Help? "Ladies" or "Mens" room

I was recently reading a post by a lovely member who was sharing a nice experience s/he had flying commercially "enfemme". She mentioned in her description that s/he had used the public ladies room at the airport on a couple of occasions.

I'm new to the forum and I'm sure this has been discussed before, but I'm curious: Which facility do you use when dressed in public, and aren't there some legal dangers in using the technically gender specifically wrong restroom? Especially in the uptight security atmosphere of a public airport.

I realize that walking in the men’s room in 4" heels, a tight leather skirt, and a nice sweater covering your VS bra, full of D cup forms, opens up it's own can of worms but still from a legal standpoint, what's the call?

:hugs:
Meesh

The law varies with respect to states and municipalities. When in doubt:

If you think you don't stand a chance of passing, use the men's room, unless a "family room" is available. Running the risk of some humiliation is a lot better than running the risk of being locked up.

If you use the ladies room, get in and out as quick as possible.

i would never walk in to a men washroom dressed en femme you are taking you very life in your own hands ..

i always use the womans washrooms as long as you respect it .... IE make sure you sit down , once done wash hands quickly and get out don't make small talk .
tip of the day.... make sure you have a pad with you ... you never know when you will get asked for one :heehee: there are a few of us here that have been asked

better yet if there are family washrooms available use them

I use the ladies restrooms when dressed...but admittely it took a while for me to get totally confident. Its only been a few months for example since I started using the ladies rooms at the Mall.

If you are not confident about the look when enfemme or just too nervous...a lot of the time there are those special unisex bathrooms esp at Malls. I think those are meant for parents to use with kids...but are a great option for CDs. I also had it down to a science of not driinking too much coffee or soda that day...then knowing if for example going out shopping that I had 4 to 5 hours where I did not have to use a restroom. But that was a pain and a lot of the time I found myself heading home only because I knew I needed a bathroom break.

Bet a lot of airports have those unisex small bathrooms too...but I have not really looked for them. But honestly flying is already such a pain and stressful situation these days...I don't think I would fly enfemme anyway. Much easier to just go in boy mode then change when ya get to the hotel or whatever. Plus most the time I am travelling for work...got stuff to do in boy mode for the job when I get to a city! Then sometimes if no one else from my company is at the hotel with me on that trip.... I dressup at night and go shopping enfemme for some quick fun.

Use the men's room, use a stall...let anyone in there think and wonder...maybe confused or perplexed as if they were in the wrong room...
Don't use the women's room...some states might have laws against that.
And you don't want to stir up a hornets nest if someone realizes that you are a man.

I'd always use the ladies restroom if I don't have any other option. But I do know that Target has "any gender" restrooms that make it easy and never a problem. Hopefully other stores will follow suit in the near future.

Massachusetts Transgender Political Coalition


Talking Points: Discrimination and Hate Crimes
These are designed to equip you with powerful answers to important questions regarding the need for anti-discrimination protections. Originally compiled by MTPC while lobbying for Boston's gender identity ordinance.

What does the proposed non-discrimination ordinance do?
This ordinance would prohibit discrimination in employment, lending, housing, education, and public accommodations on the basis of a person's gender identity or expression. The term "gender identity or expression" includes a person's actual or perceived gender, as well as a person's gender identity, gender-related self image, gender-related appearance, or gender-related expression whether or not that gender identity, gender-related self-image, gender-related appearance, or gender-related expression is different from that traditionally associated with one's sex at birth. In keeping with recent MCAD rulings (see Question 3), this ordinance would make it impermissible to discriminate against an individual simply because that person does not fit a narrow stereotype of what it means to be a "real man" or a "real woman.

People whose gender identity or expression do not conform to stereotypes often face severe discrimination when they try to find a place to live.
Many people are denied equal treatment in public accommodations on the basis of gender identity or expression. We are asked to leave restaurants, hotels, stores, medical facilities, and educational institutions. We are denied credit. We are refused access to restroom facilities.
Many transgender people are fired after their employers find out about their plan to undergo sex reassignment surgery or learn that they have already undergone such surgery.
Every community should take a stand against this invidious gender-based discrimination. Everyone deserves to live and work with equality and dignity. No one should lose their job, or be denied a place to live, because of their gender identity or expression.
Everyone has a stake in gender freedom, not just transgender-identified people. Stereotypes about gender are harmful to all people. Extending non-discrimination ordinances to cover "gender identity or expression" will benefit all people whose gender challenges traditional stereotypes. This includes not only people who identify as transgender, but women who are denied promotions because they do not wear make-up and men who are harassed in the workplace because they are not "masculine" enough.

Isn't this kind of discrimination already illegal? Isn't it covered by sex discrimination laws?
The case law is not clear on this issue. Despite some recent court decisions to the contrary, many courts have found that laws prohibiting sex discrimination do not apply to transgender people. Because of these conflicting decisions, confusion abounds regarding whether current non-discrimination laws cover gender identity or expression. In October of 2001, the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination (MCAD), a state agency, handed down a decision in which it found that the sex discrimination statute in Massachusetts covers discrimination based on gender identity and expression. The MTPC completely supports the MCAD's interpretation and we encourage other agencies and courts to find likewise, but as the law currently stands, protection for gender identity and expression is not guaranteed. With the passage of this ordinance, Boston would simply codify the legal protections identified in this recent MCAD decision. In addition, this ordinance would send a clear message to Boston employers, landlords, providers of public accommodations, and all Boston citizens that all people are entitled to the full protection of the law, regardless of their gender expression. Equally important, this ordinance would communicate to individual people that they have access to legal redress for the discrimination they face. Laws are intended to set policy and send clear messages. Amending Boston's non-discrimination ordinances would clear up any legal confusion and send the message that discrimination is not tolerable.

Why does this ordinance propose to add "gender identity or expression" as a new protected category rather than including protections in an expanded definition of "sex"?
It is important to make "gender identity or expression" a separate category in order to underscore the point that gender identity and expression are of equal importance with other protected categories. In addition, it will be easier to educate the public about discrimination on the basis of gender identity or expression when language is clear and accessible. While many people may never read the text of city and state ordinances, they will see the inclusion of "gender identity or expression" in widely distributed general policy statements listing all the bases on which it is illegal to discriminate.

Will this amendment encourage cross-dressing in the workplace?
Opposition to cross-dressing in the workplace is perhaps the most commonly voiced objection to codifying non-discrimination protection on the basis of gender identity or expression. However, 81 jurisdictions, consisting of millions of people, have already extended their local non-discrimination ordinances or statutes to cover gender identity or expression (see chart for a listing of the jurisdictions) and there is no evidence that such protection leads to any increase in the number of employees who cross-dress on the job.

Employers in jurisdictions that have passed similar ordinances have not reported or complained of any such increase in cross-dressing, and human rights departments in those jurisdictions have not been inundated with complaints from cross-dressing employees. The City of Minneapolis has had a gender identity inclusive non-discrimination law since 1975, and there has been no influx of cross-dressers into the workplaces in that jurisdiction.
Furthermore, employers would still be entitled to have reasonable, equitable dress codes at their places of employment.
Does this mean that women will have to share bathrooms with men, and vice versa?
This ordinance will prevent employers and proprietors of public accommodations from requiring people to use bathrooms that do not correspond to their gender identity. It will not mean that women will have to share bathrooms with men. All people must have access to safe and dignified bathroom facilities, regardless of their gender identity or expression.

The Boston City ordinances currently permit restrooms and other such facilities to be separated by sex. Nothing in this proposed ordinance will change that. What the ordinance will do is prevent the obvious disruptions and problems that arise when people are required to use bathrooms inappropriate to their gender identity, (for example, when transgender women are forced to share bathrooms with men, or transgender men are forced to share bathrooms with women). This ordinance simply will allow individuals to use bathroom facilities based on the gender identity that they "publicly and exclusively assert or express." By adding this language, this ordinance will help resolve awkward bathroom situations, not create them.
Allowing individuals to use the restroom that corresponds with the gender identity that they "publicly and exclusively assert or express" makes sense. There is simply no legitimate way to do "anatomy checks" or "chromosomal checks" before determining who can use what restroom.
Nothing in this proposed ordinance would alter an individual's reasonable privacy and safety expectations in restrooms. Legitimate safety concerns, of course, need to be addressed regardless of who poses them. Proprietors of public accommodations have an obligation to make restroom facilities safe for all people. However, we cannot let legitimate safety concerns become a proxy for bias and prejudice.
Would Massachusetts be going out on a limb here? Is our jurisdiction going to be the first to adopt this kind of law?
In enacting this proposed ordinance, Massachusetts will join a growing number of local and state governments that have already enacted such protections. As of January 2006, 81 jurisdictions (6 states, 75 cities and counties) in the U.S. have passed non-discrimination laws or ordinances that protect people on the basis of gender identity or expression (see chart).

Civil rights legislation protecting gender identity and expression has passed in jurisdictions as varied as Pittsburgh, Seattle, Louisville, New York, Philadelphia, Cambridge, Dallas and many more. The state of Minnesota added gender-inclusive language to its human rights law in 1993 and the state of Rhode Island did the same in 2001. California, New Mexico, Illinois, and Maine have also now passed statewide protections for gender identity and expression.
Lucent Technologies, American Airlines, Eastman Kodak, Walgreen's, Xerox, Apple Computers and J.P. Morgan Chase have adopted non-discrimination policies that protect transgender people. Many other businesses, both big and small, have also added gender identity and expression to their equal opportunity policies.
What impact will protecting people from discrimination on the basis of gender identity or expression have on how the Registry of Motor Vehicles and other government-sanctioned bodies determine sex for identification purposes?
The government's determination of an individual's sex for identification purposes does not conflict with protecting them from discrimination on the basis of their gender identity or expression in public accommodations, housing, and employment. However, it does highlight shortcomings in our present means for making a determination of an individual's sex for those individuals for whom such determination encounters conflicting evidence. Hopefully, increased education and awareness of gender diversity will lead to more fairness in opportunity and accomodation across lines of sex and gender.

I was told at support group that in California and Nevada genetic men must use the men's room no matter how they are dressed or what gender they identify with. I believe that this informtion was correct but hve no idea how to verify.

From Wendy me and MTPC - you will notice the wording

"publicly and exclusively assert or express."

I interpret that to mean the casual crossdresser who is not exclusively presenting as the other gender all the time is not covered by the ordinance. That is still a scary condition for me.

Dee

I go out in public a lot dressed totally enfemme, but still looking like a man! I never go in the ladies restroom. Always use the men's room, and a stall.
After all, a lady has to sit!

When my wife was still alive we did go out as two ladies, and i always used the ladies restroom. No way would I walk into a men's room if I looked like a lady! The way I am now, I look like man wearing a skirt and a top that shows off cleavage!:heehee:

Sissy

More Girl than man sometimes

Once I started wearing heels in public and carrying a cute shoulder bag and my "boobies"...I ain't goin' in no mens room. Wallmart as well as my local Harkins theater have those 'family" rooms, which I'll give first crack. Last week while at a trade show being held at Sea World, dressed (in heels with purse & boobies) I felt the urge. As I was looking for the restroom I overheard another lady asking one of the staff where it was. I sashayed over and said what a coincidence I was just looking for it too. She & I laughed and both proceeded to the ladies room together making small talk. I went into a stall and lowered jeans & panties with FFF (Feet facing forward) ,did my thing and washed my hands, adjusted my hair & lipstick and went on my way. At the time not a big deal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kehleyr

(California) state law is somewhat vague (it prohibits discrimination based on gender identity, but it isn't really specific about restrooms), but many cities and counties in California have local ordinances making it clear that people should use the bathroom that corresponds to the gender identity that they "consistently assert".

---

:lol2: Something in California is vague??? Aw, come on, no way!!! :lol2:

Actually, comedy aside, Kehler make a good point here, as do several of the others. While there are specific statutes or ordinances in place in some states or on some county/local government level, they often are vague, or fail to adequately address significant points of, the issue. (H'mmm -- wonder what the satndard of evidence would be to prove how one consistently asserts their gendr identity?!! Highly subjective in its basis if you ask me!!!)

The best advice I've seen lies in the fact that so many department stores, malls, large retailers, outlet stores, etc., now offer a neutral bathroom -- often called the family bathroom.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wendy me

The Boston City ordinances currently permit restrooms and other such facilities to be separated by sex. Nothing in this proposed ordinance will change that. What the ordinance will do is prevent the obvious disruptions and problems that arise when people are required to use bathrooms inappropriate to their gender identity, (for example, when transgender women are forced to share bathrooms with men, or transgender men are forced to share bathrooms with women). This ordinance simply will allow individuals to use bathroom facilities based on the gender identity that they "publicly and exclusively assert or express." By adding this language, this ordinance will help resolve awkward bathroom situations, not create them.
Allowing individuals to use the restroom that corresponds with the gender identity that they "publicly and exclusively assert or express" makes sense. There is simply no legitimate way to do "anatomy checks" or "chromosomal checks" before determining who can use what restroom.
Nothing in this proposed ordinance would alter an individual's reasonable privacy and safety expectations in restrooms. Legitimate safety concerns, of course, need to be addressed regardless of who poses them. Proprietors of public accommodations have an obligation to make restroom facilities safe for all people. However, we cannot let legitimate safety concerns become a proxy for bias and prejudice.
Would Massachusetts be going out on a limb here? Is our jurisdiction going to be the first to adopt this kind of law?
In enacting this proposed ordinance, Massachusetts will join a growing number of local and state governments that have already enacted such protections. As of January 2006, 81 jurisdictions (6 states, 75 cities and counties) in the U.S. have passed non-discrimination laws or ordinances that protect people on the basis of gender identity or expression (see chart).

Civil rights legislation protecting gender identity and expression has passed in jurisdictions as varied as Pittsburgh, Seattle, Louisville, New York, Philadelphia, Cambridge, Dallas and many more. The state of Minnesota added gender-inclusive language to its human rights law in 1993 and the state of Rhode Island did the same in 2001. California, New Mexico, Illinois, and Maine have also now passed statewide protections for gender identity and expression.

---

Thanks for that very interesting read, Wendy!!! Very informative!!! Our lives may be on the upswing!!!!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MJ

i would never walk in to a men washroom dressed en femme you are taking you very life in your own hands ..

i always use the womans washrooms as long as you respect it .... IE make sure you sit down , once done wash hands quickly and get out don't make small talk .
tip of the day.... make sure you have a pad with you ... you never know when you will get asked for one :heehee: there are a few of us here that have been asked

better yet if there are family washrooms available use them

---

Great advice, MJ -- especially the tidbit about having some pads. In the main, I think, if what I am reading you correctly, that you are absolutely right in suggesting we all be prudent in our actions while out and about!!!

In most districts the only thing they would charge you with is disorderly conduct, at least if you were behaving yourself in there. I have never had a problem and believe me, I am not about to use the men's room! If you don't look like a huge guy, with beard stubble in a dress, you won't startle the women. You just have to look and act the part.

Behave like a lady and that is how you will be treated.

I always thought the US was a free country where an individuals freedoms to express and exist were constitutionally assured. Clearly, from this thread and others like it, it is far from the free utopia that it likes the rest of the world to think it is. The idea of having to go to the mens (room) when presenting as Kay would not be cricket. I suppose here in the UK and for that matter most of Europe, we actually do have the freedoms. We don't have stupid variations of discriminative laws between regions. If you present good enough to pass as a female then legally no one can tell if you are pre op TS, post op TS or a particularly good TV with out officially challenging you, and if they get it wrong boy are they in the crapper. So they don't (that does not include the prats who make derogatory comments, but their views mean nothing)

I was visiting a non LGBT pub recently, the land lord knew i was not born a woman, but he also new that he could not determine if I was pre, or post of just a TV so when i asked where the ladies was, he directed me with out hesitation. In fact I was told by a landlord friend of mine that because of this, the LGBT discrimation laws effectivly apply to any Tgirl presenting in public and not just girls certificated as transitioning. I think this must apply in retail too as I never ever have problems wanting to use ladies changing rooms or rest rooms.

So you ladies in the US just get out there and if you present as female then use the ladies and be done. Oh and vote for a decent administration that is not so ultra conservative and perhaps you will begin to enjoy some of the freedoms we have.

Hugs


Kay

The city of Dallas, Tx has a law that states that one may use the restroom of the sex that they are presenting as. Thus if I go out dressed as a woman, I can legally use the women's restroom.

I've only just started to go out and I've used the ladies several times already. I seem to be passing - so if I used the mens they'd be a riot I think - or could I be arrested for using the mens when I'm looking all female ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeeInGeorgia

From Wendy me and MTPC - you will notice the wording

"publicly and exclusively assert or express."

I interpret that to mean the casual crossdresser who is not exclusively presenting as the other gender all the time is not covered by the ordinance. That is still a scary condition for me.

Dee

---

That would be exactly my worry. Well, that and despite excellent bladder control, I DON'T think I can hold it all the way across the country til I get to Massachusetts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kay_jessica

I always thought the US was a free country where an individuals freedoms to express and exist were constitutionally assured. Clearly, from this thread and others like it, it is far from the free utopia that it likes the rest of the world to think it is. The idea of having to go to the mens (room) when presenting as Kay would not be cricket. I suppose here in the UK and for that matter most of Europe, we actually do have the freedoms. We don't have stupid variations of discriminative laws between regions. If you present good enough to pass as a female then legally no one can tell if you are pre op TS, post op TS or a particularly good TV with out officially challenging you, and if they get it wrong boy are they in the crapper. So they don't (that does not include the prats who make derogatory comments, but their views mean nothing)

I was visiting a non LGBT pub recently, the land lord knew i was not born a woman, but he also new that he could not determine if I was pre, or post of just a TV so when i asked where the ladies was, he directed me with out hesitation. In fact I was told by a landlord friend of mine that because of this, the LGBT discrimation laws effectivly apply to any Tgirl presenting in public and not just girls certificated as transitioning. I think this must apply in retail too as I never ever have problems wanting to use ladies changing rooms or rest rooms.

So you ladies in the US just get out there and if you present as female then use the ladies and be done. Oh and vote for a decent administration that is not so ultra conservative and perhaps you will begin to enjoy some of the freedoms we have.

Hugs


Kay

---

Apologies in advance for going a little off topic before going back to bathroom issues:

Having lived in both countries Kay I can say that you're a little misguided on this. True, the US did get its concept of freedom and bill of rights from the English. The American BoR is actually based on the 1689 English BoR and magna carta which guaranteed such things as no fines or forfeitures without a trial by jury, innocent until proven guilty and even the right to bear arms. Not a lot of Brits realize this because, effectively, British politicians have been using the 1689 BoR as toilet paper for the last 100 years or so. Many American politicians are attempting to do the same thing with the US constitution here but, because the US version is more codifed, it is harder for them.

Also, the President of the USA does not make or create the laws here. Congress does. The president then signs or vetos proposed laws. This is in contrast to the British system where the prime minister is effectively running the country himself. Once parliament had voted on a new law it goes to the Queen for "royal ascent". Unlike the US president, the Queen *never* refuses to sign a new law - even though she has every right to do so. Britain is a parliamentary democracy and the US is a representative republic - two different things but based on a similar concept.

Tony Blair's government passed some 9,000+ new laws in the last ten years. Many are laws which remove personal freedoms. There are CCTV cameras everywhere. They have the world's largest DNA database. They want to track every vehicle in the country with little black GPS boxes. I heard this morning something about knitting needles being banned as deadly weapons. The word "banned" seems to appear in British news every single day. It's also heading this way in the states unless we the people put a stop to it.

So I'm not sure which country I could say is the most "free". They both have the rule of law - and this includes bathroom use. Like most of the states here, I'm assuming that in the UK you use the bathroom that you're dressed for. However, if you went into the mens room wearing a dress, you are just as likely to get beaten up in the UK as in the US. One difference is that in the UK you can no longer legally defend yourself (with pepper spray or whetever) like you can in the US.

So when it comes to freedoms, it's swings and roundabouts. Sorry for going off topic.

I go into the ladies room when I am dressed as my femme side and get what I need to do done.I never had a problem yet and i am very lucky about this

I only go to the ladies room when I'm dressed and haven't had a problem whatsoever. I am confident in myself when I go out and I blend in very well so I have no issues with it.
I've been to them at hotels, malls, restaurants, and rest areas and nobody has said anything or spotted me.

Not too long ago, I was at an outlet mall in Orlando (a tourist mecca) and I had to use the ladies room. The restrooms were, of course, located in the food court so I walk in and there were lots of people in line ordering food and eating at their tables, but I didn't let them bother me. I looked around for the restroom and proceed to follow a group of women going in. When I went in, there lots of others washing their hands and doing their thing, but nobody seemed to pay attention to me. I walked into an open stall and did my thing then I was out the door. No problem.

This is funny, there was this one time I was at a restaurant, in drab, with some friends and I had to use the men's room, but I accidentally walked into the ladies.
When I noticed that there were no urinals, I realized where I was and so I immediately walked out and into the men's room.
I kind of got a chuckle out of it.
Luckly, there were no ladies there at the time so I avoided a possible embarassing situation.

The one thing that has been mentioned before is to dress appropriately, as well as dress your age, and be confident in yourself.
If you don't act or look suspicious, minding your own business, and just be your feminine self, then you shouldn't have a problem.
Most establishments have family restrooms, so if you're not confident in going into the ladies then you should go there, but definitely not the men's. If you can't do that, then you'll just have to hold it as long as you can. :eek:

Hugs!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Meeshell

I was recently reading a post by a lovely member who was sharing a nice experience s/he had flying commercially "enfemme". She mentioned in her description that s/he had used the public ladies room at the airport on a couple of occasions.

I'm new to the forum and I'm sure this has been discussed before, but I'm curious: Which facility do you use when dressed in public, and aren't there some legal dangers in using the technically gender specifically wrong restroom? Especially in the uptight security atmosphere of a public airport.

I realize that walking in the men’s room in 4" heels, a tight leather skirt, and a nice sweater covering your VS bra, full of D cup forms, opens up it's own can of worms but still from a legal standpoint, what's the call?

:hugs:
Meesh

---

If I am dressed as a woman.....and can pass as a woman (GG approved)....I sure the hell am not gonna use the boys room. Rule #1 DO NOT CUASE ALARM!

I was in a bar in Orlando last week that only had one bathroom with two urinals and a stall. The lady I went in there with said she would take the stall, so I proceed to lift my dress and use the urinal. While I was finishing up, a man walked in. He did his thing while I washed my hands. Then after my friend came out of the stall, we primped a little and then went back into the bar.

It was a rather unique experience. So far, though I haven't gone shopping dressed en femme so haven't had to make the judgement called for in this thread.

Julie

Ya'll have lost half of the question.

The question is about an AIRPORT restroom not just any restroom.

I have not gone to the airport dressed. Funny thing though, I was wondering about that today and I found this thread.:happy:

When I am dress as a woman I use the ladies room. Once in a rest area in Michigan I went into the Mens Bathroom and I was ask ask to leave and use the Ladies Restroom an I thought I was drest as a guy. It is sad that I can't even Pass as a guy any more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RayAnn

When I am dress as a woman I use the ladies room. Once in a rest area in Michigan I went into the Mens Bathroom and I was ask ask to leave and use the Ladies Restroom an I thought I was drest as a guy. It is sad that I can't even Pass as a guy any more.

---

I'm sorry you're sad but I can think of about 100 GM's that would love your problem.

I just have to say that I have gone into the mens room SEVERAL times when we are at a big event, because the line is always shorter. When I gotta go........... I go! I was in construction and am known to whip down my pants and go next to a tree! LMAO

You should have seen me pregnant, I did that ALL the time.

:hugs: Kris

Mens room, Just because you want to be a woman doesn't mean you are there is no reason a little girl or any woman should be worried about a cross dresser using a womans bathroom. It's just over stepping bounds In my opinion.

i just started using the ladies room but I am in a stall and quickly washing my hands and out. When I have bumped into other women I have been met with smiles so I guess I passed, but Starbucks is another good choice only one person in the restroom at a time

it was once said, long time ago, i think by ann landers, that if you are dressed as a lady, use the ladies. seems reasonable to me, unless you are at a halloween party, in which case, i dont think it makes much difference. who are we to argue with ann?

Last year at HEF2006, the hotel put a sign on one of the ladies restroom saying it would be used by those of us attending HEF. We also used the normal ladies restroom in the bar, since the HEF restroom was too far away.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JoAnnDallas

Last year at HEF2006, the hotel put a sign on one of the ladies restroom saying it would be used by those of us attending HEF. We also used the normal ladies restroom in the bar, since the HEF restroom was too far away.

---

Right on JoAnn, when you must then you must.

Never mind the law or whatever it may mean. (If an upholdable law does exist in the free country)
~Samm

This seems like a bit of a no-brainer to me.

If you are presenting as a woman, you use the little girl's room. If you are presenting as a guy, you use the guy's room.

I any case if you DO use the little girl's, PLEASE remember to SIT! If you plan on standing to urinate, it's the little boy's room for you, no matter what you look like.

Lovies,
Stephenie

I agree that you should look appropriate for the bathroom you wish to use. But, has anyone ever been challanged or humiliated while using a ladies room when dressed, but were spotted as a CDer. And conversely, ever use a men's room when dressed en femme and have someone actually confront you. I use both rest rooms when dressed at various times and have never had anyone say a word. Also, when shopping, the SA always has me use the ladies dressing room when trying on clothes. Never a second thought about it.

The material on using public restrooms in Las Vegas that Kimberly, President of the Tri-Ess chapter there , sent me, should be of interest. See my restrooms in Las Vegas post.

Whichever one you use, don't tap your foot!

I use the ladies room, always and everywhere, when I am out en femme, malls, movies, casino's, restaurants, etc. As long as you go right to an empty stall, sit to do your business and then quickly washing your hands before leaving. Unless the bathroom is empty, it's probably not a good idea to gaze into the mirror for any length of time :-)

I feel there is a far greater danger of something nasty happening while using a men's room when dressed than using the ladies room. I think, in NJ (where I live), it is or was illegal for a man to use a ladies room. But now that we are protected in our recently passed anti-discrimination law I'm not so sure that is true any longer.

Hugs,
Becky

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bobbi_Gurli

Whichever one you use, don't tap your foot!

---

LOL!!

:2c: I am the daughter of Joann0830 and i just would like to say that everyone has their own special feeling mine would be theres that old saying where when ever a lady goes to the restroom u go in pairs if u feel comfortable walking in as one as ur dressed then more power to you girl! i respect any CDM who can walk into a ladies room and smile thinkin YES I CAN AND I DONT CARE WHAT ANYONE ELSE THINKS.

:love:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BeckyAnderson

I use the ladies room, always and everywhere, when I am out en femme, malls, movies, casino's, restaurants, etc. As long as you go right to an empty stall, sit to do your business and then quickly washing your hands before leaving. Unless the bathroom is empty, it's probably not a good idea to gaze into the mirror for any length of time :-)

I feel there is a far greater danger of something nasty happening while using a men's room when dressed than using the ladies room. I think, in NJ (where I live), it is or was illegal for a man to use a ladies room. But now that we are protected in our recently passed anti-discrimination law I'm not so sure that is true any longer.

Hugs,
Becky

---

I always use the room for how I am dressed. I agree that if you use the wrong room for how you 'appear' that would be more problematic. Some places still have laws regarding which gender can use which room but realistically, who is going to check if you behave appropriately all the way around?
Oh yes, and don't gawk around like you never saw women in a bathroom before.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joann0830

:2c: I am the daughter of Joann0830 and i just would like to say that everyone has their own special feeling mine would be theres that old saying where when ever a lady goes to the restroom u go in pairs if u feel comfortable walking in as one as ur dressed then more power to you girl! i respect any CDM who can walk into a ladies room and smile thinkin YES I CAN AND I DONT CARE WHAT ANYONE ELSE THINKS.

:love:

---

I am always presenting as confident that I belong where I am. That said, with or without someone else, if I have to go while out dressed, I go. Do what I have to do and leave. One comment I got was as I left the ladies room, a black woman commented on my muscular legs. That was kinda kewt really since I am ANYTHING BUT muscular.

Perhaps I am lucky but so far, no one has questioned my right to use a particular rest room.