Situation at the Freezone?

[annie]

> Freezone update - I visited Freezone during my recent stay in LV.

I think I speak for everyone when I convey thanks for checking this out and getting us some first-hand information.

> The restrooms are labeled Men's & Unisex. I don't know if they
> were recently changed to this setup.

This had to be very recent. I'm sure I would have noticed this when I was there in April. Also, the report which started this thread is maybe 2-3 weeks old at most.

It appears that a change has most definitely been made.

I will update the Big List item from this report. Thanks again for checking this out.

[External Poster]

This posting is from: Cynthia Phillips
----------

Hey Bob,

I gotta add my two cents here:

According to the 2000 census there are roughly four to six million gays
estimated living in the U.S. By 2010 it may be up to ten million.

As "we" merge with the mainstream we tend to do so in status groups.
More respectable groups tend to be accepted first with the less
acceptable ones being admitted last if not least.

Poor old cross dressers and TG's, being the least understood as well as
still being identified with deviant "out" groups, are still fighting for
acceptance. Married gays with children are in first, marrieds without -
next, college educated professionals, married hetero sexual cross
dressers, married homo sexual cross dressers, transgenders, and on down
the list of "types".

Now, in Vegas, these "types" tend to congregate in clearly defined
territories - gay bars and mainstream and gaystream organizations,
according to their economic status level. No one seems to mind. But it
does make bathroom issues confusing for low-heeled gays. The exception
being the bottom level of us who can and will use any facility they want
to; they're not afraid of an altercation. The higher-heeled of us look
for safer locations where money will buy us freedom to choose.

Your last paragraph is on point. It is an attitude issue that is being
settled state by state, election by election. Money talks and gay money
is the hot topic of the business community these days. The gay community
is buying it's way in, and is being bought thereby. This is what makes
event organization so difficult: every one of these private casinos and
clubs has their own opinion of what constitutes correct behavior for
bathroom use and "gay" acceptability, and here in LV there's as many
opinions as there are "types". Your first para is on point too: It is
all MESSED UP. This is of course just another way of saying that the
issue is far from settled.

----------
(This posting was entered by Cynthia Phillips, an external user of MyDLV.)

[bobbiemlv]

Thank you for your input, but this has nothing to do with being gay, The tg laws that were signed into law Oct. 1, 2011 does not at any time mention gay rights. It was totally passed as trans gender rights. It has nothing to do with where a gay person goes to the bathroom, but everything to do with where a tg does her business. It is no longer up to each business definition of who gets to use either restroom, but defines gender identity, which again, has nothing to do with being gay, because most tg's are not gay, in fact many are married to genetic females. According to the law, in simple terms, you are allowed to use the rest by your appearance, male or female and not what's between your legs. It is a misdemeanor if a company violates this law. It has NEVER, in Las Vegas been against the law for someone of the opposite sex to use the other's restroom, but now they have further defined what is and what is not allowable by law. If a person appears to be female and acts as such, she is allowed to use the ladies room. I it is found out that that person isn't being ladylike when using the ladies room, then she could possibly be asked not to. Companies used to be able to determine, individually who gets to use a rest room, now it's a law that they cannot discriminate because of gender identity. That also applies to employment and housing.

You talk about the gay population in the US as being, maybe 10 million. I think that number should be closer to 5% and the majority of them are of voting age. In Nevada they estimated there is close to 8% that are tg in any form. They made that figure as any male who puts on female clothing. 8% of 2 million or so is a BIG number, especially when the vast majority of them are voters.

[External Poster]

This posting is from: kumiko yvonne watanabe
----------

Perhaps Free Zone got 'educated' by someone or somehow on the law -
SB331 and changed the restroom signs to say Men's and Unisex. Or after a
possible filed complaint to the Nevada Equal Rights Commission against
the business based on SB331.

Unisex or Family restroom - same thing - solves the problem.

I agree with Bob too - its all messed up.

The law is still up for interpretation on who it applies - It states:


"4. Gender identity or expression means a gender-related identity,
appearance, expression or behavior of a person, regardless of the
person's assigned sex at birth."

This is where I think its interpretation is varied, and goes with the
differences of definition of a person who is 'transgendered' or 'cross
dresser', if any.

The Review Journal interprets it for only the transgendered people
living that life which means every and all day, and not theB occasional,
less than everyday crossB dresser.

Others say its for
the cross dresser too, that don't dress all the time, as long as
they are
expressing, behaving, and appearing as a specific gender.

So who is to judge the kinds of interpretation for the expression,
behavior, or appearence to objectively state it belongs to a specific
gender. (ie is a female 'tom-boy' a male?)

Yup - all messed up.

----------
(This posting was entered by kumiko yvonne watanabe, an external user of MyDLV.)

[annie]

> The Review Journal interprets it for only the transgendered people
> living that life which means every and all day, and not the occasional,
> less than everyday cross dresser.

I'm not hearing that as any kind of opinion by the LVRJ. I'm hearing it as stated from un-named individuals. Here's the quote:

+ During hearings in the Legislature, transgender people said the bills were
+ intended to apply to people who consistently live a transgender lifestyle, not
+ to occasional cross-dressers.

Total hearsay, IMAO.

The link to the text of the LVRJ article is in this thread.

> Others say its for the cross dresser too, that don't dress all the time, as long
> as they are expressing, behaving, and appearing as a specific gender.

I've read the bills, specifically 331, several times. The link to the bill's text is also in this thread. I don't recall any distinction between full/part time or between any of the self-identity labels.

[External Poster]

This posting is from: Mindy
----------

I showed the bill to and attorney friend. She says if she had to defend
a cross dresser in court regarding the bathroom portion of the law she
is 90% sure she would win the case. The way it is written it covers all
trans expressions.

Mindy

----------
(This posting was entered by Mindy, an external user of MyDLV.)

[bobbiemlv]

I'm one of those people who likes to play "Devil's Advocate'. The down side of the bill and what most venues are worried about, is the sex fiend, that now knows, that all he has to do to gain access to the ladies room, is to present himself as a woman.

[annie]

> what most venues are worried about, is the sex fiend,

IANAL, but I sure don't see anything in the bill that in any way rescinds existing statutes on peeping, voyeurism, lewdness, etc.

[External Poster]

This posting is from: Vera Delmar
----------

A sex fiend will go to whatever extreme it takes for him to do to do his
sick thing... You all hear about the guy that was arrested yesterday in
Oklahoma after the police fished him out from the septic tank of a
women's bathroom all covered in sh*t. He had climbed down into a into
aseptic tank so he could view ladies doing their business. If such a
creep were to infiltrate the bathroom at the Freezone, I'm sure we would
all pounce on him and hold him for the police. I'm sure management would
owe us a debt of gratitude.

----------
(This posting was entered by Vera Delmar, an external user of MyDLV.)

[External Poster]

This posting is from: Vera Delmar
----------

That's the same excuse some retail clothing stores try to utilize in
preventing us from going into the ladies dressing room to try on
clothes.

----------
(This posting was entered by Vera Delmar, an external user of MyDLV.)