(...most of this particular post are "words words words", nothing really new or what I haven't commented on already. If you disagree with what the majority treats as the standard then it's your problem... I'm sorry, I really like discussing interesting political matters with you on various occasions, but whenever you start throwing "religion" or "the burguoise" into the equation, I already know that we're no longer chatting on the "serious" front. These have nothing to do whatsoever with the matter at hand. Moreover, why would I even want to discuss the issue universally when I was given the context? It's a school based in the U.S and their students need to conform to social "rules" that are commonly accepted there. I'm not interested in what is conscidered shameful on Mars, I'm thinking "a school in the U.S". I'm getting the feeling that you purposely misinterpret what I'm saying in an attempt to make me look like a redneck, and I must say I do not appreciate that. For example that part about race, where you emphasized that my phrasing is "a bit of a weird way to say it", as if you tried to point and say "he may be racist". I'm not. There is nothing to be ashamed of in either race, we are all equal and there's nothing weird in the sentence whatsoever unless you WANT to read it in a weird fashion. Forgive me if that was not your intention, that's just how I feel after being forced to explain every little tidbit. In the end, there was just this one sentence I felt like it's worth to comment on
Lastly, transgenderism cannot be dismissed as a "whim".
When in my entire argument have I said it is a whim? You're twisting my words, that's not nice. What I said was that demanding to use a specific bathroom that was *not made for you* and its explicitly stated by the administration body BEFORE you were suspended is. It would not be any more difficult to use the one that was prepared for your sex, nor would it be physically painful or otherwise degrading. In school, there are students and there's the administration - the administration supervises over the students and the students conform. If they believe there needs to be change, there are different ways to do so other than blatantly breaking the rules. You can't pick and choose rules you like, you can't ignore clear instructions from your supervisors.
This teaches these young people that if they do not conform at work and ignore what their bosses tell them - they loose. Plain and simple.
People's needs have evolved, and are evolving, and they are beginning to find real expression in the civil sphere, both socially and politically. It is my opinion that if you continue to tow the line with such reductive and bigoted views, you will end up being left behind.
Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs is the only thing taken into conscideration when building a rules board. As long as all the lower needs are satisfied AND the school satisfies the higher need of learning and education, everything's in the clear.
The only "special needs" a school has to satisfy are needs directly related to education. A student on a wheelchair? Gotta satisfy his needs - he has the right to move around the school and study. A blind student? Gotta find him books written in braile or find a school that will specifically satisfy his needs and prepare a transfer. Transgender student...? Uhm... They can
access necessary facilities and study just fine...
right?
I now publicly identify myself as a female, so I should be obliged to use the female public restroom without any consequences. I'm going to go into the female restroom, whip out my junk, and start peeing along the girls in the female restroom. They are totally comforted about my existence in the female restroom and are going to tell their parents about me. Their parents are assured that the female public restroom is a secure place for their beautiful daughters to be using. You see how fucked up your argument is?
Thank you, this explains pretty much everything I was trying to convey. I was trying to avoid ridiculing the other side of it though.
make ALL restrooms places with ONLY booths where only ONE person was going to be in it removing bodily wastes and temporarily partially undressed on the process. It's not like a male couldn't just pee like they do at home eh. I don't have a urinal in my home eh. We could just make it plain, PUT YOUR DAMNED CLOTHES ON BEFORE EXITING THE STALL!!. No doing anything that permits partial nudity whatsoever outside of the stall. No fixing you clothing, no changing into some other outfit nothing in the way of cleaning that involves partial clothing removal at all outside of the stall.
That is not the point - nobody's standing right under your balls at the urinals either. Nobody stares at you - that would be creepy. The point is that the concept of sharing a private space like this and performing bodily functions of that kind while infront of the opposite sex will be uncomfortable regardless whether or not they see you.
There's one critical point that the article failed to address:
Did the trans students have their reproductive organs changed?
I can see why school officials would be concerned if genital type A's went into a Type B restroom, but that still is not grounds for a warning, let alone suspension.
Nobody would ever have any problems if that were the case. In fact, nobody would probably notice the difference, which is the basis of this entire "argument", AKA, "is your sex in your pants or in your head".
I'm really tired with explaining every little bit of my argument and getting caught by my tongue - I'm sorry, but as long as you pee with what you have in your pants, not what you have in your head, it's very much in your pants.
Peeing is a bodily function, and as such should be classified with bodily terminology and reffer to it. Her gender might be male, his gender might be female, but at the end of the day they cannot yet "decieve" others sucessfuly enough not to cause a "stir" in the student body.
My one and only argument was that bathrooms, restrooms and changing rooms are divided into ones dedicated to males and females in regard of sex, not anyone's personally identified gender. Attempting to "make of it more than it really is" is sort of pointless - that's simply my point of view with which anyone can agree or disagree, but at the end of the day it will be the "majority" of a given society that will set that standard, and if it so happens that they will at some point reffer to gender, then I will gladly conform but that is not the state of matters as of now.