When Is A Gender Neutral Bathroom Not Neutral?

By Jonathan Goldstein

Chris Murphy spoke at a Town hall at Westhill High School in Stamford on Friday night to a room filled with almost a thousand supporters, and less than a handful of those who disagreed with the Senator and his form of governance.

The event was promoted by Indivisible Stamford, which is part of the Indivisible network that has been popping up at Tesla Takedown protests throughout the country to embolden Democrats who are disgruntled with the November election results.

The Town Hall was a spectacle in the name of DEI, but the majority of the demographic was mostly white senior citizens (with more women than men), a sprinkling of progressive youth and representation from the local democrat party in Stamford and Greenwich.

The two gender neutral bathrooms outside the auditorium provided a source of humor all night long.

I was taken aback reading the gender neutral sign, noting two gendered figures specific to men and women, but missing the combined third icon symbolic of gender fluidity or simply the "all gender" sign without icons, the most inclusive sign.

I walked into a bathroom that contained two urinals—which are gender specific restroom devices—and one stall, which is gender neutral as toilets are universal.

I was more upset that the sign only had the handicap symbol and was missing the braille required underneath to comply with the Americans With Disability Act (ADA). This was truly not an inclusive sign.

As I used one of the urinals, multiple women came in and apologized for disturbing my stream. I simply laughed and attempted to add some levity to the absurdity of this particular bathroom, which contained only one working stall and no door at the entrance to the bathroom. A woman popped out of the stall and apologized as well.

This happened throughout the night, so I was easily able to capture the mass confusion and hysteria associated with women, especially, being concerned, confused or taken aback by sharing a bathroom with those who identify as male.

The “conservatives” in attendance felt comfortable using the facilities, but the progressives who pushed for this inclusive facility seemed entirely confused and uncomfortable.

We are the same group of conservatives that do not object to females using male restrooms at stadiums when the lines to the women's rooms are too long. To quote from a Bronx Tale, “nobody cares” or at least we don’t unless you try to give a male child a tampon with no place to put it.

I have no objections to gender-neutral single-occupancy bathrooms, and many public places have done an amazing job to create communal and private gender-neutral water closets with shared sinks that do not cause hysteria, concern, or result in numerous apologies. WC is gender neutral, with no symbol needed, and it is how it’s referred to when a bathroom is filed on building plans.

In those WC locations, there is no feeling of being threatened or triggered or intimidated or insecure by the use of such facilities, especially those who suffer from paruresis, a type of social anxiety disorder where people find it difficult or impossible to urinate when they are in the presence of others, like in a public restroom. It's often referred to as "shy bladder syndrome" or "bashful bladder". I don’t think children or adults should leave a restroom and then need a mental health consult for a disorder that can be prevented by common sense or single-occupancy facilities.

More importantly, there’s nothing neutral about a bathroom that contains urinals as the primary waste capturing device—a device that is only for those assigned male at birth.

While I could not ascertain the price of Westhill's signage, I do know that Yale University spent $7,000 to put "all gender" signs in 23 buildings in 2015, and they probably spent less as a private institution.

If you want to have a gender neutral bathroom, take a lesson from our progressive New York neighbors that originated these policies. They got it right four years ago. For schools, all single-occupancy bathroom facilities must be designated as gender neutral and “for use by no more than one occupant at a time or for family or assisted use.”

We can’t even copy our neighbors right -- this was not a single-occupancy bathroom.

Had I turned to zip up while a woman walked in, she probably would have screamed and the three police officers would have charged me with Public Indecency, a Class B misdemeanor.

If it was a single-occupancy facility, then we probably wouldn’t object to tampons either. Tampons are unnecessary where urinals are present, except when it’s one of those single occupancy bathrooms with both a toilet and a urinal to keep men from missing the target and hitting the seat.

What further concerns me is: what if it had been a school assembly instead of Murphy's Town Hall?

And what if I was a male teacher using that urinal and turned to “zip-up” just as a female student walked into the bathroom. It would make the nightly news, and the teacher would likely be fired or suspended, even if his political views were progressive!

The law of unintended consequences has to be revisited here.

My progressive friends, pretty please rethink your policies, as you are often the ones most affected by them.

You can follow Jonathan Goldstein on X at https://x.com/JGoldstein81.

Originally posted at When Is A Gender Neutral Bathroom Not Neutral? - Connecticut Centinal

Thank you for your continued support. Please subscribe and spread the word as we need your support to grow this message

Dr. Michael Goldstein & Jonathan Goldstein

The father-son team continues on so please spread the word and lets really rebuild CT together in a meaningful way.

Please subscribe and support.