It is insane that our society is so concerned with a small minority's
rights that the majority's rights are trampled and the majority are called
bigots. It's great for teenage boys who can now claim to
"identify" as female so they can shower with the cheerleaders. If a
female student filed a sexual harassment charge in such a case, would it even be
heard? Unfortuantely, these issues are only being dealt with in a
one-sided way. One side's morals are being forced onto the other side.
Today, the LGBT morals are being shoved on everyone out of fear of lawsuits.
Truly sad for our country.Thankfully, by kids are homeschooled,
where they are not forced to comply with someone else's idea of
My wife and I will be carrying our birth certificates and a doctor's
notarized statement of our gender from now on in case we have to use a public
bathroom. Wouldn't want to end up in trouble with the "law in
@ Evidence Not Junk Science:Here is where your logic fails. You
seem to believe that a court of law can force people to ignore their conciences
and nature. If courts create laws for special classes of people, those new laws
may have unintended consequences. For example, if there are non-discrimination
laws that result in complicated litigatiion for some alleged infraction in the
work place, employers will avoid hiring members of that protected class in the
first place to avoid later having to deal with the litigation.If the
courts create new laws that force the schools and other places to allow a man
who feels he is a female to be able to enter into the ladies bathroom or locker
room, the ladies might feel inclined to not accept that person violating their
privacy. Sadly, that could result in that person being bullied - which would
truly be unfortunate.So if you find security in laws that force
people to do things against their moral and intellectual conscience, it might
have uninteded consequences that you hadn't considered. Lets
find solutions that respect the concerns, needs and rights of both parties in
this debate - that would work better for everyone.
@tatorsExactly, you hit the nail on the head .Is there not more
urgent issues that need attention ?
Since chromosome irregularities, and physical abnormalities are present in many
of these cases, it seems to me that a non-gendered bathroom for those with
disabilities is the best solutions. Otherwise, if you look like a
boy, use the boys' room, and if you look like a girl, use the girls'
room.I can't believe that we have reached a state where we have
to legislate this!
>Evidence, not Junk Science: I am not referring to any transgender issue.
I'm stating WHY the whole thing is disconcerting to so many. As for as
citation go, this forum does not seem to allow for links, so, I'll just
suggest you Google under "sexual assaults of children in public
bathrooms". I think that the first hundred will keep you busy.Before there is change of any type, logical hypothetical situations must be
scrutinized to avoid the obvious problems that will arise. I have
no issue with ANYONE living out their own personal view of their life, as long
as it does not infringe upon the rights of those who are too vulnerable to
defend their own rights or becomes overboard in its zealousness. This can and
will. Anyone who is truly looking to make things fair for all STARTS with those
who have no say and are dependent upon us to protect them.
To inform the minds of the people, and to follow their will, is the chief duty
of those placed at their head. (Thomas Jefferson)
@Charlemange ""How many high school boys do you think there are in
California wondering how many days they have to wear a dress before they get to
go into the girl's locker room?"Great news, not even one,
hasn't been a problem in school districts across the nation for over ten
years now.. Anymore hyperbole?
This makes me think about Michael Medved's comment regarding a law in
California that allowed students to use the facilities for the gender they
chose:"How many high school boys do you think there are in California
wondering how many days they have to wear a dress before they get to go into the
girl's locker room?"Clearly that overwhelming number of
students who are not gender confused have the right to use bathrooms and locker
rooms without somebody of the opposite sex being there!
@Jcobabe " The needs of the many, outweigh the needs of the few. Or the
one." 3 hungry wolves and one delicious lamb simply do not have
the right to vote on what they need for dinner, under our US constitutional
guarantees of due process and equal protection for all americans preventing your
tyranny of the majority.
This is clearly not related to "ignorance". It is logical. The needs of
the many, outweigh the needs of the few. Or the one.
@Business Teacher, "But if you do not see a problem here, you obviously have
never sent a little boy into a men's bathroom alone for the first time, or
a little girl into a ladies room alone for that matter. It's a scary time,
as there ARE bad people out there, and they use restrooms to hide their
actions."The please cite the scary times and problems that have
occurred as a result of California's transgender protection law..
Facts and evidence are better than animus, fear and irrational sky will fall
arguments. "We have had no incidents of anybody pretending to
be transgender," As the district has for nearly a decade,
Chiasson said that Los Angeles schools would determine students'
eligibility for the law on a case-by-case basis, verifying that a student's
gender identity has been "consistent" and "persistent."
Conservative claims that the law would let students who aren't transgender
sneak into opposite-sex restrooms and locker rooms won't pan out, because
such claims bear no relationship to the reality of implementing transgender
protections."- MM for America
@JcoBabe "here is little need for everyone to compromise in what serves well
for the overwhelming majority, to placate unreasonable demands of a few."Are you suggesting that a minority should continue to placate the
ignorance of the majority? Is this a legitimate and rational basis for state
law?Maine's state supreme court noted that the court found
there was a violation of the Human Rights Act: by prohibiting the use of a
female restroom though she identified as female, the school district
discriminated because of her gender identity.Other cases around the
country hint at further progress on the issue of transgender bathroom use. Two
individuals in Iowa, both of whom were born as males and identify as females,
won the right to use women’s public restrooms. In June, in Colorado, six
year old Coy Mathis’ family won their case against the Fountain-Fort
Carson School District that had barred Coy’s use of a female restroom.
Now, the Maines case can be added to the list of successes in furthering the
rights and acceptance of transgender individuals.The only way to
resolve animus appears to be through a court of law. Let the legal action
>Baccus0902 your scriptural referrence is way out of context. But if you
want to use scripture, go ahead and explaine why there is not reference to
Jesus' sexuality in scripture? is it because he's straight and
married, gay or celibate? Well, what it for certain is, is PRIVATE, because it
is considered sacred, and not up for everyone's discussion. Your talents,
your good works, your service should not be hid under a bushel. Your private
life, well, there is a clear example given here.
years ago at a business conventions, we found ourselves caught in the middle of
a national transgender convention. The hotel had bathrooms set aside for
naturally born females, for those who were uncomfortable with a man who had had
surgery and hormone treatment coming into the bathroom with them (and attempting
to fit into the female modes of checking on make-up and talking by the mirror
for periods of time).About 20% of people will find themselves
disabled at some point in their life. This is why we have wheelchair accessible
bathrooms.Creating a floor to ceiling stall for a transgender
(rather than a born hermaphrodite person) would single them out to ridicule. If
they are obviously male (whether transgender or not), they should be in the male
restroom. If they were born with a sexual organ defect, they should be able to
go into the restroom they feel is correct to their gender.
>No H8 - Celebrate: Asking a question certainly does imply that I do not
have all the answers does it not? But if you do not see a problem here, you
obviously have never sent a little boy into a men's bathroom alone for the
first time, or a little girl into a ladies room alone for that matter.
It's a scary time, as there ARE bad people out there, and they use
restrooms to hide their actions. Do you really need me to cite examples to you?
Why don't you just do a little google there yourself. I think you'll
find plenty. Change can be good, but only if there is a better way. This way
is pretty foggy at best. Though we adults can just pretend it isn't wierd
or awkward, there is a point to feeling that way- people's sexuality
isn't meant to be ignored, but kept sacred and private. There are a few
folks who want change and want it now and they don't have logical plans in
place to bridge that gap.
When I was teaching at the high school there were children that felt more
comfortable using the bathroom in the nurse's office.
Very complicated concept here. Common sense and common decency along with
simple anatomy speak to having separate bath and locker rooms for girls and
separate ones for boys. Maybe that isn't politically correct to say? If all else fails, maybe we can fall back on what is "morally
correct"? Now for those few individuals who have a "gender
identity" issue, perhaps they can use the nurses restroom or another
restroom designated for that particular accommodation?Hence we
preserve respect for each gender and dignity for all those other kids who
appreciate privacy and decency when they use the restroom. Pretty simple.
My impression is that this is a case where the exception proves the rule. There
is little need for everyone to compromise in what serves well for the
overwhelming majority, to placate unreasonable demands of a few. Mandates that
impose the lowest common denominator on everyone only serve to force everyone to
act as equally handicapped.
@ TatorsYou wrote:"For thousands of years, this hasn't been
an issue for civilization. And now it suddenly is? Wow!"Perhaps
it wasn't much of a civilization after all.We live at the best
time in human history. For the first time we dare to question and pay attentions
to matters that we used to discard or ignore because it made us
uncomfortable.Jesus talk about this in Luke 8:16,17"No one
lights a lamp and hides it in a clay jar or puts it under a bed. Instead, they
put it on a stand, so that those who come in can see the light. 17 For there is
nothing hidden that will not be disclosed, and nothing concealed that will not
be known or brought out into the open."
SB100 states:517 (b) It is a discriminatory and prohibited
employment practice to deny an employee518 access to restrooms, shower
facilities, or dressing facilities that are consistent with the519
employee's gender identityAccording to SB100 what is gender
identity?83 (k) "Gender identity" means an individual's
internal sense of gender, without regard to84 the individual's
designated sex at birth. Evidence of gender identity may include an85
individual's self-identification, as well as the individual's
gender-related appearance,86 mannerisms, and other gender-related
characteristics.What does this mean? It means that if I am a
biological male who identifies as female, an employer must allow me to use the
ladies' restroom, dressing area, and showers.Where? Certainly
any facility that receives public funds, such as the county recreational
facility where you go swimming. Also, any incorporated business such as the gym
where you go exercise or where you work. I strongly object to this
provision in SB100. I believe it is an outrageous encroachment on women's
privacy and right to feel safe at their place of employment or a public
facility. One question: Do these provisions extend to patrons of
these establishments or just for emplyees?
Just build unisex washrooms from now on. Such washroom facilities are completely
private so that either gender can use them in complete confidence of their
@Tators, what if the body parts don't match the birth certificate? What if
the genetic testing shows something different than the body parts? How do you
get the birth certificate changed? Answer You can't. Do you have any
This is about children. You don't disrespect the majority of children and
their feelings and discomfort because of a few. Those few can deal with it a bit
longer until they get out of school. Then they can go knock themselves out and
do their thing. This is about common sense. What they were born genetically
should decide which bathrooms and, locker rooms and showers are used.
@Tators, so body parts make the determination? What if you have both? What
percentage is required of each to make a determination that would make you
comfortable? @Business Teacher, what specifically determines
opposite sex, from a biological, physiological, genetic, endocrinology and
psychological perspective. How is one "supposed" to make that
determination? You seem to have this all figured out. As you can see, genetic,
and body parts are not enough. Please provide specifics, not
speculation. What has been the experience of school districts in
California and other states that have addressed this issue for years? How many
dangerous characters out there are misrepresenting themselves in school
bathrooms? Evidence please, not irrational fear.
What a waste of time and tax payer money.
@ No H8 - Celebrate:Very few answers in life are totally absolute.
Just pick a method and go with it. If a person's birth certificate says
he's a boy and he has boy body parts, use the boy's restroom. If born with girl body parts and that person's birth certificate
says she's a girl, have her use the girl's restroom.For
the love of common sense, why are some people trying to make such a simple issue
of restroom use so complicated? Regardless of what a particular study might
allude to or insinuate, the number of people actually mixed up about whether
they are male or female is truly miniscule. There are much bigger
issues in life that need much more attention than what some people are trying to
give to this one. Let's move on.
@wrz 3:57 p.m. Feb. 3, 2014The answer is not too complicated. Just
have full doors and ceiling to floor walls on stalls. And keep the
'restroom' apart from the sinks and mirrors.-------------------------My thought exactly. Problem solved.
@ equal protection and Kalindra:I don't see where this
legislation is about passing moral judgement on anyone. It's a physical,
not moral issue. There are physical, sexual differences between guys and girls
that have always been distinguished and accepted. In the interest of
political correctness, we are making this issue a lot more complicated than it
should be. It seems lately that even the tiniest segments of society want
special treatment and are blurring the lines of distinction.Do you
think we should perhaps have a separate "inter-sex" bathroom for those
who are not really sure that their body parts can tell them who or what they
are? Since almost all restrooms have stalls with locking doors, it
shouldn't be a big issue for anyone born a girl to use the girl's room
and for those born a boy to use the boy's room. Though there are exceptions
to everything, the vast majority of people just want to appease the calls of
nature when using a restroom and nothing more. A simple concept.For
thousands of years, this hasn't been an issue for civilization. And now it
suddenly is? Wow!
Ok, here's my question: Why did we separate bathrooms in the first place?
Wasn't it to avoid the awkwardness of private bathroom situations to the
opposite sex if not protect our children from being alone around potentially
dangerous adult characters? If I'm wrong about that, please let me know.
And if I'm not has that changed any since our first public
bathrooms? I'm sorry, I don't want to do my business around folks of
the opposite sex, or those who feel they are. Let's be honest, I know
it's not all about sexual attraction. But can't we have any social
expectations of private behavior anymore for fear of offending those who have
changed or are deciding their sexual orientation? And if I've upset you,
I'm sorry. It's an honest question.
Boys go to the boys room, girls to the girls room. Is this really that
difficult? I don't want an adult gay male stepping out of a stall while my
10 year old daughter is waiting.
@equal protectionAre you and Ketchum referring to Anne
Fausto-Sterling's paper, The Five Sexes? This paper was a thought exercise
and had nothing scientific about it; no experiment was performed. While I
do agree with the idea that sensitivity is absolutely necessary, to whom should
we be sensitive, the individual or the masses? With the instance in Maine- her
friends were okay with it, but is that indicative of how it would always be, or
might some be offended? Another question- who determines this? Imagine a
teenage boy decides he wants to go to the girl's locker room. He pretends
he feels like a girl so that he can do so and gains access. This can lead to all
sorts of problems. Ample documentation would need to be provided, then, and who
is to say what would qualify one to use the other bathrooms? This issue is much
more complex than the feelings of one person, as everyone around them has
feelings and motivations as well.
As far as I know, Muslims and Mormons treat their offspring with disabilities in
a very kind and respectful manner. In Utah we have much done for special
care and treatment for those who have less intelligence or physical
shortcomings. This is well known to the church and its welfare program.The evil done with a new agenda on gender choice or inborn trades, is not to
treat them with kindness, but to put them on public display to serve any
political purpose.If there are children with such abnormalities, they are
in need to be treated as much as normal, but kept in distance to publicity and
emotional confrontation.Many comments on this subject deny them such
privacy to live a normal life.They stirr up the heat, instead such
children have rights to live a quiet life.
@SAMom "I agree with Rep. Kennedy. Keep it simple. If you were born a boy,
use the boy's bathroom. If you were born a girl, use the girl's
bathroom."And how specifically is that determination made?
Please read some of the comments above before you answer. DNA won't work,
body parts won't work, biology won't work. A patriarchal blessing
appears to be the best way and should be legislated by law in order to attend
As long as there are stalls for every bathroom, who cares which restroom you
use?Eliminate urinals in every single restroom and the problem is solved.
This also has the positive effect of making men have to wait in line
just as long as women, to use the restroom.
@ 1951 That dang Constitution, every time you want to trample on some folks
rights, there it is, saying you can't do that.
The answer is not too complicated. Just have full doors and ceiling to floor
walls on stalls. And keep the 'restroom' apart from the sinks and
No, we won't look at LGBT legislation at all... except the ones that will
restrict transgender rights...
The proposed law's practical effect of punishment and shame is the best
solution to this problem. Look at the horrific outcome of the effect of this
law in California and other states that have addressed this issue in their
school districts for years. The evidence is clear and convincing.
Laws a plenty, who are we helping, who are we protecting?"Science provides further evidence of these complex distinctions and
interrelations. Brown University biologist Anne Fausto-Sterling studies the
biological variation of sex characteristics among humans. Her research estimates
that 4 percent of babies born are “intersex,” meaning they are born
with some mixture of male and female characteristics that prevent them from
being neatly sorted into binary categories of biologically female or
biologically male. More children are born intersex, than are born with red hair
(1 percent to 2 percent). If we apply these findings to Orange County,
California, it translates into more than 20,000 students who were born intersex
now attending local schools.An individual's biological sex is
different from one's “gender identity,” or the way in which an
individual understands and experiences masculinity and femininity. And, though
related to gender identity, it is also important to recognize that an
individual's “gender expression” – the gender one enacts
and performs in one's public life – can also be distinct, and even
sometimes in opposition to, one's internal gender identity."- Dr. K.
I agree with Rep. Kennedy. Keep it simple. If you were born a boy, use the
boy's bathroom. If you were born a girl, use the girl's bathroom.
How many times do you have to use the bathroom in one school day?
The girl in Maine had doctor certification of her gender. She used the
girl's restroom for 5+ years until a _boy_ complained about it. Balpreet Kaur is a Sikh woman with a beard. Most transgender
individuals present as the gender they identify with - meaning trans mtf will
not be a man with a beard wearing a dress. The average person would
not know someone was transgender unless that person told them. What
are you going to do? Have DNA testers outside all school restrooms?
@desert "... We need laws plenty."How do we pass moral
judgement on gender identity and people born inter-sex? DNA won't work,
"proper" body parts biology, physiology and endocrinology won't
work either. Do we look to our religious organizations to make the
determination? Can our legislators figure this all out and assign the proper
gender to someone in our laws without considering all of the factors that make
up gender? It turns out that DNA is not much help either in
properly passing moral judgement on the gender of others. There is more to
maleness and femaleness than X or Y chromosomes. About 1 in 20,000 men has no Y
chromosome, instead having 2 Xs. This means that in the United States there are
about 7,500 men without a Y chromosome. The equivalent situation - females who
have XY instead of XX chromosomes - can occur for a variety of reasons and
overall is similar in frequency.
@desert: So, society is going down the drain because people are trying to do
something about vulnerable children being ostracized or assaulted in school
restrooms?It's the job of schools to educate and protect every
child entrusted to their guardianship. We have laws that require children to
attend school. The least we could have are laws to keep them safe while
they're there.Gender Identity Disorder is not a joke, although
plenty of people here seem to want to make it into one, or worse. If a child is
honestly living the life of a girl, or of a boy, with the support of family,
friends and physicians, it's dangerous to single them out and force them
into the opposite restroom. Take a look at the young woman in Maine who won her
court case. You tell me honestly if she looks like she belongs in the
boys' restroom. (Hint: NO.) Her girlfriends CHEERED when they heard she
won the right to be treated the same as the other girls.Sometimes
kids have more basic sense than adults.
Why bother with our liberal judges. It is a waste of time for something they
will rule unconstitutional.
"We welcome your thoughtful comments"Well, how am I to put
this down to be thoughtful ?First there used to be a bathroom for
handicaps, since they do need more space and time, not one around to harass
them. That same restroom would be asinged to any in doubt (med.)as
well.That is as far as you could call it today. From now on ?Define me gender in doubt, would a patriarchal blessing make sure ? Are there
political motivations behind those wishing to be as they could select gender ?
But who would trust a patriachial blessing in a public school ?I
think it used to be ok for special people to have special restrooms.But
now there is a political movement on the horizon that claims insults around any
possible corner; good to put some preventive rulings into place.I
hope WW III is not to start on this one.Whom to trust in our days ?My thoughtful comment is in this direction, if people are kind and can
be trusted we need less law, when our society goes down the drain, we need laws