188
submitted 9 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

Utah became the latest state to regulate bathroom access for transgender people after Republican Gov. Spencer Cox signed a law Tuesday that requires people to use bathrooms and locker rooms in public schools and government-owned buildings that match their sex assigned at birth.

Under the legislation, transgender people can defend themselves against complaints by proving they had gender-affirming surgery and changed the sex on their birth certificate. Opponents noted not all states allow people to change their birth certificates and that many trans people don’t want to have surgery.

The legislation also requires schools to create “privacy plans” for trans students and others who may not be comfortable using group bathrooms, for instance by allowing them to use a faculty bathroom — something opponents say may “out” transgender children.

all 37 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 56 points 9 months ago

I love that they claim that they're stopping women from being sexually assaulted by a man wearing a dress and going into the women's room... as if bathrooms are so closely monitored that a man in standard men's clothing couldn't just slip into one if he wanted. I mean he could wear a janitor uniform if he was worried about it.

[-] turbowafflz@lemmy.world 32 points 9 months ago

Also, they always seem to forget that if you force trans people to use the restroom for their agab, you're also forcing trans men into women's restrooms. So now instead of having women they want to pretend are men in the women's restroom you now have actual men in the women's restroom.

(But also gendered restrooms are just dumb everyone would be so much better off without them)

[-] chuckleslord@lemmy.world 13 points 9 months ago

It's about making being trans an obvious thing, making life for them more dangerous. It's not about anything else they say out loud.

[-] skydivekingair@lemmy.world 14 points 9 months ago

If it’s a code brown and the mens/womens room is closed who wouldn’t use the other bathroom?

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 12 points 9 months ago

Code either. I've used the women's room when I've had to pee and couldn't hold it in.

[-] aeronmelon@lemmy.world 6 points 9 months ago

I believe the civilian term is; "When you gotta go, you gotta go."

[-] snooggums@kbin.social 7 points 9 months ago

I wouldn't be surprised if it is worded in a way that would make it illegal for janitors who are men to be breaking the law if they enter a woman's bathroom.

[-] kescusay@lemmy.world 50 points 9 months ago

Utah joins 10 other states in declaring themselves shit-holes no one should think about visiting.

[-] aniki@lemm.ee 18 points 9 months ago

It's unfortunate that the most gorgeous state in the union was settled by religious fuckwads.

[-] kescusay@lemmy.world 9 points 9 months ago

...most gorgeous state in the union...

I guess beauty truly is in the eye of the beholder. Utah has a certain stark appeal to it I can see, but the sheer lush greenery of my native Oregon always wins me over.

[-] agent_flounder@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago

I mean my beloved Colorado is far from ugly but Utah (or, well, Moab which is the only part I have seen in person so far) is fucking amazing to see. But I also think Arizona is gorgeous. Wyoming too. At some point it isn't a contest it's just, "these states are fucking amazing, holy shit."

Anyway it sucks Utah is overrun with zealots.

[-] aniki@lemm.ee 3 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Utah has plenty of green-space you just need to climb a mountain to get to it. It's perfect. It's also not raining 75% of the time.

[-] kescusay@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

Mountains are fine, no complaint there... but my counterpoint would be that to reach a lush, green area, I can basically just step outside my front door.

You're not wrong about the rain, though.

[-] Reverendender@sh.itjust.works 1 points 9 months ago

Everywhere I've lived, and I've lived in quite a few places, has paled in comparison to Anchorage, AK.

[-] ivanafterall@kbin.social 5 points 9 months ago

As someone currently striving to move out of Utah, I can confirm this.

[-] Spitzspot@lemmings.world 40 points 9 months ago

I give you the party of "small government".

[-] kescusay@lemmy.world 17 points 9 months ago

Hey, they're making it just small enough to fit between your legs.

[-] Norgur@kbin.social 26 points 9 months ago

The underlying argument is so laughable to me. The whole "but men will disguise themselves to access women's bathrooms and grope and rape freely. Yeah sure, the guy who wanted to do some serious sex crime walks up to the bathroom and goes "Oh No, A wOmAn SiGN oNlY, dAnG iT, nO rApE tOdAy"... Even if there was some sort of bathroom rape epidemic, your solution is like trying to stop a bank robber from escaping through the backyard by putting a "no trespassing " sign up on the back lawn, you muppets.

[-] ObsidianZed@lemmy.world 20 points 9 months ago

I'll say it again, make ALL bathrooms genderless and non-communal. Individual rooms, walls floor to ceiling, complete with lockable door for each toilet. This saves us from soooo many other issues aside from this "debate."

[-] Mr_Blott@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago

France - Eh, we only ave ze one toilet anyway. You must be stupeed

[-] BetaBlake@lemmy.world 19 points 9 months ago

This is such a non-issue that they are trying to make into an issue, most restrooms should be gender-neutral anyways because who the fuck just trying to check out other people in the bathroom, people just want to get in and get out and the gender of the other people in there makes no difference to me.

[-] i_like_birds@lemmy.world -4 points 9 months ago

Gender neutral private bathrooms? Sure Gender neutral community bathrooms? I'm a little uneasy. As a small female, the thought of being in a semi-private area with just any guy gives me the chills. Trans people can share my bathroom, but I'd rather keep the other dudes away please.

[-] jose1324@lemmy.world 7 points 9 months ago

"other dudes" lol

[-] anon6789@lemmy.world 19 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

For those curious:

At least 10 other states — Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, North Dakota, Oklahoma and Tennessee — have passed laws that seek to regulate which bathrooms trans people can use, and nine states regulate the bathrooms that trans students can use at school. West Virginia’s Legislature is considering a transgender bathroom bill for students this year.

In good news though:

The Utah bill requires any new government buildings to include single-occupant bathrooms and asks that the state consider adding more of the bathrooms to increase privacy protections in existing government buildings.

Yay! This actually eliminates the whole issue, and you get actual privacy unlike a normal public bathroom!

It did not provide any funding for such upgrades.

Facepalm....Nevermind.

[-] tanja@lemmy.blahaj.zone 17 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Could've worked on tackling climate change, inflation, homelessness, (some form of) European style health care, labour rights, or expand public transit, but they choose to discriminate against transgender people for zero gain.

Why are the United States so wird?

And how do you even enforce such a law effectively?
Many people have very good passing, and there have already been (self video-) recorded cases of cisgender people getting "accused" of being trans by some transphobe.

No one even wants these laws, at least most people don't.

And why is the headline so non-judgemental? "Regulates" isn't a good fit for tyranny imo.

[-] Shalakushka@kbin.social 18 points 9 months ago

These laws create an environment where bigots are empowered to point the finger and harass people with the veneer of civic duty. Bigots and shit heels want these laws, and red states seem full of them.

[-] agent_flounder@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Why so weird? I guess a long history of religious zealotry, bigotry, slavery, etc. going back to the very beginning--the initial invasion by British colonists in the late 16th C. Apparently that kind of culture takes more than 500 years to overcome.

[-] Technofrood@feddit.uk 9 points 9 months ago

Do have to wonder (well not really it's going to be horrendous) what these people's response to a transman using a woman's toilet would be.

[-] chuckleslord@lemmy.world 11 points 9 months ago

The Legislation is designed to make being trans more dangerous in public. Any other given reason is a lie.

Trans men entering a women's restroom is dangerous. My brother can attest to that.

[-] Drivebyhaiku@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

They don't think about it.

Getting attacked or forcibly ejected from women's bathrooms where they already feel desperately exposed make a lot of trans guys so gun shy from amalgamated bad experiences that they develop bladder and intestinal problems from refusing to go and tend to retreat from public entirely due to general anxiety. Some of pro move one can adopt to combat this is basically never going out without a female chaperone who can vouch for you...

But it's still a severe restriction of your general comfort going out of your house for more than a couple of hours at a time.

End result is you basically rarely see trans men in public bathrooms so the bigots basically never are inconvenienced with considerations that they exist much less need consider the welfare of them.

[-] badbytes@lemmy.world 6 points 9 months ago

How can a state afford to staff gender checkers at every bathroom?

[-] Tristaniopsis@aussie.zone 6 points 9 months ago

Glad to know they are focusing their attention on such important stuff.

[-] sentient_loom@sh.itjust.works 2 points 9 months ago

There shouldn't be laws about who can use what bathroom. Just let people use the bathroom. It really has nothing to do with gender ideology. Just let people use the bathroom even if you reject transgender identities.

[-] Gsus4@mander.xyz 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)
[-] Mango@lemmy.world -1 points 9 months ago

Why at birth? Why isn't it "this is the room for penises and this is the room for vaginas"? We only wanna stop creeps from invading the others. Wtf is this whole war on choice bs?

[-] chuckleslord@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)
  1. Assigned sex and genitals aren't synonymous. Intersex is a thing. Also Güevedoces, the young "girls" (according to this genital-at-birth definition) in the Dominican Republic who go through male puberty, cause they're actually male genetically speaking

  2. Creeps aren't stopped by these laws, you twat, it's only about making being trans more obvious and more derided (see, a trans woman now needing to use the men's restroom and a trans man now needing to use the women's (which is likely to cause panic))

  3. Trans people aren't fucking creeps, they're just people. Why is that so hard to understand?

  4. Instead of listening to only right-wing weirdos, listen to the communities that are affected by your malicious actions. You might find some empathy rather than just more misplaced anger

  5. Most importantly, the "reason" for this legislation, men pretending to be women to gain access to the women's restroom, isn't a thing. It's a hypothetical and always has been. Meanwhile, real people are actually harmed by Legislation like this, not just thought people in your thought world

this post was submitted on 31 Jan 2024
188 points (97.0% liked)

News

23367 readers
1864 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS