Bathrooms, Discontinuity and Our Community

[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...ty/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.