Should Transgenders be Separated With Their Own Bathrooms and Locker Rooms.
I created a similar debate that asked if LGBT's should have their own bathrooms and locker rooms but apparently, lesbians, gays, and bisexuals don't identify themselves with transgenders. I deleted the other debate and narrowed it down to just transgenders. The purpose of this debate was inspired by the recent report that a woman, whom complained about a transgender being in her locker room at a Planet Fitness gym, had her membership revoked for complaining. Is this justice? How or how wouldn't it be better served to just have separate private areas just as men and women are separate?
Yes, keep separate.
Side Score: 11
|
 |
No, everyone share.
Side Score: 27
|
|
|
|
|
I'd be less concerned with a transgender than I would be with homosexual. I'm not sure if someone who transitions gender usually has a heterosexual outlook to their new gender. I'm not trying to be an ass, it's about feeling comfortable in a gym looker room without feeling like your being sexually ogled. I go either one all encompassing, or three; male, female, and whoever. Side: Yes, keep separate.
1
point
So how exactly would you segregate the gays? How do you detect who is or who isn't? It's not always obvious who is gay or not, not all gays fit the stereotypical behavior which you rely off to identify them with. I bet you're one of those hideous straight guys who is always paranoid about gay guys perving on him. Side: No, everyone share.
1
point
Wait, so what is your solution? If you just tell homosexuals to go have their own bathroom, wouldn't they feel the same way about eachother? Even if you're gay, you don't necessarily want to feel "sexually ogled" by people of the same gender. A locker room of all gay men might be even MORE uncomfortable for everyone present. Also, it would be impossible to enforce. How are you going to stop a gay person from simply saying they are straight to get into a bathroom? This could also open doors to more segregation/discrimination as to the quality of facilities that are made available. I do agree that one all encompassing bathroom with individual privacy would be ideal, but that doesn't fit in with the argument of keeping everyone separate… xD Side: No, everyone share.
Yes, there are a few members in my gym who are clearly, and, quite rightly, unashamedly gay, and I feel decidedly uncomfortable when they're present in the changing area. All those with deviant sexual orientations should have separate changing facilities. Forget about all the amateurish, 2 cent psychologist's comments on this issue and give it to them between the eyes. They're as out of place as anyone in a changing room for the opposite gender. Identifying gays could be difficult and undoubtedly fraught with problems as well being a legal minefield. But, nevertheless I fail to see why those who are sexually attracted, in my case, to males, are permitted to share the same changing facilities. The genders have their separate changing areas, children are corralled and shielded from adults and so heterosexuals should be extended the right to their own facilities. We have ''gay rights'' rammed down our throats regularly, that's fine, but what about heterosexual right? Side: Yes, keep separate.
2
points
Oh, the poor, ever-prosicuted heterosexuals. When will anything go right for them? ;) The thing is, you're assuming that gay people can't be uncomfortable either. A locker room of all gay men would be incredibly uncomfortable for them. You want to "protect heterosexual rights" but all you are doing with this solution is taking your problems and giving the same problems to others. And yes, we often hear about "gay rights," but the end goal is always equal rights. Equality doesn't mean taking your problems and giving them to others. If the concern is privacy and sexual comfort, then an easy solution exists: providing options for individual privacy in unified bathrooms. That would be easier, more feasible, cheaper, and would help make people like yourself who think all of "the gays" and perverts to rest east. Side: No, everyone share.
1
point
Also, you focused your argument on homosexuality, which is not the subject of this debate. Gender identity has no direct correlation to sexuality, so while I responded to your point, it doesn't really fit the argument. Ultimately however, the fundamental argument is the same. Side: Yes, keep separate.
Please read and show you heard my points You can disagree, but I want to know i was heard! Very important points you should read about the gender bathroom issue The point is this does occur. And even if in some far fetched world it didnt, which it actually does! Once the law is a Real Law, it will be almost impossible to prosecute perverts who peep, in ladies rooms and dressing rooms too! So, this law will open up crimes against women and little girls and give pradators legal arguments that will almost always escape prosecution! And stores, concerned citizens that are aware of deviant predators, law enforcement, and the courts will have their hands tied by this law and will not be able to keep women and little girls safe in these areas. Because 1 - they will have an a legal argument of defense thanks to a law And 2 - a law would justify law suits from preditors, who should be prosecuted and justify suit against accusations on the grounds they are " transgender" 3 - the political correct environment would excuse these preditors day in and day out, as people walk away and question the confusing circunstance they just witnessed, or they will in general fear accusing a peedator because of not wanting to offend a transgender. My suggestion is no law allowing it! And let the issue go. If you are truely transgender, you most likely really look feminine, and just do it. Go into your stall, do your thing, wash your hands and finish your shopping. But if its a law, you will effectively have given predators a free pass, and thats unconcienciable! You hear many incidents of peepers in bathrooms and dressing rooms, AND DRESSING ROOMS will come if not passed in one swoop along with bathrooms!! Dressing rooms are really the end game of the law. Bathrooms are just the foot in the door! Side: Yes, keep separate.
A few dynamics you guys need to think about before you jump in and be fair at the cost of great unfairness. A guy could rape in a bathroom with or without this law. The difference with the law not only is being uncomfortable, and there are varying degrees of that. A 10 year old girl going to a public rest room with a an older transgender would be very scarey for her too. You cant make a law with a small picture. You have to be responsible and look at the different scenarios and apply it. An even bigger issue is this, a guy could rape or peep in a bathroom anyway, with or without law. But with the law passed, you WILL tie up just prosecutions of offenders! You have a perv peeking or worse, with this law, these crimes will occur with nasty peepers in frequency beyond current incidents. But because of this law, you wont be able to touch perverts legally using these areas. Its a matter of chaos, and its to confusing to prosecute them. And they will prey on it! And hide through this law, legally. Its a perfect legal argument, to go out and do it again and again. Without even a smack. As a matter of fact, the pervert will actually sew stores and concerned citizens AND WIN! Without a bathroom law, if a customer or employee sees a 40 year old guy in the girls room, and it looks suspect, they can act on it! And can call someone, and have it investigated. With this law, deviant behavior will get a free pass, and the law will protect preditors. By easily claiming they are trangender. And approaching them will guarenteed to get the concerned person who is accusing appropriately in trouble, and sued. Because he can sue, he will sue! And be able to continue being free preditors! So the look at at impact of a law like this, and weigh it with common sense, and also knowledge of the legal process! Side: Yes, keep separate.
You may not want to hear this, but dont reject true evaluation of legal process, to defend your views. If you can say the trade off of letting preditors be preditors and continue to get away with it, and perping toms or worse will be excused in droves in the legal process over this law, then fine. Have a good day. We agree to disagree. And like I said, just do it. We wont likely question your gender, if you are really transgender. But a law will aid preditors! And you being sure has control of the legal process and loopholes, assuring these preditors will have to prove something? Prove something that is gray, against someone saing they are protected as a transgender? Proof of the incident would be very gray and extremely difficult to prove or disprove, no matter how clear the incident is? Law is a funny thing! The burden if proof is on the accuser. Word against word, ask a lawyer what would likely happen! He may not have to show much at all, if anything. Afterall, "trangenders" will be protected. You would have to have proof of what you saw. Or its word against word! A few dynamics you guys need to think about before you jump in and be fair at the cost of great unfairness. A guy could rape in a bathroom with or without this law. The difference with the law not only is being uncomfortable, and there are varying degrees of that. A 10 year old girl going to a public rest room with a an older transgender would be very scarey for her too. You cant make a law with a small picture. You have to be responsible and look at the different scenarios and apply it. An even bigger issue is this, a guy could rape or peep in a bathroom anyway, with or without law. But with the law passed, you WILL tie up just prosecutions of offenders! You have a perv peeking or worse, with this law, these crimes will occur with nasty peepers in frequency beyond current incidents. But because of this law, you wont be able to touch perverts legally using these areas. Its a matter of chaos, and its to confusing to prosecute them. And they will prey on it! And hide through this law, legally. Its a perfect legal argument, to go out and do it again and again. Without even a smack. As a matter of fact, the pervert will actually sew stores and concerned citizens AND WIN! Without a bathroom law, if a customer or employee sees a 40 year old guy in the girls room, and it looks suspect, they can act on it! And can call someone, and have it investigated. With this law, deviant behavior will get a free pass, and the law will protect preditors. By easily claiming they are trangender. And approaching them will guarenteed to get the concerned person who is accusing appropriately in trouble, and sued. Because he can sue, he will sue! And be able to continue being free preditors! So the look at at impact of a law like this, and weigh it with common sense, and also knowledge of the legal process! Side: Yes, keep separate.
|
There seems to be an issue with this debate. Norcalkev, from my point of view you seem to be getting quite defensive here... The point of creating a debate is to allow people to voice their opinions and give everyone equal opportunity to say what they want, even if it's about you. I don't know who's downvoting some of these arguments, so I'm going to (somewhat blindly) assume it's you, since you're disputing those you think have the wrong idea. Be a bit more fair and let them say what they want and others decide, 'kay? The person putting forth the debate should usually be the last to give their opinion on the matter, seeing as that the debate is meant to see what everyone else thinks. That aside, I agree a bit with both sides, though a bit more with everyone sharing. From my own experience, at least, and those I've heard of, I haven't really heard of much in the way of molestation, rape, or even much staring ever going on in gyms and public bathrooms, even with a homosexual present in the area. So safety, as far as I know, isn't really the issue. Additionally... You're not comfortable with the idea of changing clothes with someone present that might stare? Oh, I'm sorry. Would you like for every gay person in the room to come out to you now and then leave for the sake of your comfort? The same, I believe, goes with transgenders. The discomfort in most people lies in knowing that there's something there that they're not comfortable with. So, of course, one would automatically know that a transgender is in the room. Still, trusting and being comfortable with their presence is up to you and no-one else. They can't control what they are, but you can control your level of trust in them. "How would I explain that to my child?" Is a common question for lots of social matters. Well, we've managed to progress into telling kids that being a different color is okay, that liking the same sex is okay, so what's the trouble in explaining to your little girl that the reason there's a man in the ladies' room is because that person was born in the wrong body, and that they're a girl on the inside? The only concern I'd have with this one is that plenty of perverts and pedophiles of both sexes would pretend to be transgender in order to get into those rooms. Maybe some form of legal identification could be used? That would be an issue for gender-fluid people, though... Last would be the issue of discrimination. We've seen it in the past, such as with the de-segregation of schools; people won't be very accepting at first and might commit terrible acts of hate toward transgender individuals. I'm going to take a much less humane point on this one and say that you need a few eggs cracked to make an omelet. In other words, conflict and loss has to be endured before progress arrives. Side: No, everyone share.
Estmond, This is my debate and I have the right to arbitrate what is a valid argument or not, when people want to attack me personally when they don't know me and base their argument on a narrative they want to hear in a debate description, I will down vote them or ban them as it is not relevant or constructive to the debate. Also, the reason why I'm so defensive is because I'm being personally attacked on an accusation that isn't even expressed in my debate description... I made sure to be neutral in the description by not specifically stating my opinion and rather leaving it open for both sides to express as you so expressed that I'm not doing! Furthermore, I down voted myself for the responses to those accusations as they were not constructive either. I'm perfectly fair and balanced! I haven't even added an argument for or against yet and I'd appreciate it if I wasn't the target just because I created the debate! I'm purely debunking bias opinions and validating people's real concerns! With that being said, you can't side with one side of an argument with the position of neutrality as you have expressed, I would even go as far to say, the points you have made about the subject specifically is more in line with against allowing transgenders in the same private areas as other genders. Also, please don't bring gays, bisexuals, or lesbians into this debate as I so clearly stated, that was in another debate that was unsuccessful as lesbians, gays, and bisexuals don't identify with transgenders and was deleted. The fact that you haven't had a bad experience is irrelevant. What's relevant is there are actual cases of men changing into women and sexually assaulting women and vise-verse and it will only get worse as this progresses. I believe you stated a common concern of that happening, which I will direct to your question of, "What's wrong with teaching our children that it's okay." To address your discrimination concern, suggesting different genders to have different bathrooms and locker rooms is not the same as making different races ride different buses, drink from different water fountains, ect. In the future, if you're going to make an argument for both sides please do so in separate entries, one for and one against or just clarify or support. Side: Yes, keep separate.
1
point
No, psychologically speaking.Transgenders are born in the wrong body and seek to change physical features in order to clarify their physical, social, etc. identity. Therefore, transgender people only wish to fit into society. Creating a separate environment specifically for "segregating" them would not only be discriminate, but also unnaturally cruel. Statistically, transgender are the most suicidal out of the LGBTQ community. Rates would presumably soar if transgender people were further separated from society. Side: No, everyone share.
You're completely being bias and only looking at the perspective of a transgender without even having their opinion specifically to make it look like discrimination. The reason for keeping them separate in changing areas and bathrooms is not to segregate but rather, to provide security and safety for all genders ... I didn't say make them have their own gyms! Why would you put "segregate" in parenthesis and even say "specifically" when I didn't say any of that? Furthermore, you go on to try to blame society for the suicidal rate of transgenders?!? Lets get one thing straight, nobody is responsible for somebody whom commits suicide... People whom commit suicide are cowards and do so out of complete selfishness! Side: Yes, keep separate.
3
points
Ok, so I'm just trying to get an idea of why you think they should be separate. How does allowing transgender people into a bathroom/locker room compromise the security of the others in that room? Not trying to be rude, just trying to understand your argument. Also, in regards to suicide rates, social isolation and conflicts are two major causes of depression, which often leads to suicide. While suicide is very self driven, the things that have made a person commit suicide can come from external sources. Also, according to this study by The American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, there is an average of a 41% chance of a transgender person attempting suicide, as opposed to an average of a 4.6% chance for non-transgender people. That's nearly 9X as much. Clearly, some factors are at work other than selfishness and internal trouble. Also, 50-60% of the sample reported bullying/harassment, 60% refused to be treated at a doctor's clinic, and 57-61% were disrespected or harassed by law enforcement officers. All of these factors are linked to depression and suicide, and these numbers are much higher for transgender people than cisgender people (people who are the gender they are born with.) To claim that society does not play a role is simply false. The study is here: http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/ Side: No, everyone share.
1
point
1
point
Well, even though this debate is not about lesbians, gays, or bisexuals and I haven't said one thing that expresses hate or discrimination about them and you want to personally insult me like an immature hateful person, explain to me why your logic is valid? Side: Yes, keep separate.
Would that include hypodermic needles? Seriously, this is a very unintelligent comment... Not saying you're unintelligent but, to say and idolize the lyrics of a song that was produced by a popular singer expresses the correct standard of society and we should all live in the ideal world of John Lennon is preposterous... And as I said to another ignorant comment, segregation has nothing to do with this debate... I didn't say transgenders need to have their own gym. Side: Yes, keep separate.
Thanks for your negative thoughts It is a pity you do not read comments thoroughly. I cannot speak for your country but in Australia if anyone is still sharing needles then they are foolish because needle exchange is free everywhere. In "his " ideal world means John Lennon's ideal world and not necessarily anyone else's This is a point for debate not your negative criticism. Perhaps you should read the intent of this debate site before you make further unnecessary and unworthy comment Side: No, everyone share.
2
points
Hypodermic needles are a separate case because sharing them can lead harmful effects to spread from one person to another. A person's gender identity is genetic, and as such cannot spread from one person to another in the same way. Also, you claimed that "segregation has nothing to do with this debate" which is again, false. The first two definitions of segregation in the dictionary are: 1) to separate or divide (people, activities, or institutions) along racial, sexual, or religious lines. 2) to set apart from the rest or from each other; isolate or divide. The title of your debate is "Should Transgenders be Separated With Their Own Bathrooms and Locker Rooms." The debate poses the question if people should be separated from eachother due to their gender identity. It doesn't mean that the answer is yes or no, but to say that segregation has nothing to do with this debate is, by definition, false. Side: No, everyone share.
1
point
Just how many bathrooms are we going to require business to maintain? Applying the most basic, oversimplified perspective on the trans phenomenon, doing this alone would necessitate 4 bathrooms. One for cisgendered male One for cisgendered female One for physically male identifying as female One for physically female identifying as male Even that is a massive oversimplification. Consider the cases of pre-op transexuals, post-op transexuals, and transexuals uninterested in gender reassignment surgery. Imagine an individual born physically male, who identifies as female. Pre-op, s/he would use the "physically male identifying as female" restroom. If s/he then had gender reassignment surgery, the end result would be "born male, physically female, identifying as female." Would this individual continue to use the physically male identifying as female restroom? Or would this individual now use the cisgendered female restroom? Or would we need 2 more restrooms to accomodate pre-op and post-op versions of each? What about those trans individuals who don't map exactly to either male or female mentally, but have traits of both or neither? If we make this 'fair' for everyone, the average restaurant will be 90% bathrooms, 10% restaurant. That's just plain ridiculous. Better plan: Eliminate multi-stall gender-specific restrooms altogether, in favor of multiple individual unisex bathrooms each containing a toilet, urinal, sink, mirror, and the appropriate toiletries incl. bins for the disposal of pads/tampons. Side: No, everyone share.
|
