The Left celebrates as external males allowed to use girls locker room

If you want your child getting naked with opposite sex classmates who identify transgender, that's your right. But its not ok with all parents, or children.

Shower Scene from Porky's (the movie)

WASHINGTON, November 4, 2015 – After months of hearing about isolated incidents of transgender students being told to share bathrooms with whichever gender they “identified” with, the federal government took the definitive step of declaring that the State of Illinois violated Title IX discrimination laws by preventing a 13 year old boy from gaining “unrestricted” access to the girls locker room on the grounds that he considers himself a girl.

The rights of young girls, or their parents, who don’t want to be “exposed” to a developing young man’s genitalia, were not addressed.

Tuesday, like most first Tuesday’s in November have recently been, was otherwise a good day for the conservative crowd.

In search of our true identity

Ohio said no to legalizing drugs, Houston said no to a poorly written and unnecessary anti-discrimination law, Kentuckians elected a conservative superstar, Matt Bevin, as their governor and San Francisco ousted their embattled Sheriff because of his ardent support for radical “sanctuary city” laws.

These stories, all hugely important, will likely be overlooked by the dishonest main stream media.

This move represents a startling departure from reason and as David French articulately pointed out for National Review while writing about a similar incident in Missouri,

“The controversy exploded after a girl at the school reported encountering an ‘intact male‘ in the locker room. Exposing a penis to girls in a public high school is generally considered an act of sexual harassment, not part of the sexual revolution.”

A sexual revolution is exactly how the left is trying to paint this issue.

While this may sound exciting and progressive to millennials and people who desperately want to be part of a positive movement, in reality, there are few things more regressive than forcing parents to cede control of their children’s lives and safety due to nothing more than the desire to create the illusion of supreme tolerance in order to pat yourself on the back for doing something good.

Give me that new-time religion: Leftism

The unintended consequences of these laws are difficult to even think about, let alone write about in detail.

Let’s just leave it at this and be as blunt as possible without being crude.  Laws like this expose children, at very young and developmentally important ages, to the naked body parts of the opposite sex on a daily basis.  The rest is up to your imagination, but also don’t forget we aren’t just talking about locker rooms with children, laws like the one rejected Tuesday in Houston want to allow transgender citizens of any age to be allowed to use whatever bathroom they identify with.

There is absolutely a way for conservatives to win this argument.

First of all, this issue is not about Democrats and Republicans.  Or at least it shouldn’t be.  While I have mentioned this as a partisan issue several times, that is only the case because of the epidemic of intolerance that has been rapidly spreading throughout the Democratic party that has demanded everyone who disagrees with these kinds of rulings be publicly outed and humliated as a bigot.

That’s a shame.  Mostly because we are dealing with children here and these kids should be able to use the bathroom at school without having to suffer from the unintended consequences of political correctness that their parents failed to stop the government from exposing them to.

This conversation is about government overreach, protecting children, and standing up for the rights of parents to determine what their children are exposed to.

Perhaps the most troubling aspect of this situation is that there is a clear solution that doesn’t oppress anyone but doesn’t put anyone at risk either.

The previously mentioned controversy in Missouri involved the same sort of situation where a young man who identified as a girl wanted to use the same locker room as the girls at the school.

The school initially came up with the appropriate response and allowed the young man to change in his own private bathroom which would not expose any of the girls to inappropriate graphic encounters that made the parents uncomfortable but equally as importantly would prevent the boy from being ridiculed if he had been callously banished back to the boys locker room.

Sounds sensible right?


That wasn’t good enough for our friends on the left.

This solution was deemed to be too alienating for the young man who didn’t want to be singled out.

This speaks to the crux of the issue.  It is impossible to appease everyone all the time, which is why compromise is so vital whether we are talking about capitol hill, state legislatures, or a locker room in middle America.

This response from the left boils down to nothing more than a complete inability to accept less than 100% of what they want.

It’s why Obamacare was a one-sided piece of legislation, it’s why Democrats have refused to work with Republicans on every issue, it’s why the president rules by executive fiat rather than through Congress, and it’s ultimately why Congress has such an abysmal approval rating.

If you can look yourself in the mirror and claim that you have absolutely no problem with your 13-year-old child being exposed to his or her naked classmates of the opposite sex simply because that other child believes in their mind that they are a different gender, then that is a position you are entitled to.

That is in no way the position of the vast majority of parents and in no way is it the government’s job or right to tell individual schools across the country that they can’t decide for themselves what their children are exposed to.

There are solutions to this problem that most level headed people can agree with, but with the all-or-nothing mentality being so prevalent on the left, this battle promises to only get more fierce.


Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2015 Communities Digital News

• The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the editors or management of Communities Digital News.

This article is the copyrighted property of the writer and Communities Digital News, LLC. Written permission must be obtained before reprint in online or print media. REPRINTING CONTENT WITHOUT PERMISSION AND/OR PAYMENT IS THEFT AND PUNISHABLE BY LAW.

Correspondingly, Communities Digital News, LLC uses its best efforts to operate in accordance with the Fair Use Doctrine under US Copyright Law and always tries to provide proper attribution. If you have reason to believe that any written material or image has been innocently infringed, please bring it to the immediate attention of CDN via the e-mail address or phone number listed on the Contact page so that it can be resolved expeditiously.