Friday, November 8, 2019

Transphobes Are The Weirdest People On The Planet

I came across this little gem of a tweet yesterday containing an excerpt from an article telling a definitely real story about the dangers of naughty little boys and gender-neutral bathrooms. Buckle the fuck up.

The article is real. I googled it and clicked on it only so I could make sure everyone has access to the following horrifying text:

I was out for lunch at a Manhattan restaurant with my friend’s daughter, an exceptionally classy seven-year-old. 
“Please, may I go to the bathroom by myself?” she asked. “Yes, but no dilly-dallying!” I replied. And off she went. Striding briskly, blonde curls a-bouncing — straight into an “all-gender” restroom. 
Oh dear. 
As she entered this unlocked (lockable) room, three little boys were — now in full view — urinating round one toilet. Perturbed, if not alarmed, my young friend immediately burst back out, gave me a big wave, as if to say “oops” and “don’t worry!” She turned on her heel, disappearing around the corner. A moment passed. One by one, the heads of three naughty little boys popped out. Scheming and snickering, with catlike tread, they traced my wee pal’s route. 
Terrifying and immediate was my arrival on the scene, scattering the would-be tormentors. 
“Those boys were trying to peek on me!” she said. “I only peeked on them by accident!” 
Little boys are little savages, I told her gently, adding that very few improve with age. More importantly, I explained that gender-neutral bathrooms were only recently invented. And, evidently, by some very careless and wasteful people who don’t mind sacrificing the privacy, hygiene, and camaraderie of the female toilet experience.

The article goes on for several more paragraphs, during which I assume National Review William F. Buckley Fellow in Political Journalism Madeleine Kearns explains that all of the above, including the savagery of little boys and the men they grow into, is the fault of the bathrooms that don't specify a gender.

I always wonder what these people gripped in the iron clutches of bathroom hysteria think keeps people of various genders from entering bathrooms specified for different ones. There's no scanner. There's no gender-detecting forcefield. If packs of little boys are running loose in Manhattan restaurants, a sign with a simple human-like figure with a triangular body isn't going to stop them from crowding into a single-stall bathroom and peeing on the floor.

What about the restaurants with just one single-person bathroom? What horrors are wrought within those four walls?

Look. I'm not going to tell you that I've never been in a gender-neutral public or establishment restroom that absolutely reeked of piss in the way women-only restrooms never seem to. I've also been in gender-neutral restrooms that smelled fine. I've also used single-stall men's restrooms when the women's was occupied and again, the chance of strong pee smell is about 50/50. Regardless, the smell of pee is really the only downside to gender-neutral restrooms and that's a small price to pay for trans and non-binary people being able to pee in public and not getting bladder infections and wanting to kill themselves so much.

Also, now that I think about it, I have a memory from preschool in which I totally intentionally peeped on a boy who I knew was using the bathroom. Sorry, guy.

And yet transphobes have to weave tales of bands of peeing little boys stalking their friends' young daughters who they for some reason go to restaurants with in order to try and convince people that the kinds of bathrooms that already exist everywhere are going to lead directly to the downfall of civilized society. And it's impossible to simply teach boys to pee in the toilet and to not run around restaurants unsupervised stalking and peeping on girls in the bathroom. Also, boys apparently only ever do that when little girls accidentally walk in on them in the middle of their pee parties when it's in a gender-neutral bathroom. Thank fuck for those gender-detecting forcefields!

Reading the rest of the article, because I am in love with suffering, I find a series of equally absurd arguments. Kearns says that gender-neutral bathrooms, which have already existed all over the place, are "pointless" and that "most Americans care most about bread and peace," according to polls. I'm assuming she dug up this poll from the year 1279. It's also incredible to write an entire article on a topic and declare in the middle of it that it's pointless. How much did she get paid for that one?

She also laments that they're terribly wasteful right before admitting that many schools have spent only around $500 to convert some of the gendered restrooms into non-gendered restrooms. She then wails that Target spent $2 million to convert their restrooms to gender-neutrality. Does she think that Target is a taxpayer-subsidized institution? We may never know.

Her last point on this conservative website is that gender-neutral restrooms are SEXIST, and I'm assuming managed to avoid getting a thousand conservative dudes screaming at her about having a victim complex and being a misandrist. But they're sexist because "women are cleaner than men" which is apparently trans and non-binary folks' fault somehow. Also, because women take longer in the bathroom than men. I don't know how mixing genders in the bathroom rather than segregating women into one single bathroom with the same number of stalls where they're all sitting down and washing their hands is supposed to make that worse for women rather than better. She doesn't explain. Like, at all.

Her third reason that gender-neutral bathrooms are sexist are because women often like to go to the bathroom in groups for safety or for "tradition," though I don't think I've ever gone to the bathroom with a friend out of a feeling of obligation to tradition, but okay. She then fails to explain at all how groups of women would be unable to enter a gender-neutral bathroom together. Just. Nothing.

She then gives an example a London theater that converted its bathrooms to be gender-neutral, adding toilets and urinals, resulting in "44 where there were once 22." The author of another bathroom hysteria article that used the phrase "gauntlet of penis" then complains that there are now "26 toilets and 18 urinals," concluding that this means 44 toilets for men and only 26 toilets for women.

I'm just. Okay. Getting past the fact that these authors have entirely missed the point of gender neutrality, it sounds like there was previously 11 toilets for women in the old system and now there are 26. So that's quite a bit more. But also, people with penises can use both urinals and regular toilets. So the only way to make things even in their minds, which are unable to grasp the idea of women with penises and men with vaginas and non-binary people entirely, is to have no urinals at all. Which I think would be fine, urinals seem awkward to me anyway and I don't know why men have put up with them for so long, but I have a feeling if people were like "let's just stop making urinals then," the National Review would have an article up in about five minutes decrying the war on men and their precious urinals under attack by the viciousness of feminism.

Any-fuckin-way, the responses to the tweeted excerpt of this terrible article are incredible.

Thank god for these responses, honestly. I need a normal human being pallet cleanser after that article.

No comments: