Hands Off the Ladies’ Rooms

 

gender-neutral-bathroomIf it concerns sex in any way, you can be sure that our culture will fixate on it and manage to defy common sense with hyperventilating indignation. Same sex marriage roiled the waters for decades, but now that the Supreme Court has big-footed that question, culture warriors are prowling for new realms of transgression to embrace. So, coming to a bathroom near you – transgenderism.

I’m just back from a weekend at Harvard University where unisex bathrooms are the norm. On behalf of womankind, I say: To the Bathroom Barricades!

Bathroom injustice has been a feature of the world for a very long time. Ask any woman. Most buildings feature equal-sized bathrooms for the two sexes – an automatic disadvantage for women who cannot use urinals (at least as of this writing). At every concert, stadium, lecture hall, or large meeting room, the line for the ladies’ room will usually curl out the door and around corners while the men breeze through their facility with assembly line efficiency. The only building in Washington, DC I know of where this is not the case is Constitution Hall, built by and for the Daughters of the American Revolution. Constitution Hall has twice the number of women’s bathrooms as men’s. Revolutionary indeed.

Some opponents of permitting “transgender” individuals to use the bathroom of their subjective feelings rather than their biology point to the risk of sexual assault. That seems a negligible risk. Hard to imagine rapists donning skirts the better to grab women in a ladies’ room surrounded by female witnesses. But the trans bathroom movement offends in other ways.

Gender-neutral bathrooms are nothing new. We use them on airplanes and trains all the time. At the risk of offending some men, there are two things that should be said about this. First, we women hate using unisex public bathrooms. Men are messy. They leave the seat up most of the time, and sometimes fail to raise it in the first place if you get my drift. Sure, some women are also unsanitary – but fewer. One survey found that 62 percent of men, but only 40 percent of women failed to wash their hands after using the toilet.

Second, airplane bathrooms are single use and thus don’t raise privacy/modesty concerns (I know, I’ve heard those urban legends too, but leave that aside). A locker room, dressing room, or larger public bathroom is a different matter. Outside of stalls, women in public restrooms change their clothes, adjust their undergarments, purchase supplies from vending machines geared toward women, and otherwise engage in activities they would be uncomfortable conducting under the eyes of a male (even one who feels himself to be female, or aspires to be female after years of surgery, depilatories, and hormonal dousings).

People with gender dysphoria, like those with other psychological ailments, doubtless feel miserable much of the time, and competent professionals should treat them. The former chief of psychiatry at Johns Hopkins University, Dr. Paul McHugh, has studied the matter for decades and opposes “gender reassignment surgery.”

In most areas of life, when someone holds a view of himself that is at odds with reality – McHugh offers the example of people with “body dysmorphic disorder” who falsely believe themselves to be horribly ugly – psychiatry offers therapy to cure them of their mistaken perception. Only in the area of sex does the profession, and the larger society, lose its grip on reason completely and declare that any and all delusions, wishes, hopes, and behaviors are to be ratified and even celebrated in the name of non-discrimination.

We’ve become so discombobulated that perfectly intelligent people will say, without noticing the contradiction, that homosexual behavior is an inborn trait, but the “male/female binary” is a socially constructed fiction.

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals has now ruled that a “transgender” 17-year-old must be permitted to use the bathroom of her imagined “gender identity” rather than her sex. “It’s easy to forget that these debates are about personal dignity,” scolded The New York Times.

There is nothing dignified about ratifying an unhappy person’s tragic misperception. What if the young person considered herself African-American like Rachel Dolezal? Should she get preferences in college admission? Or what about Danny Almonte, who was 14 when he starred in the 2001 Little League tournament? If he felt 12, does that make it okay?

When you figure that out, culture warriors, let us know. In the meanwhile, hands off the ladies rooms.

Published in General
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 103 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Lily Bart Inactive
    Lily Bart
    @LilyBart

    Why is the marginal happiness of a tiny minority of people in this country more important than the safety and well being of the women in this country?   It just defies logic and common decency.

    Its just ugly selfishness in transwoman when they are more interested in their own slight, marginal happiness than in the safety of little girls.

    A Pennsylvania man who was arrested for taking photos of a 10-year-old girl in a public restroom.

    http://fox43.com/2016/04/18/quarryville-man-accused-of-using-phone-to-look-at-10-year-old-girl-in-sheetz-restroom/

    • #91
  2. Kozak Member
    Kozak
    @Kozak

    Josh Farnsworth:

    Wow, so a few weird cases led to this legislation it would appear. Why is the left fighting so hard against the law then? Why aren’t the proponents of the law pointing to the actual cases they claim the law would stop in the future?

    This is the current Cultural Jihad for the Left.  All over a handful of ill individuals, who would benefit more from treatment then pandering.

    Number of “transgendered” per 100,000 by state

    • #92
  3. Whiskey Sam Inactive
    Whiskey Sam
    @WhiskeySam

    Josh Farnsworth:

    Kozak:

    Josh Farnsworth: Is existing law insufficient to punish folks exploiting this issue to engage in criminal activity?

    Not in the second case. He was following the law. In the third case the actual woman was punished with loss of her gym membership because she was uncomfortable with the faux woman in her locker room.

    Wow, so a few weird cases led to this legislation it would appear. Why is the left fighting so hard against the law then? Why aren’t the proponents of the law pointing to the actual cases they claim the law would stop in the future?

    This article on it has a link to the ruling itself  https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/federal-appeals-court-sides-with-trangender-teen-says-bathroom-case-can-go-forward/2016/04/19/6a873b88-f76b-11e5-9804-537defcc3cf6_story.html

    • #93
  4. Josh Farnsworth Member
    Josh Farnsworth
    @

    Whiskey Sam:

    Josh Farnsworth:

    Kozak:

    Josh Farnsworth: Is existing law insufficient to punish folks exploiting this issue to engage in criminal activity?

    Not in the second case. He was following the law. In the third case the actual woman was punished with loss of her gym membership because she was uncomfortable with the faux woman in her locker room.

    Wow, so a few weird cases led to this legislation it would appear. Why is the left fighting so hard against the law then? Why aren’t the proponents of the law pointing to the actual cases they claim the law would stop in the future?

    This article on it has a link to the ruling itself https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/federal-appeals-court-sides-with-trangender-teen-says-bathroom-case-can-go-forward/2016/04/19/6a873b88-f76b-11e5-9804-537defcc3cf6_story.html

    So the left is seriously dug in on this.  How do we win without being boycotted by tired cultural icons (I’ve never heard a Springsteen song I didn’t think was cheesy and overrated)?  Apparently passing laws isn’t the answer – what is?  Common sense and enforcing existing laws?

    • #94
  5. Lily Bart Inactive
    Lily Bart
    @LilyBart

    Josh Farnsworth: Is existing law insufficient to punish folks exploiting this issue to engage in criminal activity?

    The problem is:  once the ‘deed’ is done, the damage is done. This is like leaving your house or car unlocked because stealing is against the law and the thieves can be prosecuted.

    In the past, we’ve had the right to question men who’ve been found in the girls room.  With the new, politically correct view, we loose our ability to police these things – we make it easier for pervs to do their work.    Isn’t it better to be honest about human nature (of pervs not transpeole) and protect our girls?

    #thingsIshouldn’thavetotellyou

    • #95
  6. Josh Farnsworth Member
    Josh Farnsworth
    @

    Lily Bart:

    Josh Farnsworth: Is existing law insufficient to punish folks exploiting this issue to engage in criminal activity?

    The problem is: once the ‘deed’ is done, the damage is done. This is like leaving your house or car unlocked because stealing is against the law and the thieves can be prosecuted.

    In the past, we’ve had the right to question men who’ve been found in the girls room. With the new, politically correct view, we loose our ability to police these things – we make it easier for pervs to do their work. Isn’t it better to be honest about human nature (of pervs not transpeole) and protect our girls?

    #thingsIshouldn’thavetotellyou

    I’m with the side of normal bathroom use, I am just trying to avoid the cross-hairs of the left and their corporate sponsors while maximizing privacy in the bathroom.  What NC did apparently missed the mark, given the bizarre corporate reaction.

    • #96
  7. C. U. Douglas Coolidge
    C. U. Douglas
    @CUDouglas

    Lily Bart:

    Josh Farnsworth: Is existing law insufficient to punish folks exploiting this issue to engage in criminal activity?

    The problem is: once the ‘deed’ is done, the damage is done. This is like leaving your house or car unlocked because stealing is against the law and the thieves can be prosecuted.

    In the past, we’ve had the right to question men who’ve been found in the girls room. With the new, politically correct view, we loose our ability to police these things – we make it easier for pervs to do their work. Isn’t it better to be honest about human nature (of pervs not transpeole) and protect our girls?

    #thingsIshouldn’thavetotellyou

    That’s the problem. Worse, we’ve made it socially unacceptable to question this. Like the woman banned from gym because she questioned a man in the women’s locker room. Sad thing for her and all of us, is thanks to the Social Progressives there will be no places she can go where she feel secure, and this has happened just in the space of a year.

    • #97
  8. Lily Bart Inactive
    Lily Bart
    @LilyBart

    A good question from a woman upset about Target’s decision:

    I wonder how safe women shopping at Target are going to feel when a man follows her and her small children to the bathroom!?

    • #98
  9. Whiskey Sam Inactive
    Whiskey Sam
    @WhiskeySam

    Josh Farnsworth:

    Lily Bart:

    Josh Farnsworth: Is existing law insufficient to punish folks exploiting this issue to engage in criminal activity?

    The problem is: once the ‘deed’ is done, the damage is done. This is like leaving your house or car unlocked because stealing is against the law and the thieves can be prosecuted.

    In the past, we’ve had the right to question men who’ve been found in the girls room. With the new, politically correct view, we loose our ability to police these things – we make it easier for pervs to do their work. Isn’t it better to be honest about human nature (of pervs not transpeole) and protect our girls?

    #thingsIshouldn’thavetotellyou

    I’m with the side of normal bathroom use, I am just trying to avoid the cross-hairs of the left and their corporate sponsors while maximizing privacy in the bathroom. What NC did apparently missed the mark, given the bizarre corporate reaction.

    NC didn’t do anything beyond the pale.  The reaction was built-in to any who dares to question the new orthodoxy that there is no objective truth.  The Left has declared war on the most fudamental aspects of our culture whether we want to fight or not.  The irony is completely lost on those like Springsteen in that the same right they claim in refusing to do business in NC because they disagree with them is the same right they deny those who would choose not to do business with people with whom Springsteen agrees.  Freedom of association in their minds only applies if you choose to associate with the right people, i.e., their kind of people.

    Their self-righteous hypocrisy knows no bounds, and it won’t be stopped by ignoring it and hoping it will go away as we’ve spent so much time doing.  It will require sacrifice.  If Springsteen feels that way, then we should be willing to not buy his albums or see his concerts.  Sauce for the goose.

    What we’re really seeing is the breakdown of culture.  There is no longer one, broad American culture.  There are two distinct cultures which are antithetical to each other.  My fear is we’re going to continue to waste time trying to find away to bind together two peoples who don’t really want to be together until we wake up and realize we’d be better off apart.  It will probably take civil war to reach that point, though.

    • #99
  10. Tom Meyer, Ed. Member
    Tom Meyer, Ed.
    @tommeyer

    Lily Bart:Why is the marginal happiness of a tiny minority of people in this country more important than the safety and well being of the women in this country?

    I confess to never being able to garner much interest in this subject, but that’s really about what it comes down to.

    • #100
  11. James Of England Inactive
    James Of England
    @JamesOfEngland

    Josh Farnsworth:

    Kozak:

    Josh Farnsworth: Is existing law insufficient to punish folks exploiting this issue to engage in criminal activity?

    Not in the second case. He was following the law. In the third case the actual woman was punished with loss of her gym membership because she was uncomfortable with the faux woman in her locker room.

    Wow, so a few weird cases led to this legislation it would appear. Why is the left fighting so hard against the law then? Why aren’t the proponents of the law pointing to the actual cases they claim the law would stop in the future?

    In the second case, current law worked just fine; someone wrongly went into the women’s changing room, and was turfed out. It didn’t happen immediately because no one saw, but it did happen when the staff were alerted. Maybe the guy should have been fined or jailed or something, but for most of American history that would have been a surprising outcome for a first offense of that variety.

    In the third case a woman spent days harassing customers because she disagreed with a company’s policy and was consequently refunded her membership fee. None of the three cases are examples of outcomes that the NC law, nor any other state law that I’m aware of, would have prevented. Indeed, I’d like to think that few Ricochetti would approve of a law that prevented businesses from dropping obnoxious clients.

    The “I would feel uncomfortable” argument is legitimate in a democratic society, but there’s a pretty strong data problem for those who defend the NC law on the basis of dramatic outcomes. This is mirrored on the other side; forcing people into bathrooms that do not match their apparent gender does seem linked to the violence that is regularly suffered, of the type that might be alluded to in this thread, but I’m not aware of an assault or murder that’s been clearly linked to a law of this type. Reducing the threat of being challenged is obviously a significant benefit to the comfort of anyone at risk from that, and to a lesser extent those around them; for both sides, the arguments grounded in data are about comfort.

    • #101
  12. Kozak Member
    Kozak
    @Kozak

    Whiskey Sam: Their self-righteous hypocrisy knows no bounds, and it won’t be stopped by ignoring it and hoping it will go away as we’ve spent so much time doing

    Unhappy about providing a service for a gay couple like a cake or hosting their wedding in your home?  We will destroy you. Including using the full force of government to force you to provide that service or destroy your business and life.

    Unhappy with a state law you dislike?  Refuse to do business with them. Like rock stars who cancel a concert, or state agencies that won’t allow travel to the offending state.  You are a hero.

    • #102
  13. Songwriter Inactive
    Songwriter
    @user_19450

    Lily Bart:Why is the marginal happiness of a tiny minority of people in this country more important than the safety and well being of the women in this country? It just defies logic and common decency.

    Its just ugly selfishness in transwoman when they are more interested in their own slight, marginal happiness than in the safety of little girls.

    A Pennsylvania man who was arrested for taking photos of a 10-year-old girl in a public restroom.

    This.  Exactly. Setting aside the complete “Yuch” Factor of genderless bathrooms, the Left wants to destroy common sense in order to soothe the hurt feelings of a tiny group of people.  I just tried explaining this to a left-leaning friend, a person of otherwise good character. And she (yes, a woman) does not get it. I gave up.

    • #103
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.