this post was submitted on 14 Jul 2023
1154 points (95.1% liked)

politics

19090 readers
4208 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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 001100010010@lemmy.dbzer0.com 71 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (19 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.

[–] xylan@kbin.social 14 points 1 year ago (8 children)

The best compromise for neutrality and efficiency is to keep gender neutral stalls but also retain an area with urinals which will be much quicker for large numbers of men to pass through then using stalls, and also saves water.

The other consideration would be that the stalls will need to be sufficiently screened that people in them don't feel overlooked or vulnerable (I'm looking at you USA with your weird gappy stall building!).

[–] 001100010010@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (7 children)

Um I think if we're gonna have urinals, they need to have a divider to completely separate them from the rest of the bathroom area, just so some conservative women don't freak out about the idea of men urinating outside of a closed stall.

But yea the stalls need to have no gaps in them. I hate people just peeking in, especially when I was in k-12 public school.

[–] Selkie210@lemmygrad.ml 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm a big fan of just getting rid of urinals altogether as a man, I'm choosing stalls every time anyway

[–] The_Nostromo@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

You son of a bitch

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (15 replies)