RSS

Bathroom wars, from Jim Crow to ‘transgendered’

01 Jun

Can we avoid the ‘bathroom wars’?” (Of course not.)

In the movie “The Help,” one of the first points of real conflict comes when Miss Hilly Holbrook, the racist villainess played brilliantly by Bryce Dallas Howard, confronts her maid Minny Jackson, played with equal brilliance by Octavia Spencer. Minny, during a fierce thunderstorm, has used the bathroom in the house, which is reserved for whites, instead of the outhouse. Miss Hilly goes on to draft legislation that would require white families to build an extra bathroom for their black help. She is haunted by the idea that white folk could get special germs she thinks are unique to the black race from shared bathroom usage.

What is it about bathrooms? Throughout the Jim Crow South, there were separate restrooms for blacks and whites. When I bring my dad, my uncle and my niece to Puerto Rico every winter, my niece claims the one bedroom with the private bathroom and the guys share the other one. Three hundred years ago, it was a mark of honor to be able to accompany the monarch as he took his toilette. Now, privacy seems most significant, and therefore the most easily endangered, when we discuss bathrooms.

Still, even I have been taken aback by the current “bathroom wars,” fought over the issue of whether or not transgender persons should use the bathroom that corresponds to their gender at the time of their birth or to the gender by which they now identify themselves.

What is it about bathrooms, indeed?

I guess what it ultimately boils down to, is that public bathrooms are public places where private functions (i.e. bodily functions; or in the case of changerooms, changing and showering) occur. In other words, they are a place where two worlds, the public and the private, intersect (and not entirely comfortably).

And, setting aside previous oddball Jim-Crow-era notions about germs (if there are germs unique to a race, then others needn’t fear contracting them), in the modern context, they put the lie to radical egalitarianism, because the existence of separate bathrooms for the two sexes reinforces what biology proclaims, which progs wish to deny, that there are two different sexes. (Note, of course, the concurrent corruption of the language, wherein our society favours the term ‘gender’ instead of ‘sex’, appropriating a linguistics term for other purposes.)

Even before World War ‘T’, progs were starting to push for mixed-sex bathrooms; recall the ’90s T.V. show ‘Ally McBeal’, where the main character’s law firm had a mixed-sex washroom. I was in university when that was on the air; the university I attended itself had mixed-sex washrooms in the residences. (It made showering complicated; you had to knock to ask if it was okay to come into the shower room, in case someone was toweling off / getting out of their stall into the common area; then you had to ask if you could get out of the shower, same reason. Some twit once tore a tiny pinhole in one curtain; no, it wasn’t me, but I did peek through it and see some girls in the altogether, before later tearing it big enough that it couldn’t be ignored, and telling everyone about it, at which time it ended up replaced.) It was very odd; I could eventually sometimes tell which girl was in the stall beside mine from the sound she made peeing. Once, going to the bathroom just after hearing my neighbour and her boyfriend fucking (in her room two doors down from mine), as I was washing my hands at the sink, they burst into the bathroom together in their bathrobes; in the mirror, I could see her post-coital flush on her face, and shortly after I heard her peeing and doubtless also expelling his cooze (she was on the Pill, liberal cafeteria Catholic that she was)… On Friday and Saturday nights, a bunch of girls would turn the damn place into a beauty salon, filling up the area around the sinks with hair products, driers, curling irons, etc., placing a chair in front of one of the sinks, taking turns doing each other’s hair before going out clubbing…  Once, when a girl got drunk, she tried to pee in the urinal in one stall… It was all very surreal, and so wrong…

Anyway… From what I can tell, the non-transgendered-centric rationale for mixed-sex washrooms is due to some feminists thinking that, like women, men like to carry on long conversations in washrooms (we don’t, normally), and worry that women might miss out on business deals, etc., that men might conduct privately amongst themselves in the last male-only public spaces left. And so even if it happens that progs have pushed too far this time with battling for transgendered access to changerooms of their choice, and get pushback in the specific case of public changerooms / showers, I doubt we will see an end to wars over access to bathrooms, as regards the sexes, at least. I suspect the assault on the last male-only public space will continue. (Note, by the way, how neo-cons feel compelled to frame the changeroom issue exclusively in terms of fears of male predators in female-only spaces. Why, it’s as if they don’t care about / believe in male-only spaces, and/or realize they can’t get any traction with such appeals in our current social and political climate.)

Advertisements
 

17 responses to “Bathroom wars, from Jim Crow to ‘transgendered’

  1. Will S.

    June 1, 2016 at 3:33 am

    I also attended another university in the ’90s, which didn’t have mixed-sex residence washrooms, but which switched the washrooms halfway through the year; the rationale being that it was unfair for some people’s rooms to be very close to their washroom, while others had to walk all the way around the corridors, so to make it fair, it was necessary to switch it up halfway through the year, to inconvenience the convenienced, and vice versa. Not specifically about sex, except, despite the switch of the male and female symbols on the doors, inevitably some people, myself included, accidentally went in the wrong washrooms in January (why bother looking at the symbol when you know which is the men’s room, since it has been thus for the last four months and you aren’t expecting a fucking change), and some people ended up seeing members of the opposite sex naked in the shower – oops! Plus it meant that, either semester, the women’s washroom had a urinal not in use, and the toilet stall in the men’s had a container meant to hold paper bags into which women could put their menstrual products, also not in use. Pointless, and absurd. All in the name of ‘fairness’.

     
    • coyote

      June 1, 2016 at 11:31 pm

      this agenda seeks the death of white males and the christian civilization created by them. bolshevism and marxist multi-culti death worshipers: the end result of world wars killing our best and bravest, drowning our nations in a tide of mud slime, white males openly watching and cheering their women fvck savages.

       
      • Will S.

        June 2, 2016 at 1:48 am

        Certainly we see from the Left today a higher level of hatred for whites than they’ve ever displayed before, publicly.

         
  2. feeriker

    June 1, 2016 at 10:37 pm

    I really think that this demonstrates above all else just how far beyond the point of no return we are.

     
    • Will S.

      June 2, 2016 at 1:49 am

      It does; when prog ideology invades the most private of public spaces, it’s clear their victory, for now, is complete.

       
  3. Socially Extinct

    June 2, 2016 at 6:44 am

    Bathrooms are (were) the last bastion of masculinity, sad to say. Now they are a battleground. Nothing is sacred. Most irksome to me is the movement to make men sit down when urinating.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/the-filter/11445274/If-youre-a-true-gentleman-you-should-pee-sitting-down.html

     
    • Will S.

      June 2, 2016 at 12:36 pm

      Ugh. Doubtless they’ll end up getting rid of public urinals, to at least pay lip service to the ideal, even if they can’t force men to sit to piss, they can take away the type of toilet specifically designed for men pissing.

       
  4. Eric

    June 4, 2016 at 12:05 am

     
    • Will S.

      June 4, 2016 at 12:11 am

      So now even a ‘progressive’ black American woman feels compelled to resign from the head of an activist organization, because ‘transgendered’ ‘rights’ trump all other considerations.

      That’s where World War T is at…

       
      • infowarrior1

        June 4, 2016 at 11:58 pm

        You know what funny is that. When a man is playing on a level field with women by pretending to be a woman. He ends up in a position of dominance.

         
      • Will S.

        June 5, 2016 at 1:05 am

        Yep! 🙂

        While I’m inclined to some small level of sympathy for TERFs, it only extends so far, because at the end of the day, this is the kind of world they fought for; now they must live in it. (They made their beds; now they must lie in them.) Sucks to be them – and us, in it.

         
  5. Mark Citadel

    June 9, 2016 at 12:49 pm

    Men should carry secateurs with them at all times, so that if their wives are ever confronted by one of these weirdos in a bathroom, an impromptu castration can be performed.

     

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s