Transgender Debate Creates Conflict

Have you ever noticed that commonsense often gets lost in the aggressive vacuum of political correctness? Should you resist the bellicose cries from these social justice warriors, you are often labeled with accusations and insults. The latest case of a solution looking for a problem, the use of public facilities by those that self-identify as transgender.

There are some issues I would rather not write about. Not out of a lack of knowledge or life experience, but because our world faces extremely serious problems I would rather talk about. However, occasionally I find myself writing a column because others are afraid to speak up. This is one of those columns that requires me to make it plainly clear that I am not a bigot, suffer from any social phobia, or that I’m not acutely aware the plight of those people experiencing any number of issues, such as transgenderism.

So before you get out your spray paint and try to figure out where I live, open your mind to the possibility that those with a countering view on this topic are not misinformed or hateful, and there is some actual validity to their concerns.

Our society is fast becoming a culture that promotes the concept that perception is reality, and that by merely declaring myself something I am not, all of society must bend to that assertion. I am not trying to make light of serious issues facing those living as transgendered persons or experiencing gender dysphoria, and although the American Psychological Association may declare transgender people do not fit into the APA’s mental disorder classification, neither do the people who believe in their privacy rights.

There are those who believe nobody is born to a gender or sex, that gender and sex are a social construct. There are those who also believe DNA and genetics have nothing to do with your sex. This is a ludicrous belief not based in factual science, but based on the often misguided credo that “live and let live” is the guiding force of social behavior. When archaeologists dig up our bones, they will confirm one of a few facts will be true: that the human race consists of men and women. This may be an inconvenient fact for some, but it is a fact nonetheless. As such, we need to not only try to understand what a transgender person may be experiencing, but we must respect the physical and psychological differences that conforming males and females adhere to.

Facilities such as restrooms, locker rooms and showers were specifically designed to accommodate the natural boundaries between the sexes, and afford people one of their essential rights, the right to privacy. If our privacy wasn’t a concern, why did we bother to build walls, stalls and doors? By creating laws and policies that allow those who are anatomically male or female to enter the facility of their choosing, you are saying to the other 99.9 percent of the population that their basic rights do not matter. These citizens, who wish no ill will, are attacked, maligned and marginalized for merely protecting their right to privacy.

One of the key facts missing in this discussion is the understanding that using the term transgender is not defining as person’s sexual orientation. An anatomically defined male, who chooses to think of themselves as a woman (such as Bruce/Caitlyn Jenner) can still be “straight,” meaning the man dressed as a women can still be sexually attracted to women. In fact, in a Penn State research survey that focused on transgender sexual preferences, 30 percent of men (anatomical) define themselves as heterosexual, and 38 percent of men (anatomical) as bisexual. Sixty-eight percent of men (anatomical), who practice a transgender lifestyle, are physically attracted to women. I know there are some who would like to break down every sexual barrier, but when your state of mind conflicts with a person’s clearly defined right to privacy, the right to privacy wins. The reason why a person may want to protect their right to privacy is not the issue. Whether that person is modest, their religious beliefs do not permit them to be alone with a person of the opposite sex (especially nude), or they believe in the natural boundaries when it comes to men and women, so be it.

On the issue of principle, I don’t believe “we will just have to agree to disagree.” This is an actual war on women because our daughters, wives and mothers will face the possibility of anatomical males walking into our dressing rooms, locker rooms and bathrooms. There are some in our society willing to put the feelings of transgendered individuals (who represent maybe 0.3 percent of our population) over the privacy rights of everyone else. However, it is unacceptable to surrender the rights of one person in favor of the fluid mindset of another person.

We may have laws that “protect” us from those who want to do us harm. However, societal norms and natural boundaries also help prevent the breach of privacy in public facilities. It is incredibly naïve not to acknowledge the fact those with ill intentions will be able to pose as transgendered and will not be questioned or prevented from entering facilities of the opposite sex. Only when they have committed a crime will the “law” step in, leaving the victim as collateral damage in the current social justice crusade.

I understand some believe this issue is complicated, but it is not. Complication and the “need for a conversation” are terms often used by some to marginalize the concerns of a person with whom they disagree. We do not promote an atmosphere of respect by disregarding the valid concerns of another person. Cramming down policies, creating laws (that will place police in an impossible position), and ignoring legal privacy issues is not how you gain acceptance, it is how you create conflict.

Share Button

Comments are closed.