![](https://uploads.ovarit.com/26df759b-7dc1-57ac-b3d5-de5cbc1061f9.jpg)
The U.S. Education Department said Tuesday it was investigating Denver Public Schools for alleged discrimination after the district converted a girl’s restroom on the second floor of a high school into an all-gender restroom while leaving another bathroom exclusive to boys.
The department’s accusation that the move may violate of Title IX, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex, appears to be unprecedented, and it marks a sharp departure from the department’s investigations under former President Joe Biden.
Brett Sokolow, the president of the Association of Title IX Administrators, said that questions about the restroom have not yet been tested.
“They are arguing that an all-gender restroom isn’t comparable to a single-gender restroom,” Sokolow said. “You’d have to establish that somehow you have a right to a single-sex bathroom, and while the Trump administration may believe that, I don’t know if that will be upheld by the courts.”
This Title IX administrator doesn't understand the law. Title IX says that US schools and education programs that receive federal funds can't treat the two sexes in a disparate way that results in students of one sex having less opportunity and fewer facilites than students of the other sex.
Making the girls' restrooms mixed-sex whilst leaving the corresnponding boys' restroom single-sex treats male students more favorably than females students. This setup means girls have less access to single-sex restroom facilities than boys do, and the school is providing girls with less privacy, dignity, respect and accommodation of their needs than the school is giving to both bog-standard boys and students who say they have a trans identity.
To accommodate trans-identified students, female students at this school are being forced to contend with invconveniences, discomfort, disadvantage, safety risks and hygiene problems that male students aren't being saddled with. Male students aren't being forced to make any sacrifices for the sake of "trans." All the burden of "be kind" is placed on female students.
“This restroom serves all students, including those who may feel uncomfortable in gender-specific facilities and aligns with our values of supporting every student,” said Scott Pribble, a spokesperson for Denver Public Schools. He added that East High School also has restrooms for male and female students.
But this restroom does not really serve all students. It serves only those students who prefer a mixed-sex restroom. More to the point: this school now has more single-sex restrooms for male students than for female students. School adminstrators decided to remove one of the female-only restrooms whilst leaving all the male-only restrooms standing.
The biological differences between teenage males and females mean that girls in high school have more physical reasons such as menstruation, UTIs and sometimes issues related to pregnancy that often cause them to need to use a toilet and washroom whilst at school more frequently and urgently than male students do. What's more, it takes adolescent girls longer to tend to their bodily functions in toilets than it takes adolescent boys to tend to theirs, and girls have more need for privacy when using restrooms, whether to urinate or deal with matters like menstruation. For these and other reasons, it should be obvious that if/when school admins decide it's best to remove/convert only one single-sex restroom to accommodate "trans," then the single-sex loo that gets canned and made mixed-sex should be a boys' restroom. [Though I personally am against reducing the number of single-sex restroom options for students of either sex.]
Male students aren't being forced to make any sacrifices for the sake of "trans." All the burden of "be kind" is placed on female students.
Surprise sur-fucking-prise.
Not only that. It violates the religious freedom of girls who cannot share intimate facilities with males due to their faith. And it forces them to adhere to the gender religion's dogma that a penis person can have a girl soul that overrides his biological sex
No matter how many girls bathrooms there are, boys who pretend to think they are girls, or are "NB", will still invade the spaces. That's the point. They are asserting dominance.
The problem is the delusion and permission that boys can claim to be girls.
Yep. I go to a community centre (big suburb in Tranada) for aquafit. There are 4 changerooms. Two are attached to the pool area and two are across the hall attached to the basketball courts.
The two attached to the pool are BOTH "universal" changerooms.
What this means is there are now THREE men's changerooms, and only one women's, which is across a freezing cold hallway from the pool. There's always a trail of girls and women across that hallway, dripping wet and shivering from the pool, because it's not safe in the universal ones.
It's so obvious that universal equals men.
That's the point. They are asserting dominance.
Exactly.
“We just want to pee”. No, they want to mark “their territory”, like other male animals do. It’s why they threw hissy fits when people suggested creating a third bathroom for them as a compromise (which I’m not a fan of personally since it’ll just become an extra men’s restroom). They don’t want compromise, they want access to female-only spaces so they can invade, conquer, and dominate them.
Archive: https://archive.ph/FpIUU
The U.S. Education Department said Tuesday it was investigating Denver Public Schools for alleged discrimination after the district converted a girl’s restroom on the second floor of a high school into an all-gender restroom while leaving another bathroom exclusive to boys.
Well, this is an interesting way to tackle it bc we all know what group this movement displaces. My guess is there will be two all gender on the second floor soon. The madness needs to stop.
Yes, it's always the women's/girls' rooms that become "all-gender," while the men's/boys'/ rooms are allowed to stay as they are, effectively turning both bathrooms into men's/boys rooms. Maybe they'll convert the boys' room, too, but it won't really change anything. Girls are going to avoid any bathroom boys are allowed in.
Side note: my mother, who died two years ago, attended East High School (the school pictured in the article) in the early 1940s, and I can just imagine what she'd have to say about this.
Having a mixed-sex toilet facility seems to contradict Colorado's state code. But Colorado state law itself is contradictory:
A minimum of one (1) sink and one (1) flush toilet must be provided for each fifteen (15) or fewer children.
The same toilet facilities must not be used simultaneously by school-age children of all genders
School-age children must be allowed the use of toilet facilities that correspond with their gender identity.
I have no issue with them creating an all gender bathroom so long as there are an equal number of single sex boys and girls bathrooms. If they wanted to alternate floors and convert a girls bathroom on one floor and a boys bathroom on another or combine a boys and girls bathroom on one floor and make it "all gender" (depending on the school's floorplan) go for it. Just don't take away more from girls than boys. There aren't a lot of teenage boys who want to be standing at a urinal and have an NB girl walk into the bathroom.
I don't know about this. See my other comment about my community centre. We have one men's, one womens and two universal changerooms. Those two are the ones attached to the pool.
What this has meant in practice is there are three men's and one women's, and a constant trail of freezing cold, dripping wet, women and girls making a beeline through the hallway from the pool to the only women's changeroom.
It would be the same in school, the universal or all-gender is effectively an extra boys' washroom.
It would be more fair if they had changed one of the unattached changing rooms into a "universal", and since it is primarily women who are concerned about having women-only spaces, I truly cannot fathom how they can rationalize that they don't make the men's room into the universal room.
If your example had one women's, one neutral on the side that was less preferred, and then the men's/ women's still attached to the pool, that would serve everyone. Even the gender neutral people would have to see that as fair since they consistently say it's 'less than 1% of the population' - so the vast majority of people don't have a need to go into a neutral space, but it's there for anyone who wants it, who's going with a friend or just wants to be part of a crowd - and then there are two spaces for women and the more convenient one for males is left male-only.
No. We shouldn't coddle this nonsense at all. Constructing new bathrooms is no easy task (especially in older buildings). And even if you could magic gender-neutral toilets into existence, the TIMs will still want to colonize the girls' spaces
When men stand to pee, their pee splatters right in front of the toilet where women place their feet. You can expect the all gender restrooms in ptown to have a literal puddle of piss to step in on your way to the toilet seat from experience.
It's unhygienic to share, it spreads urine and only women are burdened by it because of our anatomy.
Have also been a housekeeper and I can tell in one second if there's a bathroom the husband uses but the wife doesn't go in because again, piss everywhere usually including on the walls
Oh my god. I had a male friend and he was a bachelor. I had to ask him before going over to his apartment if he'd cleaned his bathroom because there would be pee drops on the floor.
From my old job, the fucking guest bathroom sink is a favorite place for certain men to pee. Like more than just a few. Pee splatter approaching eye level
Why go to all that trouble? I think an "all gender" restroom in schools is just asking for trouble
This is how our middle school dealt with it. In fact, they had a small bathroom in an odd location that was used primarily for visitors. They changed it to 'gender neutral' (it has one stall, one sink, so it's truly small for a large urban school) and left everything else the same. The principal who did this is not a TRA but she is in a district that is very progressive and I'm sure she did this as self-preservation and also to stop any questions before they were asked (she did this pre-COVID).
Unfortunately, in a lot of US states making a single-user restroom at a school "gender neutral" isn't enough to comply with the state law and the ridiculous demands of the extremely powerful and litigation-happy gender identity lobby.
In "blue" states like mine, schools can offer a single-user restroom and changing room as an extra option to students who say they have a trans, nonbinary and other "gender diverse" identity. Schools can also create and offer additional "gender neutral" communal restrooms and locker rooms whilst keeping separate single-sex communal ones for males and females. But schools can't require that students who claim to have special gender identities use those spaces. Rather, schools must allow any student who says they have a special gender identity to use whichever single-sex facilities the supposedly gender special students feel (or say they feel) best fits with their claimed gender identity at any given time.
The official guidance from my state's Department of Education says:
Title IX permits school districts to provide single-sex restrooms, locker rooms, shower facilities, and athletic teams so long as both sexes are treated equitably.
Nonetheless, while a school may provide single-sex restroom and locker facilities, under Title IX and [state law A] all students must be allowed to access those facilities that correspond to their gender identity.
Furthermore, courts have held that district or school policies that prohibit gender-diverse students from using bathrooms that are consistent with their gender identity serve no substantial public interest and violate both Title IX and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Similarly, such a prohibition would likely be held to violate [name of state] law, specifically [statute A].
In simple terms, just as cisgender males and females must be allowed to use facilities that comport with their respective gender identities, so too must gender-diverse students be allowed to use facilities that align with their individual gender identities.
In keeping, then, with both federal and [name of state] law, schools cannot require that gender-diverse students use facilities that are inconsistent with their gender identity.
schools cannot compel gender-diverse students to use individual-user facilities when other students are not required to do so, regardless of whether other students, parents, guardians, district staff, or community members raise objections.
Although students cannot be required to use suchalternatives, if either a cisgender or gender-diverse student requests a private bathroom or changing option for themselves, schools should provide one. This can be in the form of a single stall “unisex” restroom or the health office restroom. Similarly, in locker rooms,additional privacy may be provided to a student requesting such privacy through various options, which include: private changing areas such as a curtained changing room or a bathroom stall with a door; a private changing area within the public area of the locker room; a separate changing schedule; or use of a nearby private area. These options, however, cannot be forced upon a student.
Schools’ Obligations under State and Federal Laws: Establishing Gender Identity
Documentation Not Required: Neither federal nor [name of state] law requires students to produce identification documents for the school to acknowledge their gender identity or expression. Requiring such identification — which students are often unable to obtain — could have the practical effect of limiting or denying students equal access to educational programming and activities, including, but not limited to, athletics. Furthermore, except as is discussed in the section of this guidance pertaining to educational records, notice from a parent or guardian is not required in order for a school to recognize the student’s gender identity or expression.
Consistency of Gender Identity and Expression Not Required: While consistency and uniform assertion may be a way for individuals to indicate their gender identity, neither federal nor [name of state] law requires that individuals consistently and uniformly assert or express a particular identity. Students who identify as gender fluid may express that in ways that conform with more than one gender, even from one day to the next.
Regardless of how "gender diverse" students say they identify and how often they change their identity labels, my state says that
school districts should strive to ensure that their schools are “safe spaces,” in which gender-diverse students feel welcome and supported.
The obligation of school districts and schools to provide gender-diverse students with equal access to all educational programs and activities [including single-sex facilities and programs for the opposite sex] applies irrespective of concerns or objections raised by other students, parents, staff, or community members.
the discomfort of others is not a permissible basis for failing to accommodate an individual’s gender identity or expression
I kid you not, this is exactly what the official guidance from my state's Department of Education says.
“ The obligation of school districts and schools to provide gender-diverse students… applies irrespective of concerns or objections raised by other students, parents, staff, or community members. the discomfort of others is not a permissible basis for failing to accommodate an individual’s gender identity or expression”
What?! That’s insane.
Yeah, a lot depends on the layout, but it can be possible to fit in a gender neutral option without making everything a mess. It's supposedly only meant to serve a small portion of the population anyway, so it doesn't have to be particularly convenient, and since women are the ones who consistently ask that their bathrooms not be invaded, it is obvious that if a gender-specific bathroom has to be turned neutral, it should be one of the men's rooms.
Has the problem been that most men's rooms have urinals and no one wants that in a neutral space? But if there are gender-mixed people with penises - or even, with catheters to help them pee standing up - then shouldn't having urinals be acceptable? If it's not, maybe gender neutral wasn't such a good idea after all...? I really don't understand how they can argue that women's bathrooms be the ones to be sacrificed.
I used to be one of those "well, all gender bathrooms are okay if it's only one person at a time." Then I visited Trader Joe's, and the bathroom was literally unusable because there was so much piss on the ground.
Plus, that gives men a way to stick cameras and audio recorders and shit in there which is why in Japanese men are no longer allowed to have silent phone cameras. Now I'm firmly in the sex segregation only camp.
Those single use bathrooms are a godsend to people who are disabled and need extra space and privacy when using the toilet. Not to mention people caring for disabled adults or young kids who need assistance using toilet or changing a diaper
But, of course, men are ruining it for everyone
I'm pretty sure every women's-only restroom has at least one large stall.
Yes. But large stalls don't offer the same privacy and space as a single use bathroom. Especially if the disabled person uses a wheelchair, needs to use the sink to get cleaned up, or if the caregiver and the disabled adult are different sexes (I've run into this problem when assisting my father on outings)
Exactly. Sometimes new depends are needed, or catheter leg bags need emptying. Far less privacy in a large stall.
Exactly. When I originally heard of men in women's spaces, like bathrooms, it made so much sense to me. It was just common sense. So what if they weren't technically women in every single way? That was nitpicking. Rhubarb isn't a fruit. But people make desserts with it. Tomatoes are a fruit, but you don't put them in a fruit salad. Common sense, right?
But then I realized (after it was pointed out to me) that men put spy cams in women's bathrooms. Is every man going to do that? No. Are men going to do it even if you block them from using the facilities, for example a male janitor needing to clean the facility could do it? Sure. But it puts it on a different level when any man can just walk in at any time and you can't question or block them. And it's not just spy-cams either. Men can just walk in and loiter. Hang out, in a stall. Quietly starting and stopping to masturbate, because they want to make women uncomfortable or because they just can. Men walk up to women and start masturbating on the sidewalk. So to think that they aren't going to take the opportunity to do the same in a women's bathroom is more than naive, it's willfully delusional.
But, y'know, as my handmaiden friend explained to me last week, sex-segregated spaces are due to fear-mongering.
Maybe she's right. I remember a few years ago I was in a park and some guy was fear-mongering on the pathway. I told him to put his fear-monger away and he shook it at me like a weapon.
Anyhow, be kind!
Wait, what?!
Yeah, it's awful. The article called Why You Can’t Disable the Shutter Sound on Japanese Phones on Tokyo Weekender gives the best explanation, although they kind of sugar coat it by saying it's against citizen rights to not know when they're being photographed without consent.
The real reason it escalated to this point is that men were taking upskirt pictures of schoolgirls and other women and hiding their phones in bathrooms.