OPINION
Bob McCoskrie
A bill called the “Fair Access to Bathrooms Bill” has been introduced as a private members bill to Parliament by NZ First. It’s pretty easy to understand, but the media and other opponents of the bill did everything they could to misrepresent it.
WINSTON’S STRAIGHT FLUSH HAND
A bill called the “Fair Access to Bathrooms Bill” has been introduced as a private members bill to Parliament. It has two main provisions. For each provision can you indicate if you support or oppose it:
* A building code requirement for all new non-residential – so public – buildings to have single sex toilets for males and females; and unisex toilets
* A maximum $2,000 fine for using a toilet not of your designated biological sex
So here’s the signage that you would see. If you know what your biological sex is, excellent. If you don’t or think it’s something else (and you’ve got 112 to choose from – and it’s growing by the day) – then use the “other” one.
But if you “think” you’re a woman or “identify” as a woman but you’re a dude and you go in the women’s toilet, you’ll be fined.
Now Winston talked about this last year, and of course, the media (and the now-PM) weren’t having a bar of it.
So last week, on Friday, the bill was announced by NZ First
Today New Zealand First will introduce a Member’s Bill that will protect women’s spaces. The ‘Fair Access to Bathrooms Bill’ will require, primarily in the interest and safety of women and girls, that all new non-domestic publicly accessible buildings provide separate, clearly demarcated, unisex and single sex bathrooms. This Bill is about finding a balance between fair inclusion and fairness for all.
Talks about the UK and similar developments, and about defending the right to privacy, personal safety and freedom.
…a much-needed commonsense solution to an issue that has often been overshadowed by ideology.” It will stop the growing trend of mixed-sex toilet spaces which impact the privacy and dignity of everyone utilising these facilities.
It also says
In addition, the Bill will introduce a fine under the Summary Offences Act for anyone who uses a single-sex toilet and is not of the sex for which that toilet has been designated. “New Zealand First has listened to New Zealanders and we know that there is a silent majority anticipating such legislation. This Bill will ensure that every individual has fair access to safe public bathroom facilities. Every New Zealander is entitled to feel safe and have privacy in these public spaces.”
So let’s check the media coverage – and interestingly, there were only three written reports that we could find – and nothing on the 6 pm news. So 1News and Newshub had a written report on their website, and The Post in Wellington (which is part of Stuff).
Now you know what the law says and the effect – so here’s the heading for The Post – which is the old Dominion Post. This heading was also carried in The Press which is a partner paper.
Wow – that is an Utter lie. Complete BS.
NZ First leader Winston Peters wants to pass law to protect “women’s spaces”, by banning unisex bathrooms and making it a crime to use a bathroom not designated for a person’s gender.
Promise of the bill immediately drew criticism from Labour leader Chris Hipkins, who said it was “just absolutely ridiculous”.
“The country has bigger issues to worry about then Winston Peters’ homophobia or transphobia.”
Safety of women in women’s spaces is homophobia or transphobia – according to the leader who can’t define what a woman even is.
In fact, just as an aside, Winston had a very funny jab at Hipkins last week. Hipkins was asking about the gender pay gap – and Winston came back with this delightful question to the Prime Minister
So let’s have a look at the 1News coverage – and immediately they make a judgement on it. It’s not fair, or balanced, or win win, or give and take. Nope
NZ First tries to introduce controversial bathroom bill
Ah yes – controversial. Why? Because 1News doesn’t like it. So let’s see if they tell the truth about it.
The bill would require all new non-domestic publicly accessible buildings provide separate, clearly demarcated, unisex and single sex bathrooms. If passed, it would also introduce a fine, “for anyone who uses a single-sex toilet and is not of the sex for which that toilet has been designated”.
That’s it. they don’t explain why it’s being introduced. It’s immediately into “hopefully it’s dead in the water” – with their fingers crossed…
The vast majority of members’ bills may not make it to law — or even pass their first reading (the first of three votes to progress a bill), to select committee. A government can also veto a members’ bill, if, in that their view, the proposal would have “more than a minor impact” on the government’s fiscals should it become law.
And then some quotes from the media release
And then normally the media would rush to people supporting the bill and people opposing the bill. Ha ha yeah right. It’s off to Chris Hipkins who can’t even define a woman, and a Green MP who nobody has heard of – and actually the Greens have bigger issues to sort, don’t they – like bullying, exploiting, losing their rag etc
Anyway, Hipkins says
Labour Party leader Chris Hipkins said in almost all places there are a “variety” of bathroom options available, including unisex bathrooms. “Is Winston Peters going to say anyone using a unisex bathroom is going to be fined? I mean how on earth are they going to police that, how on earth are they going to enforce it.
You don’t need to be a lawyer to see that either Hipkins hasn’t read the bill OR he’s not very smart. Perhaps both. Nowhere in the bill does it say that “anyone using a unisex bathroom is going to be fined.” In fact, that’s the one toilet where anything goes. There’s no fines.
But of course, the media don’t pick him up for this fundamental error. And of course, there are many toilets currently that are purely male or female toilets – because we could always figure out biology up until a couple of days ago.
Then off to the Greens
Green Party MP and spokesperson for rainbow communities Kahurangi Carter told 1News the Deputy Prime Minister is “undermining the mana of rainbow people”, who “deserve to be treated with respect and dignity”. “This Bill is a blatant attack on our transgender whanau.
Once again, the green MP either hasn’t read the bill OR isn’t that clever. Once again, possibly both.
As Winston Peters says ““This Bill will ensure that every individual has fair access to safe public bathroom facilities. Every New Zealander is entitled to feel safe and have privacy in these public spaces.”
Including those who think they can change their sex.
Then, Newshub’s coverage
NZ First lodges Bill to fine people who use public bathrooms and are not of the designated sex
Well, that’s true. They got that bit right.
But then it immediately follows with
New Zealand First wants to fine people who use public bathrooms and are not of the designated sex.
Um, false. Because they can use the intersex one.
They then basically cover the same quotes and interview the same people – Hipkins and the Green MP.
You’ll note in all three reports that not once do they talk to a women’s rights or feminist group who have been raising concerns about having safe spaces for women and why they might support this bill.
They don’t do balance any more.
Now on Saturday early evening, the NZ Herald decided to report it. It’s what you call “latest news”
‘Ridiculous’: Winston Peters announces controversial new gendered ‘bathroom bill’.
So who said “ridiculous”? Was it Winston saying that men using women’s toilets is ridiculous? Is it someone else?
The NZ Herald quickly wants to get the negative term in. And then “controversial”. And then “gendered” bathroom bill. No it’s male, female and unisex. Biological sexes plus the unsure.
New Zealand First wants to fine people who do not use the public bathroom of their designated sex if a new member’s bill passes. Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters has announced the bill to ensure all non-domestic publicly accessible places have “clearly signed unisex and single-sex bathrooms”.
They then mentioned Winston’s tweet – which was a very good one
It’s not difficult. Men’s toilets for men. Women’s toilets for women. If you want to use a unisex toilet you can. PS. Mr Hipkins, Woman = Adult. Human. Female.
And then it’s off to a supporter of the bill.
Ok – just kidding. Of course, they wouldn’t. They went to our friends at InsideOut – you know the group being government-funded to push the radical RSE programme in schools
And their spokesperson says the whole idea was ridiculous – and an attack on transgender people.
Ah – so that’s where the “ridiculous” comes from. Perhaps the newspaper heading should have been
“Radical gender group hates women who don’t want dudes in their toilet” – but of course, that’s not the heading.
“Something as simple as being able to pee. It’s something everybody should be able to do freely.”
Yep – it’s funny you know. I never see women trying to use a urinal. Why is that?
Besley also said New Zealand First has not thought how this bill would be enforced. “It assumes you can tell who a transgender person is by looking at them.”
Let’s do a little experiment
Spot the transgender woman
This is the ripcurl transgender model
Spot the dude
This is the dude Roxy Tickle that we’ve previously discussed who wants to use women’s spaces
Ooh – tricky one. Think it’s the one in the middle
Can you figure this one out? Another clue.
Yeah, I don’t think it will be too difficult for women to figure this one out. They have an innate knowledge of who’s not a woman.
And if a woman wants to come in the men’s public toilet. Go ahead. You’ll be sorry. It’s not a pleasant place – or smell!
Now just finally, The Post actually changed their heading – 24 hours after the fake news headline.
They changed it to this.
Winston Peters wants toilet law.
What does that even mean? That you have to flush after every use. That you can’t leave smells. That you have to wash your hands. Or that women should use the women’s toilet and they don’t want men in there.
Just to add insult to injury, the Post admitted that they’d changed the heading – but said they’d done it 24 hours before they actually did! So they lied – again!
Here’s a history lesson for you – the first men’s public toilet was built in 1863 on Customs St in Auckland – it cost 21 pounds. Women must have had better self control. The first men’s and women’s toilet in NZ was built in 1910 on the corner of Symonds Street and Grafton Bridge. Ironically in Chloe’s Auckland electorate.
Here’s the plans. Bottom right you’ll see the separate toilets. Women on the right and men on the left. I know it’s men on the left because it shows the urinal – where the arrow is pointing.
In the good old days we didn’t need laws to point out the bleeding obvious biological distinction. Men and women could figure it out – but now we need politicians to try and sort the confusion out, and we have a media trying to misrepresent the whole thing.
So it’s up to Winston to get a straight flush.