Bad Women’s Anatomy Is Getting WORSE

I don’t care if you watch it, but I want to make a point about the resurgence of bathroom bills.  You know those bills that say trans people must use the bathroom of their assigned sex at birth.   Mostly because cis women have been told that trans women or women who do not look feminine enough will violate and hurt them.   Yes we must judge everyone by their looks so we can tell who fits the girl enough or the boy enough categories.   We already know that the idea that a person will go to the effort to claim to be trans to assault women in a bathroom is debunked and stupid.  If a guy wants to assault women they are not going to change their entire life to do it in a woman’s bathroom, they will just charge into one and do it, or do it when the woman comes out or a dozen other ways.  It simply is not reasonable.   But let’s go back to comfort.  A cis female person I respect said she would be uncomfortable in a bathroom with a “manly looking woman”.   OK please look at this person in the video that says they are trans.   That means if these “go to the toilet of your assigned birth” laws are enforced this person would be forced by law to use a female’s bathroom no matter how uncomfortable for them or the women.   This is the stupidity of these laws and the people pushing the bigotry.   Look at this guy, what bathroom does he belong in?   These bathroom laws are based in bigotry and made up fears.   What are you people doing in the bathroom, holding a social gathering?  We have to understand what is driving these bathroom bill laws is an attempt to stop societal change and progression by the groups that are scared of the new ways.  The die hard religious groups, the traditionalist who say it was not done this way when I was growing up, and the people that just simply feel the need to control society to make sure it stays the same so they feel comfortable.    Hugs

27 thoughts on “Bad Women’s Anatomy Is Getting WORSE

  1. I didn’t watch the video. 😁 But based on what you wrote, I repeat a comment I think I made quite sometime back … unisex restrooms could be a potential solution.

    I know you feel it’s somewhat ridiculous for women to be so sensitive, but speaking from the named sex, we have our reasons. And they do NOT have to do with a fear of being “attacked” by a transwoman.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. I think unisex, or family, bathrooms, are a fine idea. I’m not one who tends to think someone looks “manly” or “womanly,” especially in a bathroom. 🤷‍♀️ I just smile at everyone and keep on about my business. Let the people potty…

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Can you imagine what Libs of TikTok, and other anti LGBT groups would make of gender neutral restrooms? Such places would be safe ONLY if they were off limits to gays, lesbians, transmen, transwomen, males over the age of 12 and and anyone who didn’t wear “gender appropriate” attire.

        Males over 12 because of their “equipment”. The rest because in the eyes of anti LGBTQI+ groups, they are all “groomers”. If they are willing to bring guns to break up a drag reading in a library, goodness knows what they would resort to to stop the “wrong” people using gender neutral restrooms.

        Liked by 2 people

        1. Do not have to imagine! Some businesses, like Target, went through this already several years ago, when they made inclusive, safe bathrooms that whoever needs to go may use. Boycotts, curses, etc., for a while, then it wore off for a bit. We shop at a Target in a larger town just North of us; they did a single-user bathroom and included a changing table in it. I think they put one in the men’s room, too. I got a sticker I would wear that says, “I’ll go with you.” At that time, young people and people who looked like they could be Muslim were the prime targets of the RWNJs, and it was so embarrassing. But it died off there, in real time. They just don’t talk about it anymore, or look at the bathrooms. RWNJs have moved on to the schools, where they can do more harm to humans.
          Ah, well.
          I’ve always had a thing about public bathrooms; seems like women’s rooms used to get 2 maximum toilets, while mens’ got 4 urinals and 2 stalls. Then people can complain and joke about women taking so long in the bathroom. So, anything that will get people where they need to be when they need to go, is a great idea, to me! Let the nutjobs screech.

          Liked by 1 person

            1. Yeah, straight-cis crone here saying a penis would be a handy thing to bring along on, say, a picnic. Or in a dive diner with one toilet. 😉


      2. Hello Ali. I agree. I also like the idea of unisex or family bathrooms, but in many areas they are not practical. Places where there is a larger volume of people needing to use the bathroom at one time. Such as schools or sports stadiums for example. Hugs


      3. Hello Ali and Nan. I may have misunderstood something here and I think Barry picked up on it. When you both mentioned unisex bathrooms I thought you were talking the single person / family bathrooms many places have now, such as hospitals or stores. But I looked it up and some places are going to a multi person unisex facilities that are more like womans bathrooms in that all the toilets are separated but with a common sink area. Like I said when I was in Germany many of the facilities I was in were like that. I was wondering what model you were both talking about. I think Barry was talking about the larger multi use for everyone bathrooms I remember. Hugs

        Liked by 1 person

        1. Yep! I remember it was a big deal when that TV show “Ally McBeal” had one, but heck-there was plenty of room for everyone, and it worked fine. All people have to do is want it to work fine, and it will.


    2. So let me ask you Nan, how would you feel if Jaimie, the person depicted in the YouTube link above, who also hosts the video, walked into a restroom while you were there?

      You do realise that in some US states, if Jaimie wishes to go to the bathroom, he MUST use women’s facilities as he was assigned female at birth. The simple answer is to use the facilities most appropriate to your gender identity/presentation. Could it possibly be that your reasons are informed by prejudice, even if very subtle?

      May I ask how you could possibly be certain if someone is cis or trans? No one should have their gender identity questioned, any more than they should have their sexual orientation questioned, or even their sexuality questioned.

      I’m a non-gendered male. But I’m also asexual, and that simple combination has resulted being at the receiving end of considerable violence, usually of a sexual nature. No doubt being autistic contributes as I failed at learning gender differences from social cues. But the worst, most brutal and blatant forms of violence were reserved for when I failed to present as a man with a “healthy” “masculine” libido.

      Less so today, but in the 60s through to the 90s, being in male only situations or events was something I avoided at all costs, especially so if alcohol was involved. I felt my survival depended on it. But even in mixed company, if for some reason my disinterest in sexual activity was discovered, sometime women would give moral support, even if not always taking part in subjecting me to abuse.

      Perhaps because of my experiences, my sympathies lie completely with the trans community. The largest women’s organisation in New Zealand, the National Council Of Women with approximately 500,000 affiliated members (NZ population 5 million), have a statement of belief on their Gender Equal website:
      * Gender is diverse and expansive
      * Genitals do not determine gender
      * Sex traits (including chromosomes and reproductive organs) do not determine gender
      * There are many combinations of sex traits
      * Men are not inherently superior to other genders
      * Trans women are women
      * Trans men are men
      * Non-binary people are visible, valid and respected
      * All genders are visible, valid and respected
      * All genders are equal
      (Emphasis is mine)

      It’s a statement of belief I can actually support in its entirety, even if on occasions it might cause me some personal level of discomfort in specific circumstances. Those are personal discomforts and there’s no valid reason why they should be pushed onto others.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. First, as I mentioned, I didn’t watch the video. Second, I personally think if there weren’t so much “discussion” on this issue, many of the “problems” would not exist. But unfortunately, it has become a neanderthal’s club to be used against those who don’t agree with one’s personal perspective.


        1. I personally think if there weren’t so much “discussion” on this issue, many of the “problems” would not exist.
          I find that to be a disappointing attitude. Silencing those who seek equal human rights does not make the “problem” go away. It’s sweeping it under the carpet at best, or suppressing it and criminalising at worst as it is in Russia and in some US states with their “Don’t say gay” laws. It applies whether it’s racial/ethnic/cultural issues, LGBTQI+ issues that concern Scottie, or neurodiversity issues that are of particular concern to me.

          I can recall similar statements being made in regards to the rise of the civil rights movement in the US in the 1960s – “if only people would stop talking about it there wouldn’t be all this demand for desegregation”. I recall one interviewee insisting that instead of demanding the desegregation of existing [white only] facilities, those who want desegregated facilities should just quietly go about building their own and not force desegregation on those who don’t want it. A valid personal perspective?

          Which brings up the issue of gender neutral (unisex) facilities. I presume by this you mean in addition to men’s and women’s facilities, and not replacing them. In smaller venues in NZ, gender neutral restrooms are becoming the norm, replacing separate facilities. In larger venues, segregation by gender (not sex) is still the norm, but the simple binary option is likely to present complications now that this nation recognises more than two genders. Not talking about it does not make the issue go away. Talking about it helps clear misinformation (which was what the video was all about) and leads to a better understanding all round and solutions that are acceptable to everyone.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. I have only two comments to your chastising …

            1) I don’t believe I used the word “silencing.” I said if there were less “discussion.” And I stand by that. Those who are avidly against the movement are not going to change their minds simply based on the repetitious defense of the issue. In many cases, it’s going to take personal interaction with the affected parties to bring about true understanding.

            2) Essentially, while the Civil Rights Act did many good things for many people, OVERALL it did little for the black people. They are still suffering from persecution and ill-treatment.

            IMO, social issues will always be with us. Consider: women are STILL struggling for “equal rights.” For a repertoire of reasons, it’s my belief that many issues will probably never be dismissed, simply because of our human nature.

            Liked by 1 person

            1. Oh dear. I think I may have put my foot in it. My intent was not to chastise, but to challenge, question and ultimately understand your comment, so if I came across as chastising, I apologise.

              No, you didn’t use the word silencing, and you did indeed use the phrase if there was less “discussion” on this issue, many of the “problems” would not exist, although I’m not sure why you felt it necessary to place discussion and problems inside quotation marks. Perhaps it’s to imply that there isn’t any real discussion and there really isn’t a problem? I’m not entirely sure if I have understood the sentence correctly, but it appears to me that it means “if we don’t talk about trans issues, then trans issues will cease to be a problem”. If that is what you mean, I disagree. By substituting trans with any other social issue (gay rights, abortion rights, voting rights, women’s rights, black rights, indigenous rights for example) I hope it might become clear that failing to discuss social issues has never brought a resolution. Ever. It simply hides the problem from public awareness. The problem still exists.

              Additionally, I believe that calls for less discussion play into the hands of the homophobic and transphobic elements such as Libs of TikTok, DeSantis and some US state legislatures who are effectively enforcing less discussion by introducing “don’t say gay” laws, giving moral support to armed thugs breaking up family friendly drag events, forcing libraries to bar access to children of any reference to lifestyles that aren’t strictly cis and straight, treating parents of trans kids as child abusers amongst many other restraints. Hence my use of silencing.

              You refer to discussion being used as “a neanderthal’s club to be used against those who don’t agree with one’s personal perspective”. My concern here is the use of personal perspective. I freely admit that I struggle with the nuances of language, and I might have an incorrect understanding, but my reading of that sentence suggests that you don’t consider the issues raised by the trans community and the wider LGBTQI+ community as being either gender equality issues or human rights issues. Instead, you view them as “personal preferences”. If that is what you mean, then I strongly disagree. Their concerns are matters of gender equality and human rights, and as important as every other right.

              I don’t know what the situation is in the US, but here, in a legal sense, men and women are equal but in practice there is still some way to go. That applies to all genders but less so to men. While women may be the largest group struggling for equal rights, that shouldn’t diminish the rights of other groups also struggling for equal rights.

              And if you consider women and blacks suffer from persecution and ill treatment, consider this: 53% of autistic people are victims of hate crimes, not in their lifetime, but each year. 80% of autistics are unemployed, not because they are unemployable but because of the stigma associated with autism. In America it’s legal to apply taser strength electric shocks to “encourage appropriate eye contact” or to suppress stims such as rocking, even though stims are an essential component of self regulation in autistics. Autistic children are often subjected to up to 40 hours per week of “conversion therapy” where they are groomed to be fully compliant to the demands of others at the expense of their own comfort. This results in autistic children and young adults of all genders being subjected to extremely high levels of abuse including sexual abuse. Approximately 80% of autistic children who undergo conversion therapy go on to suffer from PTSD in later life. Autism is still considered a mental disorder based on incorrect assumptions about why we behave the way we do. We do not have communication and emotional deficits. Amongst other autistic people we do not display such deficits, and when it comes to interaction between autistic and non-autistic folk, most of the deficits are exhibited by the non-autistic people. In other words, we understand non-autistic folk better than they understand us. This is not because we’re better at communication but because almost everyone we communicate with is non-autistic whereas non-autistics seldom meet autistic people, and when they do, their tendency is to minimise communication as they find it awkward. That option is not open to autistics.

              I could go on, but I think I’ve gone into “info dump” mode on a topic dear to my heart. I’d better stop before I outstay my welcome.

              Liked by 1 person

              1. Barry, I appreciate your opinions and thoughts. I think if were were able to sit down face-to-face, we could have quite a stimulating conversation. However, since we can’t, we must rely on the written word.

                Once again, I feel you are missing my point. I do appreciate that it may have something to do with your difficulty related to “nuances of language,” but you are filling in blanks that I have not left open.

                When I say “less discussion,” I don’t mean that the topic should be stuffed in a closet and ignored. But the back-and-forth between the defender and the antagonist, IMO, is not solving anything. In fact, it is simply making each side “dig in” even more.

                As I mentioned before, I feel personal interaction with the affected parties is what is going to bring about true understanding. Regrettably, considering the current climate within the U.S. on this issue, such interactions are pretty much non-existent.

                One last thing … I think acceptance also depends a great deal on how “liberal” a person is. It’s pretty obvious the religious will fight against acceptance of trans people just as hard as they (continue to) fight against the gays.


                1. Hello Nan. I am not autistic that I know of, and I got the same impression from your comment Barry did. I am glad you further explained your point. However you do miss the point of the many replies to the myths and misinformation I did in the past. Yes the haters of gays and trans won’t change, Tucker Carlson will be who he is, but the solution is not to disarm / stop fighting for equality letting the haters / anti-trans be the only voices people hear. Yes Tildeb won’t change but his true colors have been exposed. But there are a lot of others reading along, there are others that might believe the lies, myths, and misinformation. Even you at one point were accepting a lie that Tildeb told. That must be countered so it doesn’t linger out there influencing other people. Just as back in the 1970s gay people stood up to the crap put out by Anita Bryant about gays recruiting children, gays shouldn’t be allowed to be teachers, gays were dirty mentally ill people, and all the rest of the tropes thrown out back then. Us gay people had to stand up to that and challenge it every day. At school, at work, at the stores, in our families, everything that is going on today with trans and drag queens happened with gay people. Today the right wants to mimic Russia and turn back the clock to a century ago, rolling back all social gains made in the last 100 years. They want a place and time they can be comfortable with and that means not having to deal with diversity, inclusion, and acceptance of others. They want a straight white Christian society centered around the church where the man is the unquestioned head of the household and kids were respectful and polite. They think Leave It to Beaver was real. That is the world they are fighting for. We must not allow them to have it. And personally I don’t think the country will. Yes in red state strong holds like Texas and Florida they have a chance to push their way. But no way the national stage will allow it. Look at the abortion issue and how even red state Kansas refused to accept strict limits on abortion. Anyway I have to go. Hugs


      2. See, that’s always been my question about people’s troubles with trans people. What about the trans guys-don’t we care that they’re guys right in the showers with the girls? Also. nobody ever complains about putting women/girls in men’s/boy’s showers and bathrooms, because of their birth assignment. Hmmm.
        I could go on a whole rant about gym showers and public restrooms, but I won’t. 😉

        Liked by 2 people

      3. Hello Barry. I am sorry you were the victim of violence and abuse because of who you are. No one deserves that and I am glad you found some people who were supportive. I hope things have improved over time, no one should feel pressured to ever act in a sexual manner that they do not wish to.

        I agree with you that it is not acceptable to demand to know the gender, sexual orientation, or genital information of other people, especially strangers. I have long figured that if someone wanted me to know their personal information they would tell me without my asking. Many questions can be answered simply by getting to know the person as a friend, and the rest again is not anyone’s business. For me I have allowed people I am friends with to ask me personal questions when they are truly trying to understand a subject they don’t know anything about as I feel that is the best way to help people understand being gay and sexual orientation.

        Thank you for all the information and for sharing your personal struggles with us. Best wishes. Scottie

        Liked by 1 person

    3. Hello Nan. You may not feel that fear personally but that is the justification used by right wing media. It is the justification used by republican lawmakers. I don’t find it ridiculous for anyone to be sensitive, but I do think most of it is a mindset that goes on the looks of the person entering or leaving the restroom. Like I said I have never seen a trans person assault anyone in a bathroom, but I have posted many times of cis women being assaulted by people who think they are not a real woman based on their looks. The facts show that the uncomfortableness you mention is not based in any data of trans people using restrooms, it is an emotional response to the idea of something that is not true which is the idea of a man in a female space. Trans women are not men, they are women, so it is still a woman’s only space. Hugs

      Liked by 2 people

        1. Hello Nan. Hard disagree. It is not just me disagreeing with you, but the majority of the medical organizations. And that is the rub. You are getting caught up in what is between the legs when gender is in the brain. Think it through, if a person identifies as a different gender than they were assigned at birth and gets sexual reassignment surgery you agree they are the gender they identify / claim they are. But if they cannot afford that surgery or for other reasons don’t want / can’t have reassignment surgery the gender they identify with has not changed, they are still identifying as a different gender than assigned at birth. The mind set in both situations is the same.

          To say that a person is not the gender they claim is to say that a person is not the sexual orientation they claim they are. It is the same as those that claim it is a choice that people make for whatever reason which again makes no sense as who would choose the hardest path when an easier one was available, unless the harder path is the way they really were born. You really need to separate your view of male and female from genitalia as it has been proven that sex is a spectrum and not binary. Hugs

          Liked by 1 person

          1. No, Scottie. A male is a male via his physical genitals. He may be a “woman” in his head (gender-wise) … but physically he is still a man. Yes, he may have surgery to alter the physical characteristics he had at birth to “match” his transgender self, but this does not change the fact he had a penis and gonads at birth.

            Scottie, I have my own thoughts about this whole “gender” thing and nothing you write or post or provide facts and figures on is going to change my thinking. As far as I’m concerned, what these people do with their lives is their business … and all this “publicity” is only magnifying whatever obstacles they face.


  2. Two comments: trans people can not be biologically altered. They are cosmetically altered. Second, what gentillia one has is no one else’s business.

    In Aotearoa New Zealand one’s legal gender is what one declares it to be. End of story. The pressure to make this so came mainly from cis women.


    Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

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

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.