Quote:
Originally Posted by timun
The original reasoning was likely rooted in Victorian-era ideas about "modesty" and "protecting the fairer sex" from men, much in the same way a lot of current-day political narrative talks about protecting women from men who use transsexuality to gain permission to these "safe spaces" and act like perverts.
A lot of why they're still gendered is our building codes. The way it works is one has to forecast the number of male and female occupants of a building and calculate a minimum number of required toilets for them on the basis of sex. It is assumed that the female occupants will proportionally need more of them than the males. For example for assembly occupancies it's assumed you need twice as many toilets for females vs. males.
|
Also...
It's old and outdated for sure. Bathrooms are bathrooms, and I am completely bored about the subject.
On another note in this topic...
Why is so much of the conversation centered on trans women and not trans men? Is there a subtle bias in assuming that someone born biologically a man is prone to violence even if they transition into being a woman, yet a biological woman transitioned into a man isn't capable of terrible things?
Obviously the correct answer is that people do terrible things regardless of gender identity or biological gender or whatever, but it's infrequent overall. Let's stop the bull#### in assuming an extremely small subset of society is out there trying to do harm to others. The sheer small size of the community would indicate that on average they're unlikely to commit any violence.