This all seems odd to one who went to college in the 70s and 80s and should probably know better than to mingle in here at all. At that time it was thought that a woman, a straight woman, would gravely upset if a man entered a women's restroom and violated her privacy. And if there were something like a unisex restroom with urinals for men, if a man at the urinal exposed his genitals to a woman, she was just supposed to wilt with shock. If the ladies' room was in a deserted area at night, one could see why a lady would not welcome the company of a male, who could be transgender or just faking it,
But it's OK now for unisex restrooms to exist and for private parts of either sex to go where they many? I could understand this, I guess, since it is over forty five years since 1970, and women commonly see men's private parts often, if not in real life, then in films and magazines. Yet indecent exposure is still a crime in very liberal New York. Not a serious crime, but one that carries a stiff fine and a possible short stay in prison for repeat offenders
And even now, a woman in that isolated restroom would feel legitimate fear if a man entered the restroom while she was in a compromising position.
The above should not be interpreted as an endorsement of the North Carolina law or the Schwartz retaliation.
Updated On: 4/4/16 at 03:07 AM
