Wisconsin judge sides with 11-year-old trans girl over her right to use school toilets
thepinknews.com
A district judge in Wisconsin has sided with an 11-year-old trans girl over her use of the girls’ toilets and temporarily blocked school officials from preventing her access.
You are viewing a single comment
While this is welcome news, it's also depressing that we live in a timeline stupid enough that bathroom panics are enough of a thing that there are laws on the books like this to be struck down by judges (and of course, the fact that other judges are likely to reverse this ruling).
Would you be ok with 17 year old boys to use the girls toilets at school if they just say that they identify as a girl?
What is the issue you have with it, really? You think that people are going to go into the bathroom and do something nefarious?
Before asking us why we think it's okay, let's really drill down into what you're so worried about.
Yeah you're right, being trans isn't even a thing, it's all just perverted teenage boys who want to... Hear girls pee, I guess?
Seriously what the fuck is wrong with you? If you find sexual gratification being in the same room where members of the opposite gender take a shit in a closed stall, you go ahead and be as pervy as you fucking want with it, but stop projecting your weird scat fetish on everyone else and just let people go to the god damn bathroom.
Guess your parents never read classics to you like: Everyone Poops. Or the wonderful sequel: Everyone Farts.
We're just people and socializing these potty hangups is pretty childish.
Well if they aren’t a boy then it wouldn’t matter and I would be fine with my daughter sharing a locker room/bathroom. I’m more worried about her being shot and killed than someone who is trans in the bathroom with her.
People don’t just wake up one day and go “I’m a girl! Hyuk! I’m going to go be a girl just to get in the bathroom! Hyuk!”
People don’t do that, especially trans people. Get your head out of your ass.
When that happens we can talk about why it happened, and how it was handled. But it's simply not a thing that happens unless it's some anti-trans activist trying to prove a point!
Two things to ponder if you dont understand why people might answer "yes.": Boys pissing in public on trees and in bushes is a normal thing, especially among circles expressing concern about a society that acknowledges trans people exist. Boys using toilets is a plus, at all ages. Second: every Porta potty in existence seems to operate with its gender neutrality without the same kind of panic. If you can square these two notions: Boys using a toilet isn't odd, strange, or worth a moral panic. You might then see your question isn't about toilets, and about gendered space and how important it is to have spaces that are exclusive and exclusionary based on something like gender, (or even... other things!)
Of course my point is about having separate spaces that are exclusive to the two sexes. Males commit the overwhelmingly large percentage of sex crimes. Giving males free access to women’s safe spaces is not going to end well.
You're making the unnecessary leap of toilets>sex. And then further to sex>sex crimes. This is why I mentioned portapotties. These are gender neutral public toilets found all over the nation. Are portapotties offensive? Sexual dens?
Toilets and bathrooms are perfectly functional as gender neutral spaces. The insistence that a transperson using the bathroom that aligns with their gender is somehow an invitation for sex crime just doesn't have much basis.
Portapotties are single person. You’re not walking around in a portapotty with other people. There’s no possibility of someone peeping under/over the stall wall in a portapotty.
Most public toilets are not gender neutral, they’re male and female.
Again - it’s not that the trans person will assault someone, it’s the fact that it eliminates it as a “safe space” where women can go knowing there won’t be men in there. If you let trans women in you’re letting biological men in, meaning any man can now use that space simply by saying they identify as a woman.
Ah, got it. You don't seem to be parsing between sex and gender here, which is probably why this is going to be a troublesome topic every time it comes up.
I mean you extrapolate from "biological men" into "any man" way too casually to have a serious opinion on this topic.
I mean, jist wait to you hear about this thing called homosexuality. No bathroom will be safe anywhere from anyone if people know about that!
Public toilets are sex based, not gender. They are male and female. They have existed since long before gender "wasn't a binary".
A biological female that identifies as a man can't use the urinals, can they? No, because they don't have a penis. Toilets have always been made to accommodate the different sexes, not genders.
It is the presence or lack of a urinal that makes a bathroom a safe space or not? Regardless of that tangent, toilets are not sex specific. (And before indoor plumbing becoming commonplace, outhouses and pit privies weren't exactly sex based either.)
But at least you've honed in and have gotten down to it: you find toilets to be inherently sexual. I find that to be pretty weird. While I won't kink shame you, I don't think it's a good foundation for how handle human waste in public.
(Stalls cam be made more private way more easily than public bathrooms be policed for genitalia conformance.)
You're just being disingenuous now. You know that was not said in relation to anything being a "safe space". You know it was said to show that toilets are sex based and not gender based, because gender apparently now has nothing whatsoever to do with your genitals.
"If I ignore your very real and very good point, I can disagree" lol. Male toilets have always had toilets designed for biological male bodies, ie a "penis owner". That proves that they aren't "gender based", otherwise why would only 1 of the 2 of them have a urinal?
I see there is no limit to your disingenuity. You're the one arguing to try and let biological males go to the toilet with biological girls.
Urgh, the notion that allowing trans people into the bathroom means sex crime is the original disingenuous point. That's kind of what I was trying to show you. Besides, a transwoman in a woman's bathroom isn't using a urinal. A transman in a man's bathroom isn't using a urinal. There shouldn't be a problem with that, and yet there are people just need to know the genitalia of everyone in the stalls. Like genitals need to policed instead of just abiding by a general social rule of public spaces regardless of sex and gender: don't be sexual in public spaces. Indecency and shit are still very real things that don't change with trans people existing and taking dumps, believe it or not. Now I don't mean to upset you, so I am sorry if you are taken so aback at my fatigue of the "trans = perverts" perspective.
No one is saying trans people = perverts. Well I’m sure some are saying that, but I’m not.
What I’m saying is that by allowing anyone to enter female-only spaces you remove the safeguards that make them safe spaces sin the first place.
Are the trans people there to assault women? No. Does it open the door to perverts that do want to assault women to just openly use female-only spaces? Yes. That’s the issue.
It only opens the door for perverts if you are, in fact, saying trans people = perverts.
After all you're saying allowing a trans person to use their aligning bathroom is the same as allowing anyone to enter female-only spaces.
(So you kinda are saying that. It does appear you might be one of those some.)
You're forgetting the trough system in stadiums on top of ignoring the recurring point I've been making: bathrooms aren't inherently sexual. The injection of sexual acts and sexual crimes by accepting the jdea of trans people using the appropriate bathroom is the original disingenuous stance, so I'm sorry if you're taken aback. I don't meant to upset you if my fatigue at the "trans equals and enables peeping pervs" perspective. And come on now: A transwoman in a women's bathroom isn't using a urinal. A transman in a man's bathroom is also not using a urinal. There shouldn't be a problem there, but somehow having to know the genitalia of people shitting is less weird than letting
I mean this is the first you've mentioned stadiums, so there's that. I've never heard of urinals being in a female bathroom at a stadium. What stadium has troughs in the female bathrooms?
No one is saying they are. Apparently this is really difficult for you. The overwhelmingly large percentage of sexual crimes are committed by men (like 99%) and opportunity is one of the biggest factors in it. By allowing men to just openly use womens "safe spaces" you're inviting opportunity for more sexual assaults to take place. This isn't rocket science.
If a pervert male wants to take photos of little girls on the toilet, do you agree that allowing him access to the female toilets presents him with more opportunity to do it? If not, explain your reasoning, because I can already say it doesn't make sense.
We're also not just talking about bathrooms. Changing rooms, sexual assault centres, gyms, doctors, etc - the same applies, and once you start making legislation that takes away womens protections to sex based safe spaces in one area, you take them away for all.
You're starting at the pervert male and are working backwards, which is kind of the problem here.
That pervert male is already just as capable and already doing the things you're fantasizing about, which has nothing to do with trans people using their correspondingly accurate bathroom. It's really the bathroom of least resistance they're seeking, and somehow sex crimes are being displaced onto them.
The hypothetical sexual pervert is not a credible argument here.
Why do questions like this always sound like the person asking is just putting a question mark at the end of something they've considered doing?
Ah yes, the people that are against letting men in the women’s spaces are the ones that want to go in women’s spaces. Impeccable logic you have there.
Trans women are women, bigot.
I'd imagine that trans women don't want to use the men's room because of people like you who consider restrooms to be peeping opportunities.
I'm talking sex, not gender.
Quit the name calling.
Also again with trying to deflect and call the people that want to stop any potential for "peeping opportunities" the ones that are the "peepers" lol. Make it make sense.
I don't want 11 year old girls being forced to use men's restrooms. Why do you want that so badly?
11 year old biological boys you mean?
Why do you so desparately want biological males to be allowed in to female-only spaces? You're trying to make out that the people that don't want biological males in biological female toilets are the creepy ones here and it's bizarre lol.
Why do you want 11 year old biological girls in the mens toilets with you? Why do you want that so badly?
I think people should use the restroom that corresponds to their gender. You keep going on about meaningless biological differences and making up hypotheticals about men in women's restrooms. The story is about a girl using the women's restroom. Note: they're not called "Biologically male restrooms" or "Biologically female restrooms". They're men's restrooms and women's restrooms. Gender. The social construct. Not the genitalia that you keep obsessing over.
Do you seriously believe that someone would go to all the trouble of dealing with the bullshit that bigots are delighted to put trans people through just to perv on people in the commode? Do you think the 11 year old plaintiff in the story is doing that? Are you really gonna libel an 11 year old?