We want LI to be one of the friendliest places on the internet, where lawyers and law students help each other with their career related queries and occasionally discuss other stuff that might affect their lives too. In other words:
1. Be kind, respectful and helpful to each other.
2. Be bona fide, truthful, genuine and curious.
3. Assume the best intention of others.
Therefore, in using the site, you must agree to do your best to uphold these community guidelines.
Note that what you find here is written and moderated by anonymous people on the internet.
Therefore everything you read here is very likely unverified, rumour, speculation and/or downright false.
In continuing to read anything here, you must therefore agree not to take anything you read here as factual and that you will exercise due caution, diligence and common sense before acting on any information you may come across here.
You also agree to report any inaccurate or malicious comments with the buttons. Moderators take action within 24 hours, as required and appropriate under law.
Our full terms and conditions apply too.
Do you solemnly agree to all of the above?
For anyone in any of these situations picking which toilet you enter can be deeply upsetting and traumatic and can result in harassment or physical attacks, so much so that some trans people try not to drink too much water so they don't have to pee when not at home and face these choices. Likewise, some biological women claim that they would be put in the same position if toilet access was liberalised in certain ways.
Therefore not very simple, unfortunately.
If you call them 'privacy toilet' it implies that normal toilets are 'zero-privacy toilets', and no one will go anymore :)
So it's correct to use the term "transgender toilets"
What is needed is a sympathetic outlook and someone to ask deeper questions about WHY a girl who is barely 11 years old is INSISTING she is a boy. Is some sort of sexual abuse driving this, are gender-roles and stereotypes driving this, is early exposure to porn driving this.
Let me be very serious, this is an epidemic in the making and ALL of us are going to be complicit for what the harm that it causes our kids.
Affirmation is ghastly.
A small minority transes, that can be OK and can perhaps have a rather palatable explanation. An increasing number of kids identifying as the opposite sex? Tough questions have to be asked.
https://www.legallyindia.com/convos/topic/222006-The-Trans-v-TERF-debate
Perhaps a more nuanced engagement with the issue is warranted, rather than reducing it to a 'trans quest'. If there's indeed a 'trans quest' pursued by every trans person (which is unlikely), it would presumably be for most trans people, that they get to live their lives free of harrassment, much like any other gender, sexual or religious preference or other choices / non-choices.
The toilet argument, as you couch it, however, is often a dog-whistle that is understandably emotive, playing on the idea of male predators, pretending to be trans, invading female-only spaces. Phrased that way, would that risk actually compare in scale to the documented sexual abuse the trans community regularly faces? And would existing laws not cover the scenario of a pretend-trans 'predator'?
That said, it's also understandable if some biological women feel uncomfortable at the idea. But even stopping short of self-id but having gender recognition be an official legal process allowing access to female spaces, might not be enough to allay those women's fears either, right?
In short, there's no easy solution that will make all sides equally happy, but "the day isn't far" arguments are not constructive. Instead, Nalsar's attempt is surely a worthwhile one to consider that doesn't really hurt anyone (or at least hurts less or fewer people than many of the other 'solutions'), other than maybe not being the most hyper-efficient use of space.
brother what practical purpose would the tiny space on which the washroom is built upon otherwise serve? is the consortium planning to host their annual meet there or do we have a paucity of space in the moot court room?
secondly, what efficiency and efficiency for whom? for transgender folks? for the college admin? I urge you to explain, what form of efficiency will these steps, if implemented, achieve?
"I do not see how transgender people can be discriminated by it in any way."
that is because you're viewing the issue merely from a heteronormative vantage point!
Failed an exam? Bro.u have hostel rooms too
In other words, what I am asking is this:
1. How many industries are actually in need of the PLI scheme (the EV manufacturing sector started this demand) and other industries (cellphone, toys, textiles, which copied the EV industry's demand)?
2. If the number of industries which actually need it is low, then why not have a single, cross-sector subsidy that goes out to all manufacturers? It can have a facility for simple loans and can be used by anyone seeking credit, which can be an MSME. a single-person undertaking, or even a regular entrepreneur who failed in getting funding and wants to cry in public. The cross-sectoral subsidy can have a production criteria and a P sign (for public) in the scheme. No other signs needed.
I understand that my cross-sectoral subsidy suggestion may not be regarded as prudent and economically correct, but it is based on practicality and efficiency. I do not see how industries can be discriminated by it any way.
(Now the answer: Gender-neutral washrooms are among facilitative measures that ensure that not only existing transgender students (even if it is a single student) get access to washroom, as a matter or right, like everyone else, but it also opens up these spaces to future transgender students. There is already talk of a quota for transgender persons, which must go through swiftly. That NALSAR and others are taking these measures is not because they are woke but because the UGC has sensibly asked all universities (https://www.deccanherald.com/content/459962/transgenders-rights-must-protected-ugc.html) to create transgender person friendly infrastructures - including restrooms.)
1. How many transgender people are there in NALSAR (the law school which started this trend) and other NLUs (which copied NALSAR)?
2. If the number is low, then why not have a single private-cum-disabled user toilet? It can have facilities for wheelchair users and can also be used by anyone seeking privacy, which can be a transgender person, a breast-feeding mother, or even a regular guy/girl who failed an exam and wants to cry in private. The toilet can have a wheelchair sign and a P sign (for private) at the door. No other signs needed.
I understand that my suggestion may not be regarded as woke or politically correct, but it is based on practicality and efficiency. I do not see how transgender people can be discriminated by it in any way.