Should gay and trans people have their own bathrooms?

I would not be going into the ladies room, but would give it a try if the honker was hot!

 

Then the MAGA crowd would whine about how they get special treatment. And it would not be fair to white men.

 

You think the ladies room should be the only honking going on?
You want someone at the entrance to the ladies room groping your wife and daughter?

 

At Giants games, I have let women ahead of me into the men's restroom. I get it. You need twice as many women's facilities as mens.

 

It appears you fully understand my position! These men in dresses have no business in the ladies room, ladies locker room, or in womens sports.

 

I've done that too. But it was back when being a gentleman was a good thing.

 

No, I don't understand your position. I mean, you actually wanted someone honking people going into a woman's restroom. Meaning your wife and daughter would be honked.

Except for the fact, it has been going on since the invention of separate sex bathrooms.

And this thread is not about men in dresses. Maybe that's where things get muddied up in this discussion?
Should these men in dresses, your words, be only allowed in men's restrooms and lockers?
...

https://www.hoodmwr.com/transgender-models/

 

No, if their junk still works. If they're eunuchs, no problem. That's why ancient civilizations had eunuchs.

 

I don't buy that you took my joke seriously. The thread is about trans and bathrooms. I completely understand those objecting to providing men in dresses private access to females. Im sure you can provide me with many images of men that look like women.

 

You don't seem to know the difference between men in dresses and transgender people.
1. there are male to female trans
2. there are female to male trans
3. Neither of which are men in dresses. Not saying some men don't wear dresses. But they are not trans.

 

If you own a business and can afford single occupancy restrooms to accommodate these people, I have no issue. I don't have an issue with women dressed like men using my restroom.

There are many terms we can use to describe a bio male going into the little girls room. I will use the pronoun they feel shows them the respect they deserve. That has nothing to do with the topic. Many object to them having private access to females and competing against them in sports. Their concerns are more than justified.

 

Obviously they do since that is the only restroom that they are worried about who goes in. Hell, some of them have even admitted that they don't care who goes into a men's restroom.

 

Sports is a completely different topic. My only comment on that, is the sports governing bodies can decided. Since there are so many different sports and they've been dealing with what a female is sports wise for over a century.

This thread is about trans using the bathroom they ID as. Usually meaning at the very least, they dress as that sex. No one knows when a trans enters a bathroom of their ID sex, as they will look remarkably like that sex.

Unless you want to have your honker patrol.

 

Nope. The architect follows the building code. The State of Calif sets the standards of how many toilets based on occupancy. So in short, the building code needs to change, but changes are generally not retroactive except ADA, etc. BUT, for a mere 1/4 mill a pot, there is a lot of room under the bleachers.
Aside from the kitchen, restrooms are the next costly to build.

 

Can you cite that? Further even if the code determines number, does it require segregation?

 

I don't want trans people, MALES, using my restrooms, so yes, trans people need to use their own restrooms or use the men's room.
A gay woman can use my restroom because she's not a guy. Even though she might look like one, she's not biologically a male, so I've got no problem with females using female facilities.

 

Change for what reasons?
Trans have been around for centuries and centuries. Until recently, no one really cared because no one can notice or tell when a trans is going to the restroom.

 

You want this person using the men's room. Why?

 

If you are so odd that you can't comport to the standards, stay home and use your own facilities.

 

Five years ago I would have said "yes" to segregation. Today, AFAIK, separate facilities still apply.

And if they didn't insist the world bend over and kiss their asses, no one would care. No doubt cross sex persons have always used the restroom stalls and no one paid attention but now you have a militant group demanding to be seen, honored, and kowtowed to.

 

There is a difference between "industry standard", for lack of a better phrase, and building code. If the code only calls for a certain number based upon formula, and doesn't require separate facilities, it means that variations, such a mixed sex restrooms only, are an option, even if no one has thought to use the option.

 

For your reading pleasure:
https://codes.iccsafe.org/content/CBC2019P1/chapter-29-plumbing-systems

At the top of the green bar on the left is an arrow to close it so you can uncover the chart on the right.

 

As a gay man, in 61 years, I have never been offered my own bathroom in public places. I don't know why I now warrant one, but I sure will take it!

 

Fair enough for California. But I am not assuming that all states have a requirement for separate facilities, and even that may change. I'd also have to spend time to go over the specifics of the different areas of the code, to see if a business could put in a certain minimum of segregated restrooms, and then make the rest unisex. But it would not surprise me to find that there are codes out there that simply leave it at the number of facilities and do not mention segregation simply because no one has thought it necessary to do so.

 

Here it is. You're not like us. You're not one of us. Go hide in your closet.