From: phil@netcom.com (Phil Ronzone)
Newsgroups: ba.politics
Subject: Re: Why Do We Have Separate Restrooms? (WAS Re: Gays, the military...)
Date: 2 Jan 93 10:02:13 GMT
Organization: Generally in favor of, but mostly random.


In article <105795@bu.edu> kane@buast7.bu.edu (Hot Young Star) writes:
    >>O.K. then, do you, or do you not, think that seperate
    >>facilities for women and men (communal sleeping showering,
    >>shitting) is justified? If it IS justified, then why?
    >>
    >Well, admittedly it does go against engrained traditions, but
    >we've seen that co-ed dorms can exist peacefully at
    >universities, and even co-ed showers. So it IS possible. Sort
    >of like nudists becoming accustomed to the sight of other
    >people naked. Nudity and sex are very much conflated in our
    >society.

No, no, no! I'm not talking about VOLUNTARY choices that people make, like
selecting a coed dorm or going to a nudist camp. Right now, tonight, all
bathrooms, showers, etc. are unisex.

Newsgroups: ba.politics
Subject: Re: Why Do We Have Separate Restrooms? (WAS Re: Gays, the military...)
Summary: 
Expires: 
Followup-To: 
Distribution: 
Organization: Generally in favor of, but mostly random.
Keywords: 

In article <105795@bu.edu> kane@buast7.bu.edu (Hot Young Star) writes:
    >>O.K. then, do you, or do you not, think that seperate
    >>facilities for women and men (communal sleeping showering,
    >>shitting) is justified? If it IS justified, then why?
    >>
    >Well, admittedly it does go against engrained traditions, but
    >we've seen that co-ed dorms can exist peacefully at
    >universities, and even co-ed showers. So it IS possible. Sort
    >of like nudists becoming accustomed to the sight of other
    >people naked. Nudity and sex are very much conflated in our
    >society.

No, no, no! I'm not talking about VOLUNTARY choices that people make, like
selecting a coed dorm or going to a nudist camp. Right now, tonight, all
bathrooms, showers, etc. are unisex.

I think a lot of people would get upset, don't you?

If you still can agree, then let's just ask this one:

What if we just made the military facilities unisex? The typical showeroom
is now male/female. No cubicles, no privacy, just all in one.

Do you think women and men in the military would like that?

    >>Why can women have seperate facilities from <people sexually
    >>attracted to them> but men can not?
    >>
    >Practically speaking, women are much less accustomed to male
    >nudity than other men are, and this is why we see so few
    >cases of male-male sexual harassment.
    >
    >>Or how about, just for you :-), all your changing rooms in
    >>clothing stores are glass enclosed? If it would bother you,
    >>why?
    >>
    >Of course. It wouldn't bother me more that women were seeing
    >me than men---the root of nakedness-anxiety is that the
    >spectators are strangers and are clothed. We are at ease with
    >nudity only if the majority of others are naked in our
    >presence.

So you DO accept the concept of a sexual context then?

But, by your reasoning, you have no argument -- it is illogical for you to
have this anxiety -- after all, nobody is going to rape you, everybody is an
adult and knows what you have, and so on.

But of course, you and most of us DO have this anxiety (except for that wacko
in Berkeley), illogical as it is.

And thus we come around once again to, yes, you guessed, Pursuit Of Happiness,
FOA, and "all happiness is subjective".

What makes you, me, him, her, happy is all different, very subjective, and on
the face of it, very illogical at times. But, it is our RIGHT to be that way.

Want to be illogical? Want to join a crazy church? Want to walk naked in
Berkeley? Or wear a veil and full gowns all the time? Go ahead.

But, if you want these freedoms, you have to give them in turn. And yes,
that means that the landlord can refuse to rent to homosexuals "just
because".



However, the coercive State must be blind. And, as you nearly hit the nail on
the head, our "cultural norms" are also very subjective. Although they
may be almost arbitary in origins, they, like the arbitary choice of
which side of the road to drive on, are EXTREMELY important to adhere to.

We segregate our sexual context in almost ALL areas. Some places, such as
Japan, segregate less (as in public baths), but seem to be changing to more
our "ways".

Homosexuality is a sexual context -- ask any straight man that has walked into
a homosexual bar without knowing it -- and most men do NOT want to be part of
that sexual context.



-- 
I believe Gennifer Flowers.

These opinions are MINE, and you can't have 'em! (But I'll rent 'em cheap ...)
Newsgroups: ba.politics