Follow Up to My Blog Post about the Transgender Controversy
My most recent blog post here was about the contemporary controversy over the use of locker rooms and restrooms by people transitioning from one gender or sex to another. Please do NOT read this follow up post without first reading the immediately preceding one; especially do not comment on this one without first reading that one.
Normally I include in my blog posts some caveats, some disclaimers, some warnings—to avoid confusion and responses that are inappropriate for this blog. This blog is on the Evangelical platform of Patheos; I am an evangelical Christian. However, as anyone who knows me or had read this blog (or some of my books) knows, I am not a “typical” evangelical whatever that means. I do not fit the media-promoted stereotype of an “evangelical.”
I will leave it at that for the moment because my only point is to say—Do not make assumptions about me or about my views on social, political or even theological issues on the basis of some preconceived stereotype of “evangelical.”
Before continuing, let me say a couple of things by way of guidance in case you wish to comment here. First, I do not speak for anyone but myself. Second, this blog is not a discussion board; it a space for me to present my opinions—which are sometimes nothing more than musings at the moment—and read constructive thoughts about them from others. Third, I will not post to this blog—in the moderated comment section—responses that are hostile, crude, uncivil, etc. Responses only get posted here if they conform to the “manners” of this blog which are guided by civility and constructive dialogue. Fourth, and finally, I will not post to this blog comments, responses, that include images or hyperlinks.
Now to my follow up “footnote” to my immediately preceding post about the transgender controversy which you must have read before responding to this one…
I want to respond here, now, to those commenters who defend the right of transgender persons who are not transsexual (that distinction is explained in my previous blog post) to use the public restroom and locker room of their choice.
My question to them is simply this: Why not abolish sex differentiated restrooms and locker rooms altogether? It seems to me the logical next step if and insofar as persons are permitted by policy and/or law to use the facilities that do not correspond with their sexual physiology.
What other reason is there for having sex-differentiated restrooms and locker rooms than to protect especially females (and I would say especially young females) from being exposed to naked male bodies?
I suspect, although I cannot speak for every male person, that most men and even most boys would not be offended or feel in any way threatened or violated by seeing a naked female body in a restroom or locker room. I also suspect, however, although I cannot speak for every female person, that most especially younger females (teenagers) would feel offended, threatened and possibly violated by being (especially alone) in a restroom or locker room with a naked male body.
I tend not to take what people say about this very seriously unless they are 1) female, 2) male with a young daughter or granddaughter, or 3) a person part of whose responsibility it is to monitor use of restrooms or locker rooms in a capacity as teacher or security person.
So let me be clearer still. I have nothing against transgender persons as such. I do not support or condone any type of persecution aimed at them as individuals or as a class. On the other hand, were I a father (for example) of a twelve year old daughter, I would want to be confident that she would not be exposed to a naked male body when she uses a restroom or locker room. And I would suspect that any male person, whatever his/her status may be with regard to “transgendering” (it wouldn’t even concern me in this instance), being naked—partially or fully—in her restroom or locker room is an exhibitionist. How is a parent or teacher or security person supposed to know what a person’s reasons are if/when they appear partially or fully naked in the restroom or locker room that is not designated for his sex?
You may think this is not a real life scenario, but it is. I have read news reports of especially boys and young men attempting to use the restroom or locker room designated for girls or women and defending their action on the basis that they are “transgendering.” Recently, near where I live, a teacher’s aide was accused by a “boy transitioning to girl” of being insensitive because she attempted to stop him from using the girls and women’s restroom in a public school. Much sympathy, of course, is poured out for the transgender boy/girl. But what about the teacher’s aide? What is she supposed to do? If the boy transitioning to girl has male physiology, genitals, would the parents of the girls want him/her using the restroom designated for their daughters? And what about the lone girl who might be in that restroom or locker room?
Please don’t tell me it doesn’t matter because the girls’ restroom has stalls because the next step in this would be, of course, his/her use of the girls’ locker room.
So, my point here is simply this: Let’s top talking about this controversy in vague generalities and be very clear and specific about it. To those who advocate transgender persons’ right to use whatever restroom and locker room they prefer I ask why not do away entirely with sex-specific designated restrooms and locker rooms? To those who advocate transgender persons’ right to use whatever restroom and locker room they prefer I ask how ought a teacher or security person distinguish between a transgender person with male physiology and an exhibitionist?
Again, use this blog only constructively; stick to the issue raised; strictly avoid hostile and accusatory (inflammatory) responses; do not include in your comment any hyperlinks or images. Also, finally, keep your comment brief. I do not have time to read lengthy essays here.