May 18, 2016 by David K. Sutton
So, A Man Walks Into A Women’s Dressing Room…
No, this is not a joke.
Today we learned a man “strolled into a Ross dressing room,” supposedly in response to the department store’s inclusiveness policy.
On Monday, Lisa Stickles went to a Ross Dress For Less department store in Mesquite, Texas, where she claims management allowed a man, who made no attempt to appear to be a woman, into the women’s fitting room.
Stickles explained that upon informing management about hearing a man’s voice in the women’s fitting room, she was told that the man was ‘representing himself as a woman today,’ and that she should wait outside the fitting room if she felt uncomfortable. – Amanda Prestigiacomo, The Daily Wire
The Right talks about how we on the Left will have blood on our hands because we believe this is a non-issue. They ask how we will be able to look in the mirror if a woman or child is molested or murdered.
Well, let me reiterate. It is indeed a non-issue for a person to use a bathroom (or dressing room) that fits their gender identity, and to dispute that is simply untenable. If you disagree, what exactly are you advocating? Do you want a transwoman, who looks every bit a woman, to use a men’s room? Does that make sense?
The problem we have here is lumping transgender people together with predators. The former should not face discrimination to thwart the latter.
Photo by Mike Licht via Flickr
One has to dismiss a person’s gender identity to support laws like North Carolina’s “bathroom bill.” One has to tell another person they are not who they say they are.
As for a store policy that advocates inclusiveness, no, this is not political correctness. Think about this for a moment. If you were facing discrimination, you wouldn’t think it was “political correctness” to point this out and to try to change it. And to head this off at the pass, having to put up with some random asshole who decides to take advantage of a store policy does not equal discrimination.
We should not pass laws in a failed attempt to protect against every possible scenario that can play out in society, especially when a law has an immediate discriminatory effect against an already marginalized minority group. So, some idiot heard about this “issue” and decided to take advantage of the store’s policy. So what? That’s what happens when these things get media attention, you get people who will dare the system. But, this is hardly evidence in support of a discriminatory law. This particular situation is evidence of an uncomfortable social situation, not an example of something criminal.
Many on the Right say we can’t pass gun laws because criminals don’t obey laws, but some of these same people believe passing a law like North Carolina’s discriminatory HB2 means reducing the incidence of predators in bathrooms, never mind that there’s no proof there is a pressing need for this protection. But even if there was, this law wouldn’t do anything to protect anyone from assault, and by the way, assault is already against the law.
This law will not affect which bathroom a person chooses to use. Everyone will continue to use the bathroom they are comfortable using. So, what is the point again?
You can spin these laws as you like, but what we are left with is yet another means to channel fear by associating a minority group with seedy behavior and then converting it to discriminatory legislation.
Human Rights • News • Politics