• samus12345@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 days ago

    Johnathan Gooch, communications director for Equality Texas, told the Texas Tribune, “It’s a very aggressive way to alienate trans people from public life, and I think it is counter to the spirit of friendship that most Texans embody.”

  • unphazed@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    7 days ago

    Cool, they got a useless law to “protect” children. Where is the law that protects them in churches/camps/etc?

    • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      7 days ago

      Why would they do that? These laws are there to convince ma and pa dipshit that child predators are trans people not a group that’s not open or openly or formally organized and consists of people in all strata of society. In short these laws are to protect the pedos in power from suspicion

  • jagged_circle@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    statutory damages in an amount of not less than $10,000

    Fuck, its a minimum fine of $10,000 every time you have to pee. Wtf

    • iamtrashman1312@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      7 days ago

      Out of curiosity what’s their fine for regular public indecency, like, urinating in an alley? I’d imagine it’s literally cheaper for a trans person there to piss on the side of city hall than it is a regular god damn restroom

      What an awful little shitville

      • vxx@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        6 days ago

        Maybe that’s their plan, to get trans people on the sex offender list because they peed in public.

        I think it’s illegal in some countries to deny someone to pee.

      • tb_@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        6 days ago

        The penalties for peeing in public in Texas can range from fines of up to $500 to facing charges that might lead to community service or even a short jail term, depending on the circumstances and whether other offenses are involved. The variance in these penalties is due to factors such as the offender’s intent, location of the act, prior offenses, and any additional disruptive behavior associated with the incident.

        https://1800lionlaw.com/is-peeing-in-public-illegal-in-texas/

        That said, baring yourself in some alley may expose you to dangers other than the cops.

      • Jumpingspiderman@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 days ago

        When I lived in Texas, urinating in public was a potential misdemeanor crime, but was also a affirmative defense against public indecency. One of the few statutes in Texas that actually made sense.

    • ✺roguetrick✺@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      7 days ago

      Actually the fine is $500 at most. This is a guaranteed civil court payout, on top of any “damages” someone may receive. And since this is civil court, you operate on preponderance of evidence instead of beyond a reasonable doubt.

      This sort of legislated punitive damages is what should be happening for instances of wage theft, but instead we’re using it for harassing trans people while wage theft tends to have few if any punitive damages and mostly amounts to “ok, now give them their paycheck.”

            • Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              7 days ago

              The bounty itself reads that any person besides local and state government officials may sue a trans person using the restroom that aligns with their gender, with payments including “injunctive relief sufficient to prevent the defendant from violating the provisions of this ordinance; nominal and compensatory damages if the plaintiff has suffered injury or harm from the defendant’s conduct; statutory damages in an amount of not less than $10,000 for each violation of this ordinance; and court costs and reasonable attorney’s fees.”

              As with the abortion bans, the “”“criminal”“” themselves has to pay.

            • ✺roguetrick✺@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              6 days ago

              So it’s the person you’re suing. Essentially, it’s a civil case like a car accident, but you’re suing someone for going into the wrong bathroom. You’re guaranteed a $10k judgement but can get more for “emotional damages” if the judge is a particular bigot.

              Edit: it also means you can blackmail a trans person for a settlement and that’s legal too, since the threat isn’t so much the criminal fine but the civil one

  • IamSparticles@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    6 days ago

    The bounty defines biological sex based on birth certificates, either at the time of birth or corrected if there was a clerical error.

    What if you were born intersex? The story talks about the lack of provisions for disabled persons. There are so many holes in this ordinance. It is so going to get thrown out in court.

    • FenrirIII@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      7 days ago

      I live in TX and see lots of trans people living their lives. It’s a much more purple area though, but we still have a lot of crazies

      • dandelion@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        7 days ago

        Yes, lots of trans people live in Texas and Florida, that’s exactly what is terrifying about these laws - there are real victims.

    • samus12345@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      7 days ago

      Oh, last time I saw only Florida had that dubious distinction. They’ve been busy. It’s infuriating what a shithole a large portion of this country has become.

    • grysbok@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      I have a trans teenage cousin in Texas. We’re not close, but I worry. All I can really do is let him and his mom know I exist in a “safe” state and hope they reach out if they decide to leave.

  • Ragdoll X@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    157
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    Despite what the law might say, there’s no evidence whatsoever that letting trans people use their preferred bathroom causes any “injury or harm” to cis people.

    To the contrary, there is evidence that restricting bathroom access is harmful to trans people - and cis people too, like Jay, a cis woman who was harassed in a bathroom after being mistaken for a trans person.

    Even if they use the “right” restroom trans people are in danger of being harassed all the same if they pass too well: https://www.advocate.com/news/2022/7/12/trans-man-brutally-assaulted-using-womens-restroom-campground

    Damned if you do, and damned if you don’t. The point of laws like this isn’t to protect cis women and girls, it’s just to cause as much suffering as possible, because that’s all Republicans care about.

    • valek879@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      45
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 days ago

      Also there is evidence that it is harmful to cis people. Especially cis women who might be queer or straight or gender nonconforming or not. These fuckwads always forget trans men exist and just harass women more with this shit. They don’t give a fuck off you’re trans or not, it’s about control. And their especially interested in controlling women.

      It’s also directly tied to fascism. Eco points to Machismo in point 12 of Ur-Fascism. “[Fascists hold] both disdain for women and intolerance and condemnation of nonstandard sexual habits, from chastity to homosexuality.” Meaning it’s not just women, trans women, gay men, people outside of traditional 1940s gender roles, but it also includes straight, cis men who just don’t seem to be straight and cis enough.

    • floofloof@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      harmful to trans people.

      And there’s the true intent of the Republican legislators.

    • Empricorn@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      7 days ago

      What, we’re supposed to let them use the restroom that matches their identity just because it’s the moral right thing to do, costs us nothing, and the alternative harms everyone!? Sounds like someone is WOKE!!!

    • Sir_Kevin@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      Despite what the law might say, there’s no evidence whatsoever that letting trans people use their preferred bathroom causes any “injury or harm” to cis people.

      Can confirm: Having shared many a bathroom with trans folks and I have managed to survive unharmed. Who would have thunk?

      • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 days ago

        Can confirm: have no idea if I’ve ever shared a bathroom with a trans person because I am there to go to the bathroom, not interact with strangers.

      • BruceTwarzen@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 days ago

        I was once in a public bathroom. Just when i was about to wash my hands, a women walked in. I was shocked, i looked around and saw that there were urinals, so the lady was in the wrong bathroom, not me. We laughed and then we both left. That was i close one, i tell you.

  • horse_battery_staple@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    84
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    Trans identity supersedes all law, or medical context, or any other bullshit justification for dehumanizing anyone experiencing any form of Gender Dysphoria.

    You as a person reading this have value. Just by your very sentience you have worth. You are loved.

    We will overcome this moment in our history eventually, we may not all live to see it happen but we will. I know that’s an atom of relief in a sea of pain. Don’t let this bullshit dim your shine.

    I love each and every one of you.

    • chaitae3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      I was about to ask, what’s with the privacy policy of that site? How can a website that focuses on an oppressed minority be so shitty about their personal data?

      I’m not telling your community what to do, but this seems very unsafe und unwise to use.

  • JonEFive@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    57
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    7 days ago

    Some of us remember the coed bathroom featured on the hit 90s show Ally McBeal. It seemed like a progressive but not so far fetched idea at the time. So WTF are we doing still arguing about this 25 years later? These bathroom nazis need to get a grip.

    • Blaster M@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      The real answer. Skip the whole gender thing if it’s an issue. Certainly public restrooms being ungendered entirely won’t be a problem, who knows why we have it this way…

      • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 days ago

        who knows why we have it this way…

        The answer is sexism. When women started to enter the workforce there was concern that they would get “overwhelmed”, so gendered bathrooms were created to give them a space they could go to that feels like the home.

          • yeather@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            7 days ago

            No, bathrooms are a fairly modern invention that evolved from outhouses, which are gender neutral, or chamberpots, which are generally made specifically for one person. The invention of the modern bathroom with indoor plumbing came about in large, male only factories, and then a new environment, the restaraunt.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      Agreed. I’ve never cared what the person who uses my bathroom at home has between their legs. Why should I care in a public bathroom?

    • Rob T Firefly@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      7 days ago

      Each and every one of those fuckers looks like they’re in a retail store about to demand to speak to someone’s manager.