Hello, my freaky Substack darlings!
I released this song a while back, and the reaction was exactly what I expected: some folks laughed, some clutched their pearls, and a whole lot of people pretended not to understand the joke.
The joke is simple.
Biological males (including trans women) are welcome to pee next to me in the men’s room. I genuinely don’t care.
Urinals are low-drama, low-privacy spaces. Men stand shoulder-to-shoulder doing their business every day without it turning into a human rights crisis. No one’s getting undressed. No one’s vulnerable in the same way. If a trans woman wants to use the men’s facilities, fine by me.
But that easygoing attitude has hard limits — and those limits protect women’s privacy, safety, and fairness.
Why This Matters in 2026
The bathroom debate was never really about hatred. It was always about asymmetry.
Men’s bathrooms (especially with urinals) are straightforward, functional, and low-risk for most users. Women’s bathrooms, changing rooms, domestic violence shelters, and female prisons involve higher vulnerability: partial nudity, trauma survivors, physical differences in strength and crime patterns (male-pattern violence doesn’t vanish with a change of clothes or pronouns.
Recent polling reflects growing public clarity on this. A 2025 Pew survey found 49% of Americans favor requiring people to use bathrooms matching their sex at birth (with only 26% opposed), and support for sex-based rules in sports is even stronger (around two-thirds). Other polls show majorities — especially women — believe sex is determined at birth and that single-sex spaces should stay that way.
That’s why we’re seeing a wave of legislation in 2026: states like Idaho, Missouri, and Kansas passing or advancing bills that restrict bathroom, locker room, and changing facility access in government buildings (and in some cases public accommodations) to biological sex. Some carry penalties for violations. These aren’t driven by cruelty — they’re a correction after years of self-ID policies that ignored material reality and led to documented problems in women’s prisons, shelters, and sports.
The pattern is clear: when sex-based boundaries erode, women and girls bear the costs disproportionately. Male-bodied individuals in female spaces create fairness and safety issues that don’t exist in the reverse direction. Pretending otherwise requires denying basic biology, statistics on strength and offending patterns, and countless women’s lived experiences.
Live and Let Pee — With Limits
I’m not interested in harassing dysphoric people. Adults with gender dysphoria deserve mental health support, not ideological reinforcement at everyone else’s expense. Third spaces, single-occupancy options, or simply using the facilities that match your biological sex are practical solutions.
But “inclusivity” that only flows one direction — forcing women to accommodate male bodies while men’s spaces remain untouched — isn’t compassion. It’s asymmetry dressed up as progress.
That’s why the song exists. It’s a cheeky way of saying: I’ll share my urinal with you. But don’t rewrite reality and expect women to pay the price.
The cultural pendulum is swinging back toward recognizing that sex is real, binary, and still matters in policy. Songs like this make the point stickier than another policy paper ever could.
Damn, it’s good to be back in the saddle again!
