Episode 2:


gummy bears

[Music]>>Rosey: Hello everyone, and welcome back to Feasting Feminists. I'm Rosey.

>>Kate: And I'm Kate, and today we're going to talk to you about religious gummy bears, and why the red ones think they're the best. 

>>R: Fucking red gummy bears, just fucking it up for everybody. [pause, papers shuffle]

>>R: I just feel like we need to talk for one second about the fact that not only did we adult super badly yesterday and


>>R: completely forget our food in a podcast about feminists, eating food, but then we forgot to talk about the food that we did scrounge up to replace it, which is gummy bears. 


>>K: As you may have noticed, from the fact that all of our episode titles have been about gummy bears.


>>R: So what that's supposed to mean is that we have a bunch of different colors of gummy bears, and we were going to use them as our 'Our So Tasty' segment, about what food we were going to do to talk about intersectionality and then we completely forgot to do that and completely skipped over it, and so the whole red gummy bear thing, that's what that's supposed to be. And then we just fucked it up.

>>K: Yeah

>>R: Just like red gummy bears always do.[hand bangs on desk, laughter]

>>R: Now I'm trying to, super hard to tie it in. 

>>K: You're doing a good job though.

>>R: Oh thank you. That is so nice of you. Okay, so today, like we said we're going to be talking about religious privilege. Um, and in particular Christian Privilege. So I want to reiterate that the format for which we hope to do these podcasts is to do sort of mini-series, and so we're going to be discussing religious privilege and specifically Christian privilege for the next few episodes and then we will be posting suggested readings and our sort of over all categories and then our sub categories and sort of organizing that information for you.  And then also we're going to have, hopefully we're going to start a forum and, have a place for us to discuss all of this as well. 

>>K: Mmhmm. 

>>R: Um. Ok. So yeah, let's talk about Christian Privilege. Let me get organized.. So there are a lot of different kinds of Christian Privilege, everything from getting time off for major religious holidays to being able to wear symbols of your religion without being stereotyped, to you know, even politicians who create and uphold laws are likely to share your faith, there are just various kinds of Christian privilege. Today we're going to be talking specifically about Christian privilege as it relates to the bills that have recently popped up around the United States discussing which restrooms transgender individuals can use. So we're going to be talking about the specifics of those bills. So originally I was going to discuss seven different bills but it looks like the bill for Arizona, the bill 1045 has been dropped so I guess we're not discussing that any longer. 

>>K: So we're going to start with talking about the GLAAD Media Guide. GLAAD stands for Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation and they have a media reference guide to sort of help people in the media talk about and write about different issues that come up.. [pause] In the news. [laughter]. And so they have a reference guide that is specifically for transgender issues, and I want to just clarify a few of those terms but we're also going to link to this page on the website. So it will be available so you can go and you can look at it and you can see what other terms are used. So for example, it defines 'gender identity' as one's internal deeply held sense of one's gender. 'Cisgender' is a term used to describe people who are not transgender. And 'gender non-conforming' is a term that's used to describe some people whose gender expression is different than traditional expectations of masculinity and femininity. Please note, that not all gender non-conforming people identify as transgender nor are all transgender people gender non-conforming. They're different things.

>>R: Mmhmm, yeah.

>>K: When you're talking about people who are transgender you should always use the transgender person's chosen name. You should ask transgender people which pronoun they would like you to use, and use it. 

>>R: Mmhmm.

>>K: Um, it is never appropriate to put quotation marks around a transgender person's chosen name or the pronoun that reflects their gender identity. And we also really want to talk about words that are used a lot that are really problematic. 

>>R: Mmhmm

>>K: Do you want to?

>>R: Yeah, I'm going to talk about specifically, because the language of these bills, was particularly surprising to me, because a lot of the language is exactly what the GLAAD Media Guide references talking about as problematic language, like biologically male, biologically female, talking about chromosomes and using the chromosomes as a specific way to measure what a person's gender is and using that as a way to rule above all which restroom individuals can use.

>>K: I just want to point out if I can jump in, one of the things that I really liked about the GLAAD Media Guide, is one of the, two of the problematic terms they use are 'born a man' and 'born a woman,' and their response to that is 'Finally, people are born babies.'

>>R: Yes!

>>K: They are not born a man or born a woman, and so the preferred language is 'assigned male at birth,' or 'assigned female at birth.' 

>>R: Yes, so we're talking about the gender that they were assigned, because like the GLAAD says, everyone is born babies and they're assigned a gender at birth based on often times their genitalia. And so that's not the gender identity that that individual may have. So even though they were assigned male at birth they may not identify as male. And so we don't want to say they were born male, because that's not true. They were assigned male upon their birth. So we'll be talking a lot about that too. As we move forward, I also just want to point out because it's a pet peeve of mine when people say 'transgendered' versus transgender. We don't ever want to talk about gender as if it's something that has happened to someone, or something that someone has chosen. But rather, that's who that person is. I've heard a lot of people sort of compare that to you know, when people would say colored people, and it made it sound like race was something that happened to them rather than just who they were and what their identity was and so that's why we now say people of color rather than colored people. So for the same reason we want to say transgender individual or transgender man or transgender woman versus transgendered. 

>>K: That's also something that comes up in --- language used to talk about disability. You're no longer supposed to say from what I understand, disabled person. You're supposed to put the person first and say "Person with a disability."

>>R: Person with a disability. Which is actually, I'm glad you pointed that out, because that's something that I mess up a lot. I do say disabled person. Or person. Well, yeah, I think I mess that up a lot.

>>K: I will say that there is disagreement about that within communities of people who are disabled, but that's sort of the accepted in terms of the media is trying to adopt that. But it's always best to talk to people about how they would like to be addressed. 

>>R: Mmhmm. Yeah, that's what it really comes down to if ever you're confused I would just ask the individual what they prefer. Ok, so we're going to move into the specifics of these bills. So I already talked a little bit about how many of these bills there are, there were originally seven that I was going to discuss today and then we realized that I couldn't find the language of Arizona Bill 1045 because Kavanagh ended up dropping that bill so we're not going to be discussing that. So I guess there are six bills now that we're going to be talking about. And as I kind of move through each of them we'll talk about whether they're still active or they died in committee or they've passed this many committees and house and need to be reviewed by the full senate or full house and how all that works but that's why we went over the language is that in particular these bills are not making any effort whatsoever to use the correct language, which is probably part of the problem that we're having with identifying that the restroom someone uses is just, you know, it needs to be up to the individual, and the reason we're having this issue is because there seems to be a really widespread ignorance about what it means to be transgender. And actually let me just mention before I dig into these bills a little bit that all of them are available on the legislative websites so the government websites of each of these states if you just search Nevada Assembly Bill number 375 you can pull it up and look at it for yourself. But anyway, this one did die in committee but I did want to use this one as an example of the general language that's used in these bills. So this one says "Section One of this Bill requires that any school facility in a public school including a restroom, locker room, or shower, which is designated for use by persons of one biological sex must only be used by persons of that biological sex as determined at birth. Section One also requires a public school to provide separate private areas designated for use by pupils based on their biological sex, for any school facility where peoples may be in a state of undress in the presence of other peoples. For the purposes of Section One Section 3 of this bill provides an exception from the provisions of existing law that otherwise make it unlawful to deny equal access to places of public accommodation on the ground of gender identity or expression." So it's basically saying it is unlawful to provide exceptions to these bills based on gender identity or expression.  So it is.. They are saying it is illegal to make an exception for someone who identifies differently as their gender assigned at birth. And that's pretty much language that you can see throughout these various bills. They mention biological sex, and the biological sex as determined at birth and that there will not be any exceptions to these bills based on gender identity or expression.

>>K: Well, and one thing 'cause I know a bunch of these bills, actually, were in response to city ordinances that granted or made non-di, di, [nonsense sounds] a lot of these bills are in response to cities that have non-discrimination ordinances and so like, you know, this one says that this bill provides an exception from the provisions of existing law that otherwise make it unlawful to deny.. So what they're saying is, this state law grants an exception to existing law that makes discrimination illegal. 

>>R: Right

>>K: So, I think it's really interesting that these bills seem to be an, like, a response to people deciding that discrimination is wrong. 

>>R: Mmhmm. 

>>K: Sorry, I just had to like...

>>R: No, I, no that's a good point and it needs to be made. And you know, speaking of exceptions, we're going to talk a little bit too about the exceptions that some of these bills make. So they say, Oh, I'm sorry, now I'm referencing the North Carolina House Bill 2, um, referenced quite frequently on social media and in the news as HB2 and this one of course is still active.

>>K: This one, you've probably heard referred to as 'The Bathroom Bill,' but, as we talked before about GLAAD's Media Guide, that is really an unacceptable way to talk about it, because it's essentially more fear mongering, so we're not going to call it that, but if you've heard people talking in the news about 'The Bathroom Bill,' this specific bill is probably the one they're talking about. 

>>R: Yeah, this is for sure the most popular one that's talked about a lot. So this language says "To Establish single sex multiple occupancy bathroom and changing facilities, local boards of education shall establish single sex multiple occupancy bathroom and changing facilities as provided." And so, the interesting thing that I found about this bill, is that it provides all of these exceptions to who is allowed in what bathroom to people they consider biologically female, biologically male, the language that they're using in bathrooms of people who are of the opposite sex. Again, according to these bills they're making the exceptions as follows: For custodial purposes, for maintenance or inspection purposes, to render medical assistance, to accompany a student needing assistance when the assisting individual is an employee or authorized volunteer of the local board of education, or the student's parent or authorized caregiver, to receive assistance in using a facility, to accompany a person other than a student needing assistance, or that has been temporarily designated for use by that person's biological sex." And so, what that's saying is, students who have a gender identity or gender expression that does not match the gender they were assigned at birth, may not use the restrooms of their gender expression. However, all of these other people can use whatever, or enter those restrooms as they please. And I think it's really interesting because we hear a lot of talk about, 'Ok, the reason that everyone is so afraid of transgender individuals being able to use other bathrooms is the fear that somebody is going to pose as transgender or as a gender of the bathroom they are attempting to use, and that's going to create a lot of sexual assault.' So there's been a lot of fear mongering, that happens there, but if we're allowing all of these other individuals who actually are of the gender that is not of the bathroom they are trying to use, where does that line get drawn. 

>>K: You can pretend to be a janitor. 

>>R: Yeah. Exactly. So when people say "Oh they can pretend to be transgender,' well you could also pretend to be a custodian, you could pretend to be assisting a student, and sexual assault could happen that way, but you never heard of that being an issue before you know, transgender individuals attempting to use the restrooms of their gender identity or expression came to light. 

>>K: I think it's a good time to point out too, that transgender people have been using the bathroom, that matches their gender identity, some transgender people have.

>>R: Yeah! This has been happening!

>>K: Right, and you would never know unless you're like, you go into the bathroom and you watch other people go to the restroom, you wouldn't know.

>>R: That's a sexual violation. Let's talk about that. If we want to inspect everyone's genitals, that's a sexual violation. You know, c'mon! And this bill I also wanted to use, well actually, let me take a second, because I want to... MediaMatters.org put out this graphic that I thought was really important to bring up because if you're, if you're a parent out there, you know, sexual assualt is I think, something as parents we concern ourselves with a lot. Or you know, a caregiver of a child, you concern yourselves with it a lot, and so I have had fellow parents say to me "But like, aren't you a little worried about the sexual assault thing?" So I'm going to bring up this graphic, again, Mediamatters.org put this out, and they said "What right-wing groups say will happen if states implement laws to protect transgender people from discrimination." You have Pacific Justice Institute saying "Laws would be abused and exploited by sexual predators." You have Peter Sprig from Family Research Council saying "Sexual Predators will have legitimized access to women's restrooms." And you have Texas Values saying "Laws would allow sexual predators to gain easier access to their targets." So you see, this is clear, like, fear mongering here. And then what experts from states with laws on the books have to say about it. Toni Troop, the spokeswoman for Jane Doe Incorporated from Maryland says "Beyond specious to say that laws would lead to sexual assault." Las Vegas Police Department says "No problems since the passage of a 2011 law." 2011. Like, since 2011 there have been no problems. For five years. William Hoshijo, executive director of Hawaiian Civil Rights Commission, says "Has not resulted in increased sexual assualt." Karen Richards from Vermont, from the Vermont Human Rights Commission says, "Not aware of any problems from a 2001 law." So that is 15 years this law has been on the books and not aware of ANY problems. Amy Sneirson, executive director of the Maine Human Rights Commission said, "No factual basis for sexual assault fears." John Elder from the Minneapolis police, er, he's the Minneapolis Police Spokesman says "Sexual assaults stemming from law not even remotely a problem." Alexa Pretty, director at Colorado Coalition Against Sexual Assault says "Opponents of protections are trying to create fear." So he, she just comes out and says it. She's like "Um, no, this is fear mongering." Charlie Burr spokesman for Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industry says "Zero allegations of bathroom sexual assault." Michael D. Évora, executive director of the Rhode Island Commission for Human Rights, "No increase in sex crimes due to 2001 law." So that's another one that says for 15 years of this law being on the books, there has been no increase. And finally, Jim O'Neill spokesman for the Connecticut Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities, "Unaware of any sexual assault as a result of the Connecticut Gender Identity or Expression law." So, as you can see, there's been a lot of fear mongering about assault in these restrooms, but these states that do have laws that protect gender identity and gender expression on the books, have said, it has literally not affected sexual assault at all. There have been no instances of increase. OK. So I'm going to use this North Carolina House Bill 2 to also point out how some of the language in these bills clearly states protecting the rights of our people, EXCEPT for transgender individuals. This bill says "It is the public policy of this state to protect and safeguard the right and opportunity of all individuals within this state to enjoy fully and equally the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages and accommodations of places of public accommodation free of discrimination because of race, religion, color, national origin or biological sex provided that designating multiple or single occupancy bathrooms or changing facilities according to biological sex as defined shall not be deemed to constitute discrimination. So that literally says-

>>K: They've redefined discrimination.

>>R: Mmhmm, yeah. They've redefined discrimination. I just can't with it. [background noise]

>>R: So as we continue to look through these bills we also can see some of the language, some more of the ludicrous language that's used. This South Dakota House Bill Number 1008 calls gender a physical condition. The term biological sex as used in this act means the physical condition of being male or female as determined by a person's chromosomes and identified at birth by a person's anatomy. And so, now it's a physical condition.


>>K: Uh....

>>R: It's a physical condition to be male or female. I mean, really. And let me just mention that this South Dakota bill was vetoed by the governor, Dennis Daugaard I think is how you pronounce his name, so that bill has been vetoed. Thank you, Dennis. Something I found super interesting as I looked at this Tennessee Bill, so now I'm looking at Tennessee House Bill 2414 also Senate Bill 2387, this bill has passed one committee and needs to pass another committee before it will be reviewed by the full house. This one, I thought was really interesting, Public Institutions of Higher Education, shall require that a student use the restroom and locker room facilities that are assigned for use by persons of the same sex as the sex indicated on the student's original birth certificate. So not even are we talking about elementary schools, and middle schools, and high schools, we're talking about higher education. Public Institutions of Higher Educations. So not even when you're an adult can you say "Clearly this is my gender expression." Because you know, a lot of people want to make the argument, "Well, children don't know what they're talking about when they say that they're transgender. Which is, Bullshit.

>>K: Ludicrous. Yeah. 

>>R: But if we did want to make that argument, this is talking about public institutions of higher education. 

>>K: Right, right. 

>>R: When you, when you go off. 

>>K: So does it, does it say anything about just public restrooms in general? Or is this one specific to schools?

>>R: This one is specific to schools. The Tennessee bill is specific to schools because it says public schools here and it says public institutions of higher education and so we're only going to do this in schools, but we're also going to do it in the schools where adults are.

>>R: Yeah, I mean. It just gets worse. So let's move through because this Texas bill makes me irate. I mean, all of these do, but this one in particular was really, it just boiled my blood to do some research on this one. This is House Bill number 1748 and this bill literally criminalized transgender individuals. State Representative Debby Reynolds has pushed two bills to make it a crime to enter a public restroom or locker room not designated for a person's sex assigned at birth. So, two bills that she's tried to push through that criminalize being a transgender individual. So not only are we saying "Ok, we're a little bit scared of maybe the sexual assault issue, we're a little bit iffy on the fact that children have the wherewithal to say that they're transgender, we're also going to say that it's a crime, it's a crime to be a transgender individual using the restroom of your gender identity. Think about that for a second, just the person that you are, you're criminalized. Just for being who you are. So I just can't. And then there's another state representative from Texas Gilbert Peña, who has proposed two bills allowing a bystander to sue a transgender individual using the restroom of their gender identity for up to two-thousand dollars, PLUS compensation for, get this, mental anguish. What mental anguish does a person have from entering a restroom.

>>K: Right.

>>R: With someone else entering a restroom. Well, and that's what I'm trying to point out too, the definition of transgender isn't you know, you have a penis and say you're a woman. 

>>K: Right.

>>R: You know, it's that your gender identity does not match what you were assigned at birth. And so that can mean a lot of different things, and people are writing these bills using language that doesn't even define transgender. So honestly, in my opinion I feel like these, you can just be transgender and be like "actually this bill doesn't apply to me, because whatever you think you defined right there-"

>>Both: Was not me. 

>>R: I mean come on, it's just. RRAWR. Moving on, the Wisconsin, and I think this is my final bill to speak of specifically, Wisconsin Assembly Bill 469, in its original state was pointed out to violate Federal Government Office for Civil Rights 2014 statement that federal non-discrimination includes gender identity. So I know that we you know, want to talk a little bit about Obama's statement and some of that on the federal level and this one in particular was critiqued to have violated similar statements that federal non-discrimination included gender identity. So let's also talk about that for a second, you know, federally, on a federal level non-discrimination includes gender identity so what these states are doing like you said, is sort of responding to that and saying "No, but my bill is suddenly magically like more, means more than that and we're going to go by that." Later the bill was revised to offer gender neutral bathrooms so I will say that, but [laughs] its just.... ludicrous. It really is. So let's talk about the fear mongering aspect a little bit. I know that you have a lot to say about that.

>>K: Um, well, I mean I think you touched on it earlier when you were talking about the statements from these other states that have been made where like, places that have these non-discrimination laws on the books are not seeing you know, a large problem with this. Like, this isn't, this isn't something that exists.

>>R: Mmhmm.

>>K: And you know, you were talking about with the exceptions, we seem to be perfectly fine with people going into bathrooms.

>>R: Yeah, it's fine for a man to go into a woman's bathroom, as long as he has this list of specific reasons he can be in there. 

>>K: Right.

>>R: But if we consider that person out of our ignorance a man because he has a penis, but he says he's a woman and he's in the restroom then suddenly it's an issue. So this is clearly NOT that anyone is trying to protect anyone from sexual assault. 

>>K: No, this is absolutely not about sexual assault. And you know, as a survivor of sexual assault, especially as someone who was assaulted in a bathroom, by a cis man, and he didn't put on a dress to pretend to come in and pose as a transgender person.. You know, nobody cared then. 

>>R: Mmhmm. 

>>K: You know nobody has cared about women being assaulted ever.

>>R: [Scoffs] Right!

>>K: You know, women get assaulted all the time and instead of actually caring that assault is happening we hear things like "Well, were you drinking? Why were you by yourself?"

>>R: "What clothes were you wearing?" "Well, your short was kind of, er, you short was kind of skirt [laughs]. Your skirt was kind of short, you were showing too much cleavage." 

>>K: Right, and you know, and I think we've talked a little bit about it, I think it's I guess kind of funny because we've been making jokes about why girls go to the bathroom in packs I mean, my whole life!

>>R: Yeah. 

>>K: And I've seen these jokes in TV shows and comic strips that are from before I was born. So this idea that women are not safe in bathrooms has existed for decades. But for some reason, we didn't want to do anything about it, until people started having non-discrimination clauses, against, or for transgender people to be able to go to the bathroom, and suddenly certain groups of people found that distasteful. 

>>R: Exactly. So,

>>K: And now we're pretending to care about assault. 

>>R: [laughs]

>>K:And I think it's also, I'm sorry, I know you keep starting to talk

>>R: No you're fine!

>>K: But I just want to point out too that I think it's really important to talk about that we're only talking about assaults on women. On Cis women.

>>R: Oh yeah.

>>K: We're not talking about the fact that transwomen, especially transwomen of color, are killed and assaulted at a higher rate than any other demographic in the United States and yet these laws would force them to go into the bathrooms with the very people who kill them. 

>>R: Yep

>>K: And you know, nobody's worried about the little boys in the little boys room, and so why, what is our fascination, SUDDENLY, with assaults on cis women, and only in bathrooms? No where else. You know, and I think that that right there just shows that this is total crap. 

>>R: [laughs] Yeah, I mean it is. It's total crap. I mean, you cannot claim to care about sexual assault and suddenly and that be the reason for it, is absolutely 100% clear to me that that is discrimination. So let's tie that into Christian Privilege. You know, where does the Christian privilege aspect come from? And I think that this comes from a long history of Christian individuals discriminating against the LGBTQ Community as a whole. Because claiming that those things, you know, "go against' their faith somehow. You know, that homosexuals are an abomination and they want to quote the Bible at people. You  know, if your faith says to you, that homosexuality that being a- and I'm using the language that Christians would use, not the language that I would use- that lesbians and gay people are somehow against your faith in just being who they are and attracted to who they are, if that is truly against your faith that's one thing, but to impose that on people who don't agree with you, or don't believe what you believe doesn't make much sense to me. So you're saying that because you're a Christian and you believe that these things are abominations and they're not what God intended, that everyone in the United States, we're just going to ignore that there are other people, who you know, have other faiths and believe in other religions, we're going ignore the people who are atheists.

>>K: There are even people within Christianity who don't agree with that. 

>>R: Exactly, we're just gonna ignore all that though, and we're going to push these bills into our government. Like, whatever happened to separation of Church and State, can I just bring that up for half a second, because it just drives me up a wall. 

>>K: Well, and you know, I.. One of the things we also want to talk about is this, and I think it ties in really well with this Christian Privilege, because we want to talk about this double standard of sexual violation. And so, since these bills have become um, I don't want to say popular, but like, known about. Since they've sort of come to light, this HB2 in North Carolina has blown up, nationally. We've seen articles about women who have police physically remove them from bathrooms. There are, you know I read an article the other day about a woman who was going to the bathroom and had someone look through like, the crack in the stall to try to see what their genitals were

>>R: [groans]

>>K: Which as we've discussed is not-

>>R: That's a sexual, that's sexual assault.

>>K: Well that's sexual assault, but you know>>R: Watching me pee is sexual assault. 

>>K: We've also talked about your gender's not defined by your genitalia, so there's that ignorance, but yeah, this is a sexual assault!

>>R: Right.

>>K: And it's happening to women now, there have already been assaults on women in the bathroom because of the bills. Not because of transgender people going to the bathroom. Not because of people posing as transgender people going to the bathroom. But because people decided to make these big bills denying, suddenly, transgender people the right to go to the bathroom that matches their gender identity, now women are being assaulted in the bathroom. 

>>R: Right.

>>K: And you know, I think also, talking about Christian Privilege I think it's important to talk about the people who have been protesting, like at Target, because Target came out right, with their inclusive bathroom policy.

>>R: Mmhmm.

>>K: As it's been called. And so these cis, Christian men have been going into bathrooms, like into women's bathrooms, and they've been standing outside women's bathrooms and asking the women going in if they are women, and you know, they are only doing that because of their faith. So they are harassing and assaulting people-

>>R: Because of their faith.

>>K: Because of you know, they have the right as Christian people to do this. 

>>R: Right. 

>>K: Which I think is the epitome of

>>Both: Christian Privilege.

>>R: Yeah. I just, the whole thing, grosses me out.

>>K: Because it's gross. 

>>R: It is. 

>>K: There's no, you mentioned separation of Church and State before, and you know, that was one of the foundations right, of our Constitution and our country, was you know, all these religious refugees showed up and [quiets voice] did a bunch of terrible things, [Rosey giggles] [Voice returns to normal volume] But they did, they showed up and they fought a revolution to get away, and they you know, they enumerated the right to freedom of religion in our Bill of Rights. It's the very first one! [hands smacking for emphasis]

>>R: Mmhmm

>>K: And so, the fact that people now, you know they want to talk about these like these pure Constitution people and "This is exactly what the Constitution says and it's exactly what we should do," but then cannot acknowledge that freedom of religion and that not everyone subscribes to your religion. And not everyone is bound by your religion's rules. 

>>R: Well, and I also want to point out that there are other faith groups as well, there are other religions that also don't necessarily believe in or agree with the members of the LGBTQ Community, but you don't see them picketing. You don't see them up in the Target trying to pull people out of restrooms. You don't see them looking in the cracks of restrooms, or trying to push these bills through Houses and Senates. You don't see that happening and not only is that because other people of other faiths don't have the privilege to do that, but I think there's an understanding with those faiths too, that-

>>K: It's dangerous for you to behave-

>>R: It is absolutely dangerous. Can you imagine if Muslim men were congregated outside of a women's restroom in Target or outside of a restroom in Target and yelling at women "Prove to us that you're women!" I mean, can you imagine what would happen then?

>>K: I don't want to imagine. 

>>R: Exactly. Because for Muslim men to do that, would be an incredibly dangerous act.

>>K: I think you brought up the fact that we don't see other faith groups trying to push these laws through, and I think that that is another sign of Christian Privilege because other faith groups do not have the representation in politics that Christianity has. So that's important to note too, that Christians make up most of our political bodies. 

>>R: Yeah, this list that I pulled, and I do want to make a note that this list I pulled is from everydayfeminism.com and it's titled "Don't Believe in Christian Privilege? These 15 Examples Will Leave no Doubt." And part of this list does state, you know, politicians who create and uphold laws are likely to share your faith is one of the things on this list. So that's part of the problem too, is that there is not representation of other religions, and so they would never dream of going to a restroom because they are not protected by the laws and the politicians in the way that Christians are, so there is a ton of Christian privilege involved in these bills. 

>>K: Mmhmm.[Music]

>>R: Ok, so now we're going to do our 'Oh So Tasty' Segment and just as a reminder, we're super unadults and-

>>K: Well, our theme is gummy bears!

>>R: Yeah, so we've designed this entire theme around gummy bears, so this-

>>K: I got a big bag of gummy bears.

>>R: It's a big bag of gummy bears.

>>K: Because I found a place where I can buy gummy bears in bulk.


>>R: And they're delicious. Yeah buying gummy bears in bulk is always a good idea, in my opinion.>>K: Is it a good idea?

>>R:  Yeah.

>>K: [laughs] I mean I've been eating gummy bears for two days. 

>>R: [laughs] We've, haha, there's nothing wrong with that. Anyway, gummy bears. So, again we're going to use the gummy bears to tie in everything we've talked about in this episode. So we're going to imagine that there's a, a little green gummy bear. And green gummy bear is going into the restroom and then a red gummy bear comes in and is like, "Hey, stop, you have blue dye..40! And therefore you're not a green gummy bear and so you cannot use this restroom, Grr." Because bears 'grrr.'

>>K: But do Gummy Bears 'grr?'

>>R: They do.

>>K: Or do they just sort of 'woobbwoobbwoobb.'


>>R: Because they're gelatin?

>>K: Yeah.

>>R: They just 'blublublub."

>>K: So.

>>R: I liked earlier when you were talking about how gummy bears going to the restroom would be like, number 2 would be jello, and number one would be Kool-Aid. HA! I think that's funny, I just think they need to know how funny we are, when we're talking about the excrement.

>>K: We're hilarious. We were talking about bathrooms! So the gummy bears pooped Jello. 

>>R: I feel it, so you have green gummy bear trying to go to the restroom, and you have red gummy bear saying "You have Blue Dye 40, you can't use the green restroom."

>>K: Yeah, like those dumb people who were talking about Chromosomes or whatever.

>>R: Yeah, so yeah, so the colorful dye that goes into the gelatin to make these deliciously flavored gummy bears that I'm obsessed with now.

>>K: And they use the inappropriate language, because the red gummy bear would be like "Clearly, because you have Blue Dye 40 you were born blue."

>>R: Exactly.

>>K: And then, another green bear, who's on top of things is like "Woah, woah, woah, you're totally wrong red bear. And you don't get to run the show."

>>R: Yeah.

[Both Laugh]

>>R: You don't get to run the show.

>>K: That's how it would go in my world. Like I would just go tell these politicians, "You don't get to run this anymore."

>>R: You, You don't get to run this.

>>K: You're not in charge of decisions anymore.

>>R: Nope, no thank you. Good day, sir.

>>K: Please go home, without pay. 

>>R: [Laughs] Please go home, without pay. Good day, red gummy bear. 

>>K: You're fired.

[Rosey laughs]