There would need to be extra police to enforce your new system, if the police need to check IDs to go to the bathroom or the changing rooms, then there are a lot bathrooms and changing rooms to police. And yes it would cost lots of money to setup, implement, and administrate such a system even if it was a revision of a current system. Departments would need create and implement admistrative processes which capture and record the correct information - then this would all need to be managed.

And again, what is the point of doing any of this if there is no problem in the first place?

There wouldn't be any need for extra police. The police check the ID if someone calls the police. Not saying the police stand outside every single door.

Well, the reasoning is that if they want their gender identity to be official, they need a way to prove it.

That still requires man power to implement so there are still financial and labour implications associated with this proposal. Plus if the police are not on the door checking the IDs, then how is it a preventative solution. The police would only be called after the problem has occurred - which again renders the whole thing costly and ineffective.

Then there would need to be more police hired. I would expect that the police will be called about these people and these police will need to respond. The ID is there to protect the individual because they have proof of why they belong in that bathroom.

Otherwise the police must assume that probability is that they are in the wrong bathroom being a perv.

I mean, look at it this way. A large 6ft 4in man walks into the women's restroom. He identifies as female. There is a young girl in that restroom. Odds are most parents would be very distressed by this because you can not tell that he identifies as female. If the police is called and the police arrive how do they confirm that this person identifies as female and belongs in that bathroom?

A quick search says that this man could be convicted of voyeurism or indecent exposure.

If there is no physical evidence, they have not done surgery, they have not started taking therapy, how do you defend this person?

Quick fix. Stop gendering bathrooms.

Of course, just remodel the entire modern civilization for billions and billions of dollars for 0.4% of the population so they can all piss in the same bathroom.
Who's gonna pay for it? Are those 0.4% gonna chip in?

On top of that, these people are a massive minority. I think the other 99.6% should have a much larger say in this.
How many women would you say would feel safe with a unisex bathroom? How many men would feel comfortable sharing a bathroom with women?
Of course you might say just make them both unisex. But 90% of men still have to go to the men's side because a women's restroom does not have a urinal. Now, I don't claim to know what goes on in the women's restroom, but in the men's room you do your deed and you get out. I hear a LOT of gossip going on in the women's side (they go to the bathroom in packs for goodness sake). An annoying amount of it. I would not want to deal with that crap just to accommodate 0.4% of people who can't just pick one and stick to it. Both sides have stalls so if you want a unisex toilet go into the stall and use the lock.
Stalls are already treated like nonbinary spots in the bathroom. Mothers and Fathers have to take their children to use them all the time if they are alone.

Most bathrooms in most establishments are single stall. They don't need to be gendered. It's a simple matter of changing signage. I've used 'male' bathrooms despite presenting as female; because the 'female' one was occupied. Honestly, gender single stall bathrooms annoy the hell out of me. It's 100% unnecessary.

People with penises don't (usually) have a urinal at home. Pee in the toilet. No big deal.

I don't go into the bathroom to socialize. I go in there to pee, wash my hands, and leave. The whole bathroom debate is exhausting. Just let people pee in peace.

Curious question for you. At what point do you intend to stop fighting for every single little thing there is? Is there a limit? Or is the feminist goal to eventually convert the world to social and economic communism?
Because there is a point when you end up making everyone so equal, that eventually the gifted individuals will be pulled down to make the world fair. We've already done it with the education system.

Most bathrooms are single stall? I've seen the very opposite here. At a grocery store I'll see a single bathroom. Otherwise the majority of places are multi-stall facilities.

Have men just use the same toilet? You do realize there are quite a number of men who can't aim. Men and women alike don't want to sit in some random stranger's piss. It's a great idea in theory, but not in practice. I wish I could find the link I had seen about this but it's buried under a lot of similarly worded stuff I'll link it if I can. But there was a company that did this, and the women complained, so the stalls were individually marked for a gender inside the unisex bathroom.

I also find it a bit odd that the majority of designs I am seeing for this include a sink next to the toilet. So if they find a design for adding a urinal, anybody who sits gets special treatment.
And while you are accommodating everyone, then every stall must be wheelchair friendly on top of that.
Then there's the insanity of the world of women complaining that men don't put the seat down, which they aren't obligated to do.

I mean given my background in engineering and basic education on architectural design I could make a layout for an all inclusive bathroom, but I'd have to invent a few things first. But the issue here is that this bathroom would have less toilets for the majority of people and more toilets to accommodate the minorities. In the end the majority get shafted by all results.

You also say you use the men's restroom to avoid the waiting in the women's restroom. Of course that seems an ideal when you're the one doing it. Imagine every single woman now does that. You get your line back and now men get a line too.

Originally Posted by The Wandering Poet

Curious question for you. At what point do you intend to stop fighting for every single little thing there is? Is there a limit? Or is the feminist goal to eventually convert the world to social and economic communism?
Because there is a point when you end up making everyone so equal, that eventually the gifted individuals will be pulled down to make the world fair. We've already done it with the education system.

I fight for the things I believe in. It's called integrity. And whoops, human rights happens to be on that list.

And I don't see socialism as a bad thing, sooooo....

And yes??? Every stall should be accessible????? Like, that's a given? [/QUOTE]

Well by making every stall accessible you drastically cut the number of potential stalls as wheelchair accessible stalls are much larger.
From there you have the issue of the majority having to have long lines because you wanted to accommodate a couple people.

Then, when you get into the parts about anxiety. Women who are afraid of men and men who are afraid of women should in theory also be accommodated for.

Socialism is something you're all for? What about communism? Because I didn't say socialism.

The biggest issue with all this is the message it sends. If you have even the slightest bit of anxiety the world shall conform for you at the expense of billions of people.
To me this is absurd because as a person who suffers from severe anxieties, i would NEVER expect the world to cater to my needs. I have been at the point of being unable to leave my home and unable to even at a point leave my room for days at a time. At no point in my life did I think "the world needs to cater to my needs". I am potentially disabled as well, but I will never expect a company to cater to that as well. Instead I have worked with myself and constantly trained and conditioned myself to make myself the person I am.
When a person changes the world for you, it heavily hurts your potential. It teaches you that the world will overcome all of your obstacles for you.

So when you push for your goal to make every single person equal, you pursue the task of putting down every single majority.

Take for example the No Child Left Behind act. This has MASSIVE effects on everyone. I have watched genius level students barely succeed in school because the challenge of school is stripped from them. The challenge which they live for is gone.

You aren't making everyone equal. You are making everyone YOUR equal. So instead of seeing them towering above you as a goal to reach, you cut them down to your level.

>>>>slightly off topic >>>>I used to clean restrooms in an office building...some guys can't keep it in the urinals, much less in the toilet...and the women's bathrooms were often much worse than the men's! ...pee on the seats, brown matter on the seat...pee on the floor..and women's hygiene products tossed into corners! Yuck!

Inzane - That's an interesting point to make.
I had forgotten that while men are trying to wash their hands they would be blocked by women trying to do their make-up.

But I wonder, if the Male and Female bathrooms were both made Unisex, do you think it would make the bathrooms cleaner (better for everyone)? Or even dirtier(worse for everyone)?

Like - you keep making these wide generalizations and slippery slope arguments... when what we are really talking about is a law that gives legal precedent to gender diverse people to have protection against descrimination.

Your 'but I'll be fined because I have a poor memory' argument was debunked. Yet you still cling to it.

Attacking feminism doesn't prove your point. My political leanings don't prove your point. (I am not a communist, btw. I'm a socialist - as I've said.)

As for the bathrooms 'they might be dirty' ? So what? They already are, and frankly that's a cultural thing. You go to other countries and they're kept clean. Look at Japan as an example. They don't have many public garbage cans yet there isn't much litter.

And I said all bathrooms should be accessible. Not that every stall had to be accessible. They should include a stall that is wheelchair accessible. A change table. Proper design to be visual impaired friendly, etc....

Making them gender neutral is just a part of that. All single stalled bathrooms should be gender neutral. And if you want to keep your gendered bathroom then simply add a single stalled option. It's. Not. That. Hard. Hell - most places I go to already have a single stall option with their bathrooms. It's labelled as a 'family' bathroom. With an attitude or signage shift this really all becomes a non issue.

And I have never encountered an issue with washing my hands because someone was doing their make Up. Your sexist, stereotyping argument can go in the trash.

A discrimination that makes no sense.
Of course I am not 100% accurate on how the women's bathroom is, I simply see 10+ women walking into the bathroom in groups loudly talking, the echo coming from the bathroom the entire time. I don't go in there because I go into the bathroom which my biological gender fits.

I think feminism was a wonderful idea for it's time. What I dislike is the millennial feminist expectation that everything is about them. They so badly want to stand out and they want the world to change NOW. But they must remember they share the world with the rest of the world. You must take baby steps to change the world.
When you take steps slowly, such as the changing of the ID, you allow people to adjust to this new idea. When you force it, you paint them with a negative light.

Your expectations still request that every single bathroom be remodeled that doesn't confine to your preferences.

And I have never encountered an issue with washing my hands because someone was doing their make Up. Your sexist, stereotyping argument can go in the trash.

I see you've taken to throwing insults.
I'm sure it would also trigger you to know that Males and Females aren't the same. That's why Male and Female was what they chose for how to divide the bathrooms. There is a biological difference which is where Male and Female are determined.

I'm sure you also want unisex changing rooms, men and women changing together to go into the pool, the gym, etc.

Your idea is good on paper, but that's all.

But in the end the reason I don't understand this, is that these people want you to recognize their IDENTITY, instead of their BIOLOGICAL GENDER. When we say Yes Sir, we say this to people who appear Male. When we say Yes Ma'am we say this to people who appear Female. These are terms of respect. If you go up to someone and greet them without these terms in many parts of the country you WILL offend them. If you greet them in a gender neutral method you will offend them.

Your gender identity is equivalent to your opinion on politics because from what I have learned here your gender identity is exactly that, your personal opinion. One which can change. Your biological gender requires actual effort to change.
You can have your Birth Certificate changed, your ID changed, etc.

The only people left out on this are the gender neutral people. Which, as I've said still have a biological gender.

Maybe to make things more accurate we should determine bathroom by dominant hormone. You can't say "I identify as a testosterone based individual" because we can test that.

It wasn't an insult but okay??
Moving on.
There is no such thing as biological gender.
Your biological SEX is one thing. Your GENDER is another. Can we not at least acknowledge that these are 2 separate things??

To clear it up for you.

I'm not triggered, or offended, or some 'millenial feminist seeking attention'. I just disagree with you, and think gender diverse people deserve protection under the law.
Plain and simple.

Also, again "Change is hard so we shouldn't do it because people will be uncomfortable" is another shitty argument that can go in the trash (not an insult, just my opinion).

It makes people uncomfortable because they're in the wrong and relearning and acknowledging that your actions and behaviour affect other people is HARD to do. That doesn't mean we shouldn't do it. It just means we as a society needs to learn and grow, and equip people with the tools to do it.

Kind of like how consent education is now being taught in primary school - because those pesky feminist realized that teaching people to consent from a young age - and basic things like empathy were important to teach in order to develop these skills in children.
Like how mental health is now being taught in schools so people develop real coping skills (aside from rape jokes, yanno?)

Not an insult? So calling me sexist is casual conversation for you?

Also to clarify. When I say biological gender, that was my implying of sex. I don't fully understand all this stuff as I've said before. As your gender stuff does not have a biological form. It's a social construct after all, not a physical one.

Alright then. Bathrooms are defined by biological sex. So it does not matter what you identify as to use the bathroom. Problem solved. Use what your biology defines. That being said, women's bathrooms should have more stalls than men's by a percentage, and that would be easy enough to calculate by monitoring a bathroom for time it takes per person on average.
Now, if gender and sex as you say are different, Sir and Ma'am are based around your biological sex. People will call you as you appear.
So if pronouns are based around your biological sex, not your gender, this makes things far more simple.

Now for those who are "intersex" as google is telling me they are called now, medical treatment is being said to be recommended to avoid health risks later in life. Considering my research states that having equal parts of both of those hormones leads to some very bad health risks, it makes sense they would need to choose which of the hormones would take effect at puberty.

Now I'm not saying you can't ask to be called he or she, or xe or something else. But perhaps while they are teaching those children consent, teach them how to handle words. Because watching a grown adult throw a temper tantrum over a word is not mature in the least.

I don't say not to change it. I am saying to take it slower (as you clearly have not been reading as I've had to repeat this several times). You don't cram change down society's throat.
It's not that "they are wrong", it's that society as a whole does not develop very fast. But when you introduce things too quickly they will react against it, not for it.
Processes take time to ensure they are done properly. Otherwise you get laws like originally mentioned.

Originally Posted by The Wandering Poet

Crimson - Basic decency yes. I've said earlier in this thread, my issue with that is the large potential fine I could face. It takes me upwards of a month to get someone's gender identity down and by then I'm pretty sure I would get fired or be put in a lawsuit or fine.

From posts made by other members, I would not be so certain that you would be as liable to a fine as you assert. Granted I am unaware of the nature of your job. The legislation itself is targeted at addressing the issue of harassment and people deliberately utilizing gendered pronouns in an aggressive manner. This is, after all, legislation aimed at addressing harassment.

Originally Posted by The Wandering Poet

The difference with race is that you are that race, as you said "you can recognize it" after they told you.

Importantly, it is only because they identified as such. If I had not been informed of this, I would be unable to recognize it. This is the point I was trying to make. Ethnicity is not such a clear cut phenomena. There is ambiguity involved. The same applies to gender.

Originally Posted by The Wandering Poet

Gender identity is exclusively in the head.

I'm not entirely sure what you are saying here. It seems a rather misleading assertion on identity.

Okay... I'm just going to press lause for a minute.

You've said yourself that you don't know much about the subject. So why do you hold your opinion above mine when not only am I nonbinary - but have extensive experience working in the queer and trans communities?

At this point it has been explained multiple times that the law does not work the way you think it does. It is in fact 'a law that works properly'. It is the same as laws based on sex, race, sexuality, etc...

Second of all.... The bathroom issue is honestly getting ridiculous. When new rules are implemented- the government gives businesses time to adjust. Like they did when they required businesses to be accessible. YES it costs money. But it's for the betterment of society.
More over - for the most part we don't even need gender neutral bathrooms - even though they're the best solution the first 'baby step' is to just let people use what ever bathroom they identify with.

Yet y'all ain't even willing to do that because of your hyperbolized arguments. /Even when there are no documented cases of a trans person using this to attack others in bathrooms/.

And I have heard you. I said I disagree. I don't think this is slamming anything down anyone's throat. If you have to wait for everyone to agree then change will never happen.

I'm not even going into the intersex argument because 1) You don't know what you're talking about, and a Google search is not enough to inform you. 2) Its honestly a whole other discussion and deserves it's own thread.

Crimson - But who decides if something is intentional or not? If I mess up their pronoun several times who decides if I am being intentional. I mess up people's names at work all the time I'm not going to get their pronoun right.
It would seem that casually refusing to use their preferred pronoun would also result in said fine.

By being in the head I mean that this is where many of the sources I find is saying. That gender identity is in the head and not a physical trait. It is independent of your physical biology.

2femme - Because if your ideas aren't challenged then you wont bring up more information. I also research as I post.
I don't "hold my opinion above you", this is how a discussion happens it's not some power play. It goes back and forth as ideas are shared until a mutual placement is reached or both parties decide they wont agree.

Not all points I bring up are my viewpoint. But also the viewpoints of the research that I find.

The main thing reason I bring it up the shared bathroom concern is because of the many issues I hear brought up. Regardless of what WILL happen, almost all complaints I have read were from women. They were terrified of the idea of sharing a bathroom with a male. Of course they might identify as female but when they first walk in you don't know that.
Then there is the argument about changing rooms and showers and even prisons. Do you let someone decide what changing room they use by their identity or their external biology? Do you decide who they shower with by their gender identity? When they go to jail how do you decide whether they go to a male or female prison?
The end result should be in sight before changes are set in motion.

You seem to keep thinking I am saying "trans people" are the concern here. I've corrected you on this at least twice now. The concern is people who DO NOT identify as female SAYING they identify as female in order to go into the women's bathroom. The people who may do this would be predators and they would not be allowed to ask them to leave.

This is the concern which must be addressed. Found a site which lists 9 instances where this has happened and for some they couldn't do anything about it until they can catch them of a crime. Like having taken photographs of the women. Some of the people photographed were CHILDREN.
Men from what I am reading don't really care if a woman uses the men's restroom. We have stalls, granted not much privacy (really needs fixed) but while it would be weird, we know the women's line is far slower.

Of course if everyone had to agree nothing would happen. But if you remember learning about segregation in school, it was done in steps. Introduced slowly to avoid violent reactions. They had a goal in mind, to make blacks and whites equal and able to use the same bathrooms and drinking fountains and everything else. It's a slow integration process. Of course, the racial process I am told is still going as of last year but is still making progress.
The steps trans/nonbinary are taking seems to be getting pushed much faster.

In order to know the dangers that can come of the law it needs to be introduced slowly and studied extensively to ensure the safety of everyone NOT JUST trans people.

THIS Shows that those 9 instances are very minimal compared to the harassment trans people get in bathrooms.

The concerns are unfounded, and based in bigotry. They're also based in the idea of toxic masculinity, that everyone born with a penis is a predator, which is also gross and untrue.

I've already mentioned single stall bathrooms. This can be easily applied to change rooms and fitting rooms. The idea of gender privacy is honesty weird to me anyway? I don't want /anyone/ seeing me naked/changing/going to the bathroom. Period. Not to mention single stall facilities make it easier for those with disabilities to access them and receive help as needed.

Ah now you're calling me a bigot.... Pretty sure I don't need to reply to you anymore. You seem to like smearing people that disagree with you with the worst names you can possibly find.

Originally Posted by The Wandering Poet

Crimson - But who decides if something is intentional or not?

At this point I would note that it is important to realize that harassment itself is already illegal under anti-discrimination laws. The legislation itself concerning gendered pro-nouns is simply expanding the definition of what qualifies as harassment. As for who decides, my assumption would consequently be that it follows the same procedure as any other harassment case?

Originally Posted by The Wandering Poet

It would seem that casually refusing to use their preferred pronoun would also result in said fine.

Ideally before it got to the fine stage the workplace in question would be applying their own disciplinary procedures. Harassment can result in fines when it escalates, but many workplaces have processes in place to address harassment before it reaches that level.

Originally Posted by The Wandering Poet

By being in the head I mean that this is where many of the sources I find is saying. That gender identity is in the head and not a physical trait. It is independent of your physical biology.

I don't know if I would agree with such a boundary. Although I guess that is a topic in and of itself. At this point I will just note how happy I am that you were not saying what I thought you were.

Crimson - But the problem remains that gender according to the organization pushing this can be fluid. Meaning they could want you to call them Sir one day, Ma'am another day, and Xir a different day.

Again, it weighs heavily on who defines if something is harassment before you can tell who till take action first. The company or the law.
If you see 1,000 faces a day in retail and you say "have a good day sir" to someone who appears male because in society this is a polite gesture. In some places you will insult people if you are not as polite as you can.
Now this person comes by once a week so every 5,000 faces is this person. By this law this employee needs to remember this specific customer and any other customers like them. That or they have to constantly prompt the other 99% for their preferred pronoun and risk insulting many of the other customers.

In this instance does the employee decide if it was intentional? Does the customer? Does the business? Who decides who enforces this law?

The reason I am so heavily in favor of "segregated" bathrooms as people probably call it, is that the mental health of those who are afraid of men or women will not be forced to co-habitate, when current systems do not force it on them. This sort of thing requires extensive research into every possible effect it can cause long before we can take proper action.
At current they are simply pushing an agenda.

I have encountered a LOT of women who are afraid of men, and justly so given their pasts. I am pretty sure that number far exceeds the number of people who want to use the other bathroom.

It's not particularly relevant who is going to take action first. If the company in question does not have sufficient policies in place, then naturally they will not be the first to respond. However most companies do have policies in place in order to address issues of harassment. The same also applies to interactions with the public. So to answer your questions, it would be the same as any other instance of alleged harassment.

It is relevant to who is taking action first. Because when you have something like this, you need to know who decides when the action is intentional.

The difference between this being an intentional act of harassment and someone with a flakey memory, where do you draw the line? Do you fine the person with a flakey memory and fire them for harassment? What about the mentally disabled individuals? Trying to comprehend gender fluidity may be too complex for some of them. Would they also be at risk for these fines?

Additionally, how does the "victim" prove their gender identity in a court of law?