Transnegation Roundup/2020/09/09/1

From CWRE
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Toilets of Terror, part N

Reality

I came across this very in-depth article about the sexist history of bathroom segregation, which specifically demolishes (yet again) Gender Critical arguments against trans women being allowed to use women's bathrooms:

...this notion of a predatory cross-dressing man is complete fiction. In reality, if you look at the numbers: it is trans people who are at the greatest risk of being attacked in public restrooms.

(Citation: What Experts Say)

This is of course only what we've been saying for quite some time now.

That said, I've been frustrated by how difficult it can be to find stats on violence by trans women.

I search for "sexual abuse by women" and find plenty of information about that still relatively-small slice of the assault-pie: Assault/by women

...but as soon as I add "trans" into the search, I only get results about abuse *of* trans women.

CLEARLY THIS IS THE POSTMODERN WOKE PC TA CONSPIRACY SILENCING THE TRUTH!!

...or maybe it just means that trans women are much more likely to be assaultees than assaulters? 🤔

In any case...

...both sides of this debate claim that they’re on the side of safety. One side argues that trans people should be safe in the bathroom [of] their gender identity, while the other side [cites the risk of attack] in the bathroom by cross-dressing men.

So: in order to factually address this question, we need to look at the relative danger of cis women/girls in women's rooms from two possible sources:

(a) other cis women
(b) trans women

There's plenty of info on (a), not so much on (b).

...but really, though, this feels like a diversion.

For one thing, *everyone* would be safer in unisex bathrooms with a more open design for communal activities (sinks, mirrors) and better privacy for the individual toilets (floor-to-ceiling stalls which can't be peeked into).

More relevantly, though, sex-separated bathrooms were a sexist institution from the very beginning:

as [indoor restrooms] moved into the public realm, they entered a world that was at the time shaped by a very popular idea called the 🌺'separate spheres ideology'🌺...

...which was:

The idea that women belonged in the home and that men belonged in public spaces. There was an idea that allowing women into the public sphere was to be risky because, given their 🥀“weakness”🥀, they could become contaminated by the vile influence of men.

(
Aside: Gotta love that phrase —
THE VILE INFLUENCE OF MEN 👹
...but really, that's how Gender Criticals sound when they talk about how trans women are ACTUALLY MEN who are of course pretty reliably DANGEROUS AND VIOLENT.
...and therefore so are trans women, QED.😝
But I digress.
)

This theory resulted in:

...ladies-only train cars, ladies-only dining rooms, and ladies-only waiting rooms. These spaces were often decorated to look very domestic...

...which is ultimately how we get to gendered bathrooms.

So very feminist.

To be clear: Gender Criticals are anti feminist, no matter how they self-identify. When was the last time someone made a "safety" argument for separatism that actually benefited the group being separated? Even just staying with the bathroom issue:

  • skin color bathroom segregation (1940s, 50s)
  • fears of gay men having sex in bathrooms (1950s, 60s)
  • claims that the ERA would mean unisex bathrooms (1970s)
  • fears of gay men spreading AIDS in bathrooms (1980s)

...and this is just one example of that.

BUT ANYWAY.

So there's that article (and some accompanying short videos). I stashed it away for future reference, thinking "well... that argument has been dealt with *so* thoroughly by now, the GCs will probably stay away from mentioning restrooms, so [shrug]."

...and then I check Twitter, and see @ripx4nutmeg's tweet, and Wendy's comment "This is why we flip out about locker rooms, etc. How can you tell the difference between the innocent and the abusers?" which is basically the racial profiling argument, but with genitalia.

(Actually secondary physical cues serving as a proxy for genitalia, but I think we all understand that by now? Not even GCs are proposing crotch-checks as a prereq for restroom entry... so far...)

So, you know, Gender Critical Twitter didn't disappoint. There's no argument against trans people that's so hopelessly bad that they won't bring it out if it can be given a fresh coat of paint with a current news article.

...or one from 2001.

Retrieved from "https://cwre.org/w/index.php?title=Transnegation_Roundup/2020/09/09/1&oldid=1718"