Sunday, May 08, 2016

Separate but equal

On Christian comment threads I sometimes see softheaded people propose a simple solution to the transgender controversy over restrooms: have a separate restroom for transgenders. A single-occupant restroom with a lock. Problem solved!

I'd like to discuss the problem with that "solution". Some Christians are caught off-guard by this debate because it's so ridiculous to begin with.

i) At best, that solution would only work for new construction. Existing buildings already have space and plumbing allocated for restrooms. So the solution would require retrofitting old buildings with an extra restroom. 

I assume people who propose this "solution" aren't in businessmen or structural engineers, because they've clearly given no thought to the expense or feasibility of their proposal. It's one of those unfunded mandates dear to people who delegate implementation to someone else. 

Take a skyscraper. The cumulative weight must be carefully distributed. The structural loads and stresses are enormous. You can't just knock out a weight-bearing wall to make room for a new restroom. Likewise, the floor of one story is the ceiling of another. Consider what would be involved adding new plumbing for an additional restroom (or restrooms) on each floor. 

ii) Another problem is enforcement: what's to keep cisgendered men and women from using the transgender restroom? 

iii) But perhaps the biggest problem is that, from what I've read, trans activists reject separate but equal facilities in principle. They find that exclusionary. It singles them out as abnormal. So this is a "solution" by cisgendered people who haven't been listening to trans activists. 

iv) Another problem is the notion that there's a one-size-fits-all restroom (or locker room) for the transgendered. But the taxonomy is much more varied:

• Cis men (i.e. normal men)

• Cis woman (i.e. normal women)

• Trans men (i.e. biological females who self-identify as male) 

• Trans women (i.e. biological males who self-identify as female)

Trans men and trans women further subdivide into:

• Trans men and trans women who've undergone body modification (i.e. hormone therapy, sex-change operation) 

• Trans men and trans women who haven't undergone body modification

In addition to:

• Pangender

• Agender

Now, since the whole perceived need to accommodate the transgendered is because they find it unbearable to use restrooms and locker rooms that match their biological sex, won't many of them find it unbearable to share the same restrooms and locker rooms with the cisgendered? Won't they still feel out of place?

Put another way, you'd expect trans men to feel at ease around other trans men rather than cis men. Trans women to feel at ease around other trans women rather than cis women. Body modified trans men to feel at ease around other body modified trans men. And so on. Isn't that the logic of their position? Each gender variation is a unique kind. Not equivalent to another kind. 

To take one example, where does Bruce Jenner belong? He's a surgical hermaphrodite. Male genitalia and breast implants. He will stick out whether you put him in a cisgender men's locker room or cisgender women's locker room. 

Suppose he undergoes a penectomy. He still won't look like a normal woman. He has a male body plan. A male chassis. 

And this isn't like someone with a birth defect. No. This is self-mutilation. 

So, to accommodate all the subdivisions, don't we need to build multi-occupant restrooms and locker rooms which each subgroup will share with members of the same subgroup? That's about eight different multi-occupant restrooms and locker rooms to accommodate all concerned parties. 

v) What about otherkin? Should humans who self-identify as animals be free to defecate and urinate outside, in public spaces? Of course, that will create public sanitation issues.

vi) The deeper issue is that transgender ideology represents a direct attack on the whole "cisnormative/heteronormative" binaries. It's a frontal assault on the natural order. Transgender activists don't believe biological sex represent God's design for human nature. They don't think nature is normative. 

The distinction and interplay of manhood and womanhood are central to human society. Deny that and anarchy ensues. 

ivi) Finally, transgender activists will demand accommodations in sports. What happens when transgender girls and women (i.e.. biological boys and men who self-identify as female) invade women's sports? The biological males will dominate women's sports. Squeeze out the females. Conversely, when transgender boys and men elbow their way onto male teams, they will negatively impact performance. Same thing with military readiness and unit cohesion. 


  1. How would you respond to the nonsense? I know a leftist who thinks it's discriminatory to have women and men use separate restrooms, and even if I weren't completely exhausted at the time, the main thing I can really think to do is laugh at her. I could also point out that given atheism, it's not as if their's anything wrong with discrimination, even assuming that were an example of it...but then it'd take time to actually show her that's the result of her atheism.

  2. From what I know there is provision for trans athletes at least within the Olympics. I can't remember what the lines are but I think FtM have no restriction but MtF need to have a certain level of hormone treatment. Further I pretty sure there is a MtF woman fighting in the UFC.

    1. I'm sure that's in the works. It hasn't achieved escape velocity yet because only a few people are taking advantage thus far, but I'm sure that will change soon enough.

      It's like Renée Richards. That was an isolated case. He was a second-rate, over-the-hill athlete, so the best female players (e.g. Chris Evert) could still beat him. But it's only a matter of time before it really takes off.

  3. I'm thinking about encouraging my freshman high school son to say he's a girl so he can sue to run on the girl's track team and set state and national records, and get a full ride scholarship to any college he wants.

    He's already better at the 800m run than any female high schooler in the state, and he's only 5 seconds away from the all time top female performer at the university he's looking at going to.

    I wonder why so many people who advocate for this want to return to a time when the only place for women were at home raising kids.

    1. I actually think it's a good idea for normal boys to start gaming the system to their own advantage.