Should Public Restrooms Become Gender Neutral?

[Ethel mermania]

So rapists should be allowed to rape?

Or are we going to finally stop treating "I want it" as a sound argument?

Yes. Rape and smoking are completely comparable.

Because we all know cigarettes are actually being lit on fire without their consent.

i missed this, " i want it" is his entire argument.

[Linux and the X]

Holy shit no it's not! This isn't a matter of dispute! It simply, factually, is not! Being in a majority does not make your side the most just, nor the most logical, nor the most moral! It has no bearing on any of those things! To argue this point is to argue the ad populem fallacy.

Look, if you're going to blatantly spit in the face of reality like this, there's no point in furthering our discussion.

Alright, I'm going to put this in the basic argument form you learned on your first day of logic class, with premises each on their own line. Maybe then you'll understand.

Most people want gendered bathrooms
What most people want, unless it causes harm outweighing the benefit, is the basis of policy in a democracy
We live in a democratic society
Gendered bathrooms do not cause significant harm
THEREFORE, gendered bathrooms should exist as a matter of policy

This is not an ad populem fallacy. An example of an ad populem fallacy would be "most people are Christian, therefore the bible is true". Merely mentioning popularity does not make an argument fallacious.

Why? Because, let me guess, the majority wants it?

Bullshit. That is not sound reasoning. The majority could also want to slaughter all homosexuals, that doesn't make it just, nor logical, nor moral.

The majority wants it AND it does not cause significant harm.

Having a lack of choice in what you can and cannot do is negative. It constricts your freedoms. That you cannot see how a loss of freedoms is a harm, means you do not actually value freedom in any sense. In which case, you have no basis to even be complaining about being forced to have unisex rooms in the first place.

Again, I'll accept that there is harm in you not being allowed in a specific bathroom. However, it is a very insignificant harm. The amount of harm is outweighed by the benefits of allowing people to have gendered bathrooms.

So says the person who criticizes the usage of logic?

No one is criticising the use of logic. What is being criticised is your ridiculous limitations on the arguments you will accept. Where there is apparent criticism of logic is really criticism of what you are accepting as logic.

Get over your fucking logic fetish. Seriously.

Magnolia, stop falling for his trap. There's nothing wrong with logic. It really is important. But you are using it, even if Aurora refuses to accept it.

emotions being an invalid argument =/= not taking them into account. It just means they alone do not justify something. And of COURSE public policy can be based on just emotions. It would be based on an inherently irrational premise, but it could happen. Worse things have.

You are either consistently misreading me, or intentionally ignoring what I am saying. What I sam saying is whether or not the majority wants it, whether or not public policy has in the past been based on pleasing the greatest number of people, that does not mean that either of those things are inherently logical, just, moral, or above all, sound justifications in a debate.

Sorry, but a foundations of democracy lesson is outside the scope of this discussion. I suggest that you take a break, read the works explaining democracy, and come back, whether to continue arguing without sounding ridiculous or to concede.

False. It was never rebutted. When the dictionary definitions clearly use the terms to define one another, yes, they mean the same thing.

Do you dispute they did this?

I certainly dispute. If the dictionary actually claims that justification and justice are equivalent, the dictionary is wrong. If they are the same, what justification do you have for continuing to post here? Remember, simply wanting something isn't justification. You're not convincing anyone, so you'll not get a change in public policy. Is it an injustice for you to post here?

Small evils are still evils, even if greater evils exist.

This isn't even a small evil, though. It's more a small slightly-bad. On the scale of how bad things are, this doesn't come close to even a five-year-old swiping a candy bar from a convenience store.

Yes, they are, hence the topic of discussion, and the complaint by the trans community for unisex rooms. The fact that people are still legally and socially reprimanded for entering the "wrong" bathroom, is evidence that they are not desegregated.

The trans* community argues in favour of having non-gendered restrooms, not against gendered restrooms. If it's between only having gendered restrooms and only having non-gendered restrooms, then yes, only having non-gendered restrooms is the better solution. However, the best solution is to have both gendered and non-gendered bathrooms. You seem to be arguing against having gendered bathrooms as an option for those who want them alongside gendered bathrooms.

Because not everyone is the same, simply because they have a penis or vagina.

Yes, and? We're arguing in favour of gendered bathrooms here. Should people not have a right to a space exclusive to their own gender if they want it?

So rapists should be allowed to rape?

Or are we going to finally stop treating "I want it" as a sound argument?

[/quote]
JESUS MOTHERFUCKING CHRIST. Have you not figured out by now that when people say use this argument, there's an unsaid "...and there is no significant harm caused by it" following? It is completely ridiculous that one has to specifically voice what should be an obvious implied addendum. I would hope you are simply refusing to understand this out of pure bloody-mindedness, rather than actually being unable to understand.

(EDITED: Oops, had an unnecessary (and format-breaking) open quote at the start of the post. Also, fixed spacing.)

[The Lone Alliance]

So let me sum up the thread so far.

On the Anti side:
Feminist(s) who claim it is sexist.
People who are rational enough to see it as impractical
People who think that the majority sometimes should be allowed to have their will.
People who think it's not hurting anything.
People who think that it's "separate but equal" except not oppressive
People who think that it could lead to increased sex crime.

On the pro side:
Delusional people who believe that unisex restrooms will eliminate gender roles.
People who think we should have progress simply for the sake of having progress
People who think it should end because tradition is unnatural.
and a Libertarian who believes telling someone no is oppression.

[Winland]

Yes, if only so that I can witness what they talk about when they go to the bathroom together.
Their evil feminist conspiracy shall be shrouded in darkness no longer!

[Choronzon]

So let me sum up the thread so far.

On the Anti side:
Feminists who claim it is sexist.
People who are rational enough to know that it's insane to think that everyone should do
People who see it as impractical
People who believe it's not worth it.
People who think it's not hurting anything.

On the pro side:
Delusional people who believe that unisex restrooms will eliminate gender roles.
People who think we should have progress simply for the sake of having progress
People who think it should end because all tradition is evil.
and Libertarians who believe telling someone no is oppression because it hurts their feelings.

Sounds like the Anti side is using reason and logic while the pro side is using feelings and delusions.

...the fuck?

If you're going to try and sum up something, read it first.

[Souseiseki]

So let me sum up the thread so far.

On the Anti side:
Feminists who claim it is sexist.
People who are rational enough to know that it's insane to think that everyone should do
People who see it as impractical
People who believe it's not worth it.
People who think it's not hurting anything.

On the pro side:
Delusional people who believe that unisex restrooms will eliminate gender roles.
People who think we should have progress simply for the sake of having progress
People who think it should end because all tradition is evil.
and Libertarians who believe telling someone no is oppression because it hurts their feelings.

Sounds like the Anti side is using reason and logic while the pro side is using feelings and delusions.

it sounds like you're just deliberately misrepresenting the side you don't like tbh

[Souseiseki]

So let me sum up the thread so far.

On the Anti side:
Feminists who claim it is sexist.
People who are rational enough to know that it's insane to think that everyone should do
People who see it as impractical
People who believe it's not worth it.
People who think it's not hurting anything.

On the pro side:
Delusional people who believe that unisex restrooms will eliminate gender roles.
People who think we should have progress simply for the sake of having progress
People who think it should end because all tradition is evil.
and Libertarians who believe telling someone no is oppression because it hurts their feelings.

Sounds like the Anti side is using reason and logic while the pro side is using feelings and delusions.

to the point that we've had libertarians in saying that no-nigger restaurants + bathrooms are perfectly a-ok as long as they're like totally separate but equal and we mean it this time and for some reason you interpreted that as "and Libertarians who believe telling someone no is oppression because it hurts their feelings." or otherwise failed to include them on the pro side, which is really only the tip of the suspiciously straw-like iceberg that is your amazingly high quality post

[Freiheit Reich]

Bad idea, I think a lot of conservative types will feel uncomfortable.

Thats all the more reason to do it. The discomfort of prudes and bigots should not hold back progress.

Also, will women be cool with passing by men peeing in urinals and possibly catching peeks.

Why do you assume that all men are perverts? This says more about you than you probably intended.

What if your daughter is 12 years old and a man is showing his sausage?

Why do you assume all men are perverts?

Also, a public place with people constantly entering and leaving is a really shitty place to rape.

Will he get in trouble for harassment? I see some possible sexual harassment cases (justified and unjustified) coming out of this. We would then need video cameras for court cases but that means you will be watched while making yellow water.

Unsubstantiated, baseless, paranoid bullshit.

Many problems, a stupid idea.

You haven't demonstrated this.

The fact that the "best" argument against this is "But what about rape!" as if women peeing near you will increase the prospect of rape reveals quite a bit about the people who oppose this.

I never said rape, I was thinking more of flashing which would be hard to prove (unless there are camaras).

I would not want a 12 year old girl watch me pee, that would be awkward for her and me. What if she is curious and takes a look at a man peeing? What if her parents don't want her to see male genitals until she is married?

Most men are not perverts but some are, we don't know if there will be a pervert in the bathroom when a woman (or girl) enters.

Yes, I am a bit prudish. I don't want to pee when a strange woman is nearby. I think prudish women's rights are more important than prudish men's rights though. What about very religious types? What about Muslim women for example? I am not a pro-Muslim but I know this would cause offense to devout Muslim women who can't show their face even, is it OK for them to be with exposed strange men in a room? There are probably other religions that are against this as well.

[Choronzon]

I would not want a 12 year old girl watch me pee, that would be awkward for her and me. What if she is curious and takes a look at a man peeing? What if her parents don't want her to see male genitals until she is married?

Are you fucking kidding me?

Yes, I am a bit prudish. I don't want to pee when a strange woman is nearby. I think prudish women's rights are more important than prudish men's rights though. What about very religious types? What about Muslim women for example? I am not a pro-Muslim but I know this would cause offense to devout Muslim women who can't show their face even, is it OK for them to be with exposed strange men in a room? There are probably other religions that are against this as well.

They'll get over it, just like you.

The objection of prudes is no reason to hold back progress.

[The Lone Alliance]

The objection of prudes is no reason to hold back progress.

"Progress for the sake of progress" is not a valid excuse, you need to realize that there are plenty of people who do not care about gender either way, they just want to be left alone, they want the right to believe what they believe.

Using Force, which is what you are suggesting people should do in eliminating Gendered restrooms, would most likely lead to a massive backlash against progressives and in turn cause things to regress instead.

Pick the battles worth fighting, this isn't one.
You will never fully eliminate gender roles, the best you can get it for people to accept other genders, but you will never cause everyone to see themselves as the 'same'. All this idea will do is cause increased friction between the genders, it won't improve things.

to the point that we've had libertarians in saying that no-nigger restaurants + bathrooms are perfectly a-ok as long as they're like totally separate but equal and we mean it this time and for some reason you interpreted that as "and Libertarians who believe telling someone no is oppression because it hurts their feelings." or otherwise failed to include them on the pro side, which is really only the tip of the suspiciously straw-like iceberg that is your amazingly high quality post

Added

The list is ever evolving, I welcome your input as well.

[Ostroeuropa]

The objection of prudes is no reason to hold back progress.

"Progress for the sake of progress" is not a valid excuse, you need to realize that there are plenty of people who do not care about gender either way, they just want to be left alone, they want the right to believe what they believe.

Using Force, which is what you are suggesting people should do in eliminating Gendered restrooms, would most likely lead to a massive backlash against progressives and in turn cause things to regress instead.

Pick the battles worth fighting, this isn't one.
You will never fully eliminate gender roles, the best you can get it for people to accept other genders, but you will never cause everyone to see themselves as the 'same'. All this idea will do is cause increased friction between the genders, it won't improve things.

to the point that we've had libertarians in saying that no-nigger restaurants + bathrooms are perfectly a-ok as long as they're like totally separate but equal and we mean it this time and for some reason you interpreted that as "and Libertarians who believe telling someone no is oppression because it hurts their feelings." or otherwise failed to include them on the pro side, which is really only the tip of the suspiciously straw-like iceberg that is your amazingly high quality post

Added

The list is ever evolving, I welcome your input as well.

No, i'd just say that all government buildings should begin using non-gendered bathrooms, and that any legal blocks to them be removed.

[Choronzon]

"Progress for the sake of progress" is not a valid excuse,

Except its not just for the sake of progress.

Read the thread.

[Linux and the X]

No, i'd just say that all government buildings should begin using non-gendered bathrooms, and that any legal blocks to them be removed.

Except no one's actually opposed to non-gendered bathrooms. People are opposed to banning gendered bathrooms alongside non-gendered bathrooms.

[The Steel Magnolia]

No, i'd just say that all government buildings should begin using non-gendered bathrooms, and that any legal blocks to them be removed.

Except no one's actually opposed to non-gendered bathrooms. People are opposed to banning gendered bathrooms alongside non-gendered bathrooms.

I still have yet to see how keeping gendered bathrooms while allowing unisex ones is a harm.

[Linux and the X]

Except no one's actually opposed to non-gendered bathrooms. People are opposed to banning gendered bathrooms alongside non-gendered bathrooms.

I still have yet to see how keeping gendered bathrooms while allowing unisex ones is a harm.

No don't you get it, they can't go in the bathroom for the wrong gender and that's basically rape.

[Ostroeuropa]

Except no one's actually opposed to non-gendered bathrooms. People are opposed to banning gendered bathrooms alongside non-gendered bathrooms.

I still have yet to see how keeping gendered bathrooms while allowing unisex ones is a harm.

Reinforcing the notion of gender segregation being acceptable.
Also, i'd say having a unisex bathroom also available would be better, but not as good.

[The Steel Magnolia]

I still have yet to see how keeping gendered bathrooms while allowing unisex ones is a harm.

Reinforcing the notion of gender segregation being acceptable.
Also, i'd say having a unisex bathroom also available would be better, but not as good.

Oh no genders are important how dare that be the case.

[Greed and Death]

BTW it was the last post on the page so in case you missed it....

Are you able to tell the difference between female-laid bricks and male-laid ones?
Thats...an odd talent that i'd be interested to know how you found out about...or rather not interested. Don't tell us, please. It's probably best left unsaid.

Secondly, if someone is planning to rape someone, do you think that them waiting in a gender-neutral bathroom where EITHER gender could walk in at any moment, or waiting in a bathroom where they are virtually guaranteed the next entrant WILL be of their desired gender, is more likely to be their prefered set up?
Somehow, I doubt rapists will see the sign and think "Well, i'm all for rape but entering the wrong bathroom is just going too far."

Something about if you see someone enter the wrong bathroom, you immediately know something is amiss.

Also if a Janitor or security guard catches a man in the women's restroom the general assumption is something is amiss. Doing a google image serach for man caught in restroom produces atleast a dozen results for men caught in the women's room. I find it far better to arrest such people before they do something illegal( like installing toilet cams) rather than just assuming he has legitimate business in women's room.

As for the difference in smell it is a generalization with some basis in truth. Men in general require more protein and are likely to seek out foods higher in protein. This does tend to result in smellier craps. Even more noticable since I started body building, the restroom becomes unusable to my female roommate for 45 minutes after I drop a load.

[Ethel mermania]

Are you able to tell the difference between female-laid bricks and male-laid ones?
Thats...an odd talent that i'd be interested to know how you found out about...or rather not interested. Don't tell us, please. It's probably best left unsaid.

Secondly, if someone is planning to rape someone, do you think that them waiting in a gender-neutral bathroom where EITHER gender could walk in at any moment, or waiting in a bathroom where they are virtually guaranteed the next entrant WILL be of their desired gender, is more likely to be their prefered set up?
Somehow, I doubt rapists will see the sign and think "Well, i'm all for rape but entering the wrong bathroom is just going too far."

Something about if you see someone enter the wrong bathroom, you immediately know something is amiss.

Also if a Janitor or security guard catches a man in the women's restroom the general assumption is something is amiss. Doing a google image serach for man caught in restroom produces atleast a dozen results for men caught in the women's room. I find it far better to arrest such people before they do something illegal( like installing toilet cams) rather than just assuming he has legitimate business in women's room.

As for the difference in smell it is a generalization with some basis in truth. Men in general require more protein and are likely to seek out foods higher in protein. This does tend to result in smellier craps. Even more noticable since I started body building, the restroom becomes unusable to my female roommate for 45 minutes after I drop a load.

so the essense of your argument is you dont want to make women suffer from your smellier than average poop?

[Greed and Death]

Something about if you see someone enter the wrong bathroom, you immediately know something is amiss.

Also if a Janitor or security guard catches a man in the women's restroom the general assumption is something is amiss. Doing a google image serach for man caught in restroom produces atleast a dozen results for men caught in the women's room. I find it far better to arrest such people before they do something illegal( like installing toilet cams) rather than just assuming he has legitimate business in women's room.

As for the difference in smell it is a generalization with some basis in truth. Men in general require more protein and are likely to seek out foods higher in protein. This does tend to result in smellier craps. Even more noticable since I started body building, the restroom becomes unusable to my female roommate for 45 minutes after I drop a load.

so the essense of your argument is you dont want to make women suffer from your smellier than average poop?

That and the ability to arrest suspicious looking men hanging out in the women's room before they do something like install toilet cams.

[Ethel mermania]

so the essense of your argument is you dont want to make women suffer from your smellier than average poop?

That and the ability to arrest suspicious looking men hanging out in the women's room before they do something like install toilet cams.

i figured the first part, i found the second part more ... interesting.

[Minoriteeburg]

Yes, if only so that I can witness what they talk about when they go to the bathroom together.
Their evil feminist conspiracy shall be shrouded in darkness no longer!

Well if there were men in the bathroom, they obviously wouldn't say much at all.

[The Lone Alliance]

No, i'd just say that all government buildings should begin using non-gendered bathrooms, and that any legal blocks to them be removed.

If you want to make the progressive movement a complete laughing stock ideology by all means try and waste everyone's time with this moronic idea that serves no purpose.

It will not eliminate gender roles which is what you believe will happen, men will still think they are men and women will still think that they are women and trans will think whatever they are.

Forced coed bathrooms will not change it in the slightest. It's time to see something called "Reason".

When stuff like this is pulled all it does is drive more people to the right who don't like getting told "You're not allowed to be a gender anymore"

[Minoriteeburg]

No, i'd just say that all government buildings should begin using non-gendered bathrooms, and that any legal blocks to them be removed.

If you want to make the progressive movement a complete laughing stock ideology by all means try and waste everyone's time with this moronic idea that serves no purpose.

It will not eliminate gender roles which is what you believe will happen, men will still think they are men and women will still think that they are women and trans will think whatever they are.

Forced coed bathrooms will not change it in the slightest. It's time to see something called "Reason".

When stuff like this is pulled all it does is drive more people to the right who don't like getting told "You're not allowed to be a gender anymore"

I don't think that using the bathroom is the way to say what gender you are.

Personally, if I am using the facilities and someone of the opposite sex walks into the room, I would just finish and go about my business.

[Pope Joan]

It's a trend here in upstate NY.

They are pulling out urinals, changing the signs.

One drawback is that there has always been more demand for the ladies' room, and now the men are reputedly causing traffic jams with facilities that used to be for women only. This causes resentment.