Wednesday, September 17, 2008

Transgender Accommodations

In the 12 September 2008 articel the District Attorney discusses efforts in Maryland and Colorado to deal with transgender persons and the use of sexually separated facilities.


Anonymous said...

While such concerns you have expressed seem real to the general public, the fact is that the transgender population is less than one half of one percent. The fact is that transgender people are already using public accommodations of the gender with which they identify; people don't realize it because transgenders are "passable." Speaking for the transgender community, I can tell you that transgenders would never subject themselves to exposing their genitalia in front of others in a bathroom, shower, locker room, or any other public facility. Transgenders are simply trying to live their lives like anyone else, and they don't get sexual kicks from the activities you have suggested. If a transgender is questioned by anyone in authority, I can tell you that we carry a letter from our doctor and psychologist explaining our medical condition. Transgenderism is a medical conditon - not an immoral lifestyle choice. ....The wisdom of sex-segregated public accommodations can also be argued. An acceptable alternative are the ever-expanding use of "universal facilities" (one simply locks the door when he or she goes in), or the use of restrooms labeled "Stalls" and "Urinals". The use of these labels for restrooms allows for anyone to use either, based on whatever their anatomy and capacity. Sounds reasonable. I hope Maryland and Colorado do enact protections for "gender identity" and "gender expression." While the cisgender world hates to admit it and is resistent to dealing with it, sexual minorities do exist and they're not going away any time soon. Reasonable measures ensure the respect and dignity afforded the majority will also be provided the minority. Thank you for bringing up the subject of "Transgender Accommodations."

Jason Legg said...

The intent of the column was to demonstrate the difficulties that law enforcement would have with someone seeking to take advantage of such a law, i.e., not necessarily a transgender individual but an imposter seeking taking advantage of the law. You note that most transgender persons are "passable" and already functioning without the need for additional regulations. You also note that the transgender population is an extremely small percentage of the population. When these things are considered, the question arises as to why the government would see the need to enact regulation to address this issue.

In the end, the column addressed the problems that could arise if the new regulations were abused. There is an old saying that the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Unintended consequences generally cause more harm than good - and this rule seems to apply to most government actions.