this post was submitted on 14 Jul 2023
1170 points (94.8% liked)

politics

19118 readers
3837 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

A district judge in Wisconsin has sided with an 11-year-old trans girl over her use of the girls’ toilets and temporarily blocked school officials from preventing her access.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ilovetacos@lemmy.world 255 points 1 year ago (247 children)

Good! Republicans need to get over their obsession with trans children's genitals.

load more comments (247 replies)
[–] OutrageousUmpire@lemmy.world 144 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Good lord they are only 11 years old. Who cares what bathroom they use.

[–] GildedGriffon@discuss.tchncs.de 108 points 1 year ago (27 children)

Make them all unisex. If it's a large facility with a bunch of stalls or a small facility for only one person, make them all unisex.

load more comments (27 replies)
[–] Imotali@lemmy.world 61 points 1 year ago

Pretty much only conservatives. They're actually pretty obsessed with thinking about children being raped in bathrooms.

[–] BeMoreCareful@lemmy.world 60 points 1 year ago (1 children)

We need to separate the bathrooms by function!

Number ones on the left number twos on the right!

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Turkey_Titty_city@kbin.social 104 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

gender neutral bathrooms are the answer here.

most public places have them now, don't get why you can't have one in a school.

[–] effingjoe@kbin.social 43 points 1 year ago (3 children)

In places with large crowds, gender neutral bathrooms (assuming you also mean single-use) don't really work. It causes massive lines.

Not to mention, there's no need. It's a bathroom. Why does anyone care who they pee or poop next to? It seems so silly and arbitrary to me. Just get in, do your thing, wash your hands, and get out. haha

[–] 001100010010@lemmy.dbzer0.com 74 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (10 children)

We can have gender neutral bathrooms where we have a shared hand-washing area, and individual stalls. Heck, you can even have cameras pointed towards the sink area if people are so afraid of getting harassed in the bathroom. Gender should not matter when you have individual stalls.

[–] effingjoe@kbin.social 63 points 1 year ago (9 children)

Right? I've been using public restrooms for a long time and I don't recall ever seeing anyone's naughty bits.

..and for me the most ridiculous part of this discussion is that bathrooms have never been a secure space. If some creep wanted to go into a bathroom to harass people, there is literally nothing stopping them. It's not like bathrooms have guarded entrances and now people have a sneaky way to get into a bathroom by pretending to be transgender or something insane like that.

It's literally a manufactured issue to get the GOP electorate terrified, as everything they do is designed to do.

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] journeyman@reddthat.com 73 points 1 year ago (23 children)

I've never understood why I should care where someone else goes to the bathroom anyways.

load more comments (23 replies)
[–] SafCack@lemmy.world 67 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Imagine holding in a shit for months as a court determines where you can poop.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] BeautifulMind@lemmy.world 46 points 1 year ago (44 children)

While this is welcome news, it's also depressing that we live in a timeline stupid enough that bathroom panics are enough of a thing that there are laws on the books like this to be struck down by judges (and of course, the fact that other judges are likely to reverse this ruling).

load more comments (44 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›