632
Police Called on Trans Men Using Women's Restroom As Required By Kansas Law
(www.erininthemorning.com)
this post was submitted on 11 Aug 2026
632 points (99.1% liked)
News
38782 readers
2410 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Okay, this is exactly the kind of malicious compliance that I can get behind. Fucking legends.
Travelling the state, shitting for a cause. Big ups to the GOATs!
It's funny because it's barely even malicious compliance, it's just following the law 😭😭
yes, that's what malicious compliance is
Well yeah but isn't it usually taking advantage of small technicalities within a law to cause disruption? This is literally taking the law at face value, as it was intended
Malicious compliance generally doesn't involve technicalities, just following the rules. The maliciousness comes from knowing that following the rules, exactly as they are written down, will cause problems and disruption, and then doing it anyway, allowing the rules to override things like common sense.
As I understand it, it's generally any form of compliance. Typically, it's abusing technicalities, but what makes it "malicious" is that it subverts the intention behind the rule or order.
This law was designed to harass women. The transphobia is the vehicle used to deliver that intent, but for all its bigotry, it clearly isn't the ultimate point. All the discourse is about "protecting (cis-)women", about transfem athletes, and so on. Frankly, I'm not sure the type of politician to push this type of politics even remembers that transmascs exist. Even if they do, it's not like they could do anything about it that wouldn't risk collateral damage among cis-men.
Imagine how it would to if you tried to apply the "bathroom genital check" to the gender that invented etiquette about not standing too close to others when pissing. The geriatiric shrimpbearers in power would have a meltdown over the idea of someone manhandling their dick to make sure it's real.
(Nothing wrong with a small dick, just with making your insecurity about it someone else's problem.)
Now, unlike the transphobia, they can't make the misogyny explicit in the law (or at least they aren't sure they'd get away with it yet, so why risk it?). The law as written technically also applies to transmascs, even though they weren't the target and it realistically would never be enforced against them.
Thus, the malicious compliance is that the transmascs carry out the letter of the law rather than its spirit, fully expecting the predictable result and provoking the authorities into tipping their hand.
For the lawmakers it has an added bonus of being a double bind for transmascs. Passing for cis isn't binary or consistent, every trans guy has to guess what the likelihood is that any time he uses the men's room someone will think he looks trans and call the cops. There is no safe answer for him (trans women have a similar situation). For both trans men and trans women the less likely to get the cops called answer will tend towards men's rooms, but that's only because men are less likely to call the cops on a woman in the men's room.
they are going out of their way to create situations where they follow the law and cause disruption. that makes it malicious.
the intent of the rule is irrelevant.
Ah okay, fair enough
Malicious compliance is about applying an overly literal interpretation of a rule. There is nothing overly literaral about acting as if a law requiring trans people to use the wrong bathroom requires trans people to use the wrong bathroom.
that is one method of performing it, yes. that is not the only method.