Evaluating the Relative Validity of Common Arguments in the Bathroom Debates

Abstract

Since 2016, the ‘Bathroom Debates’ have gained increased media and legal attention
throughout the Western world. These debates are tied closely to ‘Bathroom Bills’ (which seek to
enforce multi-user restroom segregation based on ‘biological sex’) but the discourse and
repercussions extend beyond the legal and political sphere. Many people with significant
platforms in entertainment, news, and social media are actively influencing macro and micro
decisions and responses regarding gendered restroom segregation. In this article, the author
categorizes the main arguments made in the Bathroom Debates; critically analyzes the meaning
and wider impacts of the arguments; and concludes that the arguments for cisgender restroom
segregation are the most disingenuous and baseless. Contrastingly, the author demonstrates that
many of the arguments in support of gender-inclusive multi-user restrooms have higher relative
validity than the primary arguments in favour of multi-user restrooms segregated based on
assigned sex identities.

Keywords: Bathroom Debates, trans, non-binary, J. K. Rowling, gender