‘Trans People Are a Myth’: Idaho Republicans Pass Extreme Bathroom Ban Carrying 5-Year Prison Sentence

https://transitics.substack.com/p/trans-people-are-a-myth-idaho-republicans

I dont want to live in this reality any more.

367 points · 117 comments · view on lemmy.world

117 Comments

TheFermentalist@reddthat.com · 104 pts · 132d (16 replies)

Serious question: if they are a myth, why the need to ban trans people from anything?

I hereby ban dragons from Starbucks! And the bank! And from driving! Muahaha, I’m so fucking evil!!

FishFace@piefed.social · 28 pts · 132d (2 replies)

Their logic, such as it is, is that since trans people don't exist, anybody in the "wrong" bathroom is there for nefarious reasons.

It's false to anybody with a brain, because trans people do exist. In fact, even if you think gender dysphoria and trans identity are not how they're commonly described, harsh punishments for using the "wrong" bathroom still don't make sense, because the logical conclusion would be that those people are misguided or deluded, not predatory.

Still, it behooves us all to understand the emotional reasoning behind gender-segregated bathrooms: in most cultures (at least Western ones, but I think it goes further) there is a deep-seated idea that certain things are wrong if done in the presence of people of the other gender. Cultures with very different attitudes to nudity, for example, still have gender-segregated baths and saunas. I don't think there's any logical reason for this, but people (especially conservatives) feel the need to preserve it: the idea of gender-neutral bathrooms is crazy to them.

What, then, do you do with people who say their gender is other than what you, the dominant culture, say it is? Do you let them use the bathroom/shower/sauna they say they should? But then ANYONE could say their gender is different, and you wouldn't have gender segregation at all! Oh no!

And actually, I agree with this. I think if you're going to let people pick which bathroom they use according to their self-identification, gender segregated bathrooms are pointless, so we should get rid of them. Of course, this is not a popular view even among moderate left-wingers in Western countries, never mind Republicans, so we have this stupid culture war.

lemmyng@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 132d (1 reply)

Agree. The fuck is wrong with a bathroom that has le gasp a urinal AND a toilet in one?!

Gender truly is a fuck.

Soggy@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 132d

When my college moved to gender-neutral bathrooms they took every urinal out. It was a 60% loss in places to pee. Gender aside, it was a stupid decision.

cows_are_underrated@feddit.org · 19 pts · 132d

That's The thing i was asking myself too.

dorumon@lemmy.cafe · 12 pts · 132d (1 reply)

Thank you very much for banning me. Now I can go finally touch grass and not read the Internet and fascist going ons.

TheFermentalist@reddthat.com · 7 pts · 132d

Seriously dude (dudette? Non binary dragon??), don’t come back, because it’s a billion dollar fine and hundreds of years in horny jail

firelight@startrek.website · 7 pts · 132d (7 replies)

Is the wording in this really that trans people can't use certain bathrooms, or that people must use the bathroom that aligns with their sex?

TheFermentalist@reddthat.com · 4 pts · 132d (5 replies)

What’s the difference?

firelight@startrek.website · 7 pts · 132d (4 replies)

One acknowledges the existence of trans people and the other doesn't.

TheFermentalist@reddthat.com · -5 pts · 132d (3 replies)

Both discriminate

firelight@startrek.website · 6 pts · 132d (2 replies)

Your question wasn't about discrimination, it was about acknowledging the existence of trans people.

TheFermentalist@reddthat.com · -10 pts · 132d (1 reply)

My question was obviously about discrimination. You are being deliberately obtuse.

I don’t feed trolls. Fuck off

firelight@startrek.website · 7 pts · 132d

if they are a myth, why the need to ban trans people from anything?

not about the acknowledging existence of trans people

Okay, buddy.

WoodScientist@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 132d

Trans people who've medically transitioned ARE using the restroom that aligns with their sex. Trans women are biologically female. Trans men are biologically male. And frankly, I'm tired of pretending otherwise.

truthfultemporarily@feddit.org · 4 pts · 132d

They probably don't care about trans people existing, just blaming the smallest minority group for distraction until it doesn't exist anymore, then going to the next bigger one.

Ithral@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 3 pts · 132d

Now why'd you have to go and ban me from everything? grrrr

tanisnikana@lemmy.world · 41 pts · 132d (33 replies)

Honestly, as a trans woman that doesn’t pass, there’s fewer than ten states where I feel comfortable existing.

CapuccinoCoretto@lemmy.world · 32 pts · 132d (17 replies)

Give yourself credit for bravery, fortitude and resiliency. As a hetero white cis male, there are zero states I feel comfortable existing in.

tanisnikana@lemmy.world · 19 pts · 132d (2 replies)

Bravery doesn't mean much when I just wanna exist without the federal government throwing its full weight against me, while riling up lone wolves and poisoning any sort of discussion and thought process among the public.

CapuccinoCoretto@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 132d (1 reply)

Respectfully disagree. It means everything. It is an unfair burden for you to bear, but your existence is a beacon of light for everyone who struggles with acceptance of diversity and seeks basic human rights. You are not alone.

Maeve@kbin.earth · 6 pts · 132d

Bear. Bare= without covering

tanisnikana@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 132d (13 replies)

I do have a question though, when did cis become an acronym, and what does it stand for now? When I was learning English, I had learned that it was a Latin root, to imply "on the same side of", like "cisisochemic" or "cisatlantic," and is the opposite of trans, or "on the opposite side of."

At some point in the last few years, I've been seeing it capitalized in places, and I wonder why the switch? Unfortunately, when I look it up, I get a mismatched set of AI slop results and generated pages that say nothing coherent.

cows_are_underrated@feddit.org · 7 pts · 132d (11 replies)

It can very well come from Latin. Trans can be translated as "above", "beyond" or "across". Cis can be translated as "within" or "inside".

So someone who is Cisgender is "inside" their gender assigned at birth. Someone who is transgender is "beyond" their assigned gender at birth and now has a different gender.

tanisnikana@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 132d (10 replies)

Yeah, but my comment said that I understood that, but I was wondering when it became an acronym, and what does that acronym mean.

cows_are_underrated@feddit.org · 3 pts · 132d (9 replies)

Trans is just the opposite of cis. Cis is someone comfortable in their AGAB and someone who is trans is not comfortable in thei AGAB.

tanisnikana@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 132d (8 replies)

I understand the meaning of it when it's written in lowercase. I mean, I'm trans. Came out a decade and a half ago.

When I see it written in all capital letters, it's an acronym, and I have no idea what that acronym means.

TrickDacy@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 132d

You have more patience than I, you were very clear above. I am not sure why some people capitalize it. I think it's just a weird mistake that people think seems right because it doesn't seem like "English".

cows_are_underrated@feddit.org · 4 pts · 132d

Ah, thats what you meant. I personally have never seen it being written with all capital letters.

vantablack@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 1 pts · 132d

"cis" gets written in all-caps because cis people are fucking stupid and don't give a shit about learning the right terminology. that's the gist of it

sometimes they think it's an acronym that means "comfortable in skin"

PhoenixDog@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 132d

Cis isn't an acronym. No one here has any idea what you're talking about.

CapuccinoCoretto@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 132d

When? Maybe just now because I made a boo boo.

TheFermentalist@reddthat.com · 11 pts · 132d (14 replies)

No such thing as doesn’t pass. You tell me you’re a woman? Who the fuck am I to question what you feel in your bones? In the spirit of the republicans making shit up to disenfranchise, I hereby declare that you pass. As whatever the fuck you want, whenever the fuck you want to.

I will even print you a pass.

tanisnikana@lemmy.world · 11 pts · 132d (5 replies)

In Oregon, today, in a performing theater of all places, as I entered the vestibule of the women's restroom, some old lady said "are you sure this is the men's room? Wanna go check the sign once again?"

So that fucked with my whole day.

I thought I looked good, looked stylish. 13 years of HRT is not enough apparently.

There's pictures of me on my userinfo page.

TheFermentalist@reddthat.com · 5 pts · 132d (1 reply)

That picture of you is fucking stylish.

That is fucked up, and it’s absolutely shitty that you had to deal with that. My parents are the same sort of people. ( which is part of why I don’t talk to them).

You need to know: if it wasn’t this, they would still find a way to be cunts. Trans is seen as an easy target, particularly with the republicans in power. If it wasn’t this, there would be something.

This is the hard part: they want you to feel bad. It is their sole purpose in interacting with you. How you feel, only you have control over.

I tend to brutal rudeness when interacting with people like this, using language they don’t tolerate, and being personal about it.

That won’t work for everyone, and be mindful that law enforcement will back granny sour cunt over you, but be rude, be loud, embarrass them, because that’s what they are trying to do to you

backalleycoyote@lemmy.today · 4 pts · 132d

I live in Idaho and guarantee this will be used by chucklefucks to not only harass trans people, but cis women who don’t fit their standard of beauty and effeminate cis men. Not that they don’t already, but now they can really fuck with someone by calling the cops and disrupting the person’s day rather than just snide comments.

oxideseven@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 131d (1 reply)

"it's the women's, I'm a woman. Wanna go check it doesn't read "brainless muppet" you rotten hag?"

tanisnikana@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 131d

I am far too polite for that. I'm the sort that stands off to the side of the sidewalk when a bunch of people are walking in the opposite direction, and in a line abreast, and I wait patiently for them to go past. I'm the kind of person that does a quick bow when someone holds the door for me. I'm the kind of person who takes as little space as possible, and tries to be mindful of the harmony needed for society to move along.

thesingingsea@piefed.blahaj.zone · 2 pts · 132d

I don't want to be toxically positive but
Girl you are an icon! I love your fashion posts

fuck that lady

maplesaga@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 132d (6 replies)

What should the law be, everyone can use any washroom they want essentially, kind of a libertarian style system that removes all restrictions?

tanisnikana@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 132d (5 replies)

Just one restroom. Stalls with urinals, stalls with toilets, floor to ceiling doors on all of them, and a communal sink area. Mox Boarding House has my perfect public restroom. Exactly like that.

Soggy@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 132d (2 replies)

When you have the space for it sure, but urinal stalls seem like an exorbitant luxury 99% of the time I need to pee. I'm fine with a wall-to-wall stainless steel trough.

tanisnikana@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 132d (1 reply)

To give Mox credit in exorbitant luxury in bathrooms, there is a crystal chandelier over the sink, and no I’m not joking.

Soggy@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 131d

(Context for people not in the PNW, Mox Boarding House is a board game and card shop with an attached restaurant.)

maplesaga@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 132d (1 reply)

Why do you think we ever have different washrooms for men and women, what was their purpose for existing and how did they become so ubiquitous despite being an additional cost to businesses?

tanisnikana@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 132d

I don’t know, cis people are weird about that sort of thing. I just exist here.

WoodScientist@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 132d

I appreciate the thought here, but it's absurd to argue that passing "doesn't exist." Fine if you want to say it doesn't or shouldn't matter. Or that it gets too much focus placed on it. But to pretend passing simply doesn't exist? This is just gaslighting. Passing obviously does exist. It's specific definition would be "having an appearance that the vast majority of randomly selected people would say most resembles a gender other than that assigned to a person at birth." That's an objective fact. We can't just wish it away because it's inconvenient.

DarkFuture@lemmy.world · 32 pts · 132d

Remember when you could get in a car with your mother/wife/sister/girlfriend/daughter/neice/grandma/aunt and drive across the country and they'd have the same human rights from sea to shining sea and now they gain and lose basic human rights as they cross state borders?

Yeah, Republicans did that. They are traitors and the enemy of the American people.

BeardededSquidward@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 24 pts · 132d (6 replies)

If they're a myth, why make a law against a supposed myth? Oh, it's a talking point of you wanting to make them a myth. Republicans are a myth.

IamSparticles@lemmy.zip · 13 pts · 132d (5 replies)

I appreciate the sarcasm, but their actual "thought process" (yes, that belongs in quotes) goes something like this:

  • Real trans people don't exist.
  • Therefore, anyone claiming to be trans is either in need of mental healthcare to "fix" them, or else they are lying.
  • If they are lying, then their attempt to use an opposite gender bathroom means they must be doing so for reasons that put other people in danger.
  • In order to "protect" people from the lying liars, we need to make it illegal for someone to be in the "wrong" restroom.
village604@adultswim.fan · 7 pts · 132d (2 replies)

To put it simply, because they don't think trans people exist, a person using the wrong gendered bathroom is there to sexually assault people.

Because signs apparently stop rapists.

kent_eh@lemmy.ca · 6 pts · 132d

Which is weird, because people like them are statistically far more likely to commit sexual assault than trans people or drag Queens.

I guess it's yet another example of right wing projection.

IamSparticles@lemmy.zip · 2 pts · 132d

Exactly. And as we've already seen in some places, a passing trans person trying to use the "correct" bathroom according to law is more likely to get harassed or even assaulted as a result. These laws don't fix an actual problem, they just create an environment where innocent people will be punished for the crime of existing in a public space.

zalgotext@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 132d (1 reply)

Well, that's the explanation they give publicly. In reality, they just want to hurt and oppress people.

IamSparticles@lemmy.zip · 2 pts · 132d

Some do, probably, yes. Some actually believe in this chain of "logic". Those people really do believe that trans people are a threat to the safety of others. Odds are good those people have never talked to, or possibly even met, a trans person.

kyub@discuss.tchncs.de · 23 pts · 132d

Intelligence in Republicans is a Myth.

Taldan@lemmy.world · 21 pts · 132d

So many headlines over the past year are things I remember seeing out of China and Russia over the past decade

Russian politicians claim the same thing about gays. I believe it was in Chechnya

Furbag@lemmy.world · 19 pts · 131d (4 replies)

If they are passing legislation for things they believe are a myth, then when is the anti-bigfoot legislation coming? What about Chupacabra leash laws? Vampire curfew? Ghost noise ordinances?

My point is, I guess, that people typically don't pass laws against things they think aren't real in the first place.

Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 3 pts · 131d (2 replies)

what about the witches.

Asfalttikyntaja@sopuli.xyz · 3 pts · 131d (1 reply)

Witches are real.

Fedizen@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 131d

They killed Charlie Kirk

AdolfSchmitler@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 131d

Actually that sounds right up a politicians alley. Can't have Bigfoot protest cuz he's not real.

TwilitSky@lemmy.world · 17 pts · 132d (5 replies)

If trans people are a myth then the law is made up.

Beetschnapps@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 132d (4 replies)

My first thought! Okay they are a myth so what’s the point of your bill?

You legislating against Bigfoot?

No?

Soggy@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 132d (3 replies)

Washington has a law against hunting Bigfoot (but this is to keep people from shooting other people "accidentally" who may or may not be dressed as Bigfoot)

Beetschnapps@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 131d

pulsey@feddit.org · 1 pts · 131d (1 reply)

Would I be allowed to shoot people dressed as a deer?

Soggy@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 131d

"I thought that hairy, man-sized biped was a deer" is a lot less compelling as a legal defense.

partial_accumen@lemmy.world · 16 pts · 132d (1 reply)

I could see the vigilante justice response to this would be the theft of gender labeled bathroom signs. It then becomes a 50/50 gamble whether any human that needs to empty their bladder goes to prison for 5 years. Even just opening the door to see if there are urinals or stalls-only should run afoul of this law. Bonus points for activists following lawmakers that voted for this when the lawmaker needs to use a bathroom in an unfamiliar place.

BillCheddar@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 132d

The vigilante move is to protect your trans homies by taking out the cop who is trying to arrest someone for being fuckin trans.

Taldan@lemmy.world · 14 pts · 132d (2 replies)

Reading through the bill, they use the term "biological sex" without defining it

What amateurs are writing these laws? Not even defining terms? I get the vagueness of it is the point, but there are a lot of edge cases that will be in limbo from this

Angrydeuce@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 132d

AI, probably. Thats how they determined what grants to cut, after all.

emmy67@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 130d

Can't define something like that when they know it's subjective.

captainlezbian@lemmy.world · 13 pts · 131d

I just wish I was allowed to live as an equal in peace as I feel fit to live.

I hope each of those who voted this way never is able to use a public restroom again

KneeTitts@lemmy.world · 13 pts · 132d (2 replies)

How far away are we from gay people just being stoned to death in public in the US?

EmpathicVagrant@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 132d

Like, October?

cows_are_underrated@feddit.org · 2 pts · 131d

Trans people havent been stoned to death yet, so the gays still have some more time left.

BillCheddar@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 132d (7 replies)

IDK about y'all, but in that scenario, I'd just shoot the cop.

Dead cops can't arrest anyone, trans or not.

TractorDuffy@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 132d (6 replies)

We could compromise! Abolish the police. No one gets hurt that way!

BillCheddar@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 132d

I don't think "no one gets hurt" is an option in a state where Nazis have taken aim at a bloc of people.

These fucking fascists want to play with fire. They shouldn't expect to escape unburned.

Wataba@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 132d (4 replies)

And murderers magically vanish I suppose?

TractorDuffy@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 132d (3 replies)

If the police prevented murder no one would get arrested for it :)

Peruvian_Skies@sh.itjust.works · 0 pts · 131d (2 replies)

False dichotomy. Police prevents some murder, which is worse than preventing all of it but a lot better than preventing none of it.

TractorDuffy@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 131d (1 reply)

Incorrect. The police commit more murders than they prevent. Have a day.

Peruvian_Skies@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 131d

Where's your source?

robocall@lemmy.world · 11 pts · 131d

I'm questioning more often why gendered restrooms even exist.

andallthat@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 132d

I wouldn't want to go in an extreme bathroom anyway. Sounds gross.

If the law said I don't exists I would go and rob a bank instead.... Nobody would believe them

resipsaloquitur@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 132d

Another reason to avoid Idaho.

Not that I needed one.

Fredselfish@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 132d (12 replies)

How do they enforce this? Without checking people gentiles? I seen plenty of trans men that look more manly then me.

Nalivai@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 132d

The goal is not to have a proper rule, it's to hurt people, and to have additional thing they pin on people they hate.

resipsaloquitur@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 132d (5 replies)
WoodScientist@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 132d (4 replies)

And unlike most crimes, being "trans" is pretty ambiguous. Pretty soon cis women wearing pants will be called "transgender" and face persecution for not "respecting their birth sex." Same thing with any woman that wants to work a traditionally masculine career. A woman wanting to work as an engineer is now a "transgender freak" and shouldn't be subject to anti-discrimination law.

resipsaloquitur@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 131d (3 replies)

Antitrans is just the thin end of the wedge of A Handmaid’s Tale.

WoodScientist@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 131d (2 replies)

Anti-trans bigotry has always been an exercise in misogyny. In the mind of a Republican, women are inferior in every way to men. Men are stronger, faster, smarter, and deserve a superior social position. Even Republican women believe this. Trans men are seen as pitiable. It's only natural for someone to want to be the superior sex, but they are subject of infantilization and pity, as they can never achieve that goal. Trans women on the other hand are portrayed as dangerous and deviant sex fiends. They can't see why anyone would want to be a woman, as they view women as inherently inferior. So if someone wants to be a woman, they must be doing so for some vile degenerate reason.

resipsaloquitur@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 131d (1 reply)

I don’t disagree, but that doesn’t explain TERFs. I think there’s more than external or internalized misogyny there.

WoodScientist@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 131d

Oh, TERFS are the same. Deep down they also see women as inferior to men.

zalgotext@sh.itjust.works · 4 pts · 132d

Ah, see, you're making the mistake that most well-intentioned but naive people make - you're assuming these people need evidence to enforce their transphobic laws

samus12345@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 132d

Without checking people gentiles?

Oy vey!

WoodScientist@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 132d (2 replies)

And yet, you knew they were trans men. That's how the law will be enforced. Are you a trans guy who works somewhere and illegally uses the men's bathroom? All it takes is one bigoted coworker finding out you're trans, and they can then have you arrested. They may even be able to use your personally for thousands of dollars. So even if the police won't bother with such bullshit, they still may be able to attack their trans coworker. And ultimately, in a case like this with a bigoted employee suing a trans coworker, the employer would most likely just fire the trans person to make the problem go away.

Fredselfish@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 131d (1 reply)

No only said that by seeing pictures and people saying they are trans in person no. My son best friend is a trans man and until my son told me that I had no clue he wasn't a man at birth.

WoodScientist@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 131d

That's not what you said at all. Your comment said nothing about pictures. You asked how this would be enforced without doing genital inspections. Though, you misspelled genitals in lieu of a Biblical reference.

You asked how this would be enforced. I told you. Even if someone isn't visibly trans, the risk of being outed always exists. And you found out about your son's friend, just as bigots may learn that a stealth trans person is trans. People have digital records that follow them their entire lives. People gossip. It's impossible to truly hide your trans status in this day and age from someone who really wants to research it. And all it takes is one single bigot at your workplace to learn about you and to make your life hell.

Star@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 6 pts · 131d

They're gonna wish we were a myth soon.

bobzilla@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 131d

Wait... if trans people are a myth, doesn't that mean that anyone going into the women's restroom is a woman and anyone going into the men's restroom is a man?

Bluescluestoothpaste@sh.itjust.works · 5 pts · 132d

Idk i dont understand how real people that are alive ans you can talk to them are a myth. Like they're gonna throw myths in prison?? It makes zero sense.

Fedizen@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 131d

Seems cruel and unusual. Also does this mean a guy can't clean the women's bathroom and vice versa?

homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 132d

Thank dog the left can’t get their shit together to vote as a bloc.

(/s obvs)

vane@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 132d (1 reply)

Is it less punishing to throw shit and piss on government buildings ?

samus12345@sh.itjust.works · 4 pts · 132d

Yes. If the damage is less than $1000, it's a misdemeanor, which is up to a $1000 fine and a year in jail.

MehBlah@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 132d

These republicans are truly perverted. By every meaning of the word.

SethTaylor@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 132d

Does anyone know if this is less bad or worse than what they have in Russia ?

FreddyNO@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 131d (2 replies)

So sad...

Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 2 pts · 131d (1 reply)

the RIght wing of the world needs a new boogeyman for thier culture wars, right now its trans.

IronBird@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 131d

not really "new" in that respect, they were ome of the first groups demonized by the og nazis.

they're an easy Other to go after due to not really fitting in under anyone other umbrella