Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Catholic
Politics and Religion
The transgender locker room “guidance”, power, and punishment

The transgender locker room “guidance”, power, and punishment

Last updated on: May 15, 2016 at 7:52 am by Jane the Actuary

The transgender locker room “guidance”, power, and punishment 2016-05-15T07:52:29-06:00 Jane the Actuary

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Here’s an article, one of many, about the Obama administration’s decree on transgender students: “Obama Administration forces transgender bathroom rules on every school in America.” The key bit comes as a quote from the Washington Post:

The directive comes from two top administration officials: Catherine E. Lhamon, the assistant secretary of education for civil rights, and Vanita Gupta, head of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division. It will put state and local officials and higher-education institutions on notice that they risk losing federal education aid if they limit students to areas or teams based on their gender assigned at birth.

The action comes just days after the Justice Department and the state of North Carolina filed dueling lawsuits over a new law requiring individuals in that state to use bathrooms based on their birth gender.

Citing Title IX, which prohibits sexual discrimination at educational institutions that receive federal funding, the two officials warn that the obligation “to ensure nondiscrimination on the basis of sex requires schools to provide transgender students equal access to educational programs and activities even in circumstances in which other students, parents, or community members raise objections or concerns.

“As is consistently recognized in civil rights cases, the desire to accommodate others’ discomfort cannot justify a policy that singles out and disadvantages a particular class of students,” reads the letter, which was obtained by The Washington Post.

The bottom line: schools have been told they’ll have Title IX funding pulled unless they permit declared transgender or gendernonconforming students full access to restrooms, locker rooms, sports teams, and overnight accomodations and dormitories conforming to their declared gender, and protect them from any form of actual or perceived harassment, or lack of acceptance, from staff or fellow students.

All of this rests on an administration declaration that Title IX’s protection against discrimination on account of sex also encompasses protection against discrimination based on “gender identity.” And it rests on a further understanding: that one’s sex/gender is determined based on one’s perception, not on one’s physiology. Hence, “transgender girls” are not simply “boys who feel like girls” but “real girls” who should be treated as such, and vice-versa, because, in the Administration’s interpretion, it’s illegal to treat one “kind of girl” different than another.

In ordinary circumstances, it’s poor rhetoric to resort to “dictionary definitions.” It’s the classic introductory paragraph in a high school essay. But here’s how the online Webster’s dictionary defines “woman”:

an adult female human being

and what does “female” mean?

of or relating to the sex that can produce young or lay eggs.

This, of course, has nothing to do with how one perceives onesself. But in 2016, the claim of “identity” has become enough, according to “trans” advocates, to “become” a given gender — whether male, female, or some concept of Third Gender.

Certainly it wasn’t that way, not too long ago, when the terminology consisted of “sex changes” and “becoming male/female” as a result of hormone administration and surgery. Now that’s been replaced by “gender confirmation surgery” and the insistence that such a person really is a girl (or a boy) regardless of chromosomes, or hormones, or genitalia, from the moment that person “feels”/”identifies” that way, or, really, from birth, on the expectation that this feeling/identiy has always been there, even if the individual was unable to understand or articulate it. Hence, the outward appearances of such a person, rather than the inward “identity,” are the “birth defects” to be remedied with surgery, or even are irrelevant, so that we see floating around the internet claims that it’s bigoted for a man to be unwilling to date a “girlfriend with a penis.”

Fundamentally, the claim is this: something in your biology controls how your brain perceives your gender. If you “identify as a woman” — even if born male — then, this thinking goes, you truly are a woman, because that’s something hardwired in your brain, not a voluntary choice, in the same way as sexual orientation is determined to be hardwired — in each case due to genetics or the consequences of in-utero development.

But this is just one claim, one way of viewing what it means to be “male” and “female.” There is nothing particularly more “right” about this than the opposite claim that one’s sex, for humans as for all animals, is based on chromosomes, and reasonably classified into which type of the species, childbearing or not, one is, with an asterisk only for individuals who are intersex due to a chromosomal abnormality, or as a consequence of in utero development. The fact that various local governments have accepted the concept of becoming the opposite sex, legally, under various conditions (requiring surgery, hormones, or merely a declaration) is a matter of, well, law, and has to do with a balancing of interests and a creation of a legal concept that isn’t in line with biological reality.

And the treatment of children in school is a balancing of interests. It is not as simple as a declaration that “transgender girls are girls, full stop.” Should a preteen girl be obliged to change in locker rooms alongside (to sidestep terminology) individuals with penises? Should a girl be assigned a “transgirl” roommate on a school trip, or, upon reaching adulthood, as a college roommate? Is a girl a “bigot” for being unwilling to change in front of a classmate with male genitalia? What if that girl is from a religion that is particularly concerned with issues of modesty, such as Islam, and with the (in)appropriateness of girls viewing male genitalia, and vice versa? And, no, it is simply not practical to ask schools to undertake the massive remodeling project (both in terms of cost and added space required) to provide individual, wholly private changing and showering stalls for each student in gym class.

What the Administration has done is such a shocking overreach that it’s hard to comprehend. This is not a matter of “rights” or a simple issue of a proper application of existing, settled law. This is the brute-force creation of law.

And their declaration, knowing that local school districts will have to fight back, and will generally prefer to cave than fuss with the expenditures it requires, and are at risk of like-minded judges confirming the Administration’s declaration — well, it seems like nothing other than a raw exercise in power, and a punitive one at that, meant to strike back at conservatives, with the declaration that schoolchildren, and their parents, have no right to traditional sex-segregated changing spaces.

After all, why this shift, from “sex is based on physiology, but we allow legal sex changes as an accommodation” to “a transgirl is a girl and has the legal rights thereof”? It’s not a matter of science. Science can claim that the feeling of one’s “true sex” may be deeply hardwired, but the determination that the self-perception trumps the physiology of penis, uterus, etc., is a decision, not of science, but of society and law.

And once you shift from the notion of accommodation and decent treatment for people in difficult situations (that is, individuals who would experience real, significant, and lifelong distress if unable to undergo the set of procedures labelled “sex change” and be treated by others and receive legal recognition as the other sex), to demands of “rights”, you can access that language that says that your opponents are bigots whose concerns are not to be balanced but disregarded — which, of course, gives you power.

Image: a generic locker room, from https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File%3AHK_%E5%A0%85%E5%B0%BC%E5%9C%B0%E5%9F%8E_Kennedy_Town_%E5%A3%AB%E7%BE%8E%E9%9D%9E%E8%B7%AF%E5%B8%82%E6%94%BF%E5%A4%A7%E5%BB%88_Smithfield_Municipal_Services_Building_%E6%9B%B4%E8%A1%A3%E5%AE%A4_changing_room_Sept-2011.jpg; By Limysei1235 (Own work) [CC BY-SA 3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

Politics

transgender

Previous Post

May 13, 2016

Women deacons? Um, why?

Next Post

May 15, 2016 Is it the end of the line for Maduro?

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Actuarial/Retirement Issues Politics Uncategorized

Select a Month September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 December 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 August 2021 June 2021 April 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Who was the Roman emperor when Jesus was born?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Tiberius Julius Caesar Nero Augustus