NY: : Cross-Dressing Men May Use Ladies’ Lavatories, Locker

[Ayla]

In a series of new regulations, New York City human rights officials have threatened sanctions to landlords, employers, and businesses who prevent cross-dressing men from using the ladies’ room, under provisions against transgender discrimination.

Yet knowing who is cross-dressing and who is not has also become more complicated, since the same new guidelines also ban the gender “discrimination” of dress codes that require men to wear ties and women to wear skirts to the workplace.

The newest attempt to enforce gender fluidity also forbids those in positions of authority from using a male pronoun such as “him” or “he” for a man who prefers to be thought of as a woman.

An article in the January/February issue of The Atlantic alleges that as a nation, America now believes by large margins that people should “get to define their own gender, irrespective of biology.” ...


It requires that “individuals be permitted to use single-sex facilities, such as bathrooms or locker rooms, and participate in single-sex programs, consistent with their gender, regardless of their sex assigned at birth, anatomy, medical history, appearance, or the sex indicated on their identification.”

When other people, however, “including, for example, customers, other program participants, tenants, or employees, may object to sharing a facility or participating in a program” with a transgender person of the opposite sex, such objections “are not a lawful reason to deny access to that transgender or gender non-conforming individual,” the code states.

Reuters claims that about 25,000 transgender and gender non-conforming people live in New York City, where they have an ardent advocate in Mayor Bill de Blasio.

“Today’s new guidelines strengthen those laws by ensuring that every transgender and gender non-conforming person in New York receives the dignity and respect they deserve,” Mayor de Blasio said in a statement Monday.

Mayor de Blasio, a hero of the National Organization for Women, who ran for office on a platform of “gender diversity,” set up a special Commission on Gender Equity last June.

The new regulations, which stipulate sanctions of up to $250,000 for violations, have drawn predictable praise from social activists.

“By issuing some of the strongest and most comprehensive legal guidance in the country, New York City has taken a major step toward ensuring that transgender and gender non-conforming New Yorkers can enjoy dignity, respect and access to opportunity in our city,” said Donna Lieberman, executive director of the New York Civil Liberties Union.   

www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/12/22/new-york-city-cross-dressing-men-may-use-ladies-lavatories-locker-rooms/   

[Deleted]

An article in the January/February issue of The Atlantic alleges that as a nation, America now believes by large margins that people should “get to define their own gender, irrespective of biology.”

I don't believe that.  I've never defined my own gender.  The opposition is going haywire now.  An understanding of transgenderism makes things very clear.  A refusal to even try to understand it does nothing but muddy the waters.

What are they thinking?  That we come out so as to enjoy the thrill of using a different loo?  I've got lots of other things on my mind.  I wish they did.

[Deleted]

Personally Aisla, I think this is gonna' do more to cause animosity toward us than anything else. Personally I'm not a cross dresser. I am a woman when dressed as such and a man if I decide to dress as such. I will use the proper restroom according to how I'm dressed. I have done it before with no negative repercussions. I have seen way uglier and manly looking women than most MTFs. I never made a big deal out of it. If someone asks while I'm in the restroom then I ask why? Then I ask if it's because she wants to get a finger in there? And then ask her if she is a closeted lesbian and then ask them to please quit harassing me. This usually shuts them up.

This is another thing that I heard this morning on the news. In NY if you don't use gender neutral pronouns then you can be fined 250 dollars. Really? So if I'm dressed in guy clothes then I expect to be called Sir. If I'm dressed in women's clothes then I want to be called Ma'am. Some people are assholes and want to hurt with words but some if you are dressed androgynously then what the fuck is a person supposed to say? If you call them Zee or other gender neutral pronouns that may insult them. Really? This is gonna' cause more animosity toward us because of idiot assed politicians that believe that a large soda should be outlawed.  How about asking people to show mutual respect instead of fining them for using the wrong pronoun? I wonder who is gonna' reap the rewards of the fines? HMMM. Maybe the city and the state. We won't. But do we really think this is gonna' change anything? I think all it's gonna' do is make people hate us more. How about public service messages instead of charging fines? That would make way more sense to me.

[Deleted]

Dec 30, 2015 6:24:15 GMT 8 @jamie said:

Personally Aisla, I think this is gonna' do more to cause animosity toward us than anything else. Personally I'm not a cross dresser. . .

In a series of new regulations, New York City human rights officials have threatened sanctions to landlords, employers, and businesses who prevent cross-dressing men from using the ladies’ room, under provisions against transgender discrimination.


Jamie, I don't think this guy is talking about crossdressers.  Given that this article is hostile to transpeople, I'd say he's saying "cross-dressing men" when what he's really talking about is transgender women.  Just the usual sort of idiot cisgender fear-mongering.

[Deleted]

Jan 1, 2016 4:35:31 GMT 8 @foxglove said:

Dec 30, 2015 6:24:15 GMT 8 @jamie said:

Personally Aisla, I think this is gonna' do more to cause animosity toward us than anything else. Personally I'm not a cross dresser. . .

In a series of new regulations, New York City human rights officials have threatened sanctions to landlords, employers, and businesses who prevent cross-dressing men from using the ladies’ room, under provisions against transgender discrimination.


Jamie, I don't think this guy is talking about crossdressers.  Given that this article is hostile to transpeople, I'd say he's saying "cross-dressing men" when what he's really talking about is transgender women.  Just the usual sort of idiot cisgender fear-mongering.

Yeah. I think your right Foxglove. Most people don't even take the time to even begin to understand us as a whole and all the many different aspects and terminology. I am not a crossdresser but someone that is a cross dresser in public should either be able to use the restroom they are presenting as or have their own. Personally I would rather have 4 different public restrooms. M, F, FTM, and MTF and use the one that is according to the way a person is dressed or presenting mostly. Maybe even 5 counting unisex if that is comfortable with others.

I guess that I'm so tired of hypocrites. I mean the Republican Senator that got caught tapping his foot in a public restroom looking for a gay romp. Then the GOP and Dems calling for his resignment. Really? The Dems? David Vitter paid for a prostitute. So what? It isn't like he took advantage of an intern that isn't even getting paid in the Oval Office. Hell at least David Vitter was practicing free market ideals and the girl was gonna' get paid and probably really good.  He admitted to it even instead of stoutly stating," I had no sexual relations with that woman." Poor Monica got raked over the coals and everyone made her out to be a whore more or less. Same with Jennifer Flowers and Kathleen Willies. And god knows how many more.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that there are probably senators, representatives and other higher ups in government that are LGBT and especially trans in the mix or trans admirers in the mix but don't have the guts to stand up for us or themselves because the power lust is stronger than the pull for self expression. Hell even J. Edgar Hoover, the first director of the FBI was supposedly a cross dresser. That was in the 50's I believe.

Human rights. That is the key words. We are humans also and need to be treated with the same respect as anyone else of the gender we identify with regardless of our sexual orientation. Gay guys are attracted to guys and they use the men's room. Lesbians are attracted to women and use the women's restrooms. So why can't I use the ladies room if presenting as a woman? Why can't anyone? OK so I'm attracted to girls and guys too so should I have to use a porta john? But a public restroom is about the most unromantic place that I can think of. A dump would be the second most unromantic place. My home bathroom with the jets in the huge garden tub with candles around and the twin sinks, one for him or her and the other for me and all the freakin' pink. A bottle of Champaign. OK shit. I gotta' stop now. But you get the gist. My bathroom don't smell like industrial strength chemicals, urine cakes, no paper towel machines or hand dryers. 

[Deleted]

Jan 6, 2016 3:03:07 GMT 8 @jamie said:

But a public restroom is about the most unromantic place that I can think of. A dump would be the second most unromantic place.

Jamie, I think you're touching on an important point here. A restroom isn't romantic.

Here's one of my experiences, not terribly long after I came out: I was in a Penney's, found a couple of tops I liked, and headed back to the women's changing room to try them on. I expected to find the usual set up: a row of individual stalls where everyone would have their privacy. Nope! It turned out to be just one big room, and when I walked in there were women all over the place stripped down to their undies. So was this a turn-on? Nope! Why not?

Jan 6, 2016 3:03:07 GMT 8 @jamie said:

. . . a public restroom is about the most unromantic place that I can think of.

It's all about context. When a woman is stripping down in a changing room to try something on, that's not a sexual act. If she's stripping down in her bedroom before she crawls into bed with her man (or her woman), that is a sexual act.

What our enemies don't realize is that we're not in fact perverts. (Sorry to disappoint you, folks!) We're like everybody else. We shape our behavior to context, just like everybody else.

I don't go into a restroom looking for romance.  If I want a romantic date, I don't think I'll suggest a restroom or changing room.

[Trinity]

Ten second comment

I wig up in the ladies room.

So there is a transition in the ladies room and they can argue crossdressed as opposed to transitioned. Though I am close to passing when I walk in there, depends on how you read me in short hair.

So I'll take the legal break here and be glad for it. I was kicked out of the bathroom in FL and it was a one roomer....

I have had enough. And its getting easier to go in the ladies room at the shrinks office now. Still don't like it much. But better than the mens room to wig up, by a long shot

[Leena]

There was a time separate but equal bathrooms based on race were acceptable. Why is this any different? If society can't handle mixed sex multi-stall restrooms, why instead not just ban multi-stall restrooms? Locker rooms could be redesigned so that each shower is separate and has a small, dry changing area in front of it, and just the locker area is mixed. Of course this would cost money, but really if just all new buildings were encouraged to be built like this then issues like this wouldn't be as much of a problem.

[Deleted]

Jan 6, 2016 3:22:01 GMT 8 @foxglove said:

Jan 6, 2016 3:03:07 GMT 8 @jamie said:

But a public restroom is about the most unromantic place that I can think of. A dump would be the second most unromantic place.

Jamie, I think you're touching on an important point here. A restroom isn't romantic.

Here's one of my experiences, not terribly long after I came out: I was in a Penney's, found a couple of tops I liked, and headed back to the women's changing room to try them on. I expected to find the usual set up: a row of individual stalls where everyone would have their privacy. Nope! It turned out to be just one big room, and when I walked in there were women all over the place stripped down to their undies. So was this a turn-on? Nope! Why not?

Jan 6, 2016 3:03:07 GMT 8 @jamie said:

. . . a public restroom is about the most unromantic place that I can think of.

It's all about context. When a woman is stripping down in a changing room to try something on, that's not a sexual act. If she's stripping down in her bedroom before she crawls into bed with her man (or her woman), that is a sexual act.

What our enemies don't realize is that we're not in fact perverts. (Sorry to disappoint you, folks!) We're like everybody else. We shape our behavior to context, just like everybody else.

I don't go into a restroom looking for romance.  If I want a romantic date, I don't think I'll suggest a restroom or changing room.

Well here in the states we have private changing rooms. So if id decide to use to women's changing room or the men's, then I have privacy. That I like.

But regardless if I was trying on clothes, men or women if in a situation with one or the other gender in a general area, no. I wouldn't be turned on either. It is not about sex as much as Gender identification. As for sexual attraction well... either one if not private then I am apt to get turned on.  I probably won't make a move on it but still....

As for the second part... We are probably less perverted than some cis folks. Maybe less than most cis folks. I will tell you this much about me, it takes a lot to get me worked up. With either man or woman. Cis or trans. Straight or gay. I do hear a lot about MTFs and how we are so dangerous using the ladies restroom but not so much about FTMs using the men's restroom. Not to trash our borhters but why are we [ercieved as such a threat and danger? To be completely honest I would trust a MTF in a public restroom if I had a duaughter then a lot of cis females. I would trust a FTM in the men's reem with a son before I would some cismen. Hell I would trust lesbians and gays before I would cis genders. As trans, we know what we like and as gay we know what we like and lesbian we know what we like and it isn't children. We are not the predators or freaks that preyt on children. It is usually cisgenders that do. An FBI profiler will even tell you that.

As a matter of fact I would like to think that all of us would protect a child either maternally or paternally because some of us have been violated at youger tages in our lives.