“Y ou wrote: ‘so why would I care if a man who was originally a woman uses the same washroom as me?’ Typical male attitude thinking one way, not the other”, Melissa — who is a reader of The Gate — posted in response to my article pertaining to whether or not you are avoiding travel to North Carolina because of the recent passage of a law by the North Carolina General Assembly known as the Public Facilities Privacy and Security Act, which bans local governments in the state from instituting protective measures against anti-discrimination based on sexual orientation; and requires transgender people in public schools, universities and government buildings to use washrooms which match the gender on their birth certificates.
“You should care the other way: if a woman, who was originally a man….AND STILL IS A MAN….uses a woman’s room. The women don’t want HIM in there, the women that have privacy because they were originally a woman, and still are women have primary rights! The reason we have birth certificates is to prove your gender AT BIRTH. After that, the choice is not for everyone else to make simply because one person has something wrong in their head that belongs inside a mental institution.”
You ain’t heard nothin’ yet, Melissa.
Man Represents Himself as a Woman in Texas Dressing Room
Employees of a department store in Texas allowed a man — who “had on jeans, a t-shirt, 5 o’clock shadow, very deep voice” and “was in no way dressed as a woman” — into the dressing room for women because “he was representing himself as a woman” on the day of the incident, according to this article written by Dan Haggerty, who is an anchorman of KTVT Channel 11 News in Fort Worth.
“I was in the dressing room, when we heard a man’s voice,” said Lisa Sickles, who says she quickly told a manager. “She went inside the dressing room, came right back out and called me to the side and told me… he was representing himself as a woman today.”
Lisa Sickles asked “What about me? Or my feelings? (The manager) told me that if I felt uncomfortable in the dressing room with him there… I’d have to wait until he’s finished.”
A customer service representative with Ross — which is a chain of department stores — would not comment on the alleged incident which occurred in their store in Mesquite; but said “they do not discriminate against the transgender community; adding, customers may use changing rooms that apply to their gender identity.”
Other retail store companies in the United States — such as TJ Maxx, Marshalls and Target — reportedly have similar policies; while Kohl’s requires its customers to “use facilities aligned with their biological gender.”
Summary
I had lunch recently with a friend who expressed his outrage to me pertaining to the concept of a person deciding on what gender he or she would like to be that day before choosing to use the facility which corresponds to his or her choice — and this was before the aforementioned incident in Texas occurred.
Another person told me that she could see this issue leading to facilities which call for privacy and rights for males, females and every variation of the two genders in between. She wondered rhetorically whether instead of two facilities — one specifically for each gender — should there be dozens of facilities available for every conceivable variation?
I personally am not sure what sparked this issue in the first place. After all, what did people do before this controversy erupted?
People who consider themselves gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender — or any other variation of sexuality — have rights. I get that. My question is this: does that mean that the rights of straight people should erode as a result? Does Lisa Sickles have a right to use a public dressing room or public washroom for women only? Should a man be able to waltz right on into a facility meant only for women with nothing more than a declaration of what gender he decides to represent himself on a whim? What is the minima criteria in order for a person of one gender to represent himself or herself as the opposite gender other than a vocal declaration? Where should the line be drawn?
Melissa is correct: I do have a typical male attitude; and I do not care if a man who was originally a woman uses the same washroom as me; or — for that matter — if a woman outright walked into that washroom declaring herself as a man, as I do not flaunt my…er…assets around…
…but my male attitude would change if enough women latched onto the idea that they can represent themselves as men to avoid those pathetically long lines for the washroom designated for women. If I had to wait on a long line just to use the washroom as a result, you had better believe I would care…
…but would I be sexist if I declared what Melissa stated in agreement with her? Would I simply be perpetuating a double standard? Could you one day very well find a person of the opposite gender using the same washroom or toilet facilities as you at an airport?
There has to be a compromise where the rights of all people are respected. Perhaps there should be one facility which is divided into private enclosed stalls — similar to toilet rooms found in Europe or lavatories found aboard airplanes — instead of facilities devoted to specific genders.
Graphic assembled by Brian Cohen.
