this post was submitted on 17 Aug 2026
490 points (98.0% liked)

Malicious Compliance

22893 readers
734 users here now

People conforming to the letter, but not the spirit, of a request. For now, this includes text posts, images, videos and links. Please ensure that the “malicious compliance” aspect is apparent - if you’re making a text post, be sure to explain this part; if it’s an image/video/link, use the “Body” field to elaborate.

======

======

Also check out the following communities:

!fakehistoryporn@lemmy.world !unethicallifeprotips@lemmy.world

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://sh.itjust.works/post/65235734

On August 8, police arrived on the scene of Long Branch Lagoon Water Park in Dodge City, Kansas, to the sight of three self-described “bearded, burly men” who had been in the women’s bathroom and changing area. The manager of the municipally run property allegedly screamed and rushed children out the door.

The men knew this was likely. They didn’t agitate any of the women; they didn’t remove their clothes or make crass comments. They simply used the gendered spaces that the state of Kansas requires them to use by law, because these men are transgender.

“Supporters of SB244, including Attorney General Kris Kobach and Senate Majority Leader Ty Masterson, billed it as a way to keep men out of women’s spaces; it clearly requires some men to enter women’s spaces,” a press release sent to news outlets reads. So, these men took action—using malicious compliance to prove their point.

“Segregating people by suspected genitalia does nothing to improve public safety; it does quite the opposite by opening Kansans up to sexual harassment and discrimination. At no point should anyone be asking anyone else what genitals they have in public.”

The men, dressed in yellow “Compliance Crew” shirts, were part of a small group of trans-masculine Kansans who used the women’s room at facilities across the state that day in a coordinated action. They were also spotted at a zoo, a library, a museum, and other parks. They were in Emporia, Great Bend, Garden City, and Dodge City. At the library, at least one patron complained; at other places, the men used the bathroom and received dirty looks, and simply left the space without confrontation.

But at Long Branch Lagoon, members of the Kansas Compliance Crew resorted to having to describe their genitals to police in order to resolve the matter and avoid arrest.

“The men had a discussion with the manager and police and explained the situation, including uncomfortable descriptions of their bodies,” the press release said. Furthermore, both the manager and the police reportedly said “they had never heard of SB244 nor been notified by any government entity of its passage.”

“I could easily continue using the men’s restroom under the radar,” said Ray Vieux, who participated as one of the demonstrators.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I can kind of understand why places like women’s domestic violence shelters and women’s prisons need a legal definition of “woman” in order to define who is allowed in them

I've found that a lot of these policies are a legacy of affirmative action in response to the historic gulf in wealth between women and men.

They don't exist to keep men out. They exist to give women in abusive relationships a place to go without facing homelessness.

One might argue that gay men and trans-people can find themselves in exactly the same kind of relationships, for exactly the same reasons.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 2 points 3 hours ago

Yeah as a trans woman if I were in a DV situation I wouldn't even think I could go to a shelter. To my knowledge when we flee such situations we generally rely on friends (we're less likely to have family we can stay with).

Though tbh in the modern day we need shelters that can accommodate anyone, because anyone can be victims of financial abuse alongside DV. Additionally the problems associate with abusive men entering a shelter are still faced by women fleeing DV by a female partner.

[–] OwOarchist@pawb.social 4 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

One might argue that gay men and trans-people can find themselves in exactly the same kind of relationships, for exactly the same reasons.

Straight cis men can also be the victim of an abusive relationship. Maybe not quite as frequently, but it happens.

[–] Bane_Killgrind@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah but I make more money, and am bigger/stronger/ less physically vulnerable if I was stuck in a bad place late at night

All things being equal, it still isn't equal

[–] Fawkes@lemmy.zip 3 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Well that's good for you, but irrelevant to the point. Unless you're saying all men are your equal in every way. Which is philosophically nice, but realistically wrong.

[–] Bane_Killgrind@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

I'm saying that statistically, CIS straight women are still worse off than any man.

[–] Fawkes@lemmy.zip 1 points 34 minutes ago (1 children)

Yes, I'm not arguing against this, but it's irrelevant to my point, because it ignores the people who are statistically unlikely to need help, and yet still do. I understood the whole point to be "We need more shelters accepting of everyone," because a HUGE number of shelters specify they are for women and children only. Which, simply put, is just saying, "No men above 18 allowed."

Don't get me wrong, I understand the reason. I'm very aware of the bear analogy. But that doesn't make the lives of those excluded any easier

[–] Bane_Killgrind@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 3 minutes ago

So I thought that the problem you are describing isn't supported by the facts, but Kansas might have an incredibly different situation then Canada

https://www.canada.ca/en/women-gender-equality/gender-based-violence/intimate-partner-violence.html

Note the rates of reported violence.

https://womenshomelessness.ca/women-girls-homelessness-in-canada/

In Canada, there are less women-specific emergency shelter beds – across the system there are 30% dedicated to men, compared to 13% dedicated to women.

Honestly can't find Kansas statistics, I'm interested in how they operate. I'll be surprised if there is any significant IPV support for either gender, I'll be more surprised if it's equitable to the reported rates and needs.