smaller), part of the TG spectrum today.

[flatlander_48]

There isn't enough recognition for all the inbetweeners, their day will come but they won't get the help they need while grouping together with TS people, similar fight but not the same.

That sounds like what people might have said when they took T part out of the anti-discrimination legislation.


Toilets I have got an issue, women's toilets are far cleaner on average. It was hard to find a cubicle in the men's that didn't have urine splashed all over it.
It's lovely using toilets that men can't splash all over, I don't really want that to change sorry.
There are always exceptions but most of the time the ladies are a lot cleaner.

That's foreign to my experience and I'm a lot older than you. Besides, what you describe would be a maintenance issue and is not substantitive.


Contrary to how my posts probably sound I haven't got anything against CDers, I'm just fiercely defensive of my own identity.

And who said you should be something else?


One fights to break away from the binary, one fights to fit into the binary. That's such a huge difference that it makes a sliding scale pointless and a unified front impossible.

Then I guess all of the effort that we (the LGBT affinity group that I am a part of) put into getting our employer to support GENDA and add transgender health benefits was wasted effort because NONE of us will benefit from it is ANY way. Silly us.


So what does the Umbrella achieve that hasn't already been challenged by TS people, what does a CDer gain by being included?

And what are the results of that challenge?


Cause like it or not TS are the figureheads as they are the most visible, yet what I read on the CD forum most don't want to be associated with being TS.

Visible? How can that be when folks talk about distancing themselves from the community because they want to be seen as women and not transsexuals? Those 2 things are in direct opposition. Please explain how that can happen.


The difference is we come out and do the work.

I don't know. Have you ever outed yourself in front of 130 people?


Let me try again to make my point...

No, do you believe that society at large makes a distinction between crossdressers, transgender people and transexuals?

Further, WHY are we talking about bathrooms when about 2/3 of the US states have little or no legal protection for transgender people? I think all this angst is misplaced.

DeeAnn

[Badtranny]

I don't know. Have you ever outed yourself in front of 130 people?

I've outed myself to EVERYONE I know. There is no other way to transition. Everyone I worked with, everyone in my industry, everyone in my neighborhood. Those first couple of years of transition ain't exactly stealth honey.

[flatlander_48]

I meant 130 at once and 200+ in less than 3 weeks...

DeeAnn

[Zooey]

I meant 130 at once and 200+ in less than 3 weeks...

I came out to over 400 people, mostly from high school (in a rather transphobic part of Michigan) and college, with a single post on Facebook on Thursday. I came out to over 600 people in my office the same day. Does that count, or does it need to be on-stage? I "come out" every time I leave the house right now, because this. is. my. life.

Also..


No, do you believe that society at large makes a distinction between crossdressers, transgender people and transexuals?

Further, WHY are we talking about bathrooms when about 2/3 of the US states have little or no legal protection for transgender people? I think all this angst is misplaced.

I believe they should, and when we're discussing things where it matters, I believe we should too.

While I understand that others have turned this more specifically into a bathroom thread, I am merely using bathrooms as an example of an issue. We are all talking about safe access to appropriate restrooms, but we are coming at this from fundamentally different places, no matter how similar they may look to others. I think it's worth acknowledging that fact, because there is a big difference IMO between, for example, asking people to recognize transwomen as women, and asking people to support a bathroom free-for-all. Or, at least, there should be.

[flatlander_48]

I came out to over 400 people, mostly from high school (in a rather transphobic part of Michigan) and college, with a single post on Facebook on Thursday. I came out to over 600 people in my office the same day. Does that count, or does it need to be on-stage? I "come out" every time I leave the house right now, because this. is. my. life.

I made the statement because there are those here who say that no one other than transsexuals ever come out and that we hide behind being able to change our clothes. Note that similar rhetoric has always been leveled at bisexuals (and I'm one of those too). And for the 130, I was on stage, dressed. I did the Mistress of Ceremonies duties for our affinity group's annual event. I captured all of what I did in October in a thread on the main forum. I also came out during a monthly meeting held by our CTO which includes about 50 people (of which my division VP is one) and presented the transgender part of a training session for 20+ people. Beyond that, I've come out to my department manager, 7-8 close friends and my daughter and son. Anyway, this is just information so you know where I'm coming from.


I believe they should, and when we're discussing things where it matters, I believe we should too.

While I understand that others have turned this more specifically into a bathroom thread, I am merely using bathrooms as an example of an issue. We are all talking about safe access to appropriate restrooms, but we are coming at this from fundamentally different places, no matter how similar they may look to others. I think it's worth acknowledging that fact, because there is a big difference IMO between, for example, asking people to recognize transwomen as women, and asking people to support a bathroom free-for-all. Or, at least, there should be.

If I understand correctly, don't people have to essentially live as their proper gender before they get approval to embark on whatever transition process they are going to persue? I would assume that in order to live as their proper gender, they should begin to attempt to look like people of that gender during this period. There isn't anything to prevent them from being challenged by women in the women's restroom. Presumably they would have cogent documentation from their physician or mental health professional, but that won't keep them from getting challenged. That would seem to be humiliating to me. Using the men's restroom would not seem to be a good alternative. The only tangible difference between me and the person I described would be that documentation, but, we both could be challenged. Is this correct?

DeeAnn

[Badtranny]

I made the statement because there are those here who say that no one other than transsexuals ever come out and that we hide behind being able to change our clothes.

I am not one of those. However I think you can agree that the overwhelming majority of CD's are completely closeted. A good many may be out to a select group but self identified CD's are generally not day walkers.

Your courage is inspiring and if every CD was like you, the world would be a very different place indeed.

[flatlander_48]

M:

The whole thing about that script being directed at bisexuals just rubs me the wrong way. When I've seen that on the forum here it just touches a nerve. Words may not kill, but they can damn sure hurt.

Yes, granted there are folks who could come out, but don't. Then again, there are those for whom dressing is a singular and personal pursuit. They have no desire to leave the confines of their home. They just have a different world view of things.

One point: I am a transgender person. I had a bare minimum of the usual shame, guilt and remorse. I have never thought about purging. I like being dressed and looking good, but I also like putting together outfits. I don't particularly try to blend because that isn't my style. I don't have a distinct female persona. Don is DeeAnn and DeeAnn is Don. Basically I like where I am and I have no plans to transition. The degree of dysphoria that I have doesn't warrant it.

What I did was for Me. While it may be a useful thing for others, I did it to unburden Me.

DeeAnn

[Zooey]

One point: I am a transgender person.

Is the word "transgender" as used here intended to differentiate yourself from the "just CDs" folks? I'm asking for a very specific reason, not trying to be rude at all.

[flatlander_48]

Yes, that is it. I am somewhere in the gray area between. I am not completely male identified. I would define it as mostly. As I've said elsewhere, over the course of several years, the time that I've spent feeling shame, guilt and remorse could be summed as single-digit hours. Save for what I've read on this site, the concept of purging would be unknown to me.

My sensibilities have always been some combination of male and female for as long as I have known. I am pretty comfortable when I present as female. My nervous reactions are largely internal, but once I leave home, I am usually quite calm. While I'm always a bit sad when it comes time to get undressed, remove makeup, etc. because I like how I look, wearing male clothes is not a burden and has never felt so.

Back during the summer, I posted a photo that was taken during a GNO evening. I thought I looked quite nice in the photo and that was the extent of it for me. However, someone said that I looked happy in the photo and that surprised me as I had not thought about that before. As I studied the photo more, I began to see what they saw. I took that as a reflection of doing what I was supposed to be doing and being where I was supposed to be.

Further, when I dress, I don't try to act female. If I slow down a bit and become more deliberate, I seem to fall into a different space. There is no fetishistic component that I can see. I am not angling for guys while dressed. I've had men before I dressed and thoroughly enjoyed the experiences, but in current times there seems to be no linkage with dressing. In isolation, any one item might just be natural variance and perhaps consistent with crossdressers. However, taken in aggregate the suggestion is that there is something different going on for me compared to many other people who crossdress. But, I am not in the wrong body and I don't dread the time that I spend as Don. The degree of misalignment that I have is not enough to force any particular action beyond what I do now. I don't know if that will change in the future, but for now it seems pretty constant.

I know that this was the long answer, but it's pretty much the whole ball of wax...

DeeAnn

[LeaP]

I'm pretty sure I'm older than both flatlander_48 and Zooey. Age being a spectrum and all, and as I have yet to reach a point of cognitive decline, everyone instantly knows (or should) that I'm wiser, and have more and better perspective. I.e., I'm more credible. I once came out to 1.2 million people, but as I'm at the bitter end of the middle age range (we'll leave that spectrum alone for now), as a woman I was completely invisible ... so no-one noticed. I'm no sure how that impacts my street cred. I'm pretty sure I'm entitled to go breast-to-breast with all y'all, though ... excepting Misty, who is known to have large implants.

[PretzelGirl]

Just a note. I thought we put definitions as a sticky to define some of the discussion.

Transgender - An umbrella term used to describe individuals who do not conform to societies constructs based upon their assigned gender from birth. Individuals can self identify as Transvestite (or Crossdresser), Gender Queer, Gender Non Conforming, Transsexual amongst other descriptions.

So if we put our discussion in this terms, it should help the clarity of each person's references.

[Rogina B]

So if we put our discussion in this terms, it should help the clarity of each person's references.

And this is why Transgender rights need to be supported by all....No matter how they self identify. Just like gay people[which some of us are as well] we are not the "norm" of society. When a "queer"[not the norm] person is willing to accept that "they are different and will be viewed by some as different" then that is when their life changes for the better. Got to be comfortable in your own thick skin as you row your own boat in life.

[Nigella]

[QUOTE=Sue;3844717]Just a note. I thought we put definitions as a sticky to define some of the discussion.

The definintions were placed to aid when a specific posting request was made i.e. for Transexuals to respond only or for those living full time to respond only etc.

[Zooey]

Yes, that is it. I am somewhere in the gray area between. I am not completely male identified. I would define it as mostly. As I've said elsewhere, over the course of several years, the time that I've spent feeling shame, guilt and remorse could be summed as single-digit hours. Save for what I've read on this site, the concept of purging would be unknown to me.

Okay, ignoring the fact that shame/guilt/remorse are found in TS folks' lives too, I understand.

Follow-up question? Do you believe, because of the differences you highlighted between you and some other CDs, most particularly that you are not entirely male identified, that you should have access to the women's restroom when perhaps some of them should not? You mentioned (presumably) male-identified fetishistic CDs - should they be allowed freely into women's restrooms?

Just to be clear, I'm trying to dig into your perspective here. The bathroom issue is just the case I'm using to do it.


I'm pretty sure I'm entitled to go breast-to-breast with all y'all, though ... excepting Misty, who is known to have large implants.

So, so true.

[Badtranny]

... excepting Misty, who is known to have large implants.

Too large frankly. I'm seriously considering going smaller on my next trip to the Mexico.

[flatlander_48]

I'm pretty sure I'm older than both flatlander_48 and Zooey. Age being a spectrum and all, and as I have yet to reach a point of cognitive decline, everyone instantly knows (or should) that I'm wiser, and have more and better perspective. I.e., I'm more credible. I once came out to 1.2 million people, but as I'm at the bitter end of the middle age range (we'll leave that spectrum alone for now), as a woman I was completely invisible ... so no-one noticed. I'm no sure how that impacts my street cred. I'm pretty sure I'm entitled to go breast-to-breast with all y'all, though ... excepting Misty, who is known to have large implants.

Don't know. I'll be 67 in about 3 weeks. Also, I am DeeAnn and it almost always appears at the bottom of my messages. flatlander_48 is an E-mail address and username that is in place across LGBT, crossdressing, kink, cycling and motorsports forums and retail sites. I've never hidden myself by using different usernames. It is the same virtually everywhere with the exception of sites that don't recognize the "_".


Just a note. I thought we put definitions as a sticky to define some of the discussion.

Transgender - An umbrella term used to describe individuals who do not conform to societies constructs based upon their assigned gender from birth. Individuals can self identify as Transvestite (or Crossdresser), Gender Queer, Gender Non Conforming, Transsexual amongst other descriptions.

So if we put our discussion in this terms, it should help the clarity of each person's references.

With the possible exception of Gender Queer, these speak more to what we see externally. I was speaking about my personal thoughts, actions and feelings. Technically oriented definitions don't always include this kind of information.

However, I like the one from the WPATH better due to the part that I have highlighted:

Transgender: Adjective to describe a diverse group of individuals who cross or transcend culturally defined categories of gender. The gender identity of transgender people differs to varying degrees from the sex they were assigned at birth.


Follow-up question? Do you believe, because of the differences you highlighted between you and some other CDs, most particularly that you are not entirely male identified, that you should have access to the women's restroom when perhaps some of them should not? You mentioned (presumably) male-identified fetishistic CDs - should they be allowed freely into women's restrooms?

Just to be clear, I'm trying to dig into your perspective here. The bathroom issue is just the case I'm using to do it.

Not to disparage anyone, but I'm sure that we have all seen genetic women who look tougher than a lot of guys. This is just the reality. Conversely, we've also seen guys (not dressed) that might have more in common with women than men. This variance makes it hard to draw a line. I'd be inclined to say that if guys behave themselves and adhere to the unwritten rules, use the restroom consistent with their presentation.

But, it would seem that folks on HRT and living in their desired gender while awaiting their approvals would seem to fall into the same conundrum. As I've said, people will challenge first and ask questions later. Don't think that would make folks feel very good.

For me, I don't think I pass within 5'-6'; further, possibly. However, I do try to be as unobtrusive as possible when using the restroom.

DeeAnn

[Gerrijerry]

How nice that every one wants to tell what is the correct bathroom to use. Frankly I am shocked, Hey every one look around. I Think this is a room for TS most of the girls have had or are going to have surgery. That means you go to a counselor and talk about life and your future life. Hopefully you all have or are doing that. Any good counselor will tell you, dress as a woman 24 - 7, live as a woman because you are one. Before and of course after surgery. Going to the ladies room is not really a big deal. Although I hate the wait on lines at times.
However I must say, the public does not always see things the same way we do.

[LeaP]

Don't know. I'll be 67 in about 3 weeks.

Surely you didn't miss the point?



Transgender: Adjective to describe a diverse group of individuals who cross or transcend culturally defined categories of gender. The gender identity of transgender people differs to varying degrees from the sex they were assigned at birth.

Yes - from zero.

[Zooey]

Not to disparage anyone, but I'm sure that we have all seen genetic women who look tougher than a lot of guys. This is just the reality. Conversely, we've also seen guys (not dressed) that might have more in common with women than men. This variance makes it hard to draw a line. I'd be inclined to say that if guys behave themselves and adhere to the unwritten rules, use the restroom consistent with their presentation.

I agree that it's nigh impossible to enforce such differences, but that wasn't my question. My question is: From your perspective, are "man"-identifying people who occasionally present as women, perhaps especially those who do so fetishistically, entitled to access women's spaces? As somebody who is neither strictly woman-identified nor strictly man-identified, are you entitled to access both spaces?


But, it would seem that folks on HRT and living in their desired gender while awaiting their approvals would seem to fall into the same conundrum. As I've said, people will challenge first and ask questions later. Don't think that would make folks feel very good.

Yes, that period is difficult - trust me, I'm well aware. There's an ocean of difference between somebody rewriting their life with estradiol and somebody "dressing" though. In many US states, hopefully with more on the way, undergoing HRT is sufficient to get state-recognized gender change and ID approvals. It is also sufficient for most important federal documents (social security, passport, etc.).


For me, I don't think I pass within 5'-6'; further, possibly. However, I do try to be as unobtrusive as possible when using the restroom.

Why are you talking about passing? Passing is about visibility/invisibility and therefore difficulty of enforcement. Again, I agree that enforcement is nigh impossible, but my question is about identity and the right to access certain spaces, not good looks and the ability to get away with it.

[becky77]

Why are you talking about passing? Passing is about visibility/invisibility and therefore difficulty of enforcement. Again, I agree that enforcement is nigh impossible, but my question is about identity and the right to access certain spaces, not good looks and the ability to get away with it.

You're wasting your breath Melissa, no one wants to think about the ethics of that statement, they will think you are being elitist or invalidating somehow.

Going to use MtF example below:
A Crossdresser is not a woman, they just want to look like one sometimes. If they are not a woman should they have a right to female areas? Try thinking of that answer from a woman's perspective rather than from a Crossdressers needs.

A TS is a woman, therefore not a Crossdresser and they have to use female areas.

A TG is somewhere inbetween and unfortunately probably doesn't fit in either area, that's the conundrum.

All three have different needs that being lumped together doesn't address.

In an ideal world the crossdresser can use the male toilet without being misunderstood or threatened.
The TS can use the female toilet and not be viewed as anything other than a woman.
The TG gets their own toilet and never have to doubt where they belong.

It's not an ideal world, I have no idea what the solution is I just know that we need to stop kidding ourselves that we are all after the same thing, we are not.
The only thing we all want is the safety to be ourselves.

I think being TG is tough and their biggest fight will be to show the world there is more than just two Genders, to push for equality as a middle gender in its own right.
I can't be a part of that because it doesn't represent me, if I'm pulled into that category I lose any chance of a life where I am accepted as a woman.

I believe in a world without discrimination therefore in my umbrella is everyone ever considered a minority, that includes disabled or disfigured or whatever it is that has them stand out as different.
It goes without saying we should all stand together for protection rights, but after that it becomes a mess as there is no common ground to which we can agree on.

How many posts were there regarding Caitlyn that no one could agree on? It's generally noted that she provides greater visibility and speaks out about discrimination and safety of Trans folk, but beyond that I saw a lot of distancing from the rest of her message.

[pamela7]

I am trying to express what is; society is a collective of minorities; a minority rich elite protects itself (self-evidently), a minority LGBT protects itself by gathering together. Unions gather workers together to protect the rights of the weak. Educational and ability special needs gather together to protect the learning rights and support. Ethnic minorities mostly gather in what often becomes ghettoes (as opposed to mixing aming the indiginous).

Having lived as a foreigner in France, I chose to integrate rather than join up with the expats, and as a result I was accepted into their society, I became a French person in their eyes. I've been the only caucasian in a south london sports team, and treated as if i were one of the brothers, despite inherent strong racism they had against "white" teams we played. I find the same thing works to break down the barriers with any demographic. The answer is no separation, we are just all different human beings, and the only laws need to be against intolerance, against discrimination and harm-causing (oh and to set taxes).

We like labels because it helps us to build a "persona" to live/adapt to our wider society, even if its in the margins. However, we don't need to use the labels to create differences. We're all going to have different perspectives.

Right now we do live in a violent and hateful society where intolerance seems to be bred intentionally. So ladies visit the restroom in pairs, as a rule; so should we therefore, regardless of the gender sign on the door. In the UK, from a cleanliness perspective there's no argument, the ladies is almost always a lot cleaner and safer for clothing. From consideration of the fears of the prey animal - that would be the ladies - they should go where it is safest, and feel safe there. As to the males dressing as females, including myself before i have an orchie, use the mens restroom. Aside from that, we should do everything we can to bring awareness, as Caitlyn does regardless of motive, because that drops the barriers more than anything. Hiding in closets - quite funny really given the topic - helps no-one.

[LeaP]

However, I like the one from the WPATH better due to the part that I have highlighted:

Transgender: Adjective to describe a diverse group of individuals who cross or transcend culturally defined categories of gender. The gender identity of transgender people differs to varying degrees from the sex they were assigned at birth.



I meant to mention earlier that WPATH distinguishes among "transsexual, transgender, and gender non-conforming" people. It is so careful of this that this phrase is used nearly 50 times in the SOC (V7). Reading for intent is probably more important than the specific terms - especially with "transgender" - as it's overloaded with so many meanings in practice. Also, as interesting as WPATH's view may be, it should be understood in the context of medicalization only, even though WPATH does not view any of these as "inherently disordered" (their phrase also).

[Mayo]

The OP asks "What is the definition of a woman, and similarly for a man", and who is allowed in which (sex-segregated) bathroom (or other facility)?

If we reject the traditional physical parameters (external genitalia and chromosomes, which are not 100% determinative), and in the absence of any definitive psychological or neurological test for 'maleness' or 'femaleness' that can be placed on an ID card for washroom access, we are in essence asking the rest of the world to take us at our word when we say our gender identity is one or the other (or both, or neither).

If I were thinking purely selfishly, I'd say to use the facility for the gender with which you identify. However, there are other concerns, related mainly to social conventions and the comfort level of other users.

One concern is simply that men and women should not mix. North America in particular has a lot of hang-ups about sex, and as a result has segregated facilities, whereas at least in certain parts of Europe and other countries this is not an issue. As has been noted elsewhere in this thread, the US apparently didn't have any laws requiring sex-segregated washrooms until at least the late 1800s.

Another concern is the fear that men may force themselves on women (of course the reverse is never considered, nor is the thought that gay men or women may assault others in same-gendered facilities). I frankly think this is a consequence of the above-mentioned North American hang-ups about sex and if our society put less emphasis on it then we'd have fewer problems about it. Not to mention toxic masculinity.

To me, gender-neutral washrooms and facilities are the answer. Unfortunately, our current rules have been in place for over a hundred years and it will probably take that long to reverse the change.


There are an enormous number of ways for creepy, pervy guys to prey on women that are way simpler to accomplish than dressing up and entering a women's room [...] if you want to protect vulnerable people in restrooms, disallow straight, middle-aged men from accessing public restrooms

PaulaQ has the right of it. Parenthetically, I'll note that the predator shown in one of the TV ads used to whip up anti-trans sentiment against Houston's HERO legislation was apparently a cis man.


The most practical solution, other than unisex restrooms, is to simply observe that people should use the restroom they are more comfortable with, based on their gender identity and gender presentation.

CDs basically have the problems of trans women early in transition. That's why we care which bathrooms CDs are allowed to use.

In a society where binary genders still maintain primacy, I think that people who are presenting as women should use the ladies' washroom (thus I include both MTF TS and dressed CDs). However, in our current reality and for all practical purposes, where single-person non-gendered washrooms are not available then it simply boils down to a) how well you 'pass', b) how much hassle you think you'll get for using one facility or another and c) what the local laws say.

[LeaP]

(Mayo - please do not take my use of "you" in this response as directed toward you personally. Rather, your post was the trigger for my own, and I've picked up some of your themes for continuity. That's a contextual pun, believe it or not ...)

A problem with the "presenting as" approach is that it relies on stereotypes. It solves nothing and only shifts the focus of the definition.

I want to return to something Zooey said in an earlier reply, which was that (paraphrased) she's tolerant, values diversity, and is an ally, I assume of many. But, as I take her response, for appropriate solutions based on different needs that stem from material differences (material to the issue at hand, that is).

That's eminently reasonable, and I resent the attempts at trying to cast this as division, whether the perspective is community-focused, political, or something else. People may legitimately differ in their opinions on issues and solutions. I also don't feel the need to defend or attack Western or North American culture culture on such a narrow point and that, too, is an area where there is legitimate disagreement. That's boiling the ocean to get some poached fish.

The REAL point is simply that we differ. The spectrum itself mentioned in the OP was only a device to illustrate that (the OP describes this in terms of things like discontinuities). Conceptual devices like spectra are tools used to understand discrete characteristics in isolation. Continuity in a spectrum is simply a scale! Try convincing a physician that two otherwise average women - one 400 pounds with raging metabolic syndrome and a failing heart, the other a 70 pound bulemic - have the same problem, despite both existing on, say, the weight spectrum, because they're on the weight spectrum. If you're actually foolish enough to try, or even better, insist - you'll get the door. Doubtless, some reading this are thinking of all kinds of ways to rationalize keeping these women in a single category. Psychological problems ... eating disorders ... heck, maybe even "women's problems" ... all of which require references outside of the weight spectrum (i.e., making it useless as a defining element).

How about "weight management"? First, that's not the same scale! But let's go there anyway. The weight management scale runs from no weight management regimen at the low end, to a highly-regimented set of weight management controls at the other. Measurement details are irrelevant here. Let's stipulate that both are high on the scale! But wait, you say, that's not right - it doesn't account for the difference. To which I say "correct." Go ahead and stipulate that one is high and one low on the scale. Hmmm - that doesn't necessarily explain the difference either. You can spend the rest of your life trying to unite these two into a single "thing," but all you're probably going to accomplish is killing one or both of them. Even though you might be disinclined to draw the differences, something - or someone - else will force it. That could be culture or politics, but can be as simple as resources and priorities, perhaps impact scale (why not have another!), too. Maybe someone will indict immigration as the real problem. After all, the stats get much better if you get rid of such-and-such or encourage these folks over there ... Or how about everyone's favorite - it's the media depiction of women! Solve that, and the weight problems disappear! Why, you don't even need a scale for that! Just like culture and sex hangups!

Let's go back to the restroom. (Whoops - we can't both go there! Gonna have to meet right here!) I'm telling you, we don't have the same problem! That one suggested solution is based in part on superficial aspects of physical similarity and stereotypes doesn't make it so. Further, that the unified solutions suggested are all worse than my (at least) original problem. Finally, my ability and willingness to help you solve your problem has been all but obliterated. That's not going to change as long your insistence on commonality, single solutions, and overreach represents a threat (broadly construed).

[Kaitlyn Michele]

Love the weight loss spectrum analogy Lea
my daughter suffered anorexia
...its horrible beyond anything i could have thought... she almost died...
but now she is faced with a world where the nannies that run our lives demand calories counts on every single food item at every restaraunt....its torture....

just think about that for a second.... you'd think that the health police would care about my anorexic daughter...but in a rush to a one size fits all "rule"...my daughter faces a lifetime of anxiety when eating outside of the house...she does not need to know how many calories are in a peiwei chicken wrap...(lots more than you would think)...

===========
as long as our tg umbrella nannystate leaders demand one size fits all for everything, the transitioners get screwed...
and transitioners self interest is just as valid to us as a cd's is to him... our interests are NOT fully aligned...

its hard enough time convincing people that we are women, but with 10 men saying "we want the same as ts women" it's much harder...

+++++++++++++++++++

I understand we all have different angles but the Bottom Line of this thread is that it seems to me that the nature of this conversation is this

... men telling ts women what they should think for the betterment of those men...all in the guise of teamwork and peace love and tg umbrella happiness...

and fwiw...i'm for intersex bathrooms...gendered locker rooms....that has my vote...
i'd vote for an inclusive tg umbrella bill but i wouldn't argue it with anybody.... i can't see how to convince somebody to give a crap about a guy wanting to use the ladies room for any reason....and i don't want to get into a whole debate about what a tg umbrella is...

[Kate T]

....One fights to break away from the binary, one fights to fit into the binary. That's such a huge difference that it makes a sliding scale pointless and a unified front impossible....


Not quite Becky. We can show a unified front of respect, tolerance, and most importantly empathy. I respect and understand your fierce defensiveness of your identity, just beware that your defensiveness does not build walls that separate people rather than bridges that bring people together. Every piece of the puzzle is important and vital in it's own right but is incomplete without being a part of the bigger picture of the whole puzzle.

Zoey, I suspect we are arguing for the same thing from different approaches. There are many ways to skin a cat and many pathways to a destination, remember that yours, or mine, are not the only ones.

[Contessa]

When I am out and need to use the restroom I will unmistakinly use the ladies room. I would never stand at the toilet unless at home and feverishly in a hurry. Always sit and you won't forget. Don't talk unless you are sure of your voice and by all means smile as much as possible. I will talk if asked anything but have never been. When beginning using the ladies room find a stall with the door open and make a b line for it. Say Hi if met by some women's eyes that is smiling. Don't do things that single you out. If you look enough like a women i would think you would make it through without harm dignithy intact. CD or TS.

[flatlander_48]

My question is: From your perspective, are "man"-identifying people who occasionally present as women, perhaps especially those who do so fetishistically, entitled to access women's spaces? As somebody who is neither strictly woman-identified nor strictly man-identified, are you entitled to access both spaces?

I don't think you will find many of the former out in public so it is sort of a moot point. From my admittedly limited knowledge, it seems that people who are into some sort of fetishism tend to do so in private. As for me, my answer is yes, although I would have thought my opinion was clear at the end of the quoted passage.


Yes, that period is difficult - trust me, I'm well aware. There's an ocean of difference between somebody rewriting their life with estradiol and somebody "dressing" though. In many US states, hopefully with more on the way, undergoing HRT is sufficient to get state-recognized gender change and ID approvals. It is also sufficient for most important federal documents (social security, passport, etc.).

From what I've seen here, it appears that changing documentation is nearer the end of the trail rather than earlier.


Why are you talking about passing? Passing is about visibility/invisibility and therefore difficulty of enforcement. Again, I agree that enforcement is nigh impossible, but my question is about identity and the right to access certain spaces, not good looks and the ability to get away with it.

The rest of the thought, which was unwritten, was that my chances of being challenged were probably not substanitally different from someone in the early stages before transition. However, having paperwork will NOT keep you from getting challenged; particularly in view of incidents where genetic women have been challenged. I don't believe there is an "ocean of difference".


A TS is a woman, therefore not a Crossdresser and they have to use female areas.

As has been pointed out, sex-assigned restrooms came into being just before the previous century, that would mean that the statutes were intended for genetic women. The logic is that same as applied to "the original framers of the Constitution", in other words, what people knew/thought at the time. Lili Elbe became the first transsexual and that was somewhere around 1930 as I remember. Anyway, it would seem that there is logic that might contradict your statement.


In an ideal world the crossdresser can use the male toilet without being misunderstood or threatened.

EVERYWHERE will have single-use restrooms before that happens.


I think being TG is tough and their biggest fight will be to show the world there is more than just two Genders, to push for equality as a middle gender in its own right.
I can't be a part of that because it doesn't represent me, if I'm pulled into that category I lose any chance of a life where I am accepted as a woman.

I don't see how anything would change for you. The parallel for me is this: All during the Civil Rights Movement there were a number of people of the Jewish faith who were involved. I can't speak exactly to the reasons for their involvement, but I would assume that it related to things like understanding the nature of shared struggle, oppression and the personal toll that it takes. Their identities as Jews did not change as a function of their involvement.

Further, I've mentioned this elsewhere, but I will repeat it. Regarding "doesn't represent me", I could say EXACTLY that same thing. Our LGBT affinity group kept after our company for years to include transgender-related health issues in the medical coverage policy. But, NONE of the current members will ever use it. Having transgender health benefits doesn't represent us either. So, why did we do that? By your statement, we should feel foolish because we did. Same thing for GENDA. We've gotten some of the upper management to write lettrs of support to our state representatives. Again, NONE of us would benefit from GENDA if NYS passd it; not even me.


Also, as interesting as WPATH's view may be, it should be understood in the context of medicalization only

Yes, and that's why I included how it felt to me personally. It represented the part that gets screened out with a technically oriented definition.


By The Way:
http://www.outandequal.org/resources/university/town-calls/

November 19 — Transgender Topics: TDOR and New Transition Guidelines
Thursday, November 19 12:00 – 1:00pm Pacific Time
1 pm Mountain | 2 pm Central | 3 pm Eastern

Each year in November, the community comes together to remember those who are transgender or gender non-conforming who have been killed over the past year. The Transgender Day of Remembrance web site has over 45 names listed so far this year. The TDOR began in 1998 and this year we have seen increasing violence against trans women of color in the United States. We will begin the call by remembering and hearing what we can do to make a difference. We will continue the call with tangible steps you can take back to your workplace with a review by the Transgender Advisory Committee members of the newly published Out & Equal Workplace Gender Identity & Transition Guidelines.

Presenters are:
Daniel Lawrence Smith – Moderator
Lori Fox, President and Founder of Lori Fox Diversity/Business Consulting -Out & Equal Board Member Deborah Drew, Chair Transgender Advisory Committee Jenna Cook, TAC Member and Primary Guideline Author

DeeAnn

[Zooey]

Just FYI, some of the things you attributed to me in quote tags actually weren't from my posts.


From what I've seen here, it appears that changing documentation is nearer the end of the trail rather than earlier.

I think that, again, depends pretty heavily on perspective. I just changed my documentation at approximately 1 year of "full-time-except-for-work", including 7.5 months of HRT. I've got 1-2 years before possible GRS, and then - y'know - the rest of my life. I don't think my timeline is terribly uncommon, so I'd say that from the perspective of somebody actively pursuing transition, documentation changes can and do happen relatively close to the beginning of the "trail". Not always, but it happens.

[Marcelle]

As to the males dressing as females, including myself before i have an orchie, use the mens restroom.

Hi Pam,

Curious statement. Are you saying that unless you have had some form of surgery to "make you safe" you should not use the ladies restroom if you are trans? I identify as a woman, live as a woman but due to personal choices (at present) I will not seek out any form of surgical intervention. So am I to begin using the men's room again? Why would I when I am a woman. I believe you are missing the point of gender identity. Genetic sex is one thing (I will always be genetic male sort of some scientific advancement where DNA can be overwritten) however my gender identity is female. I pose no threat to any woman in the ladies restroom irrespective of my genetics and I am not just dressing up as a woman. So I think your assumption of "fixing" things is a bit off mark when in comes to the concept of trans women using the ladies restroom.

Marcelle

[flatlander_48]

I think that, again, depends pretty heavily on perspective. I just changed my documentation at approximately 1 year of "full-time-except-for-work", including 7.5 months of HRT. I've got 1-2 years before possible GRS, and then - y'know - the rest of my life. I don't think my timeline is terribly uncommon, so I'd say that from the perspective of somebody actively pursuing transition, documentation changes can and do happen relatively close to the beginning of the "trail". Not always, but it happens.

What I said was purely anecdotal. I've not seen any actual data. It's just my impression from what I've read here.

DeeAnn

[LeaP]

You know, the whole thing about building code regulation of restrooms strikes me as comical. But probably not for the reason you suspect. It's another example of the misuse of something out of context to make a point. Thing is, indoor plumbing at that time was still novel. For that matter, building codes were in their infancy. Oh, they have existed in various ways for thousands of years, but not in the detailed, prescriptive and proscriptive ways that modern codes are structured. And do we really need something like building codes taken out of context when we know for a fact that various kinds of gendered spaces have always existed?

As most likely know, outdoor facilities lingered well into the 20th century. I had one aunt and uncle who had an outhouse into the 1960s. Unless single use, gendered outhouses were common! The alternative was a private use of a chamberpot.

As for public facilities, men have often had easy access to some sort of solution. In some places and at some points in time, that's included things like public and open peeing places or even the freedom to just go wherever and whenever you wanted. If you were a woman, you were SOL. That is, unless you were poor, in which case nobody gave a crap anyway. Because the highest priority social distinction was wealth and position, not sex. In some places in the world, open defecation is common (and a health problem). Going in public in the various ways that have occurred throughout history, however, doesn't carry the same kind of implications that closed and secluded spaces do.

[becky77]

Deeann I left school without and qualification in English, thank you for picking apart my words for point scoring.
I said bathroom but any female area is applicable.

I do try hard to highlight our differences, hopefully that way someone like the younger me may find answers to their crippling GD, rather than be confused by the rhetoric of us all being the same with same goals.
That's not helpful to a potentially suicidal TS person in search of answers.

I'm in no way distancing myself from a unified front for the right to be safe to be who we are.
But I am distancing myself from Men trying to have rights to womens areas because of an item of clothing.

I can't claim to be a soldier and enter a military base, just because I put on an army uniform.

One key doesn't fit all locks.

[pamela7]

@Marcel,
I appreciate you are no threat, I appreciate we are mostly no threat, and I appreciate the concerns of all parties, knowing there is no solution that meets everyone's needs given likely considerations of planners. In a private home we have no gender controls on the bathroom. It is only my opinion that out of concern for the primary GG users in a mixed environment I would default to using the mens' room. I'm not saying what anyone else should do, but I am outlining a reason for considering being the nobler and tougher party by protecting the concerns of others first. I'm lucky to be a "big guy" (in the eyes of others) but I've never been a fighter so I'm not exactly going to be great at self-defense; when I was young my policy was to be the fastest to run away, and a fight was a cornered last resort of self-defense. I also appreciate you know the dangers all too well. It's a judgement call. Maybe one day i'll change my mind and use the ladies room.

@Becky - yes, i like the army uniform metaphor.

[Eryn]

Umm, many people enter military bases in civilian clothes every day! No uniform required.

A more applicable metaphor is "If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it should use the facilities intended for ducks!"

To do otherwise creates confusion and conflict.

[Judith96a]

I find the bathroom/changing room debate to be tricky.

If I walk into a female changing room and so does a male identified crossdresser, visibly how can you tell the difference?
But if the crossdresser removes their clothes they are a man, they think like a man. Therefore there is a man in the woman's changing room. If you think of it like that it's unfair.

I think some crossdressers are so wrapped up in the experience, they are not being respectful of the boundary they just crossed.

If you are a man that likes wearing women's clothes, you are still a man. Maybe you shouldn't be going into a woman's area.

I know that will annoy people but it's the cold hard truth. It's not a game it's people's lives and feelings.

It's this disregard for boundaries that makes genuine TS woman suffer possible discrimination.

Speaking as a CDer who identifies as 'male', can I say that that's not quite the full story. I've neither the need nor the desire to enter a 'woman only' changing room. However, I may need to enter a lavatory in order to answer the proverbial call of nature. Depending on the context the "inhabitants" of the "gents" may pose a greater danger to me than I pose to the comfort of the "inhabitants" of the "ladies"! This is especially true if alcohol is involved. So what should I do? Pee my pants? Wear a nappy? Use the 'disabled' loo? Or use the "ladies" as unobtrusively as I can?

[Mayo]

Let's go back to the restroom. (Whoops - we can't both go there! Gonna have to meet right here!) I'm telling you, we don't have the same problem! That one suggested solution is based in part on superficial aspects of physical similarity and stereotypes doesn't make it so. Further, that the unified solutions suggested are all worse than my (at least) original problem. Finally, my ability and willingness to help you solve your problem has been all but obliterated. That's not going to change as long your insistence on commonality, single solutions, and overreach represents a threat (broadly construed).

LeaP - I'm not completely sure I'm understanding your point, but I think you're saying that 'one size' does not 'fit all'. You've said that different groups under the TG umbrella face different problems, and that a blanket solution is inappropriate because someone is going to lose out. You distinguish between TS and CD, and state:


TS - Problem: Access to women's restrooms. Pre-op and/or pre-documentation change, a practical problem, a legal minefield, and rights no-woman's-land. Post-Op with documentation updated, this reduces to practicalities and passability (at least until someone passes a "birth sex" bill somewhere).

CD - Problem: Safety in the men's room. End of story.

I think we can all take it for granted that trans women should have access to women's washrooms, and that trans men should be able to tinkle in the gents'. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm getting the impression you're implying that CDs' concerns are somehow muddying the waters of TS bathroom rights. Leaving that aside for the moment, though, there are two physical accommodations that could be made to ease the problems faced by TS (or CD) folks:


1) Single-person genderless bathrooms,

2) Gender-nonspecific facilities.

The former are not always an option because of building codes and space concerns, etc, but should be adopted where possible. Large gender-nonspecific facilities are not going to happen in North America any time soon. This, as I see it, leaves only a couple of possibilities:


1) Permit access based on 'passing privilege',

2) Permit access based on self-identified gender,

3) Permit access based on official documentation of gender.

As you've noted, these all have their own problems. First, they all run up against the problem of failing to 'pass'. Additionally, the documentation option imposes additional burdens - it requires that you carry your papers with you, obtaining them is a lengthy process that may not be available to all (for reasons of cost, social marginalization or the actions of gatekeepers), and/or the documents may not match one's presentation at any given moment. All three options, ultimately, discriminate against non-passing trans people (because those who pass aren't challenged in the first place) and carry other burdens including a significant risk of violence, primarily (but not exclusively) in men's washrooms.

Now, the main respect in which CDs differ from TS women is that, while they present as female, they don't identify as such. They still face violence and harassment if they fail to 'pass'. If we reject the transphobic claim that male sexual predators might put on dresses to assault women in the ladies room, then it doesn't matter if the 'men' in question are CDs or are actually trans women - either should be able to use the ladies' facilities if only to avoid violence in the mens'. This gives a fourth option:


4) Permit access based on gender presentation (regardless of gender identification).

Any option will produce discomfort for some. Any GG woman who objects to the presence of a TS woman in the washroom probably isn't going to be much more put out by a CD. A CD or TS who passes isn't going to cause any problem at all. I think about the only argument one could make to exclude CDs is that most of them are 'more obviously' male, which again boils down to marginalizing those people (CDs and TS) who don't have 'passing privilege'. Saying that one person who is wearing women's clothing identifies as female while another doesn't is an argument that can be just as easily turned on its head and used against TS women, as has been done by the TERFs - why should internal identification matter if the bits (or even the DNA) indicate that someone is male and is 'invading womens spaces'?

Given that men tend to be more violent than women, and that men are responsible for more sexualized violence, and that toxic masculinity (and the policing of heterosexuality) is arguably behind a lot of homophobic and transphobic violence, option #4 seems to me to be the one that ensures the safety of the largest number of people - GG and TS women and CDs - in our current society. From a 'safety' perspective, I am in essence making the not-unreasonable assumption that the number of TS and/or CDs who will assault women in women's washrooms is substantially less than the number who will be assaulted in men's washrooms. My concern vis-a-vis CDs here is, then, to reduce the potential for violence against a minority that is stigmatized based on their gender presentation (I confess, though, that I'm not firmly wedded to this argument and am prepared to be convinced otherwise). I will say (and recognize that I'm being somewhat inconsistent) that I am generally in favour of excluding CDs from women's spaces that specifically limit admission to 'women or female-identified people' because such spaces are typically for people who experience more marginalization and in more ways.

Ultimately, dismantling the gender binary and abolishing gender stereotypes from our culture would benefit everybody because then anybody can present or identify as they like and all will be able to use the same bathrooms.

[becky77]

Oh come on Erin you're nitpicking.
I agree on the Duck thing, but what if it pretends to walk and quack like a Duck.......


Speaking as a CDer who identifies as 'male', can I say that that's not quite the full story. I've neither the need nor the desire to enter a 'woman only' changing room. However, I may need to enter a lavatory in order to answer the proverbial call of nature. Depending on the context the "inhabitants" of the "gents" may pose a greater danger to me than I pose to the comfort of the "inhabitants" of the "ladies"! This is especially true if alcohol is involved. So what should I do? Pee my pants? Wear a nappy? Use the 'disabled' loo? Or use the "ladies" as unobtrusively as I can?

Hi Judith, I appreciate your honesty. If you read my previous posts I wouldn't expect you to use the men's toilets. Using the ladies is the safest option as it stands currently, it doesn't make it the right option.
Hence my stance from the beginning that we have different needs to be addressed, that one rule doesn't suit all.

[LeaP]

Use the men's room. If needed, bring someone with you, ask a proprietor, whatever ... Your actual issue is restroom safety, not women's restroom access. Solve YOUR problem without creating one for someone else.

Re military base access - you have to show ID and there are criminal penalties for unauthorized access or problematic IDs. Do you really want to continue using this analogy?

[Kaitlyn Michele]

Right...

its amazing to me...
I'm truly sorry if you chose to shop pretty at a mall and get fritzed out because of the men's room...i really am..i have three words ...Deal with it.

Turning into a social justice crusade for transgender bathroom rights is ridiculous.....

and since way way way way too many people still consider us to be men or dehumanize us, it does not help for people to raise their hand and say 'hey i have the same problem'...it DOES muddy the waters...just look here...and we are a cohort that actually has interest in discussing this...most people do not...


if there were no cd's in the world, transsexuals would have very little issue with this...we'd get legal papers or therapists notes..end of story...
if there were no ts's in the world, crossdressers would be laughed out of town if they made a big deal over this...

[LeaP]

What she said. :iagree:

My God… I don't even feel the need to elaborate…

[flatlander_48]

if there were no cd's in the world, transsexuals would have very little issue with this...we'd get legal papers or therapists notes..end of story...

Except it wouldn't be.

You're sacrificing those people who are in limbo waiting to transition. Having papers with not keep you from being challenged.

In another thread, I've mentioned that our LGBT affinity group had Ian Harvie visit us for a night of entertainment and my involvement in that event. I got to talk to him a fair amount and I asked what did he find to be the most difficult thing about transitioning. He is now 47 and I believe he transitioned maybe 10+ years ago. He said the hardest thing for him was the great fear that he felt when he entered the men's restroom. The thing is, after all these years, he still feels very uncomfortable. It's not as bad as it initially was, but it still gives him pause. Anyway, it doesn't have much bearing on this conversation, but it is an interesting data point.

DeeAnn

[Zooey]

You're sacrificing those people who are in limbo waiting to transition. Having papers with not keep you from being challenged.

I don't understand why you keep bringing up being challenged as THE problem. The possibility of being challenged is a fact of life, and fixing that is about getting society to catch up comfort-wise. I'm legally a woman, and I can be challenged - I have to deal with that. But I have the right to use the facilities that are appropriate to me. We're talking "rights", not "everything being super easy and rainbows and puppies". That's not how civil rights works. You start with rights and protections; prejudice takes time.

[Eryn]

I just hope that I never move so far along the transition path that I find myself intolerant and unsupportive of those who happen to be behind me.

[flatlander_48]

I don't understand why you keep bringing up being challenged as THE problem.

Then the flip side of that would say that you are OK with folks being humiliated in public. My guess is that people who are attempting to live as their appropriate gender for the year, or whatever it is, in order to demonstrate their seriousness are in a particularly vulnerable state. It just seems like it isn't a time to be throwing them under the bus.

But, the point is that denying me also denies them. The thing is, you can't just throw out on opinion in a vacuum. You have to consider who can be effected and what the impact to them will be.


The possibility of being challenged is a fact of life, and fixing that is about getting society to catch up comfort-wise. I'm legally a woman, and I can be challenged - I have to deal with that.

Yes, but I would hope that you are in better shape than the people that I'm talking about. You're well along in the process. Very different situation from someone waiting to start.


But I have the right to use the facilities that are appropriate to me. We're talking "rights", not "everything being super easy and rainbows and puppies". That's not how civil rights works. You start with rights and protections; prejudice takes time.

That's a bit presumptuous, don't you think? The part about telling me how civil rights work.

DeeAnn

[Zooey]

I just hope that I never move so far along the transition path that I find myself intolerant and unsupportive of those who happen to be behind me.

I'm confused... As I understand it, you are on HRT and identify as a transexual woman. By any measure I can think of, if a documentation-based protection were to be implemented, there would no issue for you (beyond what any of us deal with). My belief is that anybody undergoing appropriate treatment from a licensed medical or mental health professional should pass the documentation challenge if said professional agrees that it's appropriate. I don't even think HRT is necessary - a note from a licensed therapist is sufficient. This is about identity, not appearance. This is only slightly more permissive than the current federal documentation change requirements, and approximately the same as the California DMV requirements.


Then the flip side of that would say that you are OK with folks being humiliated in public. My guess is that people who are attempting to live as their appropriate gender for the year, or whatever it is, in order to demonstrate their seriousness are in a particularly vulnerable state. It just seems like it isn't a time to be throwing them under the bus.

People in a one year RLE period, at least in many states here in the US, are generally doing so for the purposes of getting clearance for GRS. Federally, and in many (most?) states (hopefully more on the way), there is no such requirement for obtaining a legal name and gender change and updating relevant documentation (birth certificate being a sadly common exception). I would like to meet all of these people who are somehow living full-time as their appropriate gender without having at least partially modified their legal identity to match.

Forgot to say, I'm not okay with people being humiliated in public. That's a terrible thing. It's a different problem though, that is solved on a different time scale. It's is a problem with humanity, not with the law. Changes to the laws generally precede such changes.


That's a bit presumptuous, don't you think? The part about telling me how civil rights work.

I didn't say that lightly. Without opening up a GIANT can of worms, my point was to restate the hopefully obvious parallels to other civil rights struggles. We can't legislate people getting along. We can legislate rights and protections, because we believe it's the right thing to do even if our subconscious actions don't always line up with it, and then we have to work culturally to catch up. History shows us that it takes a long time for that last bit to happen, and that the legislation evolves further as we make progress.

[Rianna Humble]

This has turned into an argument where one member is trying to force everyone else to accept that their point of view on an issue that was not even the object of this thread is the only valid one and insulting members as part of that strategy. Thread done.