Seattle man tests transgender rule by undressing in women's locker room

[Recursion]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2016/02/17/transgender-rule-washington-state-man-undresses-locker-room/80501904/

Sigh

Seattle Parks and Recreation is facing a first-of-a-kind challenge to gender bathroom rules.

Last week, a man undressed in a women's locker room, citing a new state rule that allows people to choose a bathroom based on gender identity.

Around 5:30 p.m. on Feb. 8, a man wearing board shorts entered the women's locker room at Evans Pool and took of his shirt, according to Seattle Parks and Recreation.

Women alerted staff, who told the man to leave, but he said "the law has changed and I have a right to be here."

[KT2000]

1. he will likely brag about this

on his facebook page and to anyone who will listen.
What a jerk.

[Behind the Aegis]

2. Sounds like a real asshole.

Typical bigot thinks the law says one thing, except it doesn't. He didn't and doesn't identify as a woman. He was just being an asshole.

[Recursion]

3. He did claim to identify as a woman to a staffer (nt)

[Behind the Aegis]

5. Where?

Employees just rely on verbal identification or physical appearance, and this man offered neither.

Employees report that the man made no verbal or physical attempt to identify as a woman, yet he still cited a new rule that allows bathroom choice based on gender identification.

That was from the article you provided.

[Recursion]

17. Sorry, you're right and I read that wrong.

He stated to the staffer that the law allows people to use restrooms based on their choice of gender identity, but did not explicitly say his gender identity was as a woman. I retract and apologize.

[LisaL]

23. And if he did claim he identified as a woman, they wouldn't be able to ask him to leave.

That's one great law right there.

[Tien1985]

26. Yeah, it is a good law.

One asshole shouldn't get in the way of equality for thousands of people. They could easily follow up and prove that he is not transgender.

[LisaL]

28. How are they going to prove he isn't transgender?

Per this law, all the man has to do is claim he identifies as transgender. No proof of any kind is needed except what the man says. So any perv can claim to be transgender.

[Tien1985]

30. Transgender people have a pretty

extensive background, that often includes getting letters from therapists or doctors stating they are transgender.

This is a good and necessary law.

Any perv who is willing to break that law to harass others, would have anyway.

[LisaL]

34. But the law doesn't require a man to prove anything before entering the restroom.

So the fact that transgender people have extensive background has no relevance whatsoever to this law.

[Tien1985]

38. The law requires that he be transgender.

The place itself needs to come up with ways of figuring that out--which wouldn't be all that difficult.

This seems like a long way to go just to justify keeping transgender people out of the right bathroom.

[philosslayer]

42. "Not all that difficult?"

Should transgender people have to carry identification of some sort? Tell us, what is YOUR solution?

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

48. Agreed. The poster is saying that, if challenged, a transgender person has to get a letter from m

"their" therapist (of course they have a therapist!) and jump through other hoops.

Not easy.

[Lee-Lee]

126. No business or public place can require a person hand over medical records

Or any private medial information.

Being transgender is a medical diagnosis.

It is just like the whole service dog thing- a business can't challenge a claim that an animal is a service animal or require any sort of proof it is required- they must take the persons work it is a service animal as legit. And so probably half the little dogs you see with vests are just pets people abuse the law to take anywhere they want.

[snooper2]

46. be interesting to explain "how", Oh, and he went back a second time if you read the article

"No one was arrested in this case and police weren't called, even though the man returned a second time while young girls were changing for swim practice."

[Recursion]

85. "Which wouldn't be all that difficult" -- BS

Transpeople present at various times all over the gender spectrum.

I don't think this is a problem that has a solution without going to all single-occupancy bathrooms (or just going to unisex group bathrooms in general).

[Nye Bevan]

59. Are you suggesting that the law should require a doctor's or therapist's note? (nt)

[Behind the Aegis]

64. Thank you!

That was very classy.

[Nye Bevan]

6. Why are you referring to this person as "he" if ze identifies as a woman,

which presumably is the case, given zir choice of locker rooms?

The reactions to this person's behavior seem somewhat cisnormative.

[Behind the Aegis]

7. Because HE identifies as a MAN.

Read the article. HE never...let me repeat that for you...never...identified HIMSELF as a woman. Your reaction appears to be disingenuous and exemplifies why HE did what he did.

[Nye Bevan]

8. I just reread the story from start to finish,

and I don't see anything about this person "identifying as a man", as you claim. Has the story been edited subsequent to you reading it, perhaps?

[Behind the Aegis]

9. Did you read and re-read anywhere where HE identified HIMSELF as a woman?

No? It is likely because HE didn't do so, as REQUIRED by law. Transphobia is NOT a joke.

[Nye Bevan]

10. So are you retracting your claim that this person identifies as a man? (nt)

[Behind the Aegis]

11. No, I am saying HE didn't claim to be anything other than a man.

Transphobia is not a joke!

[Nye Bevan]

12. This person also did not claim to identify as anything other than a woman.

You appear to be using the pronoun "he" and referring to this person as a "man" based only upon this person's biological appearance.

[Behind the Aegis]

13. I am basing it on the article and the fact he never claimed otherwise.

You, however, seem to be trying to make an issue of it, and in the process, mock the true issue, transphobia.

[Nye Bevan]

14. So your position is that if someone appears to you to be a "man",

but actually identifies as a woman, that person should be required to announce their gender identification to someone in authority every time they want to use a women's restroom or locker room? Seems a bit intrusive. Why not just infer their gender self-identification based upon which restroom they choose to use?

[Ilsa]

18. "Why not just infer their gender self-identification..

based upon which restroom they choose to use?"

Maybe cause there are voyeurs who'd love to be able to come in without any declaration. I'd like to be able to use the locker room without fear of being leered at by men misusing and abusing an opportunity to enter my changing room or showers.

I'm not afraid of trans. I'm afraid of situations being abused at my personal expense.

[LanternWaste]

39. I find it odd that your often reach one conclusion when many are possible.

I find it odd that your often reach one and only one conclusion from remarks and then attribute that conclusion to the poster, when in fact, many conclusions are possible.

Myopia is convenient for the half-wit pretending to be clever.

[LisaL]

22. Well apparently they still let him to use women's locker room.

Or at least he managed to get into the room before they asked him to leave and returned when young girls were changing for swim practice.

[underahedgerow]

15. So what's actually going to happen if people of different genders use the same restroom or

changing room?

Literally, in that moment, what is going to happen? People will see skin? Or other people urinating? Or what? What seriously is the BFD?

Do we think that men will start waving their willies around? And then, what? Is he going to suddenly rape ALL the women in the room? Yeah, it's a willy, it's a butt, it's some boobs, and more butts and genitalia. We all got 'em.

People need to seriously chill.

[LiberalElite]

16. I've had two jobs where both genders shared the restroom-

when you think of it - that's what's done at home.

[underahedgerow]

19. And throughout Europe and pretty much the rest of the world. What's the US hangup with

this toilet & changing room thing? I so totally don't get it.

On a July 4th holiday I made the big mistake of joining a huge crowd waiting for fireworks on the beach somewhere in LA. One restroom, 20,000 people. Women's restroom, some kid pooped on the seat in one stall leaving one stall for hundreds of women and kids. Seriously, the line was at least 30 minutes.

Men's room 3 feet away, no waiting. Stalls and urinals.

I HAD to go, wasn't about to use a bush. Strolled right into the men's room, grabbed a stall, did my business without batting an eyelash. The men were shocked but no one said anything. Once I exited everyone got the message and it became a gender nuetral restroom that day.

People are so uptight. I really, REALLY don't get it.

[Orrex]

29. Out of curiosity...

What do you suppose would have happened if a man had taken it upon himself to "stroll right into" the women's room and do his business?

I'm also rather surprised that a public event hosting 20,000 people was permitted to occur in the first place with just two stalls for women and children. What event was this, and when?

[ScreamingMeemie]

37. Just my guess, but there was probably a bank of porta-potties somewhere.

I've been to events such as this, where everyone runs for the indoor plumbing. Me? When you gotta go, you gotta go.

[underahedgerow]

43. I don't know, what would your reaction be? Mine would be 'meh'. Yeah, LA, some 20 years

ago. Crappy city planners, whatta ya gonna do?

They never had one again after that, actually. It was down at the harbor at Marina Del Ray. It seriously was an effing nightmare, between parking, too many people and unusable sanitation facilities.

The likelihood of a guy needing to use the ladies' room is pretty slim, since men's rooms are pretty hit n run, gals are the ones who need a door and a sit-down. If he's needing to use the restroom and the men's is out of order, then chances are, again, you're not alone and there are plenty of other females around.

Now if he's wandering in there staring, grabbing his business and being a perv, yell like hell, swing that big old purse at him and don't let him get between you and the door. Then knee him in the groin, smash his face into the toilet, door, wall or sink and run. But here's the thing, if he's there to be a perv, you'll know it and some dumb ass law won't make any difference, anywhere, any way. If he's there to simply use the facilities, it's just not. a. big. deal.

[Orrex]

53. As a guy, I don't know that my reaction is really relevant here

I understand that you find it to be "meh," but I understand also that others might not have that response. I would be interested to see how'd you'd explain it to a woman who wouldn't be comfortable having a man in the stall behind her, even if he's not embodying the (sadly not unrealistic) caricature that you described.

[Ilsa]

40. Some of us who've been sexually abused or raped

want privacy from strangers who are the opposite gender to feel safe and feel like we still have some control over our bodies.

I don't care if a person of the opposite sex undresses before me, tran or not. I do care about having some privacy from the opposite sex when I need to undress. Like it or not, many women, some not that old, are raised to be more modest. They find undressing in front of others, especially men, emotionally repugnant.

[Matrosov]

41. In the US, nudity = sex

If you're sharing a toilet or changing room with the opposite gender, you might catch a glimpse of skin.

It's a big deal in the US because our Puritan tendencies have made nudity and sex synonymous, and a lot of Americans think that seeing someone naked is an invitation for impure, unChristian thoughts at best and maybe even some sex acts at worst.

[underahedgerow]

44. You're absolutely right. Heck, even on this site I remember members getting all in a tizzy about

President Obama's daughters SHOWING THEIR BARE ARMS ON NATIONAL TV during his inauguration.

WTF, right?

People have to find that balance and common sense somewhere.

[LisaL]

24. At the same time?

What kind of job was that?

[ScreamingMeemie]

32. Mt. Clemens Bank, Michigan... ca. 1991

One three stall bathroom for all employees. When you gotta go, you gotta go.

[LisaL]

35. Well, that sure wouldn't be a place I pick for my employment.

[ScreamingMeemie]

36. It fed my daughter and paid my bills.

It wasn't as big a deal as it's all of a sudden become in our Puritan nation. It's a nonissue that some church lady somewhere decided to make an issue.

Bad people are going to be bad, no matter what sign is on a bathroom door. Smile, and have a wonderful day.

[underahedgerow]

45. Having a common restroom for males and females would be a deal breaker for you in

an employment issue?

I don't care who's using the restroom so long as they leave it clean when they're done and don't stink up the place.

[Recursion]

110. It was a gag in Ally McBeal IIRC

Fish kept having trouble with his "dismount" or something.

[underahedgerow]

124. I remember the 'I have to have a clean bowl' thing! Something about flushing before

he used it!

I do the same thing when necessary!

What is it with men who can't hit the bowl and not splatter? Oy.

[LisaL]

20. This guy returned when young girls were changing for swim practice.

What is going to happen is that any pedo can apparently now go in and claim they are transgender and observe young children changing for swim practice or using the bathroom. If a man exposes himself to children in a park, he can be arrested. If he goes in the changing room and says he identifies as a woman, it's all good per this new law.

[Bonx]

54. Of course this is the real problem and there is no easy answer.

[Blue_Tires]

69. +1

[Yo_Mama]

74. Yep. No way out of it. n/t

[LisaL]

21. So you think it's just peachy if an adult male goes into a changing room with young children

undressing, and gets naked himself? All righty then.

[surrealAmerican]

25. He can already do that if the children are boys, though.

Maybe it would make more sense to have a children's locker room.

[LisaL]

27. Well, at lest female children were protected from this until now.

[Tien1985]

31. Adult women have been predators too. n/t

[LisaL]

33. In much fewer numbers than men.

[underahedgerow]

51. What are the chances of that happening?

If it's a changing room then it's a sports facility. Rarely with kids. And again, if by some slim chance there's kids, there's other adults, so the chances are physical harm are zero.

Chances of seeing a nearly naked male human? So-so and so what? What's wrong with seeing skin, in a changing room? What's the trauma here? My gawd, legs, torso, back, arms, stomach, possibly buttocks, possibly genitalia. Boobs even. Body hair. Toenails. What is the big deal? What's the trauma here?

At worst kids learn we're all the same while we're all different. At best kids learn that we're all the same and we're all different. The human body is nothing to be ashamed of and children shouldn't be taught to be ashamed or frightened of it.

Fear is disempowering. Women have to stop acting like prey being stalked. Act like prey and you will be prey. In a restroom, in a bar, in a restaurant, on the street, in your car, in your home.

[LisaL]

80. Per the article, this guy came back when there were kids changing in there.

So I would say the chances of that happening are pretty good.
I guess it's no bid deal to you if your young female daughter sees a naked dude, and that naked dude sees your young female daughter when she is undressing. But I hope you realize a lot of people aren't going to feel the same way you do.

[Humanist_Activist]

55. That happens all the time now, ever been to the Y?

They have 3 changing rooms, the family room(with private stalls), men and women, but there's no door check, and when I was in there, kids from as young as early adolescence(9 or 10, maybe younger) to adulthood are in there. Kids that are younger are generally with an an adult, and they mostly use the family room.

[snooper2]

47. he went back a second time when young girls were changing for swim practice

I'll tell you, if my daughter was in there and someone who didn't have hips & tits was in there leering at her-

An ass whooping would be in play...

[Humanist_Activist]

57. If someone is acting inappropriately in the bathroom, that is a cause for concern...

but its the inappropriate behavior that's the issue, not the gender. Unless you would be perfectly fine with a cis-gender woman leering at your daughter in a changing/bath room.

[uppityperson]

62. Exactly! I had a creepy PE teacher leering at us middle school girls, she was female

It was very creepy and got many complaints.

The gender or sexual orientation doesn't matter. The leering is inappropriate and does matter.

[Humanist_Activist]

66. I really don't understand this issue, the arguments used apply equally well....

Regarding sexual orientation, with echos of it being used to argue against DADT, etc.

[Recursion]

88. Keep in mind that the article never claimed he leered

And the same person can be in the men's locker room when boys are changing. However, the person presented as "male" enough to bother the women in the changing room.

[LisaL]

90. There is no suggestion this guy is actually transgender.

I think he clearly was trying to make a point. Per this law any man can go into female bathroom or changing room. This is not a good law if you ask me.

[bettyellen]

125. you just reminded me of why I stopped using the sauna at the Y- kids. They wanted to see naked women

and so they would open the door and giggle every two minutes after their class. It was only little girls, but damn it was weird.

[geek tragedy]

56. That's exactly the wrong attitude to take. Privacy is a very legitimate concern despite

the transphobia underlying stories like this.

[Dr. Strange]

65. That's probably the future.

People will eventually get over all the bullshit and use common bathrooms, changing areas, showers, etc.

[Blue_Tires]

70. Would you still be "chill" if there were a bunch of minors in there?

[Humanist_Activist]

76. Uhm, boys are allowed in men's changing rooms at the Y and I'm sure other places....

As well. Where is the concern about that?

What about grown men and women showering or sharing the bathroom with homosexuals of their gender?

[LisaL]

79. There was a bunch of minors in there. Per the article, this guy came back when

young girls were changing for swim meet.

[Blue_Tires]

128. Exactly my point

[yardwork]

86. My feelings exactly.

[Nye Bevan]

99. The concept of sex-segregated restrooms and locker rooms appears to be rapidly becoming outdated.

And when the law says that anyone can use any restroom or locker room, based upon their gender self-identification, but with no proof of any kind required, any rules about gender-segregation are unenforceable anyway.

[Bluenorthwest]

49. This OP makes me want to barf.

The conservative part of this Party might as well be Republicans.

[Behind the Aegis]

61. Agreed.

I was thinking the same about some of the responses. From the faux "supporters" to the downright transphobic responses, it is amazing how a few cannot seem to comprehend the problem isn't the transgender people, but those who allegedly hold their same view. In some cases, it is quite clear, "Rights for me, but not for thee."

[Blue_Tires]

71. Pointing out an easily exploitable loophole

that could ruin things for legit transgender folks in the future is "conservative"??

[Humanist_Activist]

75. I think they are pointing out that this is a dogwhistle for transphobes...

Who love to concern troll about this issue far too often.

[Recursion]

83. So obviously this never happened, and USA Today is lying

Understood.

[Humanist_Activist]

84. This man did this to make a transphobic statement from what we can tell...

frankly it was trolling on his part. Its not an argument against the law in question.

[Recursion]

87. It was a complete troll, and distracts from the actual bathroom safety issue,

namely that of transwomen being repeatedly attacked in men's rooms.

That said, you can't write a law that depends on the good faith of people, which this one seems to.

[LisaL]

89. I think this guy was clearly trying to make a point.

In that any male now can go into female bathroom or changing room. In that he certainly succeeded.

[Humanist_Activist]

91. I always figured gender segregated bathrooms are all about good faith...

generally speaking, as long as people behave, it shouldn't really matter what sex their body is when they go to the bathroom.

Even many cis-gendered people can look atypical of their biological sex. We don't demand genital checks at the bathroom/shower room door, if we did, people would be up in arms about it, largely. So, we have to take it on trust, or violate people's privacy.

[Recursion]

92. And I don't know that there's a way to keep gender segregated bathrooms, realistically

in a world where our concept of gender is as fluid as it is now. They'll either need to be single occupancy or unisex.

[Humanist_Activist]

100. Society changes as new information is revealed, this is as it should be, to help create a...

truly egalitarian society that has, at its core, the value of minimizing injustice when practical.

I really don't have an issue with either option, and it makes sense from a practical standpoint. Hell, there are places where the single stalls are gender segregated, like in many smaller gas stations that have public bathrooms, that makes no sense and seems to be overkill.

[LisaL]

93. This guy went into a changing room

where females are actually undressing to go swimming. So genitals would be out in the open, so to say.

[Humanist_Activist]

98. Depends on whether its has stalls for changing or not...

I can give an example of the YMCA I go to, which has locker/changing/shower/bathroom all rolled into one, its the only way to reach the pool and hot tub.

But, first, its mostly open with lockers and benches, not unusual to see guys in changing in various states of undress. On the other side, but still "open" excepting the stalls, are the bathrooms, typical men's room layout, private stalls with toliets, urinals along the wall. Further down are the showers, you are supposed to soap up and rinse before going to the pool, the showers are in 2 parts, 6 private stalls, with a private bench/changing area included, or using the group shower.

Basically, depending on comfort level, you have the option of undressing in front of others or not.

Also, bear in mind that kids use this same room as adults, in fact, I remember one time when some kids took over some of the private stalls and started throwing water over the partitions at each other, the floors are usually a little damp in the common area around the showers, that day it was a standing pool of water.

[Recursion]

82. Yup, this guy's actions make me sick too

What's most disturbing is that there is a danger in bathrooms, and it's to transwomen from cismen. But, no, this asshole had to troll.

OTOH there are transwomen who present as very masculine. Do you know this person is not one? I don't. The article writer and the gym staff seem to assume so.

[beam me up scottie]

94. Agreed.

So many people showing their true selves, disgusting.

[-none]

50. I can't help but wonder if a physical female were to do the same thing in a men's locker room,

how this thread would go?
It would probably get alerted on because the alerter thought it belonged in the Men's Group.

As a few other have noted here, this country is messed up sexually. Very messed up.

[uponit7771]

117. I've seen it happen 4 or 5 times at clubs, men get protective and understanding cause

... women don't have as many places to use.

The reason its not the same for guys is guys have urinals ...

The 2 and 3rd time I saw the girl got cool points for being comfortable around guys and having the minerals to say fuck it I gotta pee...

Humans can be unpredictable

[hollowdweller]

52. Maybe they can test them???????

[MineralMan]

58. It could be a couple of things:

My guess is that it's one of those, "I don't like this law, so I'm going to use it to make a protest by going into the women's changing room and causing a stink" situations.

It also could be that this person is truly transgender, but that seems less likely, somehow, given the circumstances and the return to the dressing room when kids were changing there.

There will be lots of similar tests, I imagine. Plenty of people oppose this sort of law. They're wrong, of course, and even more wrong to use the law to make the point that they oppose the law.

This isn't the first such incident, I'm sure, and it's likely not to be the last. People will test laws they don't like.

[Oneironaut]

60. Right wing asshole. They always have to take it to extremes.

Why can't they just mind their own business?

[greymattermom]

63. So this person claims to identify as female, right?

Can that be enforced? Force him to wear a bathing suit with a top to it. If he's female, his boobs can't be seen.

[suffragette]

67. Two Days Before a State Senate Vote on an Anti-Trans Bathroom Bill,

Pool Employees Say a Man Showed Up in a Women's Locker Room"

http://www.thestranger.com/blogs/slog/2016/02/17/23583092/two-days-before-a-state-senate-vote-on-anti-trans-bathroom-bill-pool-employees-say-a-man-showed-up-in-a-womens-locker-room


Today, KING 5 reports that two days before a critical vote on the issue, Seattle pool employees said a man who did not verbally or physically identify (note: it's unclear what this means) as a woman walked into the women's Evans Pool locker room.
~~~
UPDATE: Danni Askini, executive director of the Gender Justice League, makes a very important point: In the case described above, the Human Rights Commission policy worked.

"The person was asked to leave and did leave," Askini said. "Our opposition has repeatedly called for people to make protests like this—which is incredibly disappointing of them—to prove a point. This person did not assert that they were transgender, which I think [shows] that this person did not have a sincerely held gender identity."

~~~
Askini thinks this particular incident reeks of a stunt. "I think that it is tricky for us how to delineate how to decide [what's a sincere gender identity], but I think that in this case this person did not have a gender identity that was consistent with the locker room," Askini said.



There is more info at this much more comprehensive article. Note that conservatives here in WA have been trying to get this changed. I agree with Askini that this reeks of a stunt and a specifically timed one at that. Also agree with Askini that the policy worked.

[Behind the Aegis]

68. Thank you for adding more context.

Like you, I think this was a stunt, and it showed the policy worked, which proved the opposite of what I am sure those bigots were hoping for.

[suffragette]

72. Exactly so. More here about how Republicans have been pushing the bias.

http://www.thestranger.com/news/feature/2016/02/10/23549761/senate-republicans-anti-trans-bathroom-bills-are-unlikely-to-passandmdashbut-the-damage-is-already-done

State senator Steve O'Ban (R-Pierce County) cracked open a can of carbonated something before settling into his vice chair's seat on the state senate's Law and Justice Committee, where dozens of people had signed up to testify about the "Genital Check" bill.

It's not every day that state legislators hold public hearings on how to match penises and vaginas to their owners, but the hearing on SB 6548 concerned just that. Sponsors of the bill—all Republicans, including the chair of the Law and Justice Committee sitting to O'Ban's left—were concerned about cis women and children being exposed to transgender people's parts in sex-segregated bathrooms. SB 6548 would amend state antidiscrimination law to allow businesses, organizations, and individuals to turn transgender people away from using segregated bathrooms and locker rooms.

~~~

At two separate hearings in Olympia over the past month, legislators have advanced the argument that allowing transgender people to use public toilets and locker rooms invites sexual predators to prey on cis women and girls. A total of six bills in the state legislature now endorse the idea. But while four other bills dealing with transgender people in bathrooms have been filed in the state house of representatives, Representative Laurie Jinkins (D-Tacoma), who chairs the House Judiciary Committee, has vowed not to give them a hearing. The only reason public testimony for SB 6548 was being heard—like public testimony was heard for SB 6443, the other anti-trans bathroom bill, on January 25—was because senate Republicans made it a priority.

Republicans in the state senate either don't know or don't care that this is a dangerous argument. It may score them points with a conservative base, but just the hearings could have harrowing repercussions for the trans community.

Excellent point that this stunt proved the opposite of the bigots' argument.

[beam me up scottie]

95. Thank you, it makes sense now.

Posters should be ashamed of themselves for repeatedly claiming this is a transgender person.

[suffragette]

112. Yep. Interesting side note: one of the Repubs who railed against law had to resign

Because he lied about his military service. Even his fellow Repubs were disgusted by him. He was also a Bundy refuse takeover supporter and WA State Chair for Ted Cruz.


http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/1/28/1476393/-GOP-lawmaker-behind-anti-trans-bill-in-Washington-embellishes-his-military-record

[LisaL]

97. He was asked to leave and left, but then came back when minors were in the room changing.

And yes, he didn't identify as female, but he could have claimed he was identifying as female. He doesn't have to produce any proof he is actually transgender, so what is to stop someone from making a claim? Per this law, they wouldn't even be able to ask him to leave if he made such a claim. So, yes, I think it's clear this guy was there to prove a point. Any male can now go into female dressing room and claim to be identifying as female.

[suffragette]

104. Apparently conservatives here have been encouraging such a stunt to support Republican

attempts at legislation to change the current law.

http://www.thestranger.com/blogs/slog/2016/02/17/23584290/conservative-trolls-have-been-suggesting-men-go-into-womens-restrooms-to-help-legislators-discriminate-against-trans-people


Sounds to me like the staff there handled this well and the man left after his two attempts to stir up people.

Seems he took a swim in between.
http://komonews.com/news/local/man-found-in-womens-locker-room-cites-new-transgender-bathroom-rule

[LisaL]

108. Did the staff actually have any right to ask him to leave?

Per this new law? Doesn't he have a right to be in the female changing room per this new law?

[suffragette]

114. There's not much info on what his behavior was, so it's hard to tell about that part

Here's a link to the law.
http://app.leg.wa.gov/wac/default.aspx?cite=162-32-060

Here's the statement from Parks:
http://mynorthwest.com/992/2913750/Man-caught-undressing-in-front-of-girls-at-Green-Lake-locker-room
On Monday, Feb. 8, around 5:30 p.m., an individual, a young adult, came into the pool lobby, paid the fee for lap swim, and went into the woman's locker room to change. At no time did he verbally "identify" as female. Staff didn't see which locker room he entered as it was a busy time of day with a lot of swimmers coming and going. Previous to lap swim time at the pool was a local youth swim team practice. After lap swim was another children's swim time.
Seeing this individual in the locker room, parents of swim team members (girls) and women who had paid for lap swim became alarmed and alerted our front desk staff. In response, an Evans pool staff member entered the women's locker room and asked the man to leave and offered the availability of a family changing room. Other patrons were also offered the alternative of the family changing room. He eventually left the women's locker room. After the lap swim, he again entered the women's locker room to change. Front desk staff again asked him to leave and he eventually did.

This didn't seem like a transgender issue to staff — someone who was "identifying" as a woman. We have guidelines that allow transgender individuals to use restrooms and locker rooms consistent with their gender identity. We want everyone to feel comfortable in our facilities.

[Recursion]

115. "We want everyone to feel comfortable in our facilities"

That may not be a possible goal, though.

[suffragette]

118. Better goal than Republican exclusion and genital checking legislation.

[oberliner]

73. "the man returned a second time while young girls were changing for swim practice"

That's buried towards the end of the story.

[Nye Bevan]

77. Why are so many DUers referring to this person as a "man"?

Shouldn't the default assumption be that this person self-identifies as female, given their use of the female locker room?

[LisaL]

78. Because this guy didn't even claim he identifies as a female.

He just claimed that because of new law he can go into females changing rooms.

[beam me up scottie]

96. .

Last edited Thu Feb 18, 2016, 10:54 PM - Edit history (1)

[Nye Bevan]

101. Should a transgender person be challenged, and forced to self-identify as a female,

every single time they use a female bathroom or locker room?

[Humanist_Activist]

102. We are talking about a person who self-identifies...

as a man and hence our use of male pronouns is completely appropriate, no more, no less.

As to your first question, I would say no, but I also think the idea of such gender segregated rooms is both unnecessary and, I guess you could say quaint.

[Nye Bevan]

105. I didn't see anything in this story about the person self-identifying as a man.

Did you read that somewhere else? Do you have a link?

[LisaL]

106. This was a man who didn't claim he identified as a woman.

Should we still assume he identifies as a woman? Why exactly?

[Humanist_Activist]

107. There's nothing showing they self-identify as a woman either, the default is to assume...

they identify as a man, particularly since it appears this was a stunt to challenge the current law.

[LisaL]

103. So basically any man should be able to enter female dressing room, without anyone

having any right to question?

[Nye Bevan]

109. Suggesting on DU that any kind of proof be required to use a specific restroom

tends to generate an extremely hostile reaction, to say the least. The majority opinion here is that anyone should be allowed to use any restroom or locker room they choose, without having to present any kind of documentation or proof of which gender they identify as.

[LisaL]

111. Oh I know that.

That's what this new law is amounting to. Any man can now go to female bathroom or changing room, and nobody is supposed to be concerned or asking any questions.

[kwassa]

113. Europe, 1973, some bar in Belgium ....

I was using the urinal in the restroom, which had a big mirror over it. One of the English girls from our party upstairs walked behind me, called out a cheerful hello to me as I was peeing. I was quite startled to look up and see her. She went into a stall. There were three, labeled in French as mens, womens and private, whatever that meant. My first co-ed bathroom.

Later, in a youth hostel in Amsterdam, the women were showering in the men's shower room with us, because their showers were broken. After a couple minutes, it seemed entirely normal.

[Initech]

116. If this person is actually showing physical signs of being transgender, they can stay.

If they don't, get the fuck out. Plain and simple.

[LisaL]

119. There is nothing in the actual law that says the person has to show any signs of being transgender.

[Initech]

120. Then this needs to be rewritten then.

Because otherwise you get shit like this happening which only further proves the fears of Republicans and fundamentalist Christians that any man can claim shit like this guy is pulling and enter any restroom, locker room, or dressing room that they please. And it ruins it for everybody. Is that what we want? To me it kind of undermines the whole trans rights movement if even our lawmakers can't get it right.

[LisaL]

122. I don't want any of this at all.

I was never supporting this type of law.

[Initech]

123. I agree, having no law at all would be better than this bullshit.

I'm thinking that this needs to get challenged before SCOTUS ASAP.

[Lee-Lee]

127. How would you rewrite the law?

Allow employees to inspect the body for
"Signs" of being transgender? Allow them to question them on gender identity and allow untrained yahoos to judge whose identity claims are valid?

[AngryAmish]

121. DU, you never let me down.