On August 8, police arrived on the scene of Long Branch Lagoon Water Park in Dodge City, Kansas, to the sight of three self-described “bearded, burly men” who had been in the women’s bathroom and changing area. The manager of the municipally run property allegedly screamed and rushed children out the door.

The men knew this was likely. They didn’t agitate any of the women; they didn’t remove their clothes or make crass comments. They simply used the gendered spaces that the state of Kansas requires them to use by law, because these men are transgender.

“Supporters of SB244, including Attorney General Kris Kobach and Senate Majority Leader Ty Masterson, billed it as a way to keep men out of women’s spaces; it clearly requires some men to enter women’s spaces,” a press release sent to news outlets reads. So, these men took action—using malicious compliance to prove their point.

“Segregating people by suspected genitalia does nothing to improve public safety; it does quite the opposite by opening Kansans up to sexual harassment and discrimination. At no point should anyone be asking anyone else what genitals they have in public.”

The men, dressed in yellow “Compliance Crew” shirts, were part of a small group of trans-masculine Kansans who used the women’s room at facilities across the state that day in a coordinated action. They were also spotted at a zoo, a library, a museum, and other parks. They were in Emporia, Great Bend, Garden City, and Dodge City. At the library, at least one patron complained; at other places, the men used the bathroom and received dirty looks, and simply left the space without confrontation.

But at Long Branch Lagoon, members of the Kansas Compliance Crew resorted to having to describe their genitals to police in order to resolve the matter and avoid arrest.

“The men had a discussion with the manager and police and explained the situation, including uncomfortable descriptions of their bodies,” the press release said. Furthermore, both the manager and the police reportedly said “they had never heard of SB244 nor been notified by any government entity of its passage.”

“I could easily continue using the men’s restroom under the radar,” said Ray Vieux, who participated as one of the demonstrators.

top 98 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 130 points 2 months ago* (45 children)

If I were in charge bathrooms would be single rooms with nothing but a toilet.

Handwash sink is outside.

There is a person who maintains the facilities and offers a mint candy to only people who wash their hands.

If were gonna police anything in the bathrooms it should be hand washing.

  • source
  • hideshow 45 child comments
  • [–] 51 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    In my secondary school, it was a small school as far as the building went, so to save space they operated exclusively unisex toilets.

    The "bathrooms" were simply open-plan onto the main corridors, with sinks on one side, and maybe 15 individual cubicles on the other. There were no urinals, no gendered spaces, once outside the cubicle you'd be in view of anyone walking through the corridor. There were 4 stories including the ground floor, with these unisex toilets on levels 1 and 3.

    Never did anything happen, never heard any complaints from anyone about them, it was, dare I say, perfect.

    Petition for the abolishment of traditional gendered spaces, individual cubicles is all we need.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago*

    Our current Monkey paw Supreme Court would take your gender equality push and end up overturning Brown V Board because separate toilets have to be unequal (you know Roberts and Thomas would do it, along with the rest of the racist justices).

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 14 points 2 months ago (9 children)

    I like it, but I would put a urinal in as well. Not because as a male I would appreciate that more, but as a male, I've seen what other savages do to the toilet seat when they have to hit a stationary target from a couple feet away. I don't want to punish sitters with that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago (8 children)

    Do urinals tend to stink more?

    I feel like people flush less because after the pee drains out you can't see it any more, despite it still being there in the trap.

    Some autoflush periodically or when you open the door.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago

    If they are cleaned regularly, I don't think it's a problem, but auto flushers would be a solid choice. Bathrooms in the smaller gas stations along the interstate, not the truck stops, often have the worst bathrooms. You'll smell stale pee when you walk in, and it may be from the urinal, but it also could be from any other surface in there. But really, a light auto flush and regular cleaning will mitigate any stink, and if it didn't, the smell is still probably better than the aforementioned piss covered toilet seats.

    I go snowboarding in Colorado every year, and in the lodge at the top of Keystone I think, they don't have flushers. Not sure how it works, but they don't stink. Somehow they're engineered to be okay without them. I've also seen some bats will just dump a bucket of ice in the urinals that melts over time.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (6 children)

    Nah urinals don't smell worse than standard toilets.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (5 children)

    That's not my observed experience.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (4 children)

    Piss-soaked floors smell worse, but that's not a urinal problem per se. The steel/porcelain unit itself does not hold odor and even low-flow flush styles effectively clear liquid waste. But there are bad geometries that create splashback, drunkenness and social causes of bad aim, and business staff stretched too thin to adequately attend to the bathrooms.

    And as someone that has been paid to clean toilets, all of the worst messes I've seen have been in the women's stalls.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (3 children)

    Are you really suggesting that the addition of a urinal to a non-gender specific toilet would make it smell better ?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    I'm aware that I'm not the one you're talking with, but not necesarilly, you're making a straw man fallacy and a non sequitur fallacy.

    The fact that he, with his empirical experience, noticed that most messes were on female toilets, don't automatically mean that adding urinals is "less smelly". You're just mixing pears with apples, as they're independent variables that, at much, will stack one on top of another, not cancel with each other.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    The original comment:

    I would put a urinal in as well. [...] I’ve seen what other savages do to the toilet seat when they have to hit a stationary target from a couple feet away.

    This guy:

    Piss-soaked floors smell worse, but that’s not a urinal problem per se.

    My comment:

    Are you really suggesting that the addition of a urinal to a non-gender specific toilet would make it smell better ?

    Your comment:

    [toilets and urinals] will stack one on top of another, not cancel with each other.

    In this context:

    • my comment is not a straw man but responds to both the piss-soaked floor guy and the original comment
    • you seem to agree with me. Added urinal means worse smell.

    If only there was a single device that could act as a receptacle and disposal for both pee and poo.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • You didn't understood me, what I was trying to say is that he never stated directly that urinals would smell better, only that urine in the floor smells worse than both toilets and urinals, and what I meant with "they stack one in top of another" was not about urinals and toilets, just about the variables. And it IS a straw man because you're using a weaker version of their argument by responding to something that they did never said.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago

    A school did this. They converted a gendered restroom into several private, non-gendered toilet areas, by installing full-height walls and doors around the toilets. The law in the state said that if the hand washing area was considered a private space, it was a "changing area", and must be segregated by gender. But, if this space was not "private", it was only a hand washing area and not a "changing area".

    So they ensured the hand washing area was considered "public" by cutting a hole in the wall between the hand washing area and the hallway.

    And they pissed off pretty much everyone on every side of the issue.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 2 months ago (13 children)

    Nah put handwash inside stalls pls. Saved my life at new job where i got dog poo on my shoes and could clean it privately.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago (12 children)

    It's probably too expensive to put the plumbing for that in the walls of the stalls. Usually there's already a lot less washbasins than toilets, I don't think that's ever going to change.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago* (10 children)

    When they do have in stall sinks they're that tiny one. It's okay but still takes up more space and has a larger carbon footprint.

    Like is really the end of the world if you have to wait a second to wash your hands?

    Plus the communal sink is easier to keep clean. Just keep all the filth in the toilet rooms.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago (9 children)

    In Japan there are toilets that run a faucet that fills the tank on the toilet. Wash your hands as it flushes and fills. It’s not like it’s that hard it’s just that the ones with the checkbook want to pocket the budget instead of provide a decent quality of life

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (7 children)

    How does that work, doesn't that mean you have poop from handwashing flowing into the toilet tank?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago* (2 children)

    This could be a problem if you do in fact drink from the toilet but I would advise against that regardless of where you are.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    There are many toilets that run on gray water. They just usually aren't this direct. It shouldn't be an issue. You're already shitting in the toilet. Who cares if the water coming in to flush is slightly contaminated?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    I'm more concerned about the tank getting more and more filthy over time as filth accumulates. I'm not sure whether there's any actual practical impact from that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Everything I know about Japan tells me that it's not a problem. They tend to keep things clean, so it's either designed to mitigate the issue or it isn't something that has to be worried about at all. I highly doubt they just have some disgusting toilets all over the place.

    (Also, these probably have bidets too, so if you're getting poop on your hands then you're just having fun.)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago

    I have faith in the Japanese to keep their toilets clean. I do not have faith in my fellow citizens to do the same 😂

    if you're getting poop on your hands then you're just having fun.

    Yeah, but in a public toilet you have to expect the worst.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago

    I like the Japanese style all in one designs. Ie. The sink drains into the toilet. Even if it's just a rinse station it'd be nice and proper sink in common area. Though I haven't seen a public restroom based on this just residential toliets

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago

    I would call this a shared genderless restroom with stalls, but yes, I think that is the ideal. Red Rock Amphitheatre has a restroom like this. The stalls are all nice full concrete stalls, not the common ones in the US with huge gaps, but everyone stands in line together and takes whatever stall opens, and I haven't seen an issue in the few times I've been there. Not only does it remove any gender issues with assigning restrooms, but it also evens out the lines between men and women, where the men's restrooms basically never have lines.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -6 points 2 months ago (13 children)

    bathrooms would be single rooms with nothing but a toilet

    Hope you're ready to wait in a hella-long line.

    If were gonna police anything in the bathrooms it should be hand washing.

    angry libertarian noises

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 2 months ago* (7 children)

    You do realize they can put the same number of toilets as any other bathroom setup right? I don't even know how you got to that conclusion.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (6 children)

    I guarantee you can fight more people around one of those pee-troughs at a baseball stadium than you can fit individual toilets separated by walls and doors.

    Hell, the entire appeal of the standing urinal is to conserve space.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 2 months ago* (3 children)

    lmao a piss trough in a baseball stadium is quite the strawman my dude. Nevermind that you're forgetting about poop.

    But sure lets set the bar as low as possible. 'Tis the libertarian way I guess. That and eating popcorn with other dudes' piss all over your hands.

    Not gonna yuk your yum but microdosing golden showers is not something most people are into.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (1 child)

    lmao a piss trough in a baseball stadium is quite the strawman my dude.

    I don't think you know what a strawman is. But this need to hide people from one another while they piss and poop is a big part of what feeds the anti-trans hysteria.

    Not gonna yuk your yum but microdosing golden showers is not something most people are into.

    This is why people traditionally wash their hands after using the toilet.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago

    But this need to hide people from one another while they piss and poop is a big part of what feeds the anti-trans hysteria.

    I don't know why you're trying to use that as part of an argument for why we ought not to have a whole bunch of separate cubicles. No one sees anyone peeing or pooping then, at all. No problem.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago

    I've been to Red Rock Amphitheatre twice, and they have a restroom exactly like described (minus the mints sadly). It functions perfectly well. I used it a good number of times. And yes, there is a line, but it's no longer than the gender segregated ones on average. There's a ton of people, and most of them are drinking, so it has to function well, and it does. It's probably the "main" restroom, as it's the one closest to the front stage.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 7 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    Modern Libertarians are anti-LGBT and have completely lost their way. They hated their own 2024 presidential candidate Chase Oliver so much for being gay that there was an attempt by many in the party to replace him with Trump, and there were letters pleading for party members to vote for him despite him being gay. It was all super lame and I left. Libertarians used to be at the forefront of individuality and personal liberties, but not anymore. The official website might claim otherwise, but that's just PR.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    They hated their own 2024 presidential candidate Chase Oliver so much for being gay that there was an attempt by many in the party to replace him with Trump

    I'm intimately familiar with Texas Libertarians, having family who are actively involved in the state party. They were woo'd by Trump pretty much day one of his campaign. So much of modern southern libertarianism is just a mask over the Neo-Confederate ideology that went out of style under Bush Jr.

    Chase Oliver only won the nomination in 2024, because so many self-proclaimed libertarians had defected back to the GOP already. The folks whining about the nomination wanted to have their GOP affiliation and eat their Libertarian cake, too. And while he took a ton of cheap heat for his sexual orientation, the real thing that made Chase a target for ire is that he wasn't a closed borders militant white supremacist psycho.

    Libertarians used to be at the forefront of individuality and personal liberties

    The party has always worn two faces. One face pointed towards the liberals, which promised weed and free love and no more wars. Another face towards the Dixiecrat south, which promised Jim Crow and indentured servitude and CSAM.

    Love my NORML libertarians, but I quickly recognized this group was not for me when I spent a weekend at the state convention way back in 2012.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago

    ...the real thing that made Chase a target for ire is that he wasn't a closed borders militant white supremacist psycho.

    This is how you know Libertarians are dumb. Libertarianism would be against the borders. Left-Libertarian (Anarchism) largely is. Right-Libertarian only cares about letting companies take advantage of people, and doesn't care about people at all.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 83 points 2 months ago (15 children)

    Beginning to suspect these laws exist to criminals the existence of transgender people.

  • source
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (12 children)

    I can kind of understand why places like women's domestic violence shelters and women's prisons need a legal definition of "woman" in order to define who is allowed in them (and have no opinion on what it should be). Places where there is actual physical or logistical infrastructure in place to make sure men don't enter them…

    But bathrooms? Someone wanting to commit sex crimes (or similar) against women in bathrooms is just going to walk into them and do exactly that, they aren't going to change their legal gender just to do that because that doesn't make it either easier or harder to physically get in there.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    I can kind of understand why places like women’s domestic violence shelters and women’s prisons need a legal definition of “woman” in order to define who is allowed in them

    I've found that a lot of these policies are a legacy of affirmative action in response to the historic gulf in wealth between women and men.

    They don't exist to keep men out. They exist to give women in abusive relationships a place to go without facing homelessness.

    One might argue that gay men and trans-people can find themselves in exactly the same kind of relationships, for exactly the same reasons.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago

    Yeah as a trans woman if I were in a DV situation I wouldn't even think I could go to a shelter. To my knowledge when we flee such situations we generally rely on friends (we're less likely to have family we can stay with).

    Though tbh in the modern day we need shelters that can accommodate anyone, because anyone can be victims of financial abuse alongside DV. Additionally the problems associate with abusive men entering a shelter are still faced by women fleeing DV by a female partner.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago (5 children)

    Except then you end up with trans people barred from all domestic violence shelters. The trans woman will be barred from the women's shelter because they assume she has a certain kind of anatomy and physical strength and judge her a threat accordingly. Most cis people are comically ignorant about trans people's bodies and believe garbage stereotypes about trans women just being "men in dresses." In reality most trans women are biologically female. When she tries to go to the men's shelter, she will be told she's not safe there. And really, she wouldn't be. Meanwhile trans women face violence and abuse at rates far far higher than cis women.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago (4 children)

    Not necessarily, a legal definition of woman could include trans women too, the question is then how do you get recognized as such… fortunately I am not a politician and don't have to have an opinion on everything…

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago* (2 children)

    Given the insane amount of bureaucracy and red tape we have to go through just to get meds, it wouldn't be too hard. The nuance is in finding a way to include those who only seek to transition socially, not medically. Honestly a therapist's letter might suffice.

    I've been on HRT for 12 years, and I still struggle obtaining refills sometimes

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago* (1 child)

    You could do it in a way similar to how name changes are. My name change wasn't terribly expensive, but it was kinda a pain in the ass. Hell you could make it an optional part of the name change process as well.

    Ideally you won't have to publish it in a newspaper (archaic bullshit I had to do), but other than that the whole having to schedule with a judge and go on public record and under oath saying "this is what I'm doing, I'm not trying to do anything nefarious, this is just how I'd prefer to live my life".

    But yeah, the therapist (or social worker) thing also works, I know some US states allow for them to sign off gender marker changes.

    And yeah, any time I move or change insurance getting hormones is a pain in the ass, even when I can just tell a Dr what dose I've been on since bottom surgery

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago*

    I had to do a similar thing for my US name change. When I changed my name in my home country, I just had to sign an affidavit stating it's for trans related reasons.

    There's plenty of ways to go about it, we just need legal recognition but apparently that's too much to ask for

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -12 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    It is a problem in prisons, where lots of men are in women's prisons because they start identifying as a woman

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 76 points 2 months ago (13 children)

    And you think this would be easily resolved with well designed unisex bathrooms where each stall is completely private.

    1000064242

  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 child)

    Thats what they did at my climbing Gym (Urban Climb). They're full length cubicles and seem soundproof pretty much.

    Gendered bathrooms only triggers homophobes in practice. If you had a unisex bathroom, they wouldn't even notice. And on facebook at least, it always seems to be the people who seem highly abusive, who you wouldn't want near your kids anyway who make a big deal about it.

    At concerts here in Australia, nrgptr switching to unisex, it was fairly common for many women to line up for the mens bathrooms (as they they were often less busy)

    If your first instinct is that "they're going to rape your kids", the problem is you

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 8 points 2 months ago

    I love this. The one time I used a gender neutral bathroom I was annoyed because there were no urinals. Meaning I had to wait for the slower sitting pissers.

    95% of the time I'm using a public restroom it's to drain the main vein in the piss trough and move on.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago*

    The Museum of Sex in NYC has a unisex bathroom similar to this. TBH I'm not sure if it has urinals tucked in it somewhere (since I don't use them, I didn't look for them.) Otherwise, it was one open place without an entry door, with full-length stalls, and communal sinks just like in your diagram.

    It also had a temporary exhibit that was a bouncy castle where all the floor and walls were tits. It wasn't as fun as it sounds, though, since if you jumped on a tit you fell through to the hard floor beneath. Still a fun concept! Just needed a little work to make it safer.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (5 children)

    I’ve actually used a bathroom designed exactly like this before. Was definitely weird experience as an American

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (4 children)

    It's strange people of a different sex can't wash their hands next to each other.

    Also there really no difference between the picture/layout above and going to a concert and seeing this.

    1000064248

    Communal sinks and seperate "stalls".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    It’s not so much about washing hands next to each other itself, but rather that that never happens here. Either you wash your hands alone or next to somebody your gender. It feels weird because bathrooms have become safe spaces of sorts for each gender, that are enclosed rooms.

    At a concert the bathroom area is just the entire concert area and then the bathrooms. In the coed bathrooms pictured above the sinks are located in what is very much still “The bathroom”.

    It’s not that there’s anything actually wrong with the coed design, but it’s just sort of a culture shock thing. It feels weird to me because it’s a novel situation I hadn’t ever found myself in before. I would also argue that people wouldn’t like it because of that alternate usage bathrooms have evolved to be, which is that gender-separated safe space. A small group of women could separate from the men they’re with and have a private conversation at a social venue for example.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago

    small group of women could separate from the men they’re with and have a private conversation at a social venue for example.

    Preserving this is not worth perpetuating a strict gender binary.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago

    It would not be completely solved. Women are often harassed by men unwilling to leave them alone. The women's bathroom is used as a safe space to basically hide from men.

    Yes a woman could hide in a stall, but there's less plausible deniability for a man waiting in front of the door of a woman's bathroom (which looks and is creepy as fuck) than for a man inside an non-gendered bathroom

    I hate that this is how things are, but women have very few places free of the patriarchy.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 87 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (9 children)

    A friend of mine is a lesbian. She identifies fully as female. She does not want to be a man at all. She is a woman who wears somewhat men's type clothing for the comfort. Her face is extremely feminine. She does not try to present as a man at all.

    She's had numerous issues going to the bathroom. One time male employees of the bar went into the women's loo and opened the stall she was in, without identifying themselves or saying anything... while she was changing her pad. I was at the mirror when it happened and tried to stop them. I was physically pushed away and told to stfu.

    These MEN walked in on her while she was cleaning her period. It's clear she's female at this point, but they didn't Apologize and close the stall door. They stood there and yelled at her while she was trying to put a new pad on without pulling her panties up, because it would stain them.

    They didn't Apologize. I asked them to. She asked them to. They demanded to see her ID saying she was female before they'd close the stall door. I ended up going out of the bathroom and calling 911 to say that 3 men sexually harassed a woman in a stall while she was cleaning her period. They said "well, we thought she was a man so it's ok". But she was doing nothing to anyone.

    The owner tried giving us a $200 bar tab, but I told her to refuse because if legal issues came from it, it would be like accepting the pay out.

    She still has mental stress issues when she goes out and has to use the bathroom, especially while on her period. We only go to places where people know her or places that have unisex bathrooms.

    These maga a holes wanted to "protect women" by forcing a woman to change her pad in front of them. Even if they thought she was a man, was that the right move? Even if she was a man, would that have been the right move? I was in that bathroom with her. I'm extremely feminine. So, even if my friend Bri was trans ... these dudes were willing to bust in the women's room aggressively on someone they knew was definitely a woman.

    It's not about protecting children. They just want to fight people and have a reason to "legally" and aggressively force themselves into women's bathrooms.

    I think back on that day a lot. I should have immediately viewed these men as the threat they genuinely were and pulled either my canister of cs gas or my lifecard (single Action .22) but I was in shock. And I only had a single action on me. I'm a tall woman. If I defended us, both my friend and I would probably be dead right now. And those guys would have gotten probation for killing us.

    Is not about protecting women or kids. Bc those same people think every woman who has reported a sexual assault are "false allegations ruining a man's life" (false allegations are real. But they're very very very rare. )

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 2 months ago

    You know, sometimes I don't realize how good it is around me (central bum fucked egypt) until I read about these experiences. I got a little food truck bazaar near me with the only permanent structure being a stage/wine bar/bathroom. There is only one bathroom, and it has a sign with the classic stick figures, and a half half mix of the two, and an alien that reads "whatever, just wash your hands."

    I also see some pride flags in front of businesses downtown and no crazies making the local news by tearing them down.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago

    Yeah if anything these laws gave men the justification to angrily and violently enter women's restrooms. And that's the purpose of them, it's just that shockingly often these men do that against someone they weren't intended to target doing so.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -19 points 2 months ago (6 children)

    One time male employees of the bar went into the women's loo and opened the stall she was in, without identifying themselves or saying anything... while she was changing her pad. I was at the mirror when it happened and tried to stop them. I was physically pushed away and told to stfu.

    These MEN walked in on her while she was cleaning her period. It's clear she's female at this point, but they didn't Apologize and close the stall door. They stood there and yelled at her while she was trying to put a new pad on without pulling her panties up, because it would stain them.

    They didn't Apologize. I asked them to. She asked them to. They demanded to see her ID saying she was female before they'd close the stall door. I ended up going out of the bathroom and calling 911 to say that 3 men sexually harassed a woman in a stall while she was cleaning her period. They said "well, we thought she was a man so it's ok". But she was doing nothing to anyone.

    The owner tried giving us a $200 bar tab, but I told her to refuse because if legal issues came from it, it would be like accepting the pay out.

    Doubt 🧐🙄 Are you a master of creative fictional writing?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    Between 1.5 and 2 billion people speak english. You suppose that's not enough for this to have plausibly happened?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 34 points 2 months ago* (1 child)

    I was waiting for this to happen.
    Props to the brave boys for sticking their necks out, when no one would have cared if they used the men's room.

    Then again, no one cares what goes on in there :'(

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 19 points 2 months ago

    Fucking Kings!

  • source
  • [–] 37 points 2 months ago* (5 children)

    So, these men took action—using malicious compliance to prove their point.

    Is it malicious compliance? They went to the restroom they were told to go to. It's more a demonstration of what Kansas law actually means.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] [S] 37 points 2 months ago* (4 children)

    It is. They are complying with the law to the letter with the sole aim of pissing off the lawmakers, and succeeding.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 2 months ago* (3 children)

    But good-faith compliance would look the same way, wouldn't it? It's not against the spirit of the law, because this is the actual intent of the law.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 33 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Good faith compliance is impossible.

    Go to the restroom that is not compliant: violate the law.

    Go to the restroom compliant with your assigned gender: police is called because you don't look like your assigned gender.

    The spirit of the law is to prevent trans people (and anyone else who is not strictly gender conforming) from existing in public spaces.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 16 points 2 months ago

    Allies and the community never really talk about how trans masculine people in general get targeted. Apparently we aren't worth mentioning until it's too late

  • source
  • [–] 12 points 2 months ago

    I too enjoy a bit of malicious compliance.

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›
    107 comments in c/news@lemmy.world view that post
    7 comments in c/lgbtq_plus@lemmy.blahaj.zone view that post
    6 comments in c/pravda_news@news.abolish.capital view that post