Because Dox, you are calling my platform irrelevant. You request for data is like looking for is not something easily found. In order to gather this data, I would need access to either police databases (because sex occurring in a public place is technically a crime: public indecency) or school records (which are either in paper or things very much kept out of the public eye typically, considering that juvenile records are sealed once someone becomes an adult). I would either have to go to the police station or the locale middle school to ask about "sex in bathroom" statistics. I am not currently a journalist by my trade, thus I don't even have the badge to wave around for them to have any reason for them to give me anything other than suspicion that I am possibly a pervert. ASSUMING MAGICALLY that the middle school lets me look at their students records, I would then have the extensive task of pouring through folder after folder, because student records are sorted by name, not by offense. Even worse: assuming I found ANYTHING, it would only be really recent, because five hundred kids means five hundred folders and that adds up year to year and fills up a filing cabinet too quickly.
I'm not getting paid to do this, thus I'm not going to jump through those hoops just to prove a point on this forum (if it was a more prominent forum known for action, maybe that would change). I would ask you to prove that making all bathrooms gender neutral in Mississippi would at least cut the persecution of transsexuals in half, even just in that state alone, but I know you could not even begin to round up "sufficient data" because it is simply not there.
Does that means that making all public bathrooms gender neutral will do nothing positive for the treatment of transsexuals? No. It probably would help a little, but opens up the whole increased teen pregnancy at schools (for starters, since increasing the chance of rape at man-on-woman-rape at rest stops apparently concerns no one).
I already gave you 14 points you cannot bring down. So let us looks at this:
1)Kids ARE smoking weed. I had one kid removed from my geometry class and had class with three others that not only admitted to it, but had the smell about them to back it up.
2)If weed is legalized it will be easier to for kids to smoke weed, since their parents having it in their households will no longer be a problem.
More kids will smoke weed if weed is legalized, just like all the kids still smoking cigarettes on school property, just like all the kids that smuggle alcohol to school in their water bottles (like the few I knew of that did so in band class), because if kids aren't supposed to do it, but can sneak it, they will still do it. This is why Juvenile Hall exists: kids think they found gaps of surveillance and do things and then get caught. Making a boy allowed in the same bathroom as his girlfriend makes it that much easier to slip into the stall and do the nasty, since the bathroom and the stall are both unsupervised.
Teens are already having sex in bathrooms and sex leads to pregnancy. Teens=A, Sex=B, Pregnancy=C. A->B->C. Ergo A->C, Teens having sex leads to teen pregnancy.
By enabling man junk and women junk to be bare in an unsupervised area it is that much more easier to have sex. More chance of teen sex, means more chance of teen pregnancy.
I'm not sure how you don't get this yet, Dox. Maybe if you were a parent you would understand.
1) The higher chance of something, the more likely it is to occur.
2)Heterosexual sex has a chance of causing pregnancy.
3)Higher libido leads to higher desire for sex.
4)Puberty causes a high libido to those going through it, which is especially difficult, due to them never having a libido before in their lives.
5)Sex requires uncovered pelvises.
6)You must uncover your genitals to use the toilet and the majority of installed toilets( in public schools are in bathrooms.
7)Allowing pubescent boys and girls in the same unsupervised room with exposed genitals and curiosity can lead to experimentation
8)Said experimentation in 7 can lead to sex. See 2.
9)Bathrooms require exposed genitals.
10)The first glory hole I saw was in a school.
11)Most school bathrooms are unsupervised (meaning there is not a supervisor constantly in there, nor are their cameras set up INSIDE the actual bathrooms).
12)Not only are men and women sneaking in to airplane bathrooms to have sex with each other, but heterosexual high schoolers and middle schoolers are sneaking into their school bathrooms (well, only one has to do the sneaking) to have sex. See the ABC link from my last post and then 2.
13)Coed bathrooms would eliminate the sneaking element.
14)Making something easier to do typically makes more people want to do it more often.
These fourteen points of data aren't opinions, they are facts. From these facts we can assume thusly:
Since it is easier to have sex in bathrooms, kids will have sex more often. Please see 2.
There is my data. You assumed that because the OP posted this only in regards to transsexuals that it was the only facet of the argument. Just because I am against Co-ed bathrooms does NOT mean I am against transsexuals (if that was not made clear with my last post, yes I do donate monthly to the HRC for equality).
Please look at this, Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. The basic need given by bathrooms is providing a place to empty one's bowels. Reproduction is a basic need as it fulfills the need to continue the species. My argument falls at the safety (as far as rape) and basic (as far as teen pregnancy due to the medical needs of the female and the possible survival of the child, should it be brought to term). The transsexual aspect of the coed bathrooms hits at social and esteem needs. Taking out the bottom of the pyramid makes it collapse. Self realization matters later if one doesn't have the other portions to keep it stabilized.
You also seem to magically assume that coed bathrooms will instantly make everyone accept transsexuals as equals. That's like assuming that the South after the American civil war accepted their ex-slaves as equals when they actually saw them as slaves. That's like assuming that after Seneca Falls that women would instantly earn the same amount of money as a man would for the same job when that still is not true the majority of places. Like assuming that there would be no more homophobia in the United States after gay marriage was legalized all over the country when it is still very much present (just check /b/). Again as I said in my last post, the public needs to be educated, as education lessens the fear which is the premise for phobias (example: homophobia).
@dox: I'm not posting the main link for what I found because I don't want to be banned. I will however tell you how to find it.
Go to Bing and type in sex in bathrooms. The first recommended result is sex in middle schools. Searching for that brings up videos with content warning from news sources. Oh and since they are not OLD enough to buy contraception, please tell provide ME with statistics of whether not they bother to even procure any bit of contraception.
Otherwise: abcnews says this: "Students told us that some kids are having sex in school bathrooms and hallways — even in classrooms. " and also "The kids' definitions were different. They were a bit closer to President Clinton's definition. They said petting or touching wasn't sex. Oral sex wasn't sex. " This article covered things in Oklahoma and even Maryland. Also people are asking about having sex in bathrooms already, like on yahoo answers.
Yes, I said it: intercourse in bathrooms IS already happening, even in middle school. To the people who wish to step forward and claim "then why does it even matter if it is already happening?" I ask you this: there has been a string of break-ins throughout your community, should you unlock all your doors and open all of your windows, or should you make your house even more secure and/or a less savory target?" Making all middle school and high school bathrooms co-ed would only make the problem worse than it already is. I agree cameras are not the answer, but even having a supervisor who identifies as the proper gender for said gender bathroom goes in to wash his/her hands in the bathroom every thirty or so minutes is often enough presence and presence alone to intimidate would-be-trouble-makers from their possibly less savory actions (many fast food restaurants actually have their (co)managers do exactly this to cut down on vandalism).
Dox, I get that the OP wants transsexual people to be more comfortable and I respect that. I want them to be comfortable too, but this is not the proper course of action. The human race as whole is currently too primitive for widespread co-ed public bathrooms. As transsexuals are tied in with the LGBT community, they should probably look to the big names and organizations, such as the HRC, to run similar campaigns that were run to cut down on homosexuality hate (such as the "'That's so Gay?' Well, Ashley, how would you like it if someone did something lame and someone next to you and said 'OMG, that is SO Ashley'?" commercial).
Ru(e)? Paul's Drag Race and Modern Family are just some examples of shows that are doing a great job of keeping the LBGT community in the public eye and educating the masses about their existence and the fact that they are people too with wants, desires, strengths, weaknesses, and most importantly: feelings. Opening up co-ed bathrooms will NOT make transsexuals feel any less persecuted in places such as Mississippi, where they recently passed a bill that essentially says "One may deny access, service, or sale to anyone for any reason, as long as it isn't racial".
[quote from="pyro1934 »" url="http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/community-forums/debate/685925-gender-neutral-bathrooms?comment=45"]Possible solutions:
1) Put Condoms in Bathrooms (I think this should be done anyways as its a lot more likely for a teen to use one if they are free and given in private).
2) Make less bathrooms, but bigger bathrooms. (This would force more people into the same room, thus decreasing the likelihood of any sexual healing).
3) No teacher bathrooms, make them use the same ones as kids. (Though I can see people mobbing already when a 28 yr old male teacher uses the same bathroom as a 14 yr old girl).quote]
I must say I feel foolish for not thinking of #1 for battling the teen pregnancy issue. I am now curious of the statistical difference of assaults that occur in larger versus smaller bathrooms. Lastly, I agree with your later sentiments in regards to number three, mostly because I think in most situations it would be the teachers' privacy invaded by the students (ex: "Hey, I caught a vine of Mr. Smith dropping a deuce! His fart was too long for the clip!")
@Jay13x: Just like how rec centers, sports, and clubs are set up to keep kids off the streets and "off the streets," not providing male and female teens unsupervised time at school is keeping them focused and "keeping them from ************". Lack of supervision allows for more mischief which leads to more trouble. The internet, /b/ especially, is a breeding ground for bullying, because honestly, you don't know who I am and can't catch me so I can call you all the names I want and belittle you however I please because I know I can't get caught so why not for the lulz! *Insert random insult* I have the unpoliced space to insult you anonymously within a mass of people, which means I'll probably do it more often (and look, people on the internet as a whole do). Providing space and opportunities does absolute wonders for increasing deviant human behavior.
Anyone who doubts an increase of sex in coed bathrooms, I would like to remind them of "the mile high club".
[quote from="pyro1934 »" url="http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/community-forums/debate/685925-gender-neutral-bathrooms?comment=45"]Possible solutions:
1) Put Condoms in Bathrooms (I think this should be done anyways as its a lot more likely for a teen to use one if they are free and given in private).
2) Make less bathrooms, but bigger bathrooms. (This would force more people into the same room, thus decreasing the likelihood of any sexual healing).
3) No teacher bathrooms, make them use the same ones as kids. (Though I can see people mobbing already when a 28 yr old male teacher uses the same bathroom as a 14 yr old girl).quote]
I must say I feel foolish for not thinking of #1 for battling the teen pregnancy issue. I am now curious of the statistical difference of assaults that occur in larger versus smaller bathrooms. Lastly, I agree with your later sentiments in regards to number three, mostly because I think in most situations it would be the teachers' privacy invaded by the students (ex: "Hey, I caught a vine of Mr. Smith dropping a deuce! His fart was too long for the clip!")
@Jay13x: Just like how rec centers, sports, and clubs are set up to keep kids off the streets and "off the streets," not providing male and female teens unsupervised time at school is keeping them focused and "keeping them from ************". Lack of supervision allows for more mischief which leads to more trouble. The internet, /b/ especially, is a breeding ground for bullying, because honestly, you don't know who I am and can't catch me so I can call you all the names I want and belittle you however I please because I know I can't get caught so why not for the lulz! *Insert random insult* I have the unpoliced space to insult you anonymously within a mass of people, which means I'll probably do it more often (and look, people on the internet as a whole do). Providing space and opportunities does absolute wonders for increasing deviant human behavior.
Anyone who doubts an increase of sex in coed bathrooms, I would like to remind them of "the mile high club".
The other stupid part about the marshmallo test is that adult CHIMPS "passed" the test. From this I infer that the problem with impulse control is inherent to children but not necessarily all humans. Give the marshmallo test to adult humans or adults chimps and they will pass. Give it to children of either species and they will fail. So because human children lack impulse control you think this has any bearing on the impulse control of adults? Also, I would contend most people don't have an underlying desire to commit crime, particularly assault. I don't think we all have this innate deep dark desire to assault which we suppress. Rather, I would say most people don't have the desire to perv out in a bathroom. They don't even have the desire so impulse control isn't the issue. Not to mention the marshmallo test is off-topic.
Really it isn't. The point that lead to it was: multiple occupancy coed bathrooms would be unsafe without some sort of surveillance (and I doubt the general populace wants a camera recording them drop a deuce.)
Surveillance stops a high amount of crime simply because people don't want to be caught doing something bad. This is why people planning crimes typically attempt to mask their identity, because if they are seen by a witness (or worse, a well placed camera) they'll be caught and get punished. Think of bank cameras, atm cameras, security cameras, red light cameras, cameras at property gates, back room cameras, etc. Humans adults can and will very easily give in to temptation if they want it bad enough. Otherwise jails would be filled by people that accidently did things (like manslaughter or property damage due to folly).
So that means: in order to counteract the increased opportunity of rape in the multiple occupancy coed bathrooms, there would need to be surveillance. Hence marshmellow test example.
I could say it would be because men needing to use stalls in a unisex bathroom would feel emasculated or be emasculated by their peers. There is a much more serious reason, however:
Rape.
Are you seriously suggesting that allowing transgender to use the bathroom they identify with would be allowing rape to happen? This is probably the most ridiculous idea of the litany of ridiculous ideas about this whole thing.
Here is the reality: Until this law, it wasn't actually illegal to use either restroom. That means, somehow, despite never being illegal, the incidence of public restroom-related crime have remained low for all of history. But all of a sudden we're concerned about it now? No, the 'safety' concerns are absolute nonsense.
You know what's illegal? The illegal things everyone is so worried about happening. When a creep goes into the women's room, he gets charged with the creeptastic actions he undertakes, not simply being there. The actual crimes are all that should be illegal, and it'll still be illegal even if trans people are allowed to keep their dignity when going to the toilet.
If you are going to quote me and go on a tirade, please read. My first post was short, but lets start with the OP:
magickware99: "But why just single-occupancy? Why not all bathrooms"
This was the question that I was answering. The OP is asking for the sake of equality. My answer was that the problem isn't equality, it has nothing to do with equality. It has to do with something primal that doesn't care about transgendered people because it happens not just in humans, but in other animals as well (sometimes one non-human species of animal rapes a different non-human species even).
Now we go to the same post you quoted from me, aka my first post in this thread: "So as far as single toilet restrooms being unisex, sure. I am just fine with that. It takes at least two people for a rape to occur: at least one assailant and a victim. If there is only one person in the bathroom, rape is not possible."
So because you too jumped on the human rights train without wondering about the original intent of gender segregated bathrooms. Berkas (you know the polarizing women's garb that only shows the eyes) were originally made (and yes I know their use has changed, just as gunpowder started in fireworks and then became weaponized) to keep the beauty of women from distracting the men, as well as letting only the husband view the full beauty of his bride. I'm not making another paragraph break here, but I want you to focus on this, I will not only repeat it but I will bold it and Billy Mayes it: take that inkling of distraction notion, and put that into practice with coed middle school bathroom with a whole bunch of horny hormone driven pubescent teenagers that are just noticing their loins? The same place where you have to expose your pelvis to do what you intended to do in that room (remove bodily waste)? That whole idea is ludicrous, even if you take rape out of the situation, we are talking new-to-puberty-children with exposed loins in the same room, which as mentioned before, is going to lead to an increase in teen pregnancy.
So, Jay13x, I know that was a lot of text, so I'll give a conclusion sentence: Making all multiple occupant public bathrooms coed would greatly increase the chance of rape due almost entirely by the expected actions of straight people... and having basically nothing to do with the bathroom choice of transgendered people.
Reading gives context!
Please don't TL;DR the topic. The topic is unisex bathrooms. The fear is the suffix of unisex. Suffix is the ending of a word in case you didn't know. As far as coitus is concerned, I am worried about the notion of having only unisex bathrooms due to the possibility of increasing rape statistics in public bathrooms and increasing teen pregnancy in schools. So yes, pregnancy has much to do with this bathroom topic.
@Taix
"An Oregon high school installed separate unisex bathrooms, giving a "third option" to its students, including those who identify as transgender, a school official said."
...
Did you know Family bathrooms are unisex? They are. Most of them have door locks on the main doors themselves. This Oregon hasn't done that persay, because "third option" is doing exactly what you suggested about parking garages (which as I stated have security measures including surveillance where bathrooms do not): segregation of the transgendered students to their own bathrooms.
Face it: everyone knows that the a body of people must have at least one member of their party meet at least one of these requirements for a Family restroom: Infantile to prepubescent with parent/guardian of opposite gender, special needs with caretaker, excessively enfeebled by one way or another through age that would need a caretaker, recovering from severe injury and needing a constant caretaker. If a party of people does not have anyone that meets the requirements, they typically use their respective bathrooms (male or female) instead. If there is only one person in a party, automatically they know they do not socially qualify to use the family restroom.
Oregon unisex bathrooms are for transgendered students just as a "black box recorder" is actually orange...or as you pointed out, the War on Drugs.
Why is this important? Highschoolers know how to label things. If someone wants to bully a transgender kid, they need only watch who goes in there to pick their target. Why wouldn't they typically go in to continue harassment? Aside from the heightened LGBTQphobia of being labeled exactly what they would be going in to persecute by entering said bathroom? Because the administration of that school is giving transgender kids special treatment and a special area that technically is open to the rest of the public (hey, you ever used a handicapped stall when not handicapped and then in the middle of your business had an actual handicapped person enter the restroom and wonder why in the nine layers of Phyrexia you are in there? You will be villianized, even if it was THE last stall open.) but it really isn't meant to be used by everyone in the public (Compare handicapped stalls to, wait for it...handicapped parking spaces! Can't park in those at ALL without a handicapped sticker, that is of course unless you wish to run the risk of being socially ridiculed and/or fined!). Yet again, most highschoolers can identify symbols. Differences are mined to build the social hierarchy. Ever wonder why the "Jocks" are always overtly male, both physically and via their broadcasted lifestyle?
The Oregon unisex bathroom is not a place to make the transgendered student feel like he or she belongs to one of the groups. It is a safe place for that student, due to social stigma, just it should have been during supervised teaching moments, and just like it was not in the unsupervised bathrooms said student was avoiding due to persecution (or worse, the article didn't say).
Thought the segregated parking lot comment would escape, didn't you? No. Aside from the aforementioned surveillance (seriously, I mentioned it BEFORE your male/female parking spots idea), how would that work with carpooling? Dating? Families? All of them in one car, a mixed bag of gender having to park in a single spot... how would that even work?
Lastly, to drive this counter home: a transgender person parks in your segregated parking lot. Where would you have them park? Pre-op? Post-op? Looks the gender? Does not look the gender? Someone who claims to be transgender but you are 99.9% certain they are just saying that to get out of a parking ticket?
Looks like your solution would only add to the problem.
@Lallo Non-hermaphrodite homosexual encounters are never to result in pregnancy. That is how it works.
I have been watched using a urinal by a coworker before, it was really uncomfortable. The point of bringing this up is not to bash homosexuality, but to show that yes, pervy men exist. Going off the reported sexual assaults and peeping tom (notice the male name there) incidents, the vast majority of them are male -> female.
@Tiax : Typically I keep my underwear on in an elevator, my typical elevator ride is well below five minutes, and there are cameras in the elevators I use.
Also, moving to general fornication: would you really trust having unisex bathrooms in middle school and highschool, with that whole puberty thing? Teen pregnancies would skyrocket!
And what about parking garages? A great many rapes take place in parking garages - far more than in restrooms. If we're going to make special men and women's bathrooms to prevent rape, shouldn't we do the same for parking garages?
The answer is that that would be silly. If I were looking to rape someone in a bathroom, the little silhouette of a skirt on the door isn't going to stop me from walking in. No more than it'd stop me from wandering into the women's parking garage.
Parking garages on some campuses and now shopping centers have call boxes. Those blue boxes with phones are mainly there to stop and scare off sexual assault.
So you don't believe in signs? Most people stop at "STOP" signs. Most people avoid stepping on the grounds of "Private Property". Many burglars steer clear of houses that have signs with a security system's name. Nearly everyone, including their grandmothers, look to the proper bathroom sign to decide which way to go to sit upon the porcelain throne. Most people, if food poisoned and about to churn out a gallon of "Chunky Nesquik", would still take the extra twenty steps to enter the "proper" bathroom if it was further away. Posted signs actually serve as an authoritative reminder. If they didn't work, they wouldn't basically be everywhere. Just think of all the unlocked doors marked "Employees Only" that haven't been opened by each and every shopper. I mean DOORS even when unlocked are a deterent to many. Think about a museum. A place full of hallways and a door on the side? If it clearly isn't marked, clearly you aren't supposed to go in there because clearly it isn't a place you, a member of the public, should be!
Yes, I admit that not everyone obeys everything all the time. I want you to look at The Marshmellow Test Video. The kids eat the marshmellows. Some struggle with going through with it, but really the net result is marshmallow eaten.
Now take this experiment and the results, age the kids up to the height of puberty and stick them in a coed bathroom. What results do you think you will get?
I for one would rather not tempt fate. Nor would I tempt the installation of bathroom "security" cameras.
@Lithi A smoke detector can detect smoking, not sex. Considering the amount of smoking that occurred in my highschool bathrooms, the current supervision is not enough. One time at my school someone light toilet paper on fire and it was kids in the upstairs hallway SMELLING it that alerted supervisors, not the smoke detectors or the supervisors themselves.
Also there is a difference between people having to find a space for an act and allowing them access one. To simplify this to just cheating on tests, the colleges I attended wouldn't even let me use the bathroom until I was done with a quiz, test, or exam. This was due to the POSSIBILITY of going to look up the answers. (Something I would be able to do real life on the job and it would be perfectly acceptable... but I digress).
So I ask you what is worse if you are an administrator: a student cheating on a quiz in your school's bathroom, or a 12 year old middleschooler getting pregnant in your school's bathroom?
I could say it would be because men needing to use stalls in a unisex bathroom would feel emasculated or be emasculated by their peers. There is a much more serious reason, however:
Rape.
It is because of rape. Men are much more likely to rape women then men on men or women on women. Look up the statistics if you don't believe this.
Bathrooms are one of the few places people have in public away from cameras. In order to enforce things in bathrooms, you would either need an attendant/guard (that you can trust not to rape and/or be raped) or have cameras.
I for one would prefer separate bathrooms as supposed to a camera in the stalls.
So as far as single toilet restrooms being unisex, sure. I am just fine with that. It takes at least two people for a rape to occur: at least one assailant and a victim. If there is only one person in the bathroom, rape is not possible.
@Tiax : Typically I keep my underwear on in an elevator, my typical elevator ride is well below five minutes, and there are cameras in the elevators I use.
Also, moving to general fornication: would you really trust having unisex bathrooms in middle school and highschool, with that whole puberty thing? Teen pregnancies would skyrocket!
I'm not getting paid to do this, thus I'm not going to jump through those hoops just to prove a point on this forum (if it was a more prominent forum known for action, maybe that would change). I would ask you to prove that making all bathrooms gender neutral in Mississippi would at least cut the persecution of transsexuals in half, even just in that state alone, but I know you could not even begin to round up "sufficient data" because it is simply not there.
Does that means that making all public bathrooms gender neutral will do nothing positive for the treatment of transsexuals? No. It probably would help a little, but opens up the whole increased teen pregnancy at schools (for starters, since increasing the chance of rape at man-on-woman-rape at rest stops apparently concerns no one).
I already gave you 14 points you cannot bring down. So let us looks at this:
1)Kids ARE smoking weed. I had one kid removed from my geometry class and had class with three others that not only admitted to it, but had the smell about them to back it up.
2)If weed is legalized it will be easier to for kids to smoke weed, since their parents having it in their households will no longer be a problem.
More kids will smoke weed if weed is legalized, just like all the kids still smoking cigarettes on school property, just like all the kids that smuggle alcohol to school in their water bottles (like the few I knew of that did so in band class), because if kids aren't supposed to do it, but can sneak it, they will still do it. This is why Juvenile Hall exists: kids think they found gaps of surveillance and do things and then get caught. Making a boy allowed in the same bathroom as his girlfriend makes it that much easier to slip into the stall and do the nasty, since the bathroom and the stall are both unsupervised.
Teens are already having sex in bathrooms and sex leads to pregnancy. Teens=A, Sex=B, Pregnancy=C. A->B->C. Ergo A->C, Teens having sex leads to teen pregnancy.
By enabling man junk and women junk to be bare in an unsupervised area it is that much more easier to have sex. More chance of teen sex, means more chance of teen pregnancy.
I'm not sure how you don't get this yet, Dox. Maybe if you were a parent you would understand.
2)Heterosexual sex has a chance of causing pregnancy.
3)Higher libido leads to higher desire for sex.
4)Puberty causes a high libido to those going through it, which is especially difficult, due to them never having a libido before in their lives.
5)Sex requires uncovered pelvises.
6)You must uncover your genitals to use the toilet and the majority of installed toilets( in public schools are in bathrooms.
7)Allowing pubescent boys and girls in the same unsupervised room with exposed genitals and curiosity can lead to experimentation
8)Said experimentation in 7 can lead to sex. See 2.
9)Bathrooms require exposed genitals.
10)The first glory hole I saw was in a school.
11)Most school bathrooms are unsupervised (meaning there is not a supervisor constantly in there, nor are their cameras set up INSIDE the actual bathrooms).
12)Not only are men and women sneaking in to airplane bathrooms to have sex with each other, but heterosexual high schoolers and middle schoolers are sneaking into their school bathrooms (well, only one has to do the sneaking) to have sex. See the ABC link from my last post and then 2.
13)Coed bathrooms would eliminate the sneaking element.
14)Making something easier to do typically makes more people want to do it more often.
These fourteen points of data aren't opinions, they are facts. From these facts we can assume thusly:
Since it is easier to have sex in bathrooms, kids will have sex more often. Please see 2.
There is my data. You assumed that because the OP posted this only in regards to transsexuals that it was the only facet of the argument. Just because I am against Co-ed bathrooms does NOT mean I am against transsexuals (if that was not made clear with my last post, yes I do donate monthly to the HRC for equality).
Please look at this, Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. The basic need given by bathrooms is providing a place to empty one's bowels. Reproduction is a basic need as it fulfills the need to continue the species. My argument falls at the safety (as far as rape) and basic (as far as teen pregnancy due to the medical needs of the female and the possible survival of the child, should it be brought to term). The transsexual aspect of the coed bathrooms hits at social and esteem needs. Taking out the bottom of the pyramid makes it collapse. Self realization matters later if one doesn't have the other portions to keep it stabilized.
You also seem to magically assume that coed bathrooms will instantly make everyone accept transsexuals as equals. That's like assuming that the South after the American civil war accepted their ex-slaves as equals when they actually saw them as slaves. That's like assuming that after Seneca Falls that women would instantly earn the same amount of money as a man would for the same job when that still is not true the majority of places. Like assuming that there would be no more homophobia in the United States after gay marriage was legalized all over the country when it is still very much present (just check /b/). Again as I said in my last post, the public needs to be educated, as education lessens the fear which is the premise for phobias (example: homophobia).
Otherwise: abcnews says this: "Students told us that some kids are having sex in school bathrooms and hallways — even in classrooms. " and also "The kids' definitions were different. They were a bit closer to President Clinton's definition. They said petting or touching wasn't sex. Oral sex wasn't sex. " This article covered things in Oklahoma and even Maryland. Also people are asking about having sex in bathrooms already, like on yahoo answers.
Yes, I said it: intercourse in bathrooms IS already happening, even in middle school. To the people who wish to step forward and claim "then why does it even matter if it is already happening?" I ask you this: there has been a string of break-ins throughout your community, should you unlock all your doors and open all of your windows, or should you make your house even more secure and/or a less savory target?" Making all middle school and high school bathrooms co-ed would only make the problem worse than it already is. I agree cameras are not the answer, but even having a supervisor who identifies as the proper gender for said gender bathroom goes in to wash his/her hands in the bathroom every thirty or so minutes is often enough presence and presence alone to intimidate would-be-trouble-makers from their possibly less savory actions (many fast food restaurants actually have their (co)managers do exactly this to cut down on vandalism).
Dox, I get that the OP wants transsexual people to be more comfortable and I respect that. I want them to be comfortable too, but this is not the proper course of action. The human race as whole is currently too primitive for widespread co-ed public bathrooms. As transsexuals are tied in with the LGBT community, they should probably look to the big names and organizations, such as the HRC, to run similar campaigns that were run to cut down on homosexuality hate (such as the "'That's so Gay?' Well, Ashley, how would you like it if someone did something lame and someone next to you and said 'OMG, that is SO Ashley'?" commercial).
Ru(e)? Paul's Drag Race and Modern Family are just some examples of shows that are doing a great job of keeping the LBGT community in the public eye and educating the masses about their existence and the fact that they are people too with wants, desires, strengths, weaknesses, and most importantly: feelings. Opening up co-ed bathrooms will NOT make transsexuals feel any less persecuted in places such as Mississippi, where they recently passed a bill that essentially says "One may deny access, service, or sale to anyone for any reason, as long as it isn't racial".
1) Put Condoms in Bathrooms (I think this should be done anyways as its a lot more likely for a teen to use one if they are free and given in private).
2) Make less bathrooms, but bigger bathrooms. (This would force more people into the same room, thus decreasing the likelihood of any sexual healing).
3) No teacher bathrooms, make them use the same ones as kids. (Though I can see people mobbing already when a 28 yr old male teacher uses the same bathroom as a 14 yr old girl).quote]
I must say I feel foolish for not thinking of #1 for battling the teen pregnancy issue. I am now curious of the statistical difference of assaults that occur in larger versus smaller bathrooms. Lastly, I agree with your later sentiments in regards to number three, mostly because I think in most situations it would be the teachers' privacy invaded by the students (ex: "Hey, I caught a vine of Mr. Smith dropping a deuce! His fart was too long for the clip!")
@Jay13x: Just like how rec centers, sports, and clubs are set up to keep kids off the streets and "off the streets," not providing male and female teens unsupervised time at school is keeping them focused and "keeping them from ************". Lack of supervision allows for more mischief which leads to more trouble. The internet, /b/ especially, is a breeding ground for bullying, because honestly, you don't know who I am and can't catch me so I can call you all the names I want and belittle you however I please because I know I can't get caught so why not for the lulz! *Insert random insult* I have the unpoliced space to insult you anonymously within a mass of people, which means I'll probably do it more often (and look, people on the internet as a whole do). Providing space and opportunities does absolute wonders for increasing deviant human behavior.
Anyone who doubts an increase of sex in coed bathrooms, I would like to remind them of "the mile high club".
1) Put Condoms in Bathrooms (I think this should be done anyways as its a lot more likely for a teen to use one if they are free and given in private).
2) Make less bathrooms, but bigger bathrooms. (This would force more people into the same room, thus decreasing the likelihood of any sexual healing).
3) No teacher bathrooms, make them use the same ones as kids. (Though I can see people mobbing already when a 28 yr old male teacher uses the same bathroom as a 14 yr old girl).quote]
I must say I feel foolish for not thinking of #1 for battling the teen pregnancy issue. I am now curious of the statistical difference of assaults that occur in larger versus smaller bathrooms. Lastly, I agree with your later sentiments in regards to number three, mostly because I think in most situations it would be the teachers' privacy invaded by the students (ex: "Hey, I caught a vine of Mr. Smith dropping a deuce! His fart was too long for the clip!")
@Jay13x: Just like how rec centers, sports, and clubs are set up to keep kids off the streets and "off the streets," not providing male and female teens unsupervised time at school is keeping them focused and "keeping them from ************". Lack of supervision allows for more mischief which leads to more trouble. The internet, /b/ especially, is a breeding ground for bullying, because honestly, you don't know who I am and can't catch me so I can call you all the names I want and belittle you however I please because I know I can't get caught so why not for the lulz! *Insert random insult* I have the unpoliced space to insult you anonymously within a mass of people, which means I'll probably do it more often (and look, people on the internet as a whole do). Providing space and opportunities does absolute wonders for increasing deviant human behavior.
Anyone who doubts an increase of sex in coed bathrooms, I would like to remind them of "the mile high club".
Really it isn't. The point that lead to it was: multiple occupancy coed bathrooms would be unsafe without some sort of surveillance (and I doubt the general populace wants a camera recording them drop a deuce.)
Surveillance stops a high amount of crime simply because people don't want to be caught doing something bad. This is why people planning crimes typically attempt to mask their identity, because if they are seen by a witness (or worse, a well placed camera) they'll be caught and get punished. Think of bank cameras, atm cameras, security cameras, red light cameras, cameras at property gates, back room cameras, etc. Humans adults can and will very easily give in to temptation if they want it bad enough. Otherwise jails would be filled by people that accidently did things (like manslaughter or property damage due to folly).
So that means: in order to counteract the increased opportunity of rape in the multiple occupancy coed bathrooms, there would need to be surveillance. Hence marshmellow test example.
If you are going to quote me and go on a tirade, please read. My first post was short, but lets start with the OP:
magickware99: "But why just single-occupancy? Why not all bathrooms"
This was the question that I was answering. The OP is asking for the sake of equality. My answer was that the problem isn't equality, it has nothing to do with equality. It has to do with something primal that doesn't care about transgendered people because it happens not just in humans, but in other animals as well (sometimes one non-human species of animal rapes a different non-human species even).
Now we go to the same post you quoted from me, aka my first post in this thread: "So as far as single toilet restrooms being unisex, sure. I am just fine with that. It takes at least two people for a rape to occur: at least one assailant and a victim. If there is only one person in the bathroom, rape is not possible."
So because you too jumped on the human rights train without wondering about the original intent of gender segregated bathrooms. Berkas (you know the polarizing women's garb that only shows the eyes) were originally made (and yes I know their use has changed, just as gunpowder started in fireworks and then became weaponized) to keep the beauty of women from distracting the men, as well as letting only the husband view the full beauty of his bride. I'm not making another paragraph break here, but I want you to focus on this, I will not only repeat it but I will bold it and Billy Mayes it: take that inkling of distraction notion, and put that into practice with coed middle school bathroom with a whole bunch of horny hormone driven pubescent teenagers that are just noticing their loins? The same place where you have to expose your pelvis to do what you intended to do in that room (remove bodily waste)? That whole idea is ludicrous, even if you take rape out of the situation, we are talking new-to-puberty-children with exposed loins in the same room, which as mentioned before, is going to lead to an increase in teen pregnancy.
So, Jay13x, I know that was a lot of text, so I'll give a conclusion sentence: Making all multiple occupant public bathrooms coed would greatly increase the chance of rape due almost entirely by the expected actions of straight people... and having basically nothing to do with the bathroom choice of transgendered people.
Reading gives context!
Please don't TL;DR the topic. The topic is unisex bathrooms. The fear is the suffix of unisex. Suffix is the ending of a word in case you didn't know. As far as coitus is concerned, I am worried about the notion of having only unisex bathrooms due to the possibility of increasing rape statistics in public bathrooms and increasing teen pregnancy in schools. So yes, pregnancy has much to do with this bathroom topic.
@Taix
"An Oregon high school installed separate unisex bathrooms, giving a "third option" to its students, including those who identify as transgender, a school official said."
...
Did you know Family bathrooms are unisex? They are. Most of them have door locks on the main doors themselves. This Oregon hasn't done that persay, because "third option" is doing exactly what you suggested about parking garages (which as I stated have security measures including surveillance where bathrooms do not): segregation of the transgendered students to their own bathrooms.
Face it: everyone knows that the a body of people must have at least one member of their party meet at least one of these requirements for a Family restroom: Infantile to prepubescent with parent/guardian of opposite gender, special needs with caretaker, excessively enfeebled by one way or another through age that would need a caretaker, recovering from severe injury and needing a constant caretaker. If a party of people does not have anyone that meets the requirements, they typically use their respective bathrooms (male or female) instead. If there is only one person in a party, automatically they know they do not socially qualify to use the family restroom.
Oregon unisex bathrooms are for transgendered students just as a "black box recorder" is actually orange...or as you pointed out, the War on Drugs.
Why is this important? Highschoolers know how to label things. If someone wants to bully a transgender kid, they need only watch who goes in there to pick their target. Why wouldn't they typically go in to continue harassment? Aside from the heightened LGBTQphobia of being labeled exactly what they would be going in to persecute by entering said bathroom? Because the administration of that school is giving transgender kids special treatment and a special area that technically is open to the rest of the public (hey, you ever used a handicapped stall when not handicapped and then in the middle of your business had an actual handicapped person enter the restroom and wonder why in the nine layers of Phyrexia you are in there? You will be villianized, even if it was THE last stall open.) but it really isn't meant to be used by everyone in the public (Compare handicapped stalls to, wait for it...handicapped parking spaces! Can't park in those at ALL without a handicapped sticker, that is of course unless you wish to run the risk of being socially ridiculed and/or fined!). Yet again, most highschoolers can identify symbols. Differences are mined to build the social hierarchy. Ever wonder why the "Jocks" are always overtly male, both physically and via their broadcasted lifestyle?
The Oregon unisex bathroom is not a place to make the transgendered student feel like he or she belongs to one of the groups. It is a safe place for that student, due to social stigma, just it should have been during supervised teaching moments, and just like it was not in the unsupervised bathrooms said student was avoiding due to persecution (or worse, the article didn't say).
Thought the segregated parking lot comment would escape, didn't you? No. Aside from the aforementioned surveillance (seriously, I mentioned it BEFORE your male/female parking spots idea), how would that work with carpooling? Dating? Families? All of them in one car, a mixed bag of gender having to park in a single spot... how would that even work?
Lastly, to drive this counter home: a transgender person parks in your segregated parking lot. Where would you have them park? Pre-op? Post-op? Looks the gender? Does not look the gender? Someone who claims to be transgender but you are 99.9% certain they are just saying that to get out of a parking ticket?
Looks like your solution would only add to the problem.
I have been watched using a urinal by a coworker before, it was really uncomfortable. The point of bringing this up is not to bash homosexuality, but to show that yes, pervy men exist. Going off the reported sexual assaults and peeping tom (notice the male name there) incidents, the vast majority of them are male -> female.
Parking garages on some campuses and now shopping centers have call boxes. Those blue boxes with phones are mainly there to stop and scare off sexual assault.
So you don't believe in signs? Most people stop at "STOP" signs. Most people avoid stepping on the grounds of "Private Property". Many burglars steer clear of houses that have signs with a security system's name. Nearly everyone, including their grandmothers, look to the proper bathroom sign to decide which way to go to sit upon the porcelain throne. Most people, if food poisoned and about to churn out a gallon of "Chunky Nesquik", would still take the extra twenty steps to enter the "proper" bathroom if it was further away. Posted signs actually serve as an authoritative reminder. If they didn't work, they wouldn't basically be everywhere. Just think of all the unlocked doors marked "Employees Only" that haven't been opened by each and every shopper. I mean DOORS even when unlocked are a deterent to many. Think about a museum. A place full of hallways and a door on the side? If it clearly isn't marked, clearly you aren't supposed to go in there because clearly it isn't a place you, a member of the public, should be!
Yes, I admit that not everyone obeys everything all the time. I want you to look at The Marshmellow Test Video. The kids eat the marshmellows. Some struggle with going through with it, but really the net result is marshmallow eaten.
Now take this experiment and the results, age the kids up to the height of puberty and stick them in a coed bathroom. What results do you think you will get?
I for one would rather not tempt fate. Nor would I tempt the installation of bathroom "security" cameras.
Also there is a difference between people having to find a space for an act and allowing them access one. To simplify this to just cheating on tests, the colleges I attended wouldn't even let me use the bathroom until I was done with a quiz, test, or exam. This was due to the POSSIBILITY of going to look up the answers. (Something I would be able to do real life on the job and it would be perfectly acceptable... but I digress).
So I ask you what is worse if you are an administrator: a student cheating on a quiz in your school's bathroom, or a 12 year old middleschooler getting pregnant in your school's bathroom?
Rape.
It is because of rape. Men are much more likely to rape women then men on men or women on women. Look up the statistics if you don't believe this.
Bathrooms are one of the few places people have in public away from cameras. In order to enforce things in bathrooms, you would either need an attendant/guard (that you can trust not to rape and/or be raped) or have cameras.
I for one would prefer separate bathrooms as supposed to a camera in the stalls.
So as far as single toilet restrooms being unisex, sure. I am just fine with that. It takes at least two people for a rape to occur: at least one assailant and a victim. If there is only one person in the bathroom, rape is not possible.
@Tiax : Typically I keep my underwear on in an elevator, my typical elevator ride is well below five minutes, and there are cameras in the elevators I use.
Also, moving to general fornication: would you really trust having unisex bathrooms in middle school and highschool, with that whole puberty thing? Teen pregnancies would skyrocket!