[Funny] xHamster blocks all porn in North Carolina.

Oh, it's ON, now.
PayPal, Apple, Facebook, Disney, even The Boss all up in arms due to HB2.
And now this.

Now I have to wonder how much transgender porn (that is, porn featuring obviously transgender/intersex/crossdressing/whatever individual(s)) is consumed in NC. I also wonder whether or not this data will somehow become public knowledge very soon...possibly with IP address blocks that trace back to the State Capitol, etc., etc.

--Patrick
 
I use a porn aggregator site. But sometimes I just go to xvideos because for some reason it seems to work the best for me.
 
Sounds like a double win for supporters of the bill. They'd probably be ecstatic if the rest of the online porn industry did the same thing.
 
Sounds like a double win for supporters of the bill. They'd probably be ecstatic if the rest of the online porn industry did the same thing.
I had the same thought. I can't imagine the supporters of that new law are going to shed a tear over porn being unavailable.
 

GasBandit

Staff member
This issue just exhausts my give-a-shit really. I have a hard time really shedding a tear for people who are upset that they can't pee where they want, or go hunting from bakery to bakery until they find someone who won't bake them a wedding cake. But on the other hand, the only reason we really consider it bad/wrong to pee in the presence of the other gender is because we were told it was bad/wrong when we were 2, and it's just arbitrary programming that has been reinforced all along. The whole thing exasperates me to no end. I'll pee with any of you, any time. Right next to you. Right ON you even. Whatever.

 
This issue just exhausts my give-a-shit really. I have a hard time really shedding a tear for people who are upset that they can't pee where they want, or go hunting from bakery to bakery until they find someone who won't bake them a wedding cake. But on the other hand, the only reason we really consider it bad/wrong to pee in the presence of the other gender is because we were told it was bad/wrong when we were 2, and it's just arbitrary programming that has been reinforced all along. The whole thing exasperates me to no end. I'll pee with any of you, any time. Right next to you. Right ON you even. Whatever.

 
I really wonder what some of these people do in some of the countries around the world where gender-based bathrooms are considered weird and useless.
 
This issue just exhausts my give-a-shit really. I have a hard time really shedding a tear for people who are upset that they can't pee where they want, or go hunting from bakery to bakery until they find someone who won't bake them a wedding cake. But on the other hand, the only reason we really consider it bad/wrong to pee in the presence of the other gender is because we were told it was bad/wrong when we were 2, and it's just arbitrary programming that has been reinforced all along. The whole thing exasperates me to no end. I'll pee with any of you, any time. Right next to you. Right ON you even. Whatever.
cis privilege is pretty nice, ain't it?
 
I don't know that I want gender neutral bathrooms, but letting trams people use the gender they want to is an easy solution. I'm not gonna sit and worry about the hypothetical "man in drag uses transgender laws to rape women" that never actually happens as an excuse to make trans peoples' lives worse with these bathroom laws (which is clearly happening already).
 
It's a complicated situation. If we increase access to one group, we necessarily increase access for another group, and it's not always a good thing.

http://socawlege.com/the-case-against-fully-shifting-to-gender-neutral-bathrooms/
As a simple example, ask yourself, if a female student passes out at 3 a.m. in a bathroom stall, would you prefer another female find her, or have it be a coin flip whether the next person coming through that door is a male or female? Personally, I would prefer another female student find her, as opposed to a potentially intoxicated male.
Herein lies the biggest danger with gender neutral bathrooms – a potential for more sexual assault, and certainly more sexual harassment.
I don't feel like this is a given. Does this author have some kind of uncited statistics about trans rapists on college campuses that I don't have? I would much rather the intoxicated student be found by someone that won't take advantage to them--which, in my heavily anecdotal experience, means I'd rather ban cis lesbians from female bathrooms, instead of trans women.
 
I don't feel like this is a given. Does this author have some kind of uncited statistics about trans rapists on college campuses that I don't have? I would much rather the intoxicated student be found by someone that won't take advantage to them--which, in my heavily anecdotal experience, means I'd rather ban cis lesbians from female bathrooms, instead of trans women.

Maybe I'm reading this wrong, but I'm not exactly sure that the article is speaking of "trans rapists". When a lot of people bring this point up, it's usually under the assumption that there's literally nothing preventing anyone from using whatever bathroom that they want. What would define someone as trans? Do they need to register? Have an ID? If I wanted to walk into a bathroom and say, "Hey it's cool, I identify as a woman", would anyone stop me? I don't have a concrete opinion one way or another, but I'm pretty sure when people talk about the 'dangers', they aren't talking about trans people in particular, but the idea that either restroom can be opened up to whoever wants to get in, since the big push now isn't about which bathroom someone who's already post-op wants to go to, but which bathroom someone wants to go to that simply 'identifies' themselves as being of that gender.
 
I don't feel like this is a given. Does this author have some kind of uncited statistics about trans rapists on college campuses that I don't have? I would much rather the intoxicated student be found by someone that won't take advantage to them--which, in my heavily anecdotal experience, means I'd rather ban cis lesbians from female bathrooms, instead of trans women.
I agree, but if we separate bathrooms by which gender you're attracted to, where do we put the bi's? Won't someone think of the bi's?!

Slightly more seriously, there's always a risk of rape - it's not like it's impossible to enter the other gender's bathroom in a situation where you think someone's there to be taken advantage of. "Oh no, we have to give women separate bathrooms so they won't get raped" is the exact same reasoning of "we have to have women accompanied by an adult male of their family at all times", "we have to cover their bodies in a burka", "we should keep women in the house", and so on. Besides, while woefully under-reported, there's female-on-female rape, too.

Making sure women aren't raped in a bathroom is a matter of teaching people not to rape, not of putting punishing restrictions of otherwise innocent people, be it the average trans, woman, or man.
 
I agree, but if we separate bathrooms by which gender you're attracted to, where do we put the bi's? Won't someone think of the bi's?!

Slightly more seriously, there's always a risk of rape - it's not like it's impossible to enter the other gender's bathroom in a situation where you think someone's there to be taken advantage of. "Oh no, we have to give women separate bathrooms so they won't get raped" is the exact same reasoning of "we have to have women accompanied by an adult male of their family at all times", "we have to cover their bodies in a burka", "we should keep women in the house", and so on. Besides, while woefully under-reported, there's female-on-female rape, too.

Making sure women aren't raped in a bathroom is a matter of teaching people not to rape, not of putting punishing restrictions of otherwise innocent people, be it the average trans, woman, or man.
Out of curiosity, have any European countries implemented something similar to great success? Is this an example of the US coming 'late to the party', so to speak?
 
One of the more stressful things to me used to be when my son needed to use the bathroom when we were out and my husband wasn't with me. It wasn't acceptable to bring my 10 year old son into the women's room, and he wouldn't do it anyways because the door quite clearly said "women", but he would get distracted and vaguely stare into space in the men's bathroom to the point where I had to say fuck it and go in after him more than once.

The same also applies to dads who bring their young daughters places.

And what about single room public restrooms that are labeled by gender for no real reason?

Just separate all the toilets/urinals into stalls and who gives a fuck. Seriously.
 
Out of curiosity, have any European countries implemented something similar to great success? Is this an example of the US coming 'late to the party', so to speak?
Yes and no. In some countries - IIRC mostly Scandinavian - there's a huge push to just general bathrooms for everyone. Here in Belgium, too, I've started seeing more and more restaurants/shops where the bathrooms aren't split by gender but have just urinals on one side and just stalls on the other (iow men who want to take a shit have to go into what would've been considered the women's bathroom before).
I won't say it's a very widespread trend anywhere around where I've been, so far, but I've seen it around, at least.
 
Maybe I'm reading this wrong, but I'm not exactly sure that the article is speaking of "trans rapists". When a lot of people bring this point up, it's usually under the assumption that there's literally nothing preventing anyone from using whatever bathroom that they want. What would define someone as trans? Do they need to register? Have an ID? If I wanted to walk into a bathroom and say, "Hey it's cool, I identify as a woman", would anyone stop me? I don't have a concrete opinion one way or another, but I'm pretty sure when people talk about the 'dangers', they aren't talking about trans people in particular, but the idea that either restroom can be opened up to whoever wants to get in, since the big push now isn't about which bathroom someone who's already post-op wants to go to, but which bathroom someone wants to go to that simply 'identifies' themselves as being of that gender.
That's a much more charitable interpretation, thanks for pointing it out.
I agree, but if we separate bathrooms by which gender you're attracted to, where do we put the bi's? Won't someone think of the bi's?!
We usually just go in our trusty frying pans, so we can fling the excreta at people to exploit the inherent Improved Invisibility.
 
Also, the rapist thing is just a fallacy to begin with in that example, because it already assumes a guy who is a rapist won't go in the women's bathroom in the middle of the night just because there's a gender sign.

It's also a fallacy because it assumes that if a guy finds a passed out girl first, he will clearly have to rape her.
 
It's also a fallacy because it assumes that if a guy finds a passed out girl first, he will clearly have to rape her.
I think the logic chain there is that stranger rape is committed by penis-havers more often that not, so increasing the amount of encounters between penis-havers and impaired adults necessarily increases the risk of rape.

The above can (I think?) be wholly addressed by your point above about rapists not caring about bathroom signs when prowling, and my request for hitherto-unknown-to-me statistics on the incidence of opportunity/stranger/first-time-offender/anything-please rape by transwomen in college.[DOUBLEPOST=1460471804,1460471325][/DOUBLEPOST]
In other news, half of every high school football team now identifies as female and there's nothing anybody gets to say about it, so open up the girls' showers, cause here they come.
High school football team members are allowed to question their gender identity. I hope they are not ridiculed and bullied due to this.

In other poorly-drawn-analogy news, desegregation leads to more black-on-white rape, but arguing for apartheid still makes you racist.

Edit: poorly-drawn because rapists gonna rape, and what's being argued re: bathrooms is that the incidences would increase, not merely change victims.
 
Last edited:
The article I posted was discussing removing gender signage from all restrooms and allowing all students to use all restrooms regardless of their gender, biological or expressed. In other words, no more men's and women's restrooms, simply "restrooms". This is being pushed by some student groups on some college campuses as a possible resolution to the transgender restroom issue.

In the example, a female passing out in the restroom has a 50/50 chance of being found by a male. The suggestion is that while a determined rapist won't care about signage, there are opportunist rapists who may take advantage of a situation that wouldn't otherwise be available since they generally conform to signage rules.

I don't know how likely this is. The article simply suggests that a drunk guy stumbling into a bathroom and finding a drunk girl might increase the odds of rape more than exist currently.

Are those odds greater than the odds of a transgender woman being beaten to death? They probably are, simply because the rape rate on campus is as high as 1 in five, while the transgender rate on campus isn't that high. But if the rape rate is already that high, is going to gender-less bathrooms going to increase it substantially? It might simply be noise compared to the already significant rate of campus rape.

This, however, is just a small portion of the gendered bathrooms in the US. Campus bathrooms might require different attitudes.

Personally, if a bathroom is intended of only one occupant (sink, toilet, no stalls), there's no need for any signage. If a bathroom has secure stalls (door that can be securely locked on each toilet/urinal/etc - not just the simple latches most bathrooms have) and the only open area would contain sinks, then it really doesn't matter there either. Most shared bathrooms have simple latches that are easily opened from the outside, and men's urinals have, at most, small privacy dividers. I wouldn't suggest merely changing the signage, the bathrooms need to change if we're going down this path.

And that doesn't even start to address the "safe space" and judgement issues. Some people often use the bathroom to retreat from others of the opposite gender, it's a small, almost always available way to protect themselves from others, or their anxiety of others.

Changing rooms and showers are a different situation altogether and I wouldn't lump them in with bathrooms when changing these laws.
 

GasBandit

Staff member
"Fuck you. Got mine."

That's the libertarian way.
"Fuck you, gimme yours." That's the democrat way.

But it's not that. It's that it's turned into a sitcom where somebody got sick and they gave him a bell to ring whenever he needs something, and now he's driving everybody else nuts by ringing it every 10 seconds for everything, with the requests getting progressively more inane. "What bathroom you identify with" is the firstiest of first world problems and it is unreasonable to feel entitled to having a system put in place which would be subject to rampant exploitation just because a percentage-of-a-percentage minority doesn't feel their chromosomes.

As much as I'd like to say the answer is just to take the signs off all the doors and make everything unisex, there'd be a rather difficult transition period of a generation or two. Maybe that's a growing pain we'll just have to deal with, but let's not pretend that there aren't reasonable objections to potentially creating a problem hundreds of times more numerous than what it is supposed to solve.[DOUBLEPOST=1460474954,1460474790][/DOUBLEPOST]
if you're extrapolating bathrooms to showers, you're a huge fucking idiot, sorry!
Why? How is that not the next logical step in this chain of reasoning? What magic barrier says that peeing in comfort and safety is 100% different than showering/changing/etc in safety and comfort?

Also, you're ad homineming wrong.
 
Since you're already complaining about ad hominem, I'm pretty sure "Today it's bathrooms, tomorrow it's showers" falls under the "slippery slope" category of fallacies, Mr. Debate Rules.
 
Top