white woman self-identifying as black running an NAACP office. We have an American senator, also a white woman, who self identifies as a native American and got a sweet academic gig out of it. We have some fraction of 1% of the population who don't identify with the sex they were born into and now, by Federal ruling, get to impose their will onto the other 99.99% of society and use the bathrooms and locker rooms they feel they identify with.
Why stop there? Gender is so limiting; why not choose another species? Why not choose to be what you want to be? I self-identify as a Yak this evening. Tomorrow, I may choose to be something else. Maybe even an object instead of an animal. Do any of these court rulings say I have to identify the same way every day? (John Kricfalusi style yak from Ren and Stimpy)
The Examiner puts the parents concerns this way:
But many parents of students who aren't transgender are appalled. Parents of girls are particularly incensed that their daughters will have to share locker rooms and private facilities with transgender boys. They are concerned about girls dressing or being naked around people of the opposite sex. They feel their children's rights to privacy are being violated by being forced to share bathrooms. It's fine when the genitalia doesn't show and the boy looks like a girl, but it's asking a lot to let a kid who still has his boy parts change in front of girls. It's asking a lot to make girls with girl parts change in front of guys just because they say they're really girls.As always, the trick of rights is that you never increase freedom by taking freedom away from people. A compromise is needed and the kid at the center of the story apparently refused to compromise. If you inconvenience one person and don't impose on the freedoms of the majority, you've spread more freedom around than if you give one person their desire and remove a freedom from everyone else. I don't know the exact numbers, nobody is reporting, but instead of making 99 people comfortable and 1 person less than completely happy, we've made one person happy and 99 people very unhappy.
It's nice to say, "All that really has to happen here is the adults have to put their prejudices in check," as Mara Keisling, executive director of the National Center for Transgender Equality did, but you're dealing with very deep cultural attitudes. Separate bathroom facilities for the sexes are almost always the case in the US. Small offices and small buildings may have only one restroom, for only one person at a time, but I've never worked or even been in a building with large bathrooms that were mixed.
Handing the conclusion off to Stilton Jarlsberg of Hope n' Change:
For instance, a 12 year old who "identifies" as an adult shouldn't get to buy booze. A 25 year old who "identifies" as a senior citizen shouldn't be able to collect Social Security payments. An 11 year old girl who "identifies" as a grown woman shouldn't be able to be a consensual sex partner for a pederast. Yet in our society, it seems increasingly likely that any and all of these things could come to pass.
And once again, it is your fine friends in "Law Enforcement" who will nod their heads in agreement and ENFORCE these dictates. As long as that paycheck keeps comin' in.ReplyDelete
Happiness is dead pigs. The foul swill DICTATING these things stand behind the Blue Wall and laugh. Nothing will change for the better until enough dead pig corpses are stacked in the streets.
Transgender is a mental illness. Accommodating in this way won't help the sick person.ReplyDelete
Transgender is no longer simply a mental illness. Now it is a game, a social construct some people are using simply to force others around them to get their way, garner attention (I'm talking to you, Caitlin), or just screw with people.ReplyDelete
We already have the BSA agreeing to allow gay scoutmasters. What about a football coach who insists on raping little boys in the shower? (Oh, sorry, BTDT.) What about the sixty year old pedophile who says he identifies as an eleven year old girl, and insists on being allowed to attend any pajama party/sleepover he wants to, and threatens to sue the parents that won't let him?
And if he happens to identify as black in addition, will Loretta Lynch fight for his right to spend the night with a bunch of white girls? How about a bunch of black girls?
I also wonder if that white twit who identifies as a black woman is accepted by the blacks at that NAACP office. Would DOJ force the real blacks to accept her, simply because she self-identifies as black?
If I were the parent of a child threatened by such a ruling, I would remove my child from that school, even if it meant working a different shift so that I could homeschool my child. I would shoot anyone who thought they could force my child to be put at risk by such deviant behavior. When - at long distance, and with sufficient stealth to carry it off at _least_ as long as the Beltway Snipers - I had diminished the number of admin people at that school, or the local PD, or whoever tried to force my child to be at risk, perhaps the message would get across. Maybe enough other parents would raise a hue and cry - or copy my efforts - to get the Lefties to re-think their position on this subject.
I can't understand parents who let their children get groped at airports, but this transgender insanity has got to get enough folks riled up to put a stop to it. If not, then I really think war needs to be declared upon the Left, starting with the top, not the bottom. Look out, Bernie. The three females in SCOTUS might be another thought, since they all lean so far Left I'm surprised they don't fall over. I'm sure different people would make different lists, but I think if a "civil war" happens, it will be between Right and Left. As it must be.
A RIGHT requires nothing from others to be realizedReplyDelete
It cannot be an imposition on others
It is vastly different, diametrically opposed to privilege and indulgence.
As should be obvious, only government through a monopoly of force can demand privilege and indulgence.