In preparing this blog, I wasn't accurate to the North Carolina law that requires people to use bathrooms of their gender as established by their birth certificate. At press time, I thought the law required people to use a bathroom according to the gender of their body parts. I apologize for any confusion caused. However, I stand on my main point that one's gender should be determined according to one's body parts. If one wants a different gender, change the parts via surgery and hormone treatments, and then use the restroom of the new gender identify.
This self-gender determination makes me wonder, "Will the day come when all public facilities will be equipped entirely of unisex, single use, private bathrooms?" That will be expensive and space intensive. Yet it appears that the bathroom usage of gender modest folk are running headlong into the LGBT agenda of self-determination.
A couple years ago I stopped at a Gander Mountain store in Grand Rapids, Michigan to buy fishing equipment. I also desperately needed a restroom pit stop, so I headed to the back corner of the store where other Gander Mountains locate their bathrooms. Yes, my Gander Mountain problem is only outdone by my Cabela’s problem. But at that moment, I had an emergency. I walked briskly and headed to the right as I passed through the bathroom entrance area. I heaved the bathroom door aside and prepared to do my business while still on the move. Just past the sink I noticed there was no trough, male slang for a urinal. “Oh, oh.” You know the rest. I was in the wrong restroom. I blushed into a deep shade of pink, did a 180, and headed out the door to the correct pit stop. I was so thankful that no female was there to experience terror due to my infraction. Well, a few years later times have changed, and I need not worry any more over such a mistake if the LGBT community has its way in North Carolina. I could self-define as a female in that moment, and escape another’s claim that I had done legal and moral wrong.
It is the complaint of the LGBT community that North Carolina’s law that restricts public restroom usage to one’s physical genitals is –to those who gender self-define as other than their physical genitals- discriminatory. So, if I self-define as woman, I can go in the women’s restroom. If I self-define as man, I go in the men’s restroom. Body parts are not to be a part of the equation. Self-definition is central. Maybe self-definition sounds practical to you. But think through some scenarios.
Women, you use a stall in the women’s room only to emerge to discover a man, to the extent that your eyes can see, coming in on an emergency run. What’s your first thought? Or, you are breastfeeding your baby, and forgot a privacy blanket. But you think, “It’s the women’s bathroom, and I’m with like gender people.” Just then a man comes in, and then seems to take his time at the sink while gazing in the mirror in your direction Or men, you are standing at the urinal. A woman, to the extent that your eyes can determine- drops her pants and panties at the urinal next to you, and hovers over the front cone of that urinal taking care of her, or should I say his, business. What’s your comfort level guys? Even more uncomfortable to me are these scenarios playing out in front of my sons or daughters. I was taught that if you had boy parts, you use boy bathrooms. If you had girl parts, you used girl bathrooms. That was both law and common sense. That no longer appears to be the case. Such segregation is increasingly viewed as “discriminatory.”
I wonder where all this will go? If this case makes it to the supreme court and a judgment comes for self-definition in spite of body parts for bathroom usage, will those of male body parts soon be able to shower in women’s locker rooms? Will those of female body parts soon be showering in men’s locker rooms? I confess that I was confused enough 20 years ago when female sports reporters gained access to men’s locker rooms through a court ruling over post-game interviews. If we’re going with equality, just keep all male and female reporters out until the players emerge from their locker rooms. Modesty is a good thing. . . . But I digress.
So where does this go? Political, cultural commentator Cal Thomas writes: “legalization of same-sex marriage (mine: and boys in girls restrooms, and girls in boys restrooms) undermines ‘all of human history’ and poses a greater threat to America than Islamic extremists.” He continues: “Look at Mesopotamia. Look at the Roman Empire, which collapsed from within through moral impurity before they were conquered from without. And that’s my great fear. I don’t fear the Russians or the fundamentalist Muslims as much as I fear ourselves. We are committing moral suicide in this country: . . . . we’re mainstreaming same-sex marriage and the polygamists are right behind. You have the people who believe in adult-child marriage, they already do this in certain Muslim countries, these people want the rights as an adult to marry a child,” he added. “So all I’m asking, and what I do in debates is say, if the line has shifted now and we accept same-sex marriage (mine: and self-definition for restroom usage) , where would you then draw the line and on what basis? It’s all about the polls, feelings and the culture at the time, it’s not about established truth and real history.”
I suspect all reading this are against child-adult marriages. Many are against men in women’s bathrooms, and vice versa. And some readers are against same sex marriage. But we’re sliding down a slippery slope of redefinition, and the end is not in sight.
I hope good ‘ole common sense wins out on bathroom usage. If you got boy parts, go to the boys’ room. If you’ve got girl parts, go to the girls’ room. If you want to self-define other than what your bod shows, change your parts. Then you can go in the restroom according to your new parts.
Am I missing something?