• spujb@lemmy.cafeOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    7 months ago

    here is an example. im not educated enough to know the specifics, but this would bar single occupancy gender neutral bathrooms in most cases except when the building is too small it seems.

    the fact that it is going to legislation at all is of course absurd and obviously just anti-woke posturing. if the government cares about “dignity and privacy” they’d ban communal bathrooms in the first place.

    • areyouevenreal@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      7 months ago

      Pretty sure it doesn’t ban single occupancy bathrooms. It bans multi-occupancy gender neutral bathrooms - like bathrooms with stalls that share the same set of sinks. Don’t get me wrong it’s still dumb, but not as bad as you are thinking.

      • spujb@lemmy.cafeOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        okay fair thanks for the correction. i think we can still both agree that it’s obviously just meant to antagonize people over a non-issue in order to maintain a culture war tho 👍

        edit: okay im reading through again and i think i was right? and they are banning both? i welcome the insight of others in interpreting this bc now im confused as hell

        As part of the regulations, contractors can construct “self-contained universal toilets” which the government said may only be constructed if a “lack of space reasonably precludes provision of single-sex toilet accommodation.”

        • areyouevenreal@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          7 months ago

          Oof okay I guess it’s worse than I thought. I swear they had some provision for non-binary people, but i guess they just hate queer people.

          I don’t agree with dismissing everything as a distraction. I think some conservatives legitimately do care about this stuff. I also don’t think people would suddenly turn anti-capitalist from just not having distractions. People are generally dumb as shit, and most the alternatives to capitalism are also shit because again people are dumb. If you are going to replace capitalism you need to come up with something that’s both actually better, explainable to the public, and overcome the baggage of all the experiments that failed.

          • spujb@lemmy.cafeOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            agree, but i don’t think i said anything about capitalism?

            if anything this is conservatives continuing to use the existence of trans people, less than 1% of the population, as leverage to fearmonger themselves into public approval. i wouldn’t call it a distraction as much as plain vanilla fascist oppression.

            • areyouevenreal@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              7 months ago

              Normally when people talk about maintaining culture war they are talking about it being a distraction from the problems created by rich people and capitalism. It’s the same people who say “no war but class war”. Same guys who call conservatives fascists.

              Are you telling me you aren’t an anti-capitalist?

              • spujb@lemmy.cafeOP
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                7 months ago

                no i definitely am an anti capitalist lol. this conversation is beyond my education level maybe.

    • friend_of_satan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      What the ever living fuck? Why? For what good?

      Will British Airways be required to have separate toilets for men and women on their planes? If not, what is the reason for the inconsistency? If it’s allowed on an airplane, why is it not allowed on the ground?

      • spujb@lemmy.cafeOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        they won’t change it on airplanes obviously

        the reason for the proposed legislation is literally just to capitalize off fearmongering. conservatives have successfully built a fucked up narrative that gender neutral=trans and that trans=rape, and so now they can pass bogus legislation that just inconveniences people in order to maintain power.

    • Miaou@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Some would argue offering women a man-free bathroom is feminism, YMMV