Disgraced -- made to use the mens'!

[Kimberly]

Last night we took our usual trip to RocKabaret in West London, me and two of my friends. I was presenting as Kim, and dressed up as appropriately as possible for RocKabaret - (the theme: Angels and Daemons -- I was blatently a Daemon!)

Anyway, I was just walking into the Ladies toilets when I here this security guard behind me say, "The Gents is on the other side." I ignored him at first, but he said it again and soon I got in a rather heated discussion with him. Basically, he didn't have much but the power to throw me out, and I wasn't sure how the law covered me -- it was a private club, although the RocKabaret night does have some crossdressing clientèle other than myself.

So, basically I had to use the Mens' toilet; possibly the most degrading thing I've done. Not only that, I had to stand there waiting for a cubicle, to comments of, "Are you a boy or a girl?" Not confrontational - but just behind my back, just so I could hear it.

After, I spoke to both the only other crossdresser there and the organiser of the night. Mel, the other trans woman there knew the head of security so went to speak to him. It was all cleared up - I was apologised to and from then on allowed to use the ladies'. But, was I angry!!

Does anyone know, (for the UK), whether they could have actually done anything about me entering the ladies'? Could he have actually stopped me and thrown me out, or would the law have been on my side for some kind of sex/trans discrimination?

[Tamera]

I went to a support group meeting last night. And there were all different kinds of girls going through/or have already went through many different transitions.

One girl has a letter from her psycholgist that baically states that this girl is a patient of hers and is going through a transition states and as part of her transitioning needs to experience all aspects of a female including "Using the womans restroom".

This was actually a legal document that if an establishment did not let her use the bathroom, the establishment would be "SUED".

LOL
Tamera

[bredalee25]

Tamera said it best you must be going through a transition in order to be legally allowed to use the womens restroom. Any other reason is up to the owners and /or managment of said establishment. Yes to answer your question you are still considered to be a male and a trip to jail or citation could of been issued if you had ignored the gaurds telling you to use the mens room.

ttfn

[Karren H]

I'd assume he would have thrown you out and the legality's sorted out after the fact.. How big was he anyway? Bet you could could have taken him, Kim.. Hehe

Love your new avatar, btw...

Karren

[Ruth]

I'm not a lawyer and any legal advice you get here is worth exactly what you paid for it. However, I believe in the UK, public restrooms are not subject to explicit laws about who goes where - the relevant offence would be breach of the peace, for instance if you went into the ladies dressed as a man and upset everybody in there. But if you go in the ladies dressed as such and nobody takes exception to your appearance, you're not breaking any laws.
Unfortunately the same rights probably don't apply on private premises. The proprietors can be as particular as they like about who uses the toilet.

[Angie G]

All I know is that sucked :hugs:
Angie

[Tamera]

Kimberly,

The other thing that really bothers me is that the "Guard" appologized afterwards.

Why make a "SCENE" about a situation if your going to say "I'M SORRY" later???

LOL
Tasmera

[Kimberly]

Why make a "SCENE" about a situation if your going to say "I'M SORRY" later???
It wasn't the same guy -- the head of security apologised to me, and the guy who'd harassed me was corrected on his mistake.

I personally feel that it is the presentation of the person that counts in a situation like this... Mel, who was the trans woman who helped me with this said it well enough, "Do I look like a man?!"

And no one would have been bothered if I'd gone in there, because afterwards there was one girl who saw it all and was appalled with what happened. So... bah!!

Oh well, I'll put that one behind me -- every day a new bigot to educate. I probably did someone a favour in the long-run. xx

[Sheri 4242]

I'd assume he would have thrown you out and the legality's sorted out after the fact.

Karen is probably right on target: throw you out and let the legalities get settled later (if ever -- perhaps betting it would never go that far).

Now, while I am in the U.S., much of American law is based on English "common law." Therefore, the key issue might truly come down to the fact that this was a private establishment and most such have the right to refuse service without explaining themselves. True, you could later sue and litigate, but it would be costly and time-consuming, and the law might not be on your side anyway. The "American sense" of rights "might" play in your favor on this side of the pond, but probably not -- seen it happen before with other issues, in re private establishments. I do think that the establishment's private status is where this might turn as far as the law goes!

Hey, EricaCD: you're our resident legal expert. What do you think?

My take is that at least you got an "I'm sorry" from management, who obviously values your business. That doesn't mean you have any rights in such situation, though, b/c it all boils down to the fact that it was a private establishment!

[marie354]

I think that you did the right thing, even though it may have been a bit embarrassing for you at the time.
It avoided the immediate problem. (The bouncers/guards attitudes towards people was corrected later.)
I'm sure that it will be OK the next time.
:hugs:

[trannie T]

I was told at a support group meeting that despite how one is dressed restrooms in Nevada and California are restricted to genetic ladies and genetic gentlemen. I will try to do some research on this and make a post. Makes you want to hold it or go out back and find a convienent tree.

[Catherine Hopkins]

I'm not a lawyer and any legal advice you get here is worth exactly what you paid for it. However, I believe in the UK, public restrooms are not subject to explicit laws about who goes where - the relevant offence would be breach of the peace, for instance if you went into the ladies dressed as a man and upset everybody in there. But if you go in the ladies dressed as such and nobody takes exception to your appearance, you're not breaking any laws.
Unfortunately the same rights probably don't apply on private premises. The proprietors can be as particular as they like about who uses the toilet.


Ruth has it spot on in every detail, Kim. That is indeed the legal situation in the UK, including the rider about private premises.

[Tamera]

Well,
I see the guard was corrected in the long run. Should be able to use the restroom next time.

Regarding laws:
There may or may not be a law for using restroom, just a "Common Courtesy".
However they probably could site you for Disturbing the Peace or some other violation.

But by the same token, I personally have not run into a F to M using the mens restroom?????????
LOL
Tamera

[Susieboots]

I'm not a lawyer and any legal advice you get here is worth exactly what you paid for it. However, I believe in the UK, public restrooms are not subject to explicit laws about who goes where - the relevant offence would be breach of the peace, for instance if you went into the ladies dressed as a man and upset everybody in there. But if you go in the ladies dressed as such and nobody takes exception to your appearance, you're not breaking any laws.
Unfortunately the same rights probably don't apply on private premises. The proprietors can be as particular as they like about who uses the toilet.

Hi there, I'm not a lawyer either but as far as I can remember, they can't discriminate against you anywhere now in the UK.
What they will normally do, if a female has raised an objection to you using the female toilets, which they are entitled to do, is ask you to use the disabled toilet if you feel uncomfortable using the male toilets.
This is to avoid any embarrasment or "scene". It also shows them in an "understanding light", if they do this, as they are trying to appease both parties without causing offence.

[JoAnnDallas]

Not sure how it is in the UK, but here in the states, city concils can pass a local law protecting TG people. I live in Dallas, TX and Dallas has a local law that says that a business can not discriminate against a person on the basis of "gender presentation". I don't remember the exact wording, but the local law is on the internet, so can be looked up. So at least here in Dallas, TX if a CD wants to use the ladies restroom, she can and if refused can legally sue the business.

[Denielleinheels]

I feel for the situation. Every place is different and Delaware isn't very user friendly.

[KimberlyS]

I have been in two different clubs where their policy was that you used the restroom of your physical gender unless you were in active transition. I did not see it as an issue for me even though I was enfemme. The policies may have changed as that has been a few years ago.

My question for you is:

Were you really mad that you could not use the womens restroom?

Or

Were you mad because you were not passing? And embarrassed.

If you think that it is a safety issue going by yourself in to the mens maybe you are in an unsafe place for a CDer. Or do as gals do and go to the restroom in groups of two or three. If you trying to present a girl, that is what you should be doing anyway to start with.

Hey if Karren can hike her skirt and stand to go at the urinal more of us can.

[Kimberly]

Were you really mad that you could not use the womens restroom?
This would be the case. I was blatantly a CDer, as the evening has a few obvious CDing clientelle, as I said. So I believe the view expressed by the security guard was personal prejudice.


If you think that it is a safety issue going by yourself in to the mens maybe you are in an unsafe place for a CDer. Or do as gals do and go to the restroom in groups of two or three. If you trying to present a girl, that is what you should be doing anyway to start with.
I was doing just that -- going in with two of my friends, as a group, but the guy stopped me. Not much else I could have done.

I think it's ridiculous that crossdressers anywhere should be stopped from going anywhere their presenting gender can go. That's just downright rude, and the quicker the law covers this the better. I still haven't been able to find this out for sure.

[Sheri 4242]

" . . . in Dallas, TX if a CD wants to use the ladies restroom, she can and if refused can legally sue the business."

There are legal aspects of this issue we all should consider -- it is sort of like "what would be ideal v. what is reality, v. what is flexible, v. where can we affect change." The ability to sue doesn't mean one will win - especially regarding this thread's specific issue. (I've read the referenced Dallas ordinance, but IMO it isn't applicable in this situation even if the incidence had happened in Dallas.)

We, in this community, should, IMO, all work at gaining better understanding of the law and how it effects us. (Not that this is applicable in this case, but there are instances of decisions having to be made as to where to place one who is crosdressed should they be taken to the jail. The common way such is handled is to take one to the jail that corresponds to their anatomical sex.)

To quote an old adage, one person's rights end where another person's nose begins. IOW, a Dallas-type ordinance notwithstanding, the law isn't designed to abrogate the implied right of privacy of the general populace; it would, therefore, probably be a losing case when you factor in for whom the "ladies room" is intended (GG's) and their rights. Our GGs do have rights in all this -- and while I want to use the ladies room when out en femme, I am trying to show the various considerations of such a situation. There's going to be a judge sitting there thinking if he was at this place, would he want his wife to go to the same bathroom with this guy in a dress?!!? At the end of the day, judges want to know they did the right thing within their application of the law (which is often broad and discretionary). (Yes, I indicated a male judge, and I know there are many wonderful GG judges!)

Also, remember that Kim said this was a "private" establishment, and, as such, they (if they had been in the U.S., Dallas included) could have refused service and asked (insisted/forced) you to leave pretty much "at will." That means they really don't have to explain themselves. This is how many state employment laws read, which, itself, can be problematic to us in this community. Many times it isn't so much "the letter of the law" as it is where you are and how judges in that locale handle things. Back to the current issue: you COULD sue if they did insist you leave, but again, "suing aint winning."

Legally speaking, this bathroom issue doesn't really raise the required basic elements to make a showing of true discrimination. That said, it does sound like the management handled things (no pun intended)! Having handled the situation, it probably won't be an issue in the future at that location for like events. ( "If" it was an issue in the future, I'd join Karen at a tree outside! LOL :D ) I would issue one caution, though: Kim indicates she let this guard push her buttons and escalate the situation to where it was heated. That's probably exactly what the guard (or bouncer, whatever) wanted!!! Maybe he was trying to incite you, Kim, so that he could throw you out, saying, see how she acted?!!!

It would have been interesting if you had kept going on into the ladies room, totally and completely ignoring the guard. Would he have followed you in? Would he, then, have breeched privacy and/or decency laws? Would he have been guilty of aggravating the situation beyond a resonable person standard?!!!??? I think so!!! It is sort of like coming out of Wal-Mart and a security device sets off the door alarms and some jerk demands you halt and submit to a package search (b/c their computers and alarm system aren't properly synched a lot of the time). "If" you really haven't stolen anything, do you have to stop??? Do they have the right to physically detain you (by force)??? In most jurisdictions, no!!! If they even put their hands on you, they become the ones in trouble -- BIG trouble (Wal-Mart's Loss Prevention isn't very effective b/c they have such restrictive guidelines on stopping people). I know this sounds like I'm way off topic, but I think there is an analogy in there!!! LOL

[julie w]

I would check but I thought a washroom in a store or club is private property and they can make their own rules , its like your home you can tell someone they cant use your wash room , now a public place like a museum might be different

[ctcd]

where i live i think it me be some sort of misdemeanor at least. not sure