skirtcafe.org

JohnH wrote:Also, if you're female don't forget the funnel.

It's a wide-mouthed bottle - chosen to be as universal as possible. I do carry a funnel in the van, in case I need to pour diesel from a large jerry-can into the awkwardly-placed fuel filling pipe; but I would like to avoid the possibility of carry-over from one use to another (and so, I imagine, would any female passenger).

Sorry if I've mentioned this before, but I frequently use public men's restrooms while wearing a skirt or kilt, tights, and heels, and I've never had a bad experience, even in professional sports arenas.

Occasionally I do get a sideways glance at the urinals from some guy wondering how that works without a zipper, but that's just natural curiosity rather than hostility.

I agree with Caultron. When I'm out in public in a skirt I have no compunctions about using the Men's restroom. I always use a stall because I really don't want to put myself back together in front of an audience.
At one of the older theaters I go to on a fairly regular basis, there's always a line after the movies. Almost without fail when I get to the front of the line an urinal will open up before the stall and the fellow behind me will motion me to the urinal if I haven't suggested he take it, while I wait for the stall.
My point is, it really isn't an issue with our brethren in pants.
Even down South I would expect Southern hospitality would trump the itch to make one excuse for a fight as good as the next.
So Moon, I expect almost no one in the checkout line at Walmart even notices you, except maybe the guy who'd love to emulate you, but hasn't gotten up the nerve ... yet.
Which is why, in my experience, most people admire us for having the courage to be ourselves; it gives them the courage to be their genuine selves.

Pdxfashionpioneer wrote:When I'm out in public in a skirt I have no compunctions about using the Men's restroom.

For me.. compunctions? No. A feeling like I might get attacked? Sometimes.

Pdxfashionpioneer wrote: I always use a stall because I really don't want to put myself back together in front of an audience.

I share this reason, that and I don't like my back turned to people while peeing, especially in a skirt.

Pdxfashionpioneer wrote:Even down South I would expect Southern hospitality would trump the itch to make one excuse for a fight as good as the next.

Please understand I don't mean this question to sound arrogant, or belligerent... but have you ever actually been here in one of your dresses?

Let me break it down like this. There is such a thing as Southern hospitality. It normally is offered by southerners who are better off, and typically don't care what others do as long as it doesn't interfere with their lives. So yes, there are good people in the south. But Pdx, if you think every southerner extends southern hospitality, and you come down here on faith that you will be openly accepted and treated politely especially wearing a skirt or dress then you are playing a foolish game that could result in you being sent to the hospital, or worse, the morgue.

I've seen your pictures, and while I think they look fine, even I (as bold as I tend to be) still wouldn't wear them in certain pockets of my region, and wouldn't even think about it down where bamaskirting lives. Even in more tolerant areas I would wear it, but I know I'd be laughed at constantly.

Pdxfashionpioneer wrote:So Moon, I expect almost no one in the checkout line at Walmart even notices you,

Perhaps, but I have been threatened in public restrooms before while wearing skirts. A remark was made once "you better stay away from me" in Johnson City TN, one of the more liberal cities of the area.

Pdxfashionpioneer wrote:Which is why, in my experience, most people admire us for having the courage to be ourselves; it gives them the courage to be their genuine selves.

Oh lord no! No sir.. not around here! Admire is NOT the word I would use to describe how southerners feel about people like us. I can't use the word that describes it because the mods wouldn't approve.
Unless pointing fingers, laughing, dirty looks, blowing horns, whispering, evil eyes etc are the new signals of "admiration".
Even those sophisticated southerners, the ones who extend "southern hospitality" probably just smile and feel sorry for us, because to them, we clearly have some screws loose!

* * *

Now all this is NOT to say that there aren't good people in the south. I have met many of them. I am openly accepted by many. Quite a few on my job have expressed downright acceptance at what I do, clerks at Misty Mountain Designs in Bristol I feel are genuinely accepting of my style, and not just because they are selling me skirts. I can tell from talking to them, that the truly "get" my reasons for doing this and support it. I have had compliments and positive looks, even when wearing some of my more girly looks.

Really Pdx, it's just a matter of statistics. If there are 100 southerners in a room down here, chances are 75 of them don't care what we wear, even if they do find it a bit odd. It's the remaining 25 you've got to worry about. These are the ones that would love to catch you in a dark alley alone. And it only gets worse the further south you go.

I like you okay Pdx, and maybe it's because I've lived here for so long it has jaded me somewhat, but you seem to have an overly, if not somewhat dangerous optimistic sense of what life's like here in the south. In the south, you stick with your own kind, and you'll probably be okay. Those who roam around in neighborhoods that are not like them are asking for trouble. There are places up in the hills, rural places where I wouldn't even wear a manly kilt after dark, and if you've got an old truck like I do that's subject to break down, and you're riding around in the mountains, you'd be wise to pack a pair of trousers if you expect a ride back to town.

moonshadow wrote: So yes, I do, seriously prefer the sanctuary of Mother Nature, be it in a field, the woodlands, or just a private wayside on the highway out of sight. If I'm driving on a long trip and feel the call of nature, these are the things I look for first.

I have seen people (including bus drivers) simply urinate on their vehicles' tires or on a nearby bush or wall in full view of everyone, and I myself have done it before several times.

Judah14 wrote:I have seen people (including bus drivers) simply urinate on their vehicles' tires or on a nearby bush or wall in full view of everyone, and I myself have done it before several times.

Get caught doing that here is you are in the jail house for a while. The mentality of some here are it is an unnatural act to pee on the side of the road, even if you are well covered. Only small children can get away with it.

Fred

Franinskirts wrote: Get caught doing that here is you are in the jail house for a while. The mentality of some here are it is an unnatural act to pee on the side of the road, even if you are well covered.

This is true. The only thing we can do is be well hidden, make it quick, and hope you're not spotted.

Well if you can't urinate on the side of the road, why not get a small urinal (or bottle) as mentioned in earlier posts and just throw the contents outside?

I was shopping online for camping equipment recently and accidentally discovered you can buy urinal bottles specifically sold for use in cars. They come in men's and women's models, and purport to avoid frequent restroom stops.

Now frankly, there are no scenarios for using such a thing that don't seem creepy. I mean, there you are on vacation, with the whole family in the car, and somebody has to go, and so you hand them the bottle and they do it speeding down the freeway in plain sight of everyone else in the car. Even if it's already half full. The bottle, that is, Or do you buy enough for everyone to have their own? What if the driver has to go? Does whoever's in the passenger seat open them up and then hold them and the bottle? What about someone driving alone -- some distracted driving, eh? And it's gotta be weird doing it and watching the other cars go by. How about driving along, doing it, encountering a red light, and having a truck pull up next to you? But I guess at least you won't be arrested for doing it on the side of the road.

I just hope the workers in those tiny drive-up coffee shops don't hear about this. I always wondered where they went...

And no, I can't explain how this pertains to men wearing skirts. And no word on which car seat you're supposed to occupy depending on your birth certificate gender.

Did you ever drive up to a FotoMat booth and ask to use the washroom?

Caultron wrote:Sorry if I've mentioned this before, but I frequently use public men's restrooms while wearing a skirt or kilt, tights, and heels, and I've never had a bad experience, even in professional sports arenas.

Occasionally I do get a sideways glance at the urinals from some guy wondering how that works without a zipper, but that's just natural curiosity rather than hostility.

I've never had an issue either, but there are two differences.

First, I don't consider myself trans- anything. I don't dress in a way that I could be seen as anything but a man. But those who do and forced into a restroom situation with potentially aggressive / abusive males are perhaps in real physical jeopardy, not to mention emotional trauma. These people feel themselves women; they have the responses and sensitivities of women. Why are they not entitled to those feelings and to equal consideration in terms of protection?

Second, I am 6'3" and well over 200 lbs, and generally not indulgent of anyone's BS. Any drunk or rowdy mutha who messes with me in a public restroom may end up spitting out teeth. At the very least he will leave wearing my urine. That may not likely be the effective response of a transgendered individual; hence the reasons for compassionate treatment has to do with the possibly greater physical vulnerability of certain individuals. If we understand that some women feel exceeding vulnerable to larger, stronger males, can the HB2 supporters not understand that the same may be true for transgendered women? And perhaps to an even greater degree because of the bigotry they face? HB2 only reinforces and protects that bigotry.
.
What has not been said about this particular matter is that the Charlotte City Council debated their action for more than a year. That included TWO public hearings. There was ample opportunity for a meaningful case to be made against allowing the TG restroom privilege. The City Council was well in touch with the interest of the constituents they represent. Yet the GOP hypocrites, who have spent decades railing about intrusive big government, spent less than TWO DAYS deciding a measure that not only affected TG issues, but all protections, and even thwarted local minimum wage increase rights. They are only too happy to squash small government when it deviates from their pandering to bigots and racists. And none of the sponsors of the bill actually penned a word it contained. It was written by the John Locke Foundation, a puppet arm of Art Pope, the NC cohort of the infamous billionaire Koch Brothers. It was nothing but a garden-variety power grab obscured in a pseudo-Christian hot-button issue.

The interesting thing is that the Republicans began trotting out a lot of conservative African-American preachers to defend this law, as though that will hold sway with liberal-leaning fence-sitters. The preachers, making the political talk show rounds statewide, defend the "Biblical" traditions of the difference of the sexes with the weakest possible scriptural allegories. But these preachers have consistently gotten the issue wrong by their eisegesis of scripture. They insist that "God made only man and woman", as if they cannot fathom that a penis does not make one male, nor does a vagina make one female; nor do the chromosomes in our cells, and at no point does the Bible ever define male or female by genitalia.

And even if it seemed to, they might be reminded that scriptures have also been employed to defend slavery and segregation. If they really thought about the history of "traditional Christian values" in that effect, they might realize that they could then still be picking cotton and cutting sugar cane in white men's chains. I would hope that by this time, men of God understand that the right to be ones self in peace and equality under law is also basic in Civil Rights.

I wonder how Jesus would have voted?

But, regardless of race, preachers are human, and ONLY human, and, being mortal men, aren't endowed to speak the will of God. It is for Him to judge a person's heart and a person's self-knowledge. It leaves me shaking my head that some think they serve Him when they, in effect, decree that to call oneself a "Christian," one must first abandon both intellect and compassion. No mortal man speaks for God, so I will speak only what makes sense to me, morally, ethically, compassionately, and in terms of public safety.

Could there be some perv who enters a women's restroom under protection? Of course...but before this measure there was no statewide law preventing it, and it wasn't happening in any significant occurrence. How would a law stop a man from doing so if he wished to do so? That sort of person is just a troublemaker and will not be stopped just because a law says "You shall not." That would presume he chooses to obey laws, so to call this bigoted law "innocence protection" is just a cruel joke. As I have stated before, in the age of the internet, where anything and everything is viewable, the sorts of scare tactics the GOP uses are aimed at the oldest and most ignorant voters. It paints all TG persons as sexually-warped adults, and ignores the fact that many TG are also innocent children.

^^^ THIS

Thank you, my friend. i appreciate that anyone actually reads my rants. I'll see you at Trail Days, buddy!

dillon wrote:I've never had an issue either, but there are two differences.

First, I don't consider myself trans- anything...

Nor I. I'm just a guy who pisses in men's room urinals wearing a skirt, tights, and heels.

(looks in mirror, shrugs, doesn't get hung up on labels)

The latest twist in the saga over this side of the pond. Some student union activists are calling on universities to install sanitary towel bins in gent's toilets so that female transgender students who use them do not face discrimination. I am getting more convinced with every passing year that the sum total of insanity is increasing or the sum of sanity is decreasing, not necessarily the same thing.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... riods.html