Transgender Locker-Rooms/Bathrooms: Where do we draw that line?

Bill HaleyUncategorized

There has been a lot of news on these issues of late (May 2016) and there is a lot to say. Things have become greatly unbalanced. The root of the problem is that one person’s rights stop when they start infringing on another’s rights. It is crazy that this issue is even debated because the issues are so common sense that to argue, you have to talk down to a kindergarten level. Presumably this new ‘policy’ of allowing transgender people to use the bathroom/locker room of their identified gender just requires that they say they identify with the other gender.

The transgender bathroom issue is quite disturbing. This issue is being pushed hard by the LEFT and the Right is just saying STOP. The Right seems to always try to fight through legislation, in which it is hard to get the votes and get past a possible veto. The Left gets one federal district court ruling or a statement from a radical in the Justice dept. and thinks that their way is now the ‘norm’, and the Right needs to fight with a very difficult constitutional amendment process to get back to the old ‘norm’. I believe the Right can use a lot more effective tools to move their agenda and stop the Left.

Some want to argue the issue of allowing ‘transgender’ people using restrooms’ with the mildest cases. They start with all people acting as professionally and politely as possible. They put out a case where stalls are very private and the transgender looks like the opposite gender. They further state that they just go in, do their business, and leave without anyone knowing the difference. While I hold objections to even this, it is important to realize cases much more disturbing.

The purpose of restrooms and locker rooms is to give privacy to people when they could be exposing themselves. That is the reason for walls in the first place. People still do and should get arrested for exposing themselves in public or to the opposite gender. Bathrooms/locker rooms are a place of ‘privacy’ where it is acceptable to be exposed, because it is single gender. In restrooms, sometimes people change clothes, showing underwear, or even being fully exposed. In locker rooms, which is very much included in this debate, changing clothes is the purpose of the locker rooms. In locker rooms, it is very routine to see fully exposed bodies. There are many locker rooms with open showers with a dozen or more people showering fully exposed.

People do not always act in a very polite, responsible and professional manner. There are some people who are truly perverted, and many variations in between. This is the case in both the transgender and non-transgendered populations. With long standing ‘norms’ and laws stating that a person has to use the restroom/locker room of their own gender, many negative issues can be mitigated. This new transgender policy opens up a ‘defense’ of perverted or just hormone filled people to negative actions. This also allows bullies or someone who wants to harm another with a way to access a place where their ‘victim’ is more vulnerable due to the state of undress.

While the Left tries to make the argument with the transgendered that they have ‘transformed’ into really looking like the other gender, that is not the requirement in the least. One merely has to STATE that they identify with the other gender. Are we to ‘discriminate’ against those that want to look like a man, but identify as a woman or vice-versa? There is no requirement on what level of appearance change is needed. There is no requirement that one holds a card from a psychiatrist stating that they ‘qualify’ as a transgender because they truly ‘believe’ they are the opposite gender.

What if a 16-year-old girl states that she identifies as a boy and walks into the men’s locker room full of 16-18-year-old guys? What if she goes in, strips completely, and walks into the open shower area where teenage boys are showering fully exposed? Switch this to a 16-year boy doing the same in the girls’ locker room. These are people that are just learning how to deal with the testosterone flowing through blood. Many have not had the values training needed to train them to treat women respectfully, when the testosterone is ‘demanding’ that they have sex with any female that exposes herself to him.

The majority of wives are totally opposed to their husbands looking at fully exposed other women. The majority of husbands are totally opposed to their wives being subjected to fully exposed other men. Most people do not want to be exposed to nakedness outside of their marriage. This is true for their spouse and children as well. These are social norms that have developed over centuries and have been codified into law so that people do not need to resort to violence to stop the violation of people’s right to privacy.

What if a vindictive ex-boyfriend who has stalking issues uses this new ‘policy’ to enter into the locker room where his ex-girlfriend is getting ready for swim class, just to harass her by staring at her as she changes clothes? What if a hormone filled teen without morals just wants to hang out in the girl’s locker room waiting to see naked girls? The many more ‘what ifs’ are numerous and quite disturbing.

Fathers of little girls often find it difficult to go out with the girls without the mother because of the bathroom issue. The girls are too young to go into the lady’s room alone and too old to use the men’s room with dad because of their very wondering eyes and running around. Men do not want to make other men uncomfortable by having a little girl around when they are partly exposed. More single stall restrooms and family restrooms help, but are not universal.

Transgendered people may have some of the same issues and one can sympathize, however, one’s ‘right’ to not feel uncomfortable does not really exist; however, to the extent it does, it ends when it starts infringing on other’s rights of privacy and not being exposed to nakedness they do not desire, which causes that other person major uncomfortableness.
Are we going to come to the point in the near future where women can say they identify as a guy and now go around topless like other ‘guys’? Males with Testosterone flowing, would say ‘great!’. However, men trained to have respect for women, Christian principles, and the knowledge that civilized people cover private parts, would believe this to be a very unfortunate development.

The question in the title is “Where do we draw that line?” Over centuries, the lines were drawn and norms became known. Men use men’s rooms and women use women’s rooms. Certainly we could discuss many more norms that became socially known, most without even being stated. While another person in the locker room (of the same gender) is in a state of undress, you do not stare, gawk, comment or otherwise react. The person undressing does not flaunt, or stay that way unnecessarily long. Most of this is learned early on by shunning or shows of disapproval of out-of-line actions. Most of what happens in the locker room is not conducive to law unless it becomes abusive.

Are we going to get to the point where a 16-year-old girl is thrown in jail because she refuses to fully strip in front of a boy who identifies as a girl? So much of these cases involve a transgender person’s feelings. The courts and justice department repeatedly state that these people feel that they are not included. There is a big issue in college about not making people feel like an ‘other’. If a girl is willing to disrobe in front of other girls, yet not in front of a male who identifies as a female, should she be forced by law to also disrobe in front of the transgender? We need to go back to first principals and not get caught up with people’s feelings as having legal protection.

Will guys who do not make the guys team in high school be able to try out for the girl’s team if he just states he identifies as a girl? The reason for separate teams is because most girls would not be able to compete with the guys. If this twisted logic continues, we could have issues in so many walks of life. This could unravel the fabric of society. The claim is not that transgender people are numerous enough to have a major impact, the claim is that non-transgendered people, that just state that they are, will be able to use this new policy to cause havoc.