HS girls stage a walkout as trans teen uses girls bathroom (1 Viewer)

[matttyl]

We know that having a penis isn't what makes you a boy (hermaphrodites, birth defects, etc),

See, you keep saying this and I don't think you're getting what I'm saying. In order to be a boy, you don't have to have a penis. Yeah, I'm good with that (hermaphrodites, birth defects, accidents, whatever). But having a penis makes you one.

Simply: Not all boys have penises. All who have a (operational) penis are boys. You know, think of a venn diagram.

I just think you're kidding yourself if in fact this student could impregnate a girl naturally and you don't consider them a male.

Hermaphrodites have a penis and they aren't male.

But they also aren't female to you? This is why I asked yesterday if they are in fact "both" given that they have "reproductive organs normally associated with both male and female sexes"? That's the definition of a hermaphrodite, correct? If they have any part of a male reproductive organ and also any part of a female reproductive organ, than to me they would be both male and female. I guess medically/scientifically/naturally they could be a bit more of one than the other - but the fact that they are a hermaphrodite literally means they are at least a bit of both.

 

[matttyl]

Are any of them attempting to use the boys room? Do any of them even know they are XY unless they've gone through tests to confirm it?

Well, sure, the ones who identify as male attempt to use the boys room.

And I guess you can't confirm a genetic marker without testing, but the initial wonder about it usually starts with late-developing and stunted puberty.

Hold now, now we have XY females who identify as males? So their chromosomes are that of a typical male, their reproductive organs are that of a typical female, and then they identify as male? I would have to think this is an extremely rare situation. All the XY female examples you posted links of obviously identify as female.

 

[Henry Ford]

We know that having a penis isn't what makes you a boy (hermaphrodites, birth defects, etc),

See, you keep saying this and I don't think you're getting what I'm saying. In order to be a boy, you don't have to have a penis. Yeah, I'm good with that (hermaphrodites, birth defects, accidents, whatever). But having a penis makes you one.

Simply: Not all boys have penises. All who have a (operational) penis are boys. You know, think of a venn diagram.

I just think you're kidding yourself if in fact this student could impregnate a girl naturally and you don't consider them a male.

Hermaphrodites have a penis and they aren't male.

But they also aren't female to you? This is why I asked yesterday if they are in fact "both" given that they have "reproductive organs normally associated with both male and female sexes"? That's the definition of a hermaphrodite, correct? If they have any part of a male reproductive organ and also any part of a female reproductive organ, than to me they would be both male and female. I guess medically/scientifically/naturally they could be a bit more of one than the other - but the fact that they are a hermaphrodite literally means they are at least a bit of both.

No, they're neither. You're stuck in this dichotomy for some reason, and I don't know how to get you out. They're intersex. A third option. They may identify as male or female, but that's gender.

Gonads, chromosomes, internal reproductive organs, external reproductive organs, sex hormones. If all five of those match with the "male" option for sex, someone's male. If they all match "female," she's female. Otherwise, intersex.

 

[matttyl]

Alright, then the easy solution is to base locker room use based on the person's sex.

Okay, let's get back into this circle of discussion. How do you determine a person's sex for that?

Well, since this student still has the male reproductive organ, there you go. This situation is solved, give me the next real world (not made up) situation? The guy who lost it in the war or some bike accident - well he wouldn't have one or the either reproductive organ, so the default in this case is what you were born with that was unintentionally taken from you. The person born with both - they choose. The person born with neither - they also choose. Wouldn't the first part also encapsulate all of your xy woman (they have female reproductive organs, right, I mean a pair of your examples birthed children so they obviously do) and all of your xx males.

Interestingly, not if you're talking about interior reproductive organs. XY women run the gamut of interior reproductive organs, from not having ovaries, to having severely stunted organs, to being able to birth children. If you're talking purely penis vs. ######, yes. If that's how you want to do it, penis restrooms and ###### restrooms, I think that could be done. It'd be pretty weird, but it could be done.

And if some people can choose, what's your complaint about this person choosing?

Because this person still has a penis. The people in the above example who could choose were those who had neither, or both - which isn't the situation here. Again, simple(ish) solution to any situation.

 

[Henry Ford]

Are any of them attempting to use the boys room? Do any of them even know they are XY unless they've gone through tests to confirm it?

Well, sure, the ones who identify as male attempt to use the boys room.

And I guess you can't confirm a genetic marker without testing, but the initial wonder about it usually starts with late-developing and stunted puberty.

Hold now, now we have XY females who identify as males? So their chromosomes are that of a typical male, their reproductive organs are that of a typical female, and then they identify as male? I would have to think this is an extremely rare situation. All the XY female examples you posted links of obviously identify as female.

You don't think any women who have xy chromosomes have ever been transgender? I'd find that hard to believe.

 

[Henry Ford]

Alright, then the easy solution is to base locker room use based on the person's sex.

Okay, let's get back into this circle of discussion. How do you determine a person's sex for that?

Well, since this student still has the male reproductive organ, there you go. This situation is solved, give me the next real world (not made up) situation? The guy who lost it in the war or some bike accident - well he wouldn't have one or the either reproductive organ, so the default in this case is what you were born with that was unintentionally taken from you. The person born with both - they choose. The person born with neither - they also choose. Wouldn't the first part also encapsulate all of your xy woman (they have female reproductive organs, right, I mean a pair of your examples birthed children so they obviously do) and all of your xx males.

Interestingly, not if you're talking about interior reproductive organs. XY women run the gamut of interior reproductive organs, from not having ovaries, to having severely stunted organs, to being able to birth children. If you're talking purely penis vs. ######, yes. If that's how you want to do it, penis restrooms and ###### restrooms, I think that could be done. It'd be pretty weird, but it could be done.

And if some people can choose, what's your complaint about this person choosing?

Because this person still has a penis. The people in the above example who could choose were those who had neither, or both - which isn't the situation here. Again, simple(ish) solution to any situation.

So what? Again, the hermaphrodism example has a penis. No worry there.

 

[matttyl]

We know that having a penis isn't what makes you a boy (hermaphrodites, birth defects, etc),

See, you keep saying this and I don't think you're getting what I'm saying. In order to be a boy, you don't have to have a penis. Yeah, I'm good with that (hermaphrodites, birth defects, accidents, whatever). But having a penis makes you one.

Simply: Not all boys have penises. All who have a (operational) penis are boys. You know, think of a venn diagram.

I just think you're kidding yourself if in fact this student could impregnate a girl naturally and you don't consider them a male.

Hermaphrodites have a penis and they aren't male.

Does it work (can it naturally be used to impregnate a female)? If so, you'd be hard (no pun intended) pressed to convince me that they aren't male. Same idea with this student.

Again, is the person able to impregnate a woman is a different question that does the person have a penis. And you're talking about thousands of people who have a rare genetic structure - the ability to impregnate - or not - is person-dependant, though true hermaphrodism usually results in sterility.

I didn't ask "is the person able to impregnate a woman" - I asked if they are able to impregnate a woman with the penis they were born with.

Again, isn't true "hermaphrodism" the presence of both ovarian and testicular tissue and of ambiguous morphologic criteria of sex. Yeah, that's cut and paste. And if so, given the above working definition, they would thus be both sexes (and thus get to choose).

 

[rockaction]

Dude, you're in rapture to a logician. So change the premises.

Should we suit each and every individual with their own bathroom choice? Should that be acceptable in public? Are we willing to sacrifice all of our majoritarian rights for exceptional minorities?

That should suffice and win you the argument. If you want to go individualistic, you'll logically lose this argument.

Life isn't logic. Hell, there's even a famous law school quote...

 

[matttyl]

Are any of them attempting to use the boys room? Do any of them even know they are XY unless they've gone through tests to confirm it?

Well, sure, the ones who identify as male attempt to use the boys room.

And I guess you can't confirm a genetic marker without testing, but the initial wonder about it usually starts with late-developing and stunted puberty.

Hold now, now we have XY females who identify as males? So their chromosomes are that of a typical male, their reproductive organs are that of a typical female, and then they identify as male? I would have to think this is an extremely rare situation. All the XY female examples you posted links of obviously identify as female.

You don't think any women who have xy chromosomes have ever been transgender? I'd find that hard to believe.

You didn't see the line "I would have to think this is an extremely rare situation." Like the Panthers winning a Super Bowl.

 

[matttyl]

Alright, then the easy solution is to base locker room use based on the person's sex.

Okay, let's get back into this circle of discussion. How do you determine a person's sex for that?

Well, since this student still has the male reproductive organ, there you go. This situation is solved, give me the next real world (not made up) situation? The guy who lost it in the war or some bike accident - well he wouldn't have one or the either reproductive organ, so the default in this case is what you were born with that was unintentionally taken from you. The person born with both - they choose. The person born with neither - they also choose. Wouldn't the first part also encapsulate all of your xy woman (they have female reproductive organs, right, I mean a pair of your examples birthed children so they obviously do) and all of your xx males.

Interestingly, not if you're talking about interior reproductive organs. XY women run the gamut of interior reproductive organs, from not having ovaries, to having severely stunted organs, to being able to birth children. If you're talking purely penis vs. ######, yes. If that's how you want to do it, penis restrooms and ###### restrooms, I think that could be done. It'd be pretty weird, but it could be done.

And if some people can choose, what's your complaint about this person choosing?

Because this person still has a penis. The people in the above example who could choose were those who had neither, or both - which isn't the situation here. Again, simple(ish) solution to any situation.

So what? Again, the hermaphrodism example has a penis. No worry there.

But this person also doesn't have ovarian tissue. The hermaphrdism example does. Apples and Oranges.

 

[Henry Ford]

Are any of them attempting to use the boys room? Do any of them even know they are XY unless they've gone through tests to confirm it?

Well, sure, the ones who identify as male attempt to use the boys room.

And I guess you can't confirm a genetic marker without testing, but the initial wonder about it usually starts with late-developing and stunted puberty.

Hold now, now we have XY females who identify as males? So their chromosomes are that of a typical male, their reproductive organs are that of a typical female, and then they identify as male? I would have to think this is an extremely rare situation. All the XY female examples you posted links of obviously identify as female.

You don't think any women who have xy chromosomes have ever been transgender? I'd find that hard to believe.

You didn't see the line "I would have to think this is an extremely rare situation." Like the Panthers winning a Super Bowl.

Even if it's rare, then the clear answer to your question is "yes, we have xy females who identify as males."

 

[matttyl]

And I believe they prefer the term DSD (disorders of sex development).

 

[Henry Ford]

We know that having a penis isn't what makes you a boy (hermaphrodites, birth defects, etc),

See, you keep saying this and I don't think you're getting what I'm saying. In order to be a boy, you don't have to have a penis. Yeah, I'm good with that (hermaphrodites, birth defects, accidents, whatever). But having a penis makes you one.

Simply: Not all boys have penises. All who have a (operational) penis are boys. You know, think of a venn diagram.

I just think you're kidding yourself if in fact this student could impregnate a girl naturally and you don't consider them a male.

Hermaphrodites have a penis and they aren't male.

Does it work (can it naturally be used to impregnate a female)? If so, you'd be hard (no pun intended) pressed to convince me that they aren't male. Same idea with this student.

Again, is the person able to impregnate a woman is a different question that does the person have a penis. And you're talking about thousands of people who have a rare genetic structure - the ability to impregnate - or not - is person-dependant, though true hermaphrodism usually results in sterility.

I didn't ask "is the person able to impregnate a woman" - I asked if they are able to impregnate a woman with the penis they were born with.

Again, isn't true "hermaphrodism" the presence of both ovarian and testicular tissue and of ambiguous morphologic criteria of sex. Yeah, that's cut and paste. And if so, given the above working definition, they would thus be both sexes (and thus get to choose).

Intersex people are not male or female with respect to sex. They are intersex. It's not like being a football player and a track star. "presence of ovarian and testicular tissue AND OF AMBIGUOUS MORPHOLOGIC CRITERIA OF SEX." If five things match, you're male or female. If you can't tick all the boxes, you're intersex. That's how it works. Third sex. Intersex. Third option. Not "both," neither.

That's kind of been my point for ten pages or so. A huge group of people want to define what people can do based on "sex" without having any ####ing idea what "sex" is or how to define it. That being the case, they have no idea of the consequences of making that distinction into a legal distinction, or the benefits of just letting people use the bathroom gender they identify with as opposed to doing genetic testing at the door of the john.

 

[Henry Ford]

But this person also doesn't have ovarian tissue. The hermaphrdism example does. Apples and Oranges.

What's the relevance? How does the ovarian tissue protect the privacy of the other people in the locker room?

 

[Henry Ford]

And I believe they prefer the term DSD (disorders of sex development).

People generally prefer "intersex" but the term hermaphroditism describes a single type of extremely rare version of intersexism.

 

[matttyl]

Gonads, chromosomes, internal reproductive organs, external reproductive organs, sex hormones. If all five of those match with the "male" option for sex, someone's male.

So then by your own definition, this student is male. Kinda wraps this whole thing up, then. At least for this case.

 

[Henry Ford]

Gonads, chromosomes, internal reproductive organs, external reproductive organs, sex hormones. If all five of those match with the "male" option for sex, someone's male.

So then by your own definition, this student is male. Kinda wraps this whole thing up, then. At least for this case.

SEX. Male by SEX. But we don't have bathrooms based on sex, they're based on gender. Want to know how I know? Where's the intersex bathroom? Oh, there isn't one? Huh. We must base this on gender, then.

 

[Henry Ford]

Alright, I have to go to court. Have fun, all.

17/77 on the poll. Looking forward to ten years from now.

 

[matttyl]

But this person also doesn't have ovarian tissue. The hermaphrdism example does. Apples and Oranges.

What's the relevance? How does the ovarian tissue protect the privacy of the other people in the locker room?

What's the relevance? That isn't the situation here. This situation is vexing enough, no need to make it more so.

 

[matttyl]

Gonads, chromosomes, internal reproductive organs, external reproductive organs, sex hormones. If all five of those match with the "male" option for sex, someone's male.

So then by your own definition, this student is male. Kinda wraps this whole thing up, then. At least for this case.

SEX. Male by SEX. But we don't have bathrooms based on sex, they're based on gender. Want to know how I know? Where's the intersex bathroom? Oh, there isn't one? Huh. We must base this on gender, then.

Aren't there individuals who don't identify as either, though? We've come up with some other crazy examples, I'd have to think that "neither gender" also occurs. Likely moreso than Panther Super Bowl wins, too.

 

[TPW]

Alright, I have to go to court. Have fun, all.

17/77 on the poll. Looking forward to ten years from now.

Like I said, the agitations will never, ever stop. This isn't about rights. It's about the fulfillment of Progressive utopian fantasies, even in the face of logic, biology, and general popular resistance.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=CfSxXFj3Pns#t=347

 

[IvanKaramazov]

17/77 on the poll. Looking forward to ten years from now.

I kind of doubt that. This isn't like gay marriage, where if you don't like it, you can just choose not to get gay married. In this case, you have a group of teenage girls who reasonably believe that they're being sexually harassed by having to share a locker room with a male (admittedly, a gay male). Maybe attitudes about sexuality will change more than I expect in a decade, but I have a difficult time imagining that we're going to go to co-ed locker rooms any time soon.

 

[Black Box]

We use gender because it's actually what we're talking about. We don't actually care if someone is genetically male or female, we just don't want to see a penis in the girls' room. But that's because we think it's icky. And that's a stupid reason to create a massive societal "rule." If someone who'd had gender reassignment surgery and had been living as a woman without a penis for 30 years got up from the table at a restaurant, kissed her husband, said she'd be right back and used the men's room, we'd think that was weird, too.

So how do we judge gender in a legal sense?

Honestly, we usually don't. Unless it's one of these cases. In which case, it usually comes down to the person... wait for it... living as a particular gender. Like using those restrooms and things.

Right, or wearing a wig (check), wearing a dress (check), appearing to have an eating disorder (check...I kid, I kid). She clearly has the freedom and ability to live as a particular gender with no issues for some aspects of her life. But what about in all areas of her life?

She has been prevented from living as her chosen gender because she has boy parts and not girl parts. This is either by choice or because of the 1 year waiting period.

She has been prevented from living as her chosen gender because she cannot use the girls' locker room at school. This is because her rights run afoul of her school mate's right to privacy (or, more specifically, the right of the school not to be exposed to any right to privacy lawsuits).

Let's say that she still has a penis by choice. That seems to indicate that living as her chosen gender isn't an all or nothing proposition for her. So maybe we judge that because of this, the other girls' rights trump hers, and she is denied access to the changing room.

But let's say that she still has a penis because of the one year waiting period. In this case, legally speaking, there is a good reason (medically? ethically?) for restricting her right to having girl parts. So maybe in this case, the right to privacy can trump her right to the changing room (as there is precedent for restricting these rights for good reason).

So when her right to live as a particular gender runs afoul of the right to other people's rights (in this case, the right to privacy), maybe we draw a line there? Seems like a simple, bright line test to me.

 

[Henry Ford]

We use gender because it's actually what we're talking about. We don't actually care if someone is genetically male or female, we just don't want to see a penis in the girls' room. But that's because we think it's icky. And that's a stupid reason to create a massive societal "rule." If someone who'd had gender reassignment surgery and had been living as a woman without a penis for 30 years got up from the table at a restaurant, kissed her husband, said she'd be right back and used the men's room, we'd think that was weird, too.

So how do we judge gender in a legal sense?

Honestly, we usually don't. Unless it's one of these cases. In which case, it usually comes down to the person... wait for it... living as a particular gender. Like using those restrooms and things.

Right, or wearing a wig (check), wearing a dress (check), appearing to have an eating disorder (check...I kid, I kid). She clearly has the freedom and ability to live as a particular gender with no issues for some aspects of her life. But what about in all areas of her life?

She has been prevented from living as her chosen gender because she has boy parts and not girl parts. This is either by choice or because of the 1 year waiting period. Or because she is 17. At any rate, she isn't being prevented.

She has been prevented from living as her chosen gender because she cannot use the girls' locker room at school. No - no, no, no. SHE is doing just fine. The school is letting her use the locker room. Her rights are kicking ### and taking names here.

This is because her rights run afoul of her school mate's right to privacy (or, more specifically, the right of the school not to be exposed to any right to privacy lawsuits). Again - she's winning with the school. It's those 150 other kids who are complaining.

Let's say that she still has a penis by choice. That seems to indicate that living as her chosen gender isn't an all or nothing proposition for her. So maybe we judge that because of this, the other girls' rights trump hers, and she is denied access to the changing room. Or maybe we judge that her rights are reasonably protected, and the girls who don't like it can continue to whine, but they don't really have a legally cognizable claim.

But let's say that she still has a penis because of the one year waiting period. In this case, legally speaking, there is a good reason (medically? ethically?) for restricting her right to having girl parts. So maybe in this case, the right to privacy can trump her right to the changing room (as there is precedent for restricting these rights for good reason). Maybe. But I think that's a pretty tough case to make. Again - whether the school has a rational basis for what it's doing is the question here. And the school has a rational basis for allowing this based on its desire to avoid litigation. Schools used to do okay coming in on the other side of that decision. Last couple years, schools denying use of bathrooms to transgender students are getting shellacked. See links below.

So when her right to live as a particular gender runs afoul of the right to other people's rights (in this case, the right to privacy), maybe we draw a line there? Seems like a simple, bright line test to me. Or maybe, when other people's right to avoid having a penis/###### in the locker room runs afoul of Title IX, draw the line there. Link. Link.

It ain't 2005 anymore. Schools know what's up, and the law is no longer on the side of keeping transgender teens out of the gender-preferred bathroom.

 

[TobiasFunke]

17/77 on the poll. Looking forward to ten years from now.

I kind of doubt that. This isn't like gay marriage, where if you don't like it, you can just choose not to get gay married. In this case, you have a group of teenage girls who reasonably believe that they're being sexually harassed by having to share a locker room with a male (admittedly, a gay male). Maybe attitudes about sexuality will change more than I expect in a decade, but I have a difficult time imagining that we're going to go to co-ed locker rooms any time soon.

Yup. I'm a fairly open-minded guy and definitely fall on the side of equal rights for transgenders in almost every instance, but a high school locker room would be the absolute last barrier to fall. This is a rare case where I think the competing interests are legitimate. In fact you could even argue that it kind of conflicts with the notion that people should be accepting of gays and lesbians in locker rooms (which of course they should be), because that's based on the premise that we assign facilities not based on sexuality but simply due to shared biological traits- the idea being that nobody who has similar genitalia is going to be checking out yours in a way that makes you uncomfortable regardless of their sexuality. You would think the same rule would apply regardless of gender identity.

Attitudes about gender may eventually change to the point that the competing interest is no longer legitimate, but I think we're a long way from that.

 

[matttyl]

Another read on the subject. Learned a few things....

“They [the other female students] should have the ability to do whatever they need to do in the privacy of the bathroom without having a male in there,” Derrick Good, a parent of two girls at the school and an attorney, told KFOR. “They have a right to their own bodily privacy, and I’ve raised my girls, and many of these parents have raised their girls, to protect that privacy. They don’t share that with members of the opposite sex.”

Interesting, to me, that he would use the terms "male" (which the student technically is, even Henry agrees), and the term "the opposite sex" (rather than the opposite gender) which again, this student is. This father is also an attorney, so there's that....

And - "districts that do not allow students to use a bathroom for the gender with which they identify could risk losing federal funding from the Department of Education. Districts that refuse to allow students to use a bathroom for the gender with which they identify could run afoul of the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights."

Also question for you Henry - is the legal term "gender discrimination" or "sex(ual) discrimination"? I'll hang up and listen....

 

[Henry Ford]

Another read on the subject. Learned a few things....

“They [the other female students] should have the ability to do whatever they need to do in the privacy of the bathroom without having a male in there,” Derrick Good, a parent of two girls at the school and an attorney, told KFOR. “They have a right to their own bodily privacy, and I’ve raised my girls, and many of these parents have raised their girls, to protect that privacy. They don’t share that with members of the opposite sex.”

Interesting, to me, that he would use the terms "male" (which the student technically is, even Henry agrees), and the term "the opposite sex" (rather than the opposite gender) which again, this student is. This father is also an attorney, so there's that....

And - "districts that do not allow students to use a bathroom for the gender with which they identify could risk losing federal funding from the Department of Education. Districts that refuse to allow students to use a bathroom for the gender with which they identify could run afoul of the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights."

Also question for you Henry - is the legal term "gender discrimination" or "sex(ual) discrimination"? I'll hang up and listen....

sexual discrimination includes discrimination based on an individual's non-adherence to traditional gender roles, including sexual orientation and identification with a gender associated with a sex not assigned at birth. Don't bother hanging up, it's a short explanation.

 

[Henry Ford]

Hearing postponed. How lucky are we in here, eh?

 

[matttyl]

Another read on the subject. Learned a few things....

“They [the other female students] should have the ability to do whatever they need to do in the privacy of the bathroom without having a male in there,” Derrick Good, a parent of two girls at the school and an attorney, told KFOR. “They have a right to their own bodily privacy, and I’ve raised my girls, and many of these parents have raised their girls, to protect that privacy. They don’t share that with members of the opposite sex.”

Interesting, to me, that he would use the terms "male" (which the student technically is, even Henry agrees), and the term "the opposite sex" (rather than the opposite gender) which again, this student is. This father is also an attorney, so there's that....

And - "districts that do not allow students to use a bathroom for the gender with which they identify could risk losing federal funding from the Department of Education. Districts that refuse to allow students to use a bathroom for the gender with which they identify could run afoul of the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights."

Also question for you Henry - is the legal term "gender discrimination" or "sex(ual) discrimination"? I'll hang up and listen....

sexual discrimination includes discrimination based on an individual's non-adherence to traditional gender roles, including sexual orientation and identification with a gender associated with a sex not assigned at birth. Don't bother hanging up, it's a short explanation.

From your above link (I'm starting to find this more and more interesting, thank you)....

“Gender-based discrimination” is a form of sex discrimination, and refers to differential treatment or harassment of a student based on the student’s sex, including gender identity, gender expression, and nonconformity with gender stereotypes, that results in the denial or limitation of education services, benefits, or opportunities. Conduct may constitute gender-based discrimination regardless of the actual or perceived sex, gender identity, or sexual orientation of the persons experiencing or engaging in the conduct."

This is what I can't wrap my head around. How can gender based discrimination be a form of sex discrimination in these cases - when in these cases the gender and the sex aren't the same? She isn't being "discriminated against" due to her sex, she's being discriminated against due to her gender.

 

[Henry Ford]

From your above link (I'm starting to find this more and more interesting, thank you)....


“Gender-based discrimination” is a form of sex discrimination, and refers to differential treatment or harassment of a student based on the student’s sex, including gender identity, gender expression, and nonconformity with gender stereotypes, that results in the denial or limitation of education services, benefits, or opportunities. Conduct may constitute gender-based discrimination regardless of the actual or perceived sex, gender identity, or sexual orientation of the persons experiencing or engaging in the conduct.

Cool. It's fascinating stuff. I often wonder what these subjects will be like in 10-20-30 years.

That quote isn't intentionally in the links I put up - I'm guessing the Resolution I posted is redirecting to the EEOC.

http://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/crt/legacy/2013/07/26/arcadiaagree.pdfis what I intended to post, it's a resolution with the DOJ to allow a transgender male student to use male facilities.

 

[Parrothead]

50 years from now - "Cyborgs deserve rights too!!"

 

[Henry Ford]

50 years from now - "Cyborgs deserve rights too!!"

Well, unless you can give me a rational basis for denying cyborgs the right to use the locker room...

 

[rockaction]

17/77 on the poll. Looking forward to ten years from now.

I kind of doubt that. This isn't like gay marriage, where if you don't like it, you can just choose not to get gay married. In this case, you have a group of teenage girls who reasonably believe that they're being sexually harassed by having to share a locker room with a male (admittedly, a gay male). Maybe attitudes about sexuality will change more than I expect in a decade, but I have a difficult time imagining that we're going to go to co-ed locker rooms any time soon.

If bisexuality is all the rage, where does leave this caveat? Admittedly, it's a caveat, but ascribing a non-fluid sexual attraction to a gay male might be considered offensive in a decade.

And, yes, I'm tongue-in-cheek, but this is actually happening, and has been argued for since Kinsey's reinterpretation during the gay nineties.

 

[shady inc]

i am a man, but i identify as a women identifying as a man - which locker room would i use?

 

[Parrothead]

50 years from now - "Cyborgs deserve rights too!!"

Well, unless you can give me a rational basis for denying cyborgs the right to use the locker room...

they will rust

 

[Parrothead]

i am a man, but i identify as a women identifying as a man - which locker room would i use?

the pond

 

[Henry Ford]

17/77 on the poll. Looking forward to ten years from now.

I kind of doubt that. This isn't like gay marriage, where if you don't like it, you can just choose not to get gay married. In this case, you have a group of teenage girls who reasonably believe that they're being sexually harassed by having to share a locker room with a male (admittedly, a gay male). Maybe attitudes about sexuality will change more than I expect in a decade, but I have a difficult time imagining that we're going to go to co-ed locker rooms any time soon.

If bisexuality is all the rage, where does leave this caveat? Admittedly, it's a caveat, but ascribing a non-fluid sexual attraction to a gay male might be considered offensive in a decade.

And, yes, I'm tongue-in-cheek, but this is actually happening, and has been argued for since Kinsey's reinterpretation during the gay nineties.

Kinky.

She appears to identify as a straight woman who was born male. Not a gay male. But either way, yeah, ascribing non-fluid sexual attraction to anyone might be weird in a few decades. Stuff's changing.

 

[Henry Ford]

i am a man, but i identify as a women identifying as a man - which locker room would i use?

"Huckabee"

 

[Henry Ford]

50 years from now - "Cyborgs deserve rights too!!"

Well, unless you can give me a rational basis for denying cyborgs the right to use the locker room...

they will rust

A cyborg has the right to choose what to do with its own body.

 

[Parrothead]

50 years from now - "Cyborgs deserve rights too!!"

Well, unless you can give me a rational basis for denying cyborgs the right to use the locker room...

they will rust

A cyborg has the right to choose what to do with its own body.

what if the rust makes the cyborg leak acid, and burns the 14 year old girls?

 

[Juxtatarot]

17/77 on the poll. Looking forward to ten years from now.

I kind of doubt that. This isn't like gay marriage, where if you don't like it, you can just choose not to get gay married. In this case, you have a group of teenage girls who reasonably believe that they're being sexually harassed by having to share a locker room with a male (admittedly, a gay male). Maybe attitudes about sexuality will change more than I expect in a decade, but I have a difficult time imagining that we're going to go to co-ed locker rooms any time soon.

I'm with Henry on this one. And I do see it as similar to gay marriage. People can decide to be upset about it or they can accept it with no harm done to them personally. I guess where the difference for me is I don't understand how these girls sharing the locker room are being sexually harassed or harmed in any way. Uncomfortable? OK, maybe. But changing in front of others can be uncomfortable regardless.

 

[Henry Ford]

50 years from now - "Cyborgs deserve rights too!!"

Well, unless you can give me a rational basis for denying cyborgs the right to use the locker room...

they will rust

A cyborg has the right to choose what to do with its own body.

what if the rust makes the cyborg leak acid, and burns the 14 year old girls?

Oh, now cyborgs are all just filled with acid waiting to burn 14 year old girls? That's cyborgist, Parrot. I expected better from you.

 

[Parrothead]

50 years from now - "Cyborgs deserve rights too!!"

Well, unless you can give me a rational basis for denying cyborgs the right to use the locker room...

they will rust

A cyborg has the right to choose what to do with its own body.

what if the rust makes the cyborg leak acid, and burns the 14 year old girls?

Oh, now cyborgs are all just filled with acid waiting to burn 14 year old girls? That's cyborgist, Parrot. I expected better from you.

cyborgs of the future are badass

 

[Instinctive]

The real best outcome of this is (well, would be if it happened) that we stop indoctrinating everyone in our society that sex and the body are shameful. We really shouldn't need separate bathrooms or locker rooms at all. We should just indoctrinate people to be respectful and clean and move the #### on in a better world.

 

[matttyl]

From your above link (I'm starting to find this more and more interesting, thank you)....


“Gender-based discrimination” is a form of sex discrimination, and refers to differential treatment or harassment of a student based on the student’s sex, including gender identity, gender expression, and nonconformity with gender stereotypes, that results in the denial or limitation of education services, benefits, or opportunities. Conduct may constitute gender-based discrimination regardless of the actual or perceived sex, gender identity, or sexual orientation of the persons experiencing or engaging in the conduct.

Cool. It's fascinating stuff. I often wonder what these subjects will be like in 10-20-30 years.

That quote isn't intentionally in the links I put up - I'm guessing the Resolution I posted is redirecting to the EEOC.

http://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/crt/legacy/2013/07/26/arcadiaagree.pdfis what I intended to post, it's a resolution with the DOJ to allow a transgender male student to use male facilities.

That was on the first page of the first link you posted in post 578, as is the same link you just posted here. It's the first "definition" listed. So again, how can gender discrimination be a kind of sex discrimination when (in this case) the sex and the gender aren't the same thing. How can you be gender discriminated against but not sex discriminated against when one is a type of the other?

 

[pantagrapher]

The real best outcome of this is (well, would be if it happened) that we stop indoctrinating everyone in our society that sex and the body are shameful. We really shouldn't need separate bathrooms or locker rooms at all. We should just indoctrinate people to be respectful and clean and move the #### on in a better world.

I kind of enjoy not having to listen to a hot lady in the stall next to me drop a percussive deuce. Undermines all kinds of pleasant illusions I maintain outside of the bathroom.

 

[Henry Ford]

From your above link (I'm starting to find this more and more interesting, thank you)....


“Gender-based discrimination” is a form of sex discrimination, and refers to differential treatment or harassment of a student based on the student’s sex, including gender identity, gender expression, and nonconformity with gender stereotypes, that results in the denial or limitation of education services, benefits, or opportunities. Conduct may constitute gender-based discrimination regardless of the actual or perceived sex, gender identity, or sexual orientation of the persons experiencing or engaging in the conduct.

Cool. It's fascinating stuff. I often wonder what these subjects will be like in 10-20-30 years.

That quote isn't intentionally in the links I put up - I'm guessing the Resolution I posted is redirecting to the EEOC.

http://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/crt/legacy/2013/07/26/arcadiaagree.pdfis what I intended to post, it's a resolution with the DOJ to allow a transgender male student to use male facilities.

That was on the first page of the first link you posted in post 578, as is the same link you just posted here. It's the first "definition" listed. So again, how can gender discrimination be a kind of sex discrimination when (in this case) the sex and the gender aren't the same thing. How can you be gender discriminated against but not sex discriminated against when one is a type of the other?

You are sex discriminated against in gender discrimination. Precisely because they aren't the same thing. Courts are beginning to recognize that woman (sex) and woman (gender) are separate ideas - and a man (sex) who lives as a woman (gender) should have the same rights as a woman (sex) who lives as a woman (gender).

 

[ATC1]

You need parental permission for anything in a school. Go on a field trip or watch a PG movie for crying out loud. I can not see the school allowing her to change in the locker room unless the other girls' parents sign a permission form or she legally becomes female according to the state, school etc. I would have to get my daughter's thoughts on the situation to determine if I was comfortable with it. Questions I would have would be is this for showering or are we talking about a quick change into and out of a gym uniform? How is she as a classmate?

If she does not want to change in the seperate neutral bathroom accomindations the school provides (faculty or family bathroom) then those that don't have the permission slip signed will need to change either in a separate location or at a different time.

 

[Henry Ford]

The real best outcome of this is (well, would be if it happened) that we stop indoctrinating everyone in our society that sex and the body are shameful. We really shouldn't need separate bathrooms or locker rooms at all. We should just indoctrinate people to be respectful and clean and move the #### on in a better world.

I kind of enjoy not having to listen to a hot lady in the stall next to me drop a percussive deuce. Undermines all kinds of pleasant illusions I maintain outside of the bathroom.

So, really, coed locker rooms would probably help guard against sexual harassment.

 

[Henry Ford]

You need parental permission for anything in a school. Go on a field trip or watch a PG movie for crying out loud. I can not see the school allowing her to change in the locker room unless the parents sign a permission form or she legally becomes female according to the state, school etc. I would have to get my daughter's thoughts on the situation to determine if I was comfortable with it. Questions I would have would be is this for showering or are we talking about a quick change into and out of a gym uniform? How is she as a classmate?

If she does not want to change in the seperate neutral bathroom accomindations the school provides (faculty or family bathroom) then those that don't have the permission slip signed will need to change either in a separate location or at a different time.

Well, you must be closing your eyes. That's what happened.