Gender and Bathrooms and T&F

The basic point of separate bathrooms is the protection of those without Y chromosomes from those with Y chromosomes. That includes protection from threats both real and imaginary.

Make 3 bathrooms: Y-free, Y, and don't-care. Anyone will be allowed to use the don't-care, the other two will be restricted. Or just have 2, one of them Y + don't-care and the other Y-free.

Porta johns have been gender acceptable for many years.

Bad Wigins wrote:

The basic point of separate bathrooms is the protection of those without Y chromosomes from those with Y chromosomes. That includes protection from threats both real and imaginary.

Make 3 bathrooms: Y-free, Y, and don't-care. Anyone will be allowed to use the don't-care, the other two will be restricted. Or just have 2, one of them Y + don't-care and the other Y-free.

You didn't answer the question.

Do you really think bathrooms need to be legislated at the chromosome level?

People here at LRC (including website staff/owners) have been pretty vocal on both the bathroom issue and Caster Semenya and I'm curious as to how they reconcile those two. Should Caster and her vagina of birth get changed in the women's locker room, then walk out on the track and compete against men?

Wtfunny wrote:

Bad Wigins wrote:

The basic point of separate bathrooms is the protection of those without Y chromosomes from those with Y chromosomes. That includes protection from threats both real and imaginary.

Make 3 bathrooms: Y-free, Y, and don't-care. Anyone will be allowed to use the don't-care, the other two will be restricted. Or just have 2, one of them Y + don't-care and the other Y-free.

You didn't answer the question.

Do you really think bathrooms need to be legislated at the chromosome level?

People here at LRC (including website staff/owners) have been pretty vocal on both the bathroom issue and Caster Semenya and I'm curious as to how they reconcile those two. Should Caster and her vagina of birth get changed in the women's locker room, then walk out on the track and compete against men?

I love this so, so much.

Me? I would knock down all of the bathroom dividing walls and just have one bathroom - all stalls - for any human being to use.

As for Castor? I s'pose we have to chalk it up to "God's will" and see if she can eclipse the records of those we "know" were achieved using illegal substances.

There is no need to reconcile competition separation with bathroom separation. They are different things separated for different purposes.

I don't know or care. Do you think a male identifying as a female should be allowed to compete against females with no hormone therapy? If no, should they be allowed to use the women's bathroom? Should they be forced to compete with the males, then walk off the track and change in the women's room?

rational thinker wrote:

There is no need to reconcile competition separation with bathroom separation. They are different things separated for different purposes.

Is it not the additional testosterone that fuels both issues?

Nothing needs to be done. No laws need to be written.

There never was any problem until liberals created one.

The Stinker wrote:

rational thinker wrote:

There is no need to reconcile competition separation with bathroom separation. They are different things separated for different purposes.

Is it not the additional testosterone that fuels both issues?

No.

Why do you think that they need to line up?

This has been discussed at lengths. And the liberals always shied away from responding.

From a conservative point of view, those who were born with a penis should compete and shower in the male category, and those born with a vagina should compete and shower with those in the female category. Special arrangements have to be found for those with neither or both. To compete in the female category, however, you cannot have any Y-chromosomes in your body. And if you don't have that, you should also shower with other females.

The only remaining question is where people who look like women but have Y-chromosomes should shower. That must be solved on an individual basis. But the most important point would be to protect born transgenders from men the same we protect women from men.

Yes, there are lots of male pervs. Conservatives accept that fact and are willing to do something about it. Liberals refuse to deal with unless the perv is conservative. Then they go off their hinges.

It's real simple: get rid of gender segregated bathrooms and gender segregated sports. Everyone uses the same bathrooms and everyone competes in one open category in T&F.

Having "separate but equal" bathrooms and "separate but equal" sports is inherently unequal. There should be one category open to everyone.

Wtfunny wrote:

Bad Wigins wrote:

The basic point of separate bathrooms is the protection of those without Y chromosomes from those with Y chromosomes. That includes protection from threats both real and imaginary.

Make 3 bathrooms: Y-free, Y, and don't-care. Anyone will be allowed to use the don't-care, the other two will be restricted. Or just have 2, one of them Y + don't-care and the other Y-free.

You didn't answer the question.

Do you really think bathrooms need to be legislated at the chromosome level?

People here at LRC (including website staff/owners) have been pretty vocal on both the bathroom issue and Caster Semenya and I'm curious as to how they reconcile those two. Should Caster and her vagina of birth get changed in the women's locker room, then walk out on the track and compete against men?

People misunderstand my views on this.

I don't care too much what restroom people use. At Yale 20 years ago, the bathrooms were used by people of either sex in the dorms. It wasn't a big deal. I used the women's rest room at the office the other day. The light wasn't working in the men's room so I went into the women's (it's just one toilet in each with a closed door so why does it matter).

As long as there are doors, who cares. At my house, I don't have a men's room and women's room. If you are transgender and dressed like a woman like Caitlyn Jenner, i think it would be less jarring for a kid if you used the women's restroom.

I do have an issue with the showers. If you are Caitlyn Jenner but still haven't had the guts to chop it off, then I'm sorry, you need to shower in the men's locker room. I don't want people in communal showers with the wrong genitalia.

Yes, he whole idea of communal showers is kind of weird. If they want to put doors on showers like they do in bathrooms, then maybe Caitlyn can go into the women's room but the idea of having a person with a penis in the women's is absurd. Either one person (the transgender person who hasn't chopped it off yet) or a whole bunch of people are going to feel uncomfortable.

In track, common sense should apply. Semenya was raised as a woman and doesn't have a penis. She is a woman but she shouldn't be competing against them because she has internal testicles. If you have testicles, internal or external, you compete in the open category. Everyone else competes in the category for people with testosterone below the 10 to 1 range naturally.

A LetRun.com visitor emailed after World Indoors. He was watching the meet with his young child. During the women's 800, the child (With no feedback from mom or dad) said "Are we rooting for the girl in the USA singlet or the boy in the lead?"

I'm not going to spend even a moment worrying about this

notthesamesituations wrote:

Why do you think that they need to line up?

Do you think gender shifts between the locker room and the track?

Q for libs too wrote:

I don't know or care. Do you think a male identifying as a female should be allowed to compete against females with no hormone therapy? If no, should they be allowed to use the women's bathroom? Should they be forced to compete with the males, then walk off the track and change in the women's room?

Well, hopefully this isn't simply a "liberals/conservatives" argument.

I realize the intersection of such things is difficult to navigate. The question is shouldn't we be consistent, or be able to honestly and logically support a position?

To my mind, Caster presents a example of those intersections. Rojo just essentially said he thinks she should shower and change with women, yet compete with men. I think that's inconsistent. I also think his argument opened up his dishonesty when he referred to "compete in the open events". There's no "open 800m", there are men's and women's 800m. Rojo knows that. It's simply a way of reframing the discussion to make an inconsistent position appear consistent.

Wtfunny wrote:

There's no "open 800m", there are men's and women's 800m.

The male category should be renamed to the "open" class to accommodate those who do not want to be considered men, but are not allowed to compete in the female category.

So you're saying someone who uses the woman's showers shouldn't be allowed to compete with other women?

And this "not allowed" denlineation should be decided by who, and on what grounds? How about a woman who's 6'2" and her unfair advantage? That's largely chemistry, no.

Wtfunny wrote:

So you're saying someone who uses the woman's showers shouldn't be allowed to compete with other women?

And this "not allowed" denlineation should be decided by who, and on what grounds? How about a woman who's 6'2" and her unfair advantage? That's largely chemistry, no.

Not when she's competing against other 6'2" WOMEN.