Bathroom Battleground: The Fight for Human Rights and Dignity

Do you need to use the bathroom? Better have your ID ready. Does that sound absurd? Just wait—it might become reality sooner than you think. And it won’t just affect trans women, either. It’s likely to impact any woman who doesn’t fit narrow definitions of femininity.

The controversy surrounding bathrooms has become a flashpoint in a broader wave of discrimination, particularly against transgender people. But make no mistake: this isn’t just a “trans issue.” The policing of bathrooms threatens all women. History tells us that women who don’t conform to societal expectations of femininity—those who are tall, broad-shouldered, muscular, or simply “too different”—are often targeted in these battles. In fact, bathroom policing is just one chapter in a long history of scrutinizing women’s bodies to enforce arbitrary standards of identity and worth.

A Broader Threat to Women

Let’s start with the reality of who will be affected by bathroom restrictions. Trans women make up less than 0.5 percent of the population, meaning they are a small and vulnerable group. But any policy targeting them will inevitably affect cisgender women who don’t fit societal norms. Imagine being a woman with short hair, no makeup, or a naturally deeper voice. These are innocuous traits, yet under a system of bathroom policing, they could make you a target for harassment or forced “proof” of your gender. The fear isn’t hypothetical; it’s already happening.

For example, consider Mack Beggs, a transgender high school wrestler from Texas who made headlines in 2017 and 2018. As a trans man, Beggs was forced to compete in the girls’ division due to Texas regulations requiring athletes to participate according to the gender on their birth certificate. His success on the mat sparked national controversy, with opponents and critics accusing him of having an unfair advantage. The scrutiny Beggs faced wasn’t limited to his identity as a trans athlete—it reflected a broader discomfort with anyone who challenges traditional gender norms.

The uproar surrounding Beggs highlights how easily society’s rigid expectations of gender can spill over into policing all women. If we allow these policies to take hold, every woman risks being seen as suspicious for not looking "feminine enough."

History Repeating Itself: Women in the Olympics

This isn’t the first time women’s bodies have been subjected to invasive policing. At one point, women competing in the Olympics were required to submit to strip searches to "prove" their biological sex. These humiliating procedures weren’t about fairness; they were about enforcing narrow definitions of womanhood. The same dynamics are at play in today’s bathroom wars. It’s not just about trans women. It’s about all women being forced to fit into restrictive boxes—or face exclusion.

The Olympic example also underscores how these policies perpetuate broader cultural myths. The myth of the “fraudulent” woman—whether a trans woman or a cisgender woman who doesn’t meet expectations—serves to undermine women’s agency and participation in public life. Today’s bathroom debates carry that same harmful legacy.

Bathrooms as a Battleground

Bathrooms, while seemingly mundane, hold profound importance in this struggle. Access to bathrooms is about more than just convenience; it’s about dignity, safety, and the ability to exist in public spaces. Denying bathroom access creates barriers to employment, education, and basic participation in society. For many women—trans and cisgender alike—the fear of being harassed or assaulted in a public restroom is a daily reality.

Historically, we’ve seen similar tactics used to exclude marginalized groups. During the Jim Crow era, Black Americans were denied access to "whites-only" restrooms, reinforcing their second-class status. Today, bathroom restrictions against trans people threaten to repeat these injustices, targeting anyone who doesn’t conform to societal expectations.

Debunking the "Safety" Myth

Supposedly “funny” restroom sign of assumed man looking over a stall wall at an assumed woman

PNG Wing

One of the most pervasive arguments against allowing trans women access to women’s bathrooms is the claim that it would endanger cisgender women. This argument insists that trans women are predatory or that men would exploit inclusive bathroom policies to harm women. But let’s examine this claim closely, because it simply doesn’t hold up.

Yes, predatory men exist, and there are already laws against assault and harassment that address such behavior. The idea that allowing trans women into women’s bathrooms will open the door to widespread predation is a classic straw man argument. Trans women are not inherently predatory. In fact, studies have consistently shown that trans people are far more likely to be victims of violence than perpetrators. For instance, a report from the National Center for Transgender Equality found that nearly one in ten trans individuals experienced physical assault in public restrooms, often for simply trying to exist.

What about the men who might “pretend” to be trans women to access women’s bathrooms and commit crimes? This argument relies on fear rather than facts. In places with inclusive bathroom policies, such as cities and states across the United States and countries like Canada and the United Kingdom, there has been no increase in bathroom-related assaults. The real danger in bathrooms isn’t from trans women—it’s from the discrimination, harassment, and violence they face when forced to navigate spaces where they are unwelcome or unsafe.

Furthermore, this myth perpetuates harmful stereotypes about who trans women are. It paints them as deceitful and dangerous when they are simply trying to live their lives. By focusing on this baseless fear, opponents of trans rights distract from the real issues—like the fact that trans people face disproportionately high rates of unemployment, homelessness, and violence.

The real question we should ask is: Who is being protected by these policies? Because it certainly isn’t women, cisgender or transgender. It’s time to recognize this argument for what it is: an attempt to justify exclusion and discrimination under the guise of safety.

Healthcare Under Threat

The fight doesn’t stop at bathrooms. Gender-affirming healthcare is under siege, with potentially devastating consequences. For transgender people, access to affirming care is often funded by federal programs like Medicaid, Medicare, and the Department of Veterans Affairs. These services are critical for many, but they’re increasingly at risk.

Yet, the impact extends beyond trans people. Imagine a cisgender woman with a medical condition that complicates traditional markers of sex or gender. Will she also face barriers to care because her identity is scrutinized? Would a mastectomy, jaw surgery, or hysterectomy fall under gender restrictions? The ripple effects of these policies could harm countless individuals, eroding trust in medical systems and exacerbating health disparities.

A New Era of Scapegoating

Why are trans and gender-nonconforming people being targeted now? In times of social or economic upheaval, marginalized groups are often used as scapegoats. By creating a “common enemy,” political leaders can unite their base and distract from more pressing issues. Trans people, with our small numbers and perceived difference, are an easy target. And as history has shown, policies aimed at a minority often have far-reaching consequences for the majority.

This scapegoating isn’t new. During the Holocaust, Jewish people were blamed for Germany’s economic struggles, leading to unimaginable atrocities. In the U.S., Jim Crow laws perpetuated the myth of Black inferiority to justify segregation. Today, trans people are cast as dangerous or deceitful to justify discrimination. These same narratives also put gender-nonconforming women in the crosshairs, painting them as suspicious or out of place.

The Ripple Effect

Even in states like Washington, where trans rights are protected, the ripple effects of national policies can be felt. When federal funding is tied to discriminatory practices, state governments may find themselves powerless to resist. For example, Medicaid dollars come from the federal government, meaning restrictions at the national level could impact trans healthcare here.

It’s not just about healthcare, either. Discriminatory policies in one area often pave the way for broader rollbacks of rights. Bathroom bills, for instance, could lead to restrictions in schools, workplaces, and public spaces. The implications are far-reaching, affecting not just trans people but anyone who values equality and justice.

Turning the Tide

The tsunami of hatred may seem far off now, but it’s approaching. If we don’t act, the wave will sweep away hard-won rights. But we’re not powerless. There are steps we can take to turn the tide.

First, educate yourself and others. Learn about the challenges trans people and nonconforming women face and share that knowledge with your community. Misinformation fuels discrimination, so countering it with facts is crucial.

Second, support trans and feminist organizations. Groups like the National Center for Transgender Equality and women’s rights campaigns work tirelessly to protect and uplift our communities. Your donations, volunteer work, or even a simple social media share can make a difference.

Third, hold policymakers accountable. Contact your representatives and demand that they support women’s and trans rights. Vote for candidates who prioritize equality and justice.

Finally, amplify marginalized voices. Listen to and uplift the stories of trans and gender-nonconforming people in your life and community. Our experiences are powerful tools for building understanding and empathy.

A Hopeful Future

This fight isn’t just about bathrooms. It’s about creating a world where everyone, regardless of gender identity or appearance, can live with dignity and respect. Let’s ensure that this moment in history is one of action, not complacency. Together, we can turn the tide and build a future where no one is excluded for simply existing.