• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Restroom use: how would you do it?

maquiscat

Maquis Admiral
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
13,306
Reaction score
4,280
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
True, but cameras have been mentioned in this thread as a means to deter rape, pedophilia, harassment, etc in unisex bathrooms. Fear of getting caught might prevent some but, as you say, not all. Presumably someone monitoring the camera and close enough to intervene could do so. But I doubt that's practical.
Most law has nothing for prevention save deterrent, which was his point. All cameras are more for evidence over prevention. If they can be used for prevention, that's bonus.
 

maquiscat

Maquis Admiral
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
13,306
Reaction score
4,280
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
One problem with this is that it’s fine with new construction, but existing, say restaurants, maybe mom and pops, will have to get a third bathroom put in to stay in business? In an average business in my area this would be a roughly $40,000 - $50,000 add on. Same thing when the ADA laws were introduced. Wheel chair ramps, and all that.
IIRC, even the ADA allowed for grandfathering, with the stipulation that if you modified or upgraded any part of the building, then you had to upgrade to ADA compliance as well.
 

maquiscat

Maquis Admiral
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
13,306
Reaction score
4,280
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Let me explain then. Let's say a woman gets up in the middle of the night to pee. Most of us know our homes well enough to not turn on any lights (and lights are incredibly jarring in the middle of the night). We go to sit down on the toilet and, SURPRISE, if the seat is up, you are suddenly and unexpectedly sitting in water - especially those of us with narrow hips. We fall right through that wider opening when the seat is up. Since women are typically more likely to need the toilet in the middle of the night (maybe until old age????), we should win this battle:)
That is so off topic from the public/private business part of this thought experiment.
 

maquiscat

Maquis Admiral
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
13,306
Reaction score
4,280
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Biological sex should determine what restroom you use. It's just about the science.
And what is your proposal within your law to determine if a person walking into a given restroom is in violation of the biological sex limit of your law? How are you legally defining biological sex? What is the enforcement?

And why do people keep ignoring the "give details, just not in legalese" part of the OP?
 

JasperL

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 27, 2014
Messages
49,632
Reaction score
20,517
Location
Tennessee
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I've never seen the inside of a men's restroom at a place like a large football stadium but I expect there are some advantages to not having individual cubicles in that there is never a line like there can be for a ladies restroom:)
Very true. Our basketball seats are next to a men's restroom that used to have two stalls, and then one long "trough" along two entire walls. So about 30 guys could go at the same time. Yes, you're jammed elbow to elbow, but there was no line, and if you wanted privacy, the stalls didn't have a long wait most of the time. Dads used it for their kids mostly, and adults to pour drinks and leave the little bottles.

Then they remodeled the thing and roughly 32 slots went to 8 (4 stalls, and only four urinals, but nice sinks!!!) and now there's a long line at all times. Stupid, stupid, stupid.
 

CHuDWah

Rich Old White Guy
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 15, 2013
Messages
1,351
Reaction score
643
Location
Kritter Krick, Flaw-duh
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
True, but cameras have been mentioned in this thread as a means to deter rape, pedophilia, harassment, etc in unisex bathrooms. Fear of getting caught might prevent some but, as you say, not all. Presumably someone monitoring the camera and close enough to intervene could do so. But I doubt that's practical.
Most law has nothing for prevention save deterrent, which was his point. All cameras are more for evidence over prevention. If they can be used for prevention, that's bonus.

Which is why I said "means to deter," and prevent is synonymous with deter in the context of "Fear of getting caught." Yes, cameras are more for identifying/apprehending and providing evidence against perpetrators after the fact, than for prevention/deterrence of the crime. That's implicit in my point that cameras would be useless for intervention unless they are monitored, which is impractical.
 

Court Jester

Proud Systemic Anti-Wokist Paleocon Jedi Master
Joined
Nov 6, 2019
Messages
3,838
Reaction score
1,684
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I wanted to focus in on this more than what some of the other threads are doing. I am placing this in Law and Order since we are going to be discussing what the law should be as the main focus, although no doubt there will be much about sexuality in it as well. So Mods, move if you see fit.

Here is your hypothetical: You are tasked with writing a law on restroom use (private homes excluded), and it will be accepted as law. For the purposes of this discussion, you don't have to do this in legalese, but you do need to be specific, especially on issues such as exceptions and enforcement.
Solved

 

maquiscat

Maquis Admiral
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
13,306
Reaction score
4,280
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
And how are you legally defining who goes into which one? What methods will be used to determine if a person has violated your law? What is your enforcement? Why do you lack the ability to comprehend the word "details"?
 

Court Jester

Proud Systemic Anti-Wokist Paleocon Jedi Master
Joined
Nov 6, 2019
Messages
3,838
Reaction score
1,684
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent


And how are you legally defining who goes into which one?
See the signs that say "men" and "women"? Like that. And for those who can't read English, the pictures pretty much are the guide.


What methods will be used to determine if a person has violated your law?
The "law" of nature maybe?

XX vs XY





What is your enforcement?





Why do you lack the ability to comprehend the word "details"?
Did you say "details"? LOL, yeah, the devil is in them ain't it?

 

maquiscat

Maquis Admiral
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
13,306
Reaction score
4,280
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
See the signs that say "men" and "women"? Like that. And for those who can't read English, the pictures pretty much are the guide.
Without the legal definition, then a trans man is just as able to go into the men's restroom as the cis man. Legal definition exist to prevent any ambiguity in word usage, especially in a language where idiom and slang are common and have a tendency to become part of the structured language. For example, incest itself is only sex between blood related people, but in most laws, legal definitions exist to make it also sex between people who share a legal relationship, such as adoption or step whatever, and also often add marriage into the definition. Legal definition does not automatically equal actual definition. For that matter, a law could easily be made that states, "for the purpose of law, man shall mean any individual who identifies as a man, including, but not limited to cis man or trans man".

The "law" of nature maybe?

XX vs XY
Again, how are you determining whether a person entering into the women's restroom has an XX pair or an XY pair? How is an officer of the law to determine such? Or do you plan to just suffer a lot of false arrests?

Are we talking jail time? Fines? Community service? What's your enforcement here?




Did you say "details"? LOL, yeah, the devil is in them ain't it?
And yet you can't provide them. I mean if the problem is more than you can handle, just say so. It seems that way since you can't follow instructions.
 
Last edited:

Court Jester

Proud Systemic Anti-Wokist Paleocon Jedi Master
Joined
Nov 6, 2019
Messages
3,838
Reaction score
1,684
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Without the legal definition, then a trans man is just as able to go into the men's restroom as the cis man.
Does there need to be a "legal definition" of what is a tree vs what is boulder? Or hasn't mankind pretty much been able to observe NATURE, and even before we had a written language, mankind was capable of knowing the differences in things by their NATURAL physical and observable traits?

Legal definition exist to prevent any ambiguity in word usage, especially in a language where idiom and slang are common and have a tendency to become part of the structured language.
So, do you need a legal definition before you call the fire department and say there is a brush fire by the large oak tree on my street--- or the large boulder if that may be the case?
Common usage of terms and definitions exist because they ARE COMMON. Same way it is common that men and women have differences which are observable, knowable, and vary slightly in function on only in nature.

For example, incest itself is only sex between blood related people, but in most laws, legal definitions exist to make it also sex between people who share a legal relationship, such as adoption or step whatever, and also often add marriage into the definition. Legal definition does not automatically equal actual definition. For that matter, a law could easily be made that states, "for the purpose of law, man shall mean any individual who identifies as a man, including, but not limited to cis man or trans man".
You are going "the long way around the block" as they say, in order to attempt justify your skewed logic on something that is already very simple to figure out. Laws regarding incest have historically been based on a NATURAL aversion to sexual relationships with close family members (siblings, parents/children)--- and for good reasons; both biologically (nature), and societal (to protect children and encourge healthy family units within the culture). That higher reasoning part of us humans which sets us apart from animals.


I'm not the one here incapable of observing NATURE
Again, how are you determining whether a person entering into the women's restroom has an XX pair or an XY pair? How is an officer of the law to determine such? Or do you plan to just suffer a lot of false arrests?
"Determining" the difference between man and women isn't that difficult when MEN AND WOMEN know the difference between what is a man and what is a woman, without some convoluted legalieeze pseudo psycho-babble sliding scale where each person is allowed to apply their own definitions--- or no definition. So, when a NORMAL person (not a loon) needs to take a piss, they go into the public restroom which is indicated for their gender/sex, which is NORMALLY not something anyone would need to overthink.




Are we talking jail time? Fines? Community service? What's your enforcement here?
Scorn and ridicule are both free, it starts there. It starts by NOT encouraging mentally ill and/or delusional people any justification for their insanity. I don't care if hurts their feelings, you tell that guy who thinks he is a female HE ISN'T and NEVER will be. You don't give lunacy equal standing. That is how you enforce it; doesn't need jail time or fines. You use the same mechanisims which societies have always used to deter abnormal behavior which short of being harmful or violent to others, does not benefit the society. Same way incest was discouraged before there were written laws and punishments attached to that kind of behavior. You looked at the person in disgust.... YUK!!!! And then if necessary you shunned or marginalized the crazy or destructive behavior. Eventualy then everyone is society gets the idea. But what you don't do is encourage or celebrate it.

Why is say NO so hard to do?





And yet you can't provide them. I mean if the problem is more than you can handle, just say so. It seems that way since you can't follow instructions.
I'm not the one here who is incapable of observing NATURE. Sorry if my frank commentary is so unsettling to you. If you don't want truth, then keep looking for those "legal definitions" which not required to be natural definitions.
 

maquiscat

Maquis Admiral
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
13,306
Reaction score
4,280
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Does there need to be a "legal definition" of what is a tree vs what is boulder? Or hasn't mankind pretty much been able to observe NATURE, and even before we had a written language, mankind was capable of knowing the differences in things by their NATURAL physical and observable traits?
Are they being legally regulated? NO? Then why would there need to be a legal definition for them?

So, do you need a legal definition before you call the fire department and say there is a brush fire by the large oak tree on my street--- or the large boulder if that may be the case?
Common usage of terms and definitions exist because they ARE COMMON. Same way it is common that men and women have differences which are observable, knowable, and vary slightly in function on only in nature.
Ah yes, common usage. Such as a boot for the storage area of a car, or chips for sliced fried potatoes. Or we can look at the gay apparel of Deck the Halls.

You are going "the long way around the block" as they say, in order to attempt justify your skewed logic on something that is already very simple to figure out. Laws regarding incest have historically been based on a NATURAL aversion to sexual relationships with close family members (siblings, parents/children)--- and for good reasons; both biologically (nature), and societal (to protect children and encourge healthy family units within the culture). That higher reasoning part of us humans which sets us apart from animals.
There is nothing "higher" about it. Such repulsions are natural due to growing up in close proximity during certain early years of childhood. Which is why when siblings are raised apart of each other, meet and fall in love they don't have that repulsion.

"Determining" the difference between man and women isn't that difficult when MEN AND WOMEN know the difference between what is a man and what is a woman, without some convoluted legalieeze pseudo psycho-babble sliding scale where each person is allowed to apply their own definitions--- or no definition. So, when a NORMAL person (not a loon) needs to take a piss, they go into the public restroom which is indicated for their gender/sex, which is NORMALLY not something anyone would need to overthink.
Who is going into which restroom?
pic 1.jpgpic 3.jpg

Both pictures have at least one cis male and one trans male. If you can't tell without a picture search, then you already failed.

But what you don't do is encourage or celebrate it.
We never should have encouraged or celebrated interracial relationships and marriages. Anyone who observes nature can clearly see it's not natural. Yeah, we have heard these arguments before.

I'm not the one here who is incapable of observing NATURE. Sorry if my frank commentary is so unsettling to you. If you don't want truth, then keep looking for those "legal definitions" which not required to be natural definitions.
Sadly you are indeed. You are the person telling everyone to look how we can observe the sun move across the sky, so obviously NATURE has the sun moving around the earth. I'm sorry if the reality of science has shown that sex nd gender are not the same and don't always match is so unsettling to you.


Basically, all your posts so far have been one big single dodge, and avoidance of answering the questions. If it is so easy and natural to tell men from women, then how can these events ever occur?

So, exactly how would you propose that these woman be able to enter into a women's restroom since they obviously look like men to other people?

I've got money riding on you dodging this as well.
 

Northern Light

The Light of Truth
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 7, 2013
Messages
6,731
Reaction score
4,187
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Most people are gender binary or what one might call gender typical. A minority aren't. This is important because we don't need to redesign entire washroom facilities for a minority. I don't say that to be discriminatory but just practical. Redesign is costly. Plus let's face it, sexual assault is real and women are mostly on the receiving end of that, so I think keeping men and women's washrooms separate is a good thing.

In places where there are multi-person restrooms, it makes sense to just make a "family" restroom as a third option. It can be single occupancy. Frankly, the third option has many other uses, not just for transgender people. I hated having to change my children's diapers in the filthy common restrooms. They always put the baby change station in the disabled stall, and EVERYONE who isn't disabled uses that stall because it has more space, so it is usually more filthy. Anywhere that has a family room is usually cleaner because it's called a family room and somehow that name triggers more respect and decency in people who might otherwise trash a place.

A friend in high school had an ostomy bag and he cherished the third option. He really valued the extra privacy.

Females need more toilets. Just a fact of life. I remember taking a tour of a stadium once and they told us that there were more women's restrooms and more stalls per restroom because women taken on average 3 minutes longer than men. Go to any night club and you see this too.

In places that have single-occupant restrooms, just change them all to unisex.
 

Court Jester

Proud Systemic Anti-Wokist Paleocon Jedi Master
Joined
Nov 6, 2019
Messages
3,838
Reaction score
1,684
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
We never should have encouraged or celebrated interracial relationships and marriages. Anyone who observes nature can clearly see it's not natural. Yeah, we have heard these arguments before.
Not from me you haven't. There is NOTHING unnatural about interracial relationships. They also cannot be compared to gender delusion. Two very different subjects. Being of a different race is not abnormal. Men pretending to be woman is very abnormal.


Sadly you are indeed. You are the person telling everyone to look how we can observe the sun move across the sky, so obviously NATURE has the sun moving around the earth. I'm sorry if the reality of science has shown that sex nd gender are not the same and don't always match is so unsettling to you.
There is no "reality of science" in a situation where a man, suddenly claiims he is a female, when he is in fact a biological male. Especially when your so called claim of "reality" is one where the man DECIDED subjectively that he is a female, and then you take that as fact. But then when the same man changes his mind and says he is a male, then you also take that as "fact".

There is either an objective standard for determining sex, or there is not.


So, exactly how would you propose that these woman be able to enter into a women's restroom since they obviously look like men to other people?
"Looks like" does not make them men.
 

maquiscat

Maquis Admiral
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
13,306
Reaction score
4,280
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Not from me you haven't. There is NOTHING unnatural about interracial relationships. They also cannot be compared to gender delusion. Two very different subjects. Being of a different race is not abnormal. Men pretending to be woman is very abnormal.
Wow, completely missed the whole point. A claim of natural does not make it natural. And yes I know that argument works both way. At least I can admit that. Unnatural was indeed the claim about interracial marriages and relationships, and that was proven wrong. And it has been proven wrong by science for both sexuality and identity. Lord knows Lisa and Laura have provided more than enough evidence of such.


There is no "reality of science" in a situation where a man, suddenly claiims he is a female, when he is in fact a biological male. Especially when your so called claim of "reality" is one where the man DECIDED subjectively that he is a female, and then you take that as fact. But then when the same man changes his mind and says he is a male, then you also take that as "fact".

There is either an objective standard for determining sex, or there is not.
And exactly what is this objective standard? IIRC, you claimed that it was genitals, and @Killer Clouds claimed that the objective standard was chromosomes. I might have reversed those, but still, obviously even the "objective standard" is subjective.

"Looks like" does not make them men.
Exactly! So how do you determine if the person going in is actually a man or not? If you are going to keep men out by force of law, how are you determining they are a man at that time of entry? You keep dodging around this.
 

bomberfox

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 26, 2019
Messages
12,875
Reaction score
3,250
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Most people are gender binary or what one might call gender typical. A minority aren't. This is important because we don't need to redesign entire washroom facilities for a minority. I don't say that to be discriminatory but just practical. Redesign is costly. Plus let's face it, sexual assault is real and women are mostly on the receiving end of that, so I think keeping men and women's washrooms separate is a good thing.

In places where there are multi-person restrooms, it makes sense to just make a "family" restroom as a third option. It can be single occupancy. Frankly, the third option has many other uses, not just for transgender people. I hated having to change my children's diapers in the filthy common restrooms. They always put the baby change station in the disabled stall, and EVERYONE who isn't disabled uses that stall because it has more space, so it is usually more filthy. Anywhere that has a family room is usually cleaner because it's called a family room and somehow that name triggers more respect and decency in people who might otherwise trash a place.

A friend in high school had an ostomy bag and he cherished the third option. He really valued the extra privacy.

Females need more toilets. Just a fact of life. I remember taking a tour of a stadium once and they told us that there were more women's restrooms and more stalls per restroom because women taken on average 3 minutes longer than men. Go to any night club and you see this too.

In places that have single-occupant restrooms, just change them all to unisex.
Evidence of widespread sexual assault due to trans people using the bathroom of their identity please. Or are you just gonna go with more unfounded demonization?
 

Northern Light

The Light of Truth
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 7, 2013
Messages
6,731
Reaction score
4,187
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Evidence of widespread sexual assault due to trans people using the bathroom of their identity please. Or are you just gonna go with more unfounded demonization?
Evidence that it's widespread, please?
 

Northern Light

The Light of Truth
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 7, 2013
Messages
6,731
Reaction score
4,187
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Im not making the claim it is widespread.
Those were the exact words you used.

"Evidence of widespread sexual assault due to trans people..."

Don't lie now.

Show this evidence please, or admit you were wrong and retract your claim.
 

maquiscat

Maquis Admiral
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
13,306
Reaction score
4,280
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Those were the exact words you used.

"Evidence of widespread sexual assault due to trans people..."

Don't lie now.

Show this evidence please, or admit you were wrong and retract your claim.
@bomberfox had been asking you initially for that evidence. It was worded as a statement/demand and not a question/request. But still the call was for you to provide that information.
 

Northern Light

The Light of Truth
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 7, 2013
Messages
6,731
Reaction score
4,187
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Sorry, I misunderstood, and part of the reason why is that I said women were recipients of sexual assault, not trans people? I don't understand the call for evidence. I didn't say that.
 

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
66,559
Reaction score
37,783
Location
Uhland, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
I wanted to focus in on this more than what some of the other threads are doing. I am placing this in Law and Order since we are going to be discussing what the law should be as the main focus, although no doubt there will be much about sexuality in it as well. So Mods, move if you see fit.

Here is your hypothetical: You are tasked with writing a law on restroom use (private homes excluded), and it will be accepted as law. For the purposes of this discussion, you don't have to do this in legalese, but you do need to be specific, especially on issues such as exceptions and enforcement.
Change the restroom labels to “Us” and “Them”, have no enforcement and let people decide which they prefer to use.
 

grip

☚ Who Farted ☛
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 1, 2011
Messages
24,988
Reaction score
9,546
Location
Fl
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Either figure out which gender restroom to use or we'll have to have one universal restroom with all private stalls.
We cannot have businesses providing an endless stream of options.
 

maquiscat

Maquis Admiral
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
13,306
Reaction score
4,280
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Change the restroom labels to “Us” and “Them”, have no enforcement and let people decide which they prefer to use.
So you are just going to make a law to change signs and leave it at that?
 
Top Bottom