Trans

Federal Judge Rejects Attempt to Extend Discrimination Protection to Transgender Student

It's a case about public school bathrooms.

|

If school restrooms are as I remember, even if he wins, he loses.
Credit: Wha'ppen / photo on flickr

Transgender bathroom panic has made it all the way to federal courts. A federal judge in Virginia has partly rejected efforts by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), efforts bolstered by the position of the Department of Justice, to contest a public school's bathroom policies as a violation of federal sex discrimination laws.

I say "partly rejected" because the case can move forward as an equal protection case. But the judge, Robert Doumar, senior judge for the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, said earlier this week he would not entertain the argument that refusing to allow a transgender student to use the bathroom of his or her chosen sex rather than birth sex was a violation of sex discrimination bans of Title IX of the Education Act of 1972.

The student, Gavin Grimm, born as genetic female but now living as male, has sued for the right to use the boys' restrooms at Gloucester High School in Virginia. The school board had set up rules requiring students use the bathrooms of their birth sex but also provided three unisex bathrooms for transgender students or others who wanted them. That accommodation was not enough for Grimm.

As BuzzFeed explains, Doumar wouldn't even entertain the Title IX argument. He just abruptly threw it out of the case:

Your case in Title IX is gone, by the way," he told ACLU staff attorney Joshua Block, who argued on Grimm's behalf. "I have chosen to dismiss Title IX. I decided that before we started."

The announcement was unexpected not only because it diverges from the recent legal trend on the question of whether sex discrimination bans include anti-transgender discrimination, but also because a lawyer for the U.S. Department of Justice who had come to argue in Grimm's favor on the Title IX question had not yet been given a chance to speak.

The "legal trend" BuzzFeed is likely referring to is the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the DOJ deciding that the sex discrimination prohibitions of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects against transgender workplace discrimination (I've written about that here). This is a different law, and Doumar argued that Title IX allows for schools to segregate bathrooms and locker rooms, so therefore they could do the same to students on the basis of their birth sex.

I am uncertain of the logic of that argument, but it possibly doesn't matter. The comments from Doumar, a Reagan appointee who is now 85 years old, make him sound like an Aaron Sorkin-written parody of an embittered social conservative. Again from BuzzFeed:

On Monday, Doumar repeatedly interrupted lawyers and waxed on tangents about his frustrations with how the United States is changing. "Where the U.S is going scares me," he said. "It really scares me."

When the federal government's lawyer was asked to answer questions toward the end of the hearing, Doumar patronized the Department of Justice for enforcing marijuana prohibition in some states while allowing other states to tax and regulate pot, filing a brief in another unspecific case without pursuing a penalty, and other perceived shortcomings.

"I am sorry for the Department of Justice," he said. "Sanctuary cities. Where are we going?"

More from Reason and transgender bathroom panics here.

NEXT: Security Theatre For All: NY Lawmaker Pushes for Metal Detectors Everywhere

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Fun fact: Judge Doumar’s uncle Abe, a Syrian immigrant, invented the ice cream cone.

  2. If Grimm is living as a man then who would notice is he/she used the men’s room? I often see women use the men’s restroom when the line for theirs is too long, and no one seems to have a problem with it. Sounds like this Grimm person is just interested in causing a scene and pushing their cause.

    1. This. NO ONE CARES if a female uses the men’s room.

      1. And no one would care (or notice) if a former woman dressed as a man used one. I don’t understand why this person feels entitled to their own personal restroom. I’d like my own restroom too, but I’m not audacious enough to hire a lawyer and demand one.

        1. The thing is, they have their own personal rest room which the school provided without even being sued:

          The school board had set up rules requiring students use the bathrooms of their birth sex but also provided three unisex bathrooms for transgender students or others who wanted them.

          1. The article wasn’t clear on why the unisex restroom was unacceptable. Perhaps this person is just trying to stir things up and cause trouble for their own perverse amusement.

            1. Let’s take a stab at it.

              Use of the unisex bathroom will be restricted to only those that need it (like transgendered students), otherwise they would be so heavily used that transgendered students wouldn’t be able to get in.

              So using the unisex bathroom will get everyone’s attention, and all school staff will have to know who is allowed to use it.

              Or we could just hang signs on their backs.

            2. The point which you are both missing, or pretending to miss, is that this person views himself as male, and wants simply to be treated as other males. Your strident avoidance of gender pronouns in this tells me you have an axe to grind.

              1. is that this person views himself as male, and wants simply to be treated as other males.

                I view my self as a teacher, and simply want in the teacher’s lounge with all the other teachers during recess.

                Just because we start from a different premise than you do doesn’t mean we have “an axe to grind.”

                1. Just because we start from a different premise than you do doesn’t mean we have “an axe to grind.

                  I have no axe to grind. I’m just confused on the proper way to address someone who chooses to identify as a gender different from how they were born but hasn’t made the commitment to have gender re-assignment surgery. But I honestly wouldn’t care if a woman who identifies and dresses as a man used a men’s restroom that I frequent.

                  1. I’m just confused on the proper way to address someone who chooses to identify as a gender different from how they were born but hasn’t made the commitment to have gender re-assignment surgery.

                    However they ask people to identify them. Not all trans people will ever have surgery.

                    1. Not all trans people will ever have surgery.

                      That’s my biggest issue. Those who go through the lengthy, painful, and expensive procedure to change their gender deserve to be addressed by the gender they’ve become. When someone simply changes clothes and demands to be called a different gender then I have trouble believing they’re serious and not just acting on a whim.

                    2. I kind of feel the opposite way. Nobody should feel the need to have surgery in order to feel like the woman/man they think they are. Accept the body you have, and act the way you want, and society should treat you decently regardless of whether your behavior matches your genitals.

                    3. Everyone has the right to live as the person they want to be. However, they don’t have the right (or should not) to make the government force others to accept their lifestyle or perceived identity. My point about the surgery is that it shows a level of commitment and eliminates the possibility that the person is pretending just to get extra goodies.

                    4. and treating you decently=playing along with your delusions?

                    5. Really. So, someone has to go through expensive and dangerous surgery to quiet your suspicion that they don’t truly see themselves as the gender in their head? So, are we interrogating or strip searching them to determine genital status before addressing them as their preferred gender?

                    6. “However they ask people to identify them”

                      Given that almost no one here has been asked, why does it matter?

                  2. “Hey, you!”

                  3. How would you know? Pants check?

              2. I’m pretty sure i don’t have an axe to grind. I don’t care at all who uses what bathroom and I think it is silly that people do care. And if someone wants to identify as a gender other than what their anatomy suggests, I’m happy to use their preferred pronouns.

                That said, people do care. Enough that there are laws about what bathrooms people can use. So why do they care? Is it because of what gender people identify as or because of what kind of genitalia they have?

                What’s my point? I don’t know if i have one. Maybe that it is stupid to worry about whether the person taking a shit next to you has a penis or a vagina.

                1. Is it because of what gender people identify as or because of what kind of genitalia they have?

                  I would think that most people who care couldn’t give a flying flip about somebody’s gender identity. I think they care because 1) they think they’re more likely to run into a pervert than a transsexual at any given moment and 2) they’re highly skeptical of transsexuals.

                  1. That would be my guess too. While I think it is silly to worry about what kind of equipment the person in the next stall has, people do.

              3. “… is that this person views himself as male, and wants simply to be treated as other males.”

                The problem being is that person is not a male and therefore has no reasonable expectation that other people must treat her as a male.

              4. Exactly right.

              5. I’ll bet she still squats to pee…

            3. That’s pretty much all there is to do in Gloucester. The Daffodil festival is only so long and Meth isn’t as cheap as it used to be.

        2. Wow, Antilles, you got the facts profoundly wrong. Profoundly.

          Here, again, is the relevant part with some emphasis to help you through the tough parts:

          The student, Gavin Grimm, born as genetic female but now living as male, has sued for the right to use the boys’ restrooms at Gloucester High School in Virginia. The school board had set up rules requiring students use the bathrooms of their birth sex but also provided three unisex bathrooms for transgender students or others who wanted them. That accommodation was not enough for Grimm.

          So here’s the recap: The student wanted to simply use the restroom designated for males, which you claim to have no trouble with. The school board came up with the idea of the special unisex bathrooms.

          Having said all that, single-occupancy restrooms for all is an easy way out of this.

          1. “single-occupancy restrooms for all is an easy way out of this.”

            Yes, TOILETS FOR ALL! its a right

            1. Ah, ah, Gilly, I didn’t say it was a right; I said it was a way out.

              1. when you say, “Easy”, you’re implying that refurbishing every single public building in America to meet new arbitrary toilet-regulations is the “less burdonsome” of the possible legal interpretations.

                1. Sigh. Overcome by apoplexy, are you, Gilly? Breathe slowly and read the following again. Read for comprehension.

                  [S]ingle-occupancy restrooms for all is an easy way out of this.

                  AN easy way out. Not THE ONLY WAY out. I’m open to other suggestions, but chose not to enumerate them all.

                  1. “Sigh. Overcome by apoplexy, are you, Gilly? “

                    “Ugh. patronizing!”

                    Do you really have to constantly project this vision of angry-conservatives onto everything you read that isn’t in total agreement with your poorly expressed points?

                    You said “easy”. Single-occupancy (non-public) toilets *do not exist* in most public facilities, while “group toilets” do.

                    Transforming public facilities to meet your new ‘solution’ is not “easy” at all. And its enormously costly. And there’s little to any explanation why that cost is necessary or justified. You can try if you want.

                  2. To.meet the code requirements of high occupancy buildings, they really are not, especially existing facilities.

                  3. They’re actually not a way out at all.

                    Based on my HS, which had a boys( 4 stall, 5 urinal) and girls( 6 stall) bathroom on each floor, plus the adult men’s and women’s( 6 and three, respectively), plus four locker rooms(2 each)–the boys were 5 stall 10 urinal and the girls were 8 stall, you’re looking at adding 88 water closet type rooms to that building.

                    That’s enough construction for a new building.

                    How about, instead, we fling up a single single occupancy loo for the 0.3% of the population who might need it, tell that 0.3% that they don’t get to turn the world upside down to make their opposite sex fantasies come true, and be done with it?

          2. No, I got it. I just get the impression that Grimm wanted to grandstand and make a big deal over nothing. Had ‘he’ just used the men’s room like the other male students I can’t imagine anyone would have noticed, or cared. Was someone at the school actually denying access to the men’s room? Beyond an arbitrary rule? Because that’s what’s implied by the lawsuit.

            1. I have trouble believing that given your profound mischaracterization of the situation.

              1. ‘Real’ men don’t hire lawyers and demand to be treated like men, they just act like men do–such as using the men’s restroom. This person sounds just like Mattress Girl to me.

                1. Wow, way to ignore that he’s subject to school board rules and that they can make his life miserable. In any other situation you’d be supporting anyone fighting government.

                2. This is a problem with transgender in general. “The grass is always greener.” Men don’t whine. Men don’t mind pissing in the lady’s room because it’s usually cleaner.

                  1. Men don’t mind pissing in the lady’s room because it’s usually cleaner.

                    What alternate universe are you from, and what is Superman’s origin story there?

            2. Had ‘he’ just used the men’s room like the other male students I can’t imagine anyone would have noticed, or cared.

              I doubt that, and here’s why. When Suzy comes in to school one day as Samuel, everybody remembers that Samuel was Suzy yesterday. I wouldn’t be surprised if somebody bitched about Samuel nee Suzy using the boys’ room.

              It sounds like the school board came to a decent compromise, but evidently it wasn’t enough.

              1. You black kids have to use these two special bathrooms….

                1. So you’re saying the Boy/Girl should declare herself black and then claim racism?

                  GENIUS

                  1. You’re being deliberately obtuse, right?

              2. What probably happened is that there was an enormous gab fest among the teenagers and some busybody admin HAD TO DO SOMETHING.

          3. The unisex bathrooms ARE single occupancy bathrooms. It was not enough.

            Because he wanted to be a boy in the boys bathroom and how other people might feel about that is just too damned bad. It’s not about excrertion–it’s about the cameraderie she imagines occurs in the boys bathroom, when boys are just being boys around boys. It’s about forcing people to accept that she’s a he now. Tits, vagina and all.

            Because that’s what we’re talking about–a girl, wearing ‘boy clothes’ (as if jeans and a t-shirt–or polo shirt, if the school is uniformed–are ‘gendered’), with maybe a short haircut, and maybe a binder–not someone who’s had gender reassignment– wandering into the boy’s bathroom. How many other girls wear ‘boy clothes’ without being purportedly dysphoric?

            Why does no one care about the other kids? The boys who were born boys, and the girls who were born girls? Puberty is a rough time–maybe they don’t want to worry about seeing penises in the girl’s bathroom when they’re feeling all moody–maybe teenaged boys don’t want to deal with Gavin’s menstruation issues in the boy’s bathroom when they’re dealing with an unplanned boner.

            The school accomodated the child’s needs. They’re not responsible for fulfilling the child’s fantasies. Note that I said ‘fantasies’ and not delusions–because that is what this is about. Gavin is fantasizing that he can make the boys accept him as a boy among boys–and he’ll use force if needed.

          4. So, she wants to sit down to pee in the men’s room rather than the ladies…

      2. The school evidently cares.

      3. Are you trying to say that no one cares if a woman uses the men’s room, or no one cares if a female uses the male’s restroom?

        1. Whatever he’s trying to say is complete bullshit in the context of a high school.

          1. Back in my day, absolutely. But I thought the Millennials were more enlightened and tolerant. Am I wrong to assume that?

            1. Because teenagers are known for not being immature?

              1. known for not being immature?

                In other words, they are known for being mature?;-)

            1. That’s San Francisco. We all know how intolerant the people are there.

            2. Her gender transition completely failed when she pulled a chick-move like that.

              1. I don’t want to sound uncaring, but getting fucked with outside the bathroom is a fairly common occurence in a boy’s life.

    2. It would be different out in public. In school, everyone already knows her/him and thus the freakout.

      1. I could almost understand a freak-out if it were a former guy using the women’s restroom. But as a typical guy I never look at or make eye contact with anyone else in the men’s room. Maybe they should just make all their restrooms unisex? If there is no difference between men and women and gender is fluid, why not?

        1. I vote for unisex. Why the fuck not? Especially if there aren’t urinals.

    3. It’s “World War T.” Transgenderism is now the Biggest Civil Rights Issue of Our Time. Of course it’s people causing a scene. A very, very, tiny minority of people.

      1. The needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many.

        1. The rights of an individual are more important than the squeamishness of the masses? Well, yeah.

          1. Look nicole, the tyranny of the majority is okay if you’re part of that majority.

            1. You never listen to me when I say that!

          2. Exactly what right is involved here?

            1. The right to make other people do what you want.

  3. did the layout change? or is it me? Or both? *looks around nervously*

  4. This case should have been brought under the ADA. If someone had a documented psychological disorder that made it impossible to use the bathroom in the presence of others, I think a court would order the school provide reasonable accommodations, as in let them use a private bathroom.

    In this case the student has a disorder that causes them to think they are a boy and thus feel uncomfortable using the bathroom in the presence of other girls. That would seem to be a major life affecting disability as defined by the ADA. So give access to a private bathroom as an accommodation and call it a day.

    1. Disability? lol.

      1. I would consider being born without a dick to be a pretty severe disability, at least for someone who identifies as male.

        1. I would think believing you are man even though you are not, counts as having a disability. If the girl thought she was Cleopatra, wouldn’t you consider her disabled?

          1. That would depend on how it affected her ability to function in society. If she was able to go through school, hold down a job, pay her bills, and stay out of trouble with the law while being the Queen of de Nile, how exactly would that qualify as a disability?

            1. That is true. But she clearly can’t go through school like this. So the school owes her accommodation not acceptance. The unisex bathrooms are sufficient.

          2. It doesn’t matter what we think… didn’t someone here at Hit & Run intimately involved with some of these cases indicate that the plaintiffs often refer to theirs as a “condition” or disability?

          3. “I was born a human, but I feel like a cat and would like to be treated as such.”
            -You have a mental problem.
            “I was born a male but feel more like a woman and demand to be treated as such.”
            -You deserve a parade and award for courage.

      2. Yes. Last I looked people who are delusional can fairly be counted as disabled.

        1. I don’t know that I would call it a delusion. Transgender people don’t generally think they are something they are not. They know what their body is. Nor is it necessarily a disability. But I think you still make a good point. Being transgender, as far as I can see, isn’t like being of a particular gender or being gay. However you want to describe it, it is a problem, there is something wrong (not morally, of course, but when your mind and body don’t match up like that it’s going to be hard to be a happy, fulfilled person).

          If I were in charge, I’d say use whatever bathroom you want. But people are weird about toilet issues.

          1. I don’t know that I would call it a delusion. Transgender people don’t generally think they are something they are not. They know what their body is. Nor is it necessarily a disability.

            I think it qualifies best as a somatoform disorder. Standard Not-A-Psychologist Disclaimer applies.

          2. Transgender people don’t generally think they are something they are not.

            That’s the definition of transgender. Assuming gender has any meaning whatsoever.

    2. The irony is that transgender activists pushed to be considered normal, and so in a political decision, the latest Diagnostic and Statistics Manual (DSM-V) doesn’t include being transgender as a mental illness.

      It does include gender dysphoria – but that’s simply the agony that society supposedly inflicts on the transgender person through prejudice or oppression. It’s not the condition itself.

  5. That accommodation was not enough for Grimm.

    “Library cards are free. Let us know when you think you’re ready for the GED. Now GTFO.”

  6. If Grimm gets special treatment, I’m sure all the different Wesen will wan’t special treatment.

    1. Damn fuchsbau trying to screw everything up.

  7. I’m a tellin’ ya, this is going to be one of those issues that will have bipartisan hate.

    The ‘every man is a rapist’ crowd on the progressive left is going to howl bloody murder when a guy with a 5 o’clock shadow wants access to the women’s room.

    Oh, and I can’t resist:

    As BuzzFeed explains, Doumar wouldn’t even entertain the Title IX argument. He just abruptly threw it out of the case:

    Here are 8 other Titles you never knew existed!

    1. The ‘every man is a rapist’ crowd on the progressive left is going to howl bloody murder when a guy with a 5 o’clock shadow wants access to the women’s room.

      And they will be joined by the Socons in this. I’ll go make popcorn and pass out some earplugs to help with the shrieking.

      1. And they will be joined by the Socons in this.

        That went without saying. That’s where you expect the primary offence to come from. But oh no, I’m buying futures in Prog offense.

        “There’s a white guy with a 5 o’clock shadow calling himself “Vera” standing in line for his ‘minority-and-women-owned business loan’…

        1. If I call myself “Leshaniqua” can I get double?

          1. That’s how it’s ultimately going to end — in Oppressed Status Points. You get 1 for being non-white, 1 for being non-male, 1 for being non-straight, 1 for being non-birth assigned gender…

            Your government subsidies will be determined by your Oppressed Status Point. Maybe you’ll get a tax break based on Oppression Status.

            1. If a white male switches to a non-white, non-male is that three points or just one though?

              I almost hope the West survives just to see how this plays out in court.

      2. And they will be joined by the Socons in this. I’ll go make popcorn and pass out some earplugs to help with the shrieking.

        I’d like closed captioning.

        [SHRIEKING]

        [MORE SHRIEKING]

    2. The ‘every man is a rapist’ crowd on the progressive left is going to howl bloody murder when a guy with a 5 o’clock shadow wants access to the women’s room.

      This is all old hat. Radfems aka terfs have been on about this for literally years and your average SJW sides with trans people instead.

  8. I really think Buzzfeed is the most reliable source reporting on this topic. That’s why we should reference their take rather than any other.

  9. WTF does Buzzfeed think “patronize” means?

    1. Doumar repeatedly interrupted lawyers

      WONT SOMEONE THINK OF THE LAWYERS!?

    2. There’s probably not a whole lot of thinking going on at Buzzfeed.

      I always imagined that the mental energy flowing around Buzzfeed’s editorial offices could almost light a candle.

      1. That was just goddamn funny.

  10. And really, is the issue that the judge is described as a parody of a Sorkinesque-conservative (and he may very well be)…?

    …or should we entertain the possibility that in fact, the expansion of Title IX to include any and everything ‘gender-ish’ *is* completely fucking stupid?

    1. It’s going to be a huge shit show.

      It’s not binary. There are now 6 genders. It’s every real number between 0 and 1, given combinations of the 6 extant genders. Soon it’s going to somehow include imaginary numbers too, although I’m not quite… Imaginative

      1. enough to figure out how.

      2. Any word on which of those Napolitano identifies as?

        1. “Hair-Helmet” is now a gender?

  11. …make him sound like an Aaron Sorkin-written parody of an embittered social conservative.

    So he made the remarks while walking down a hallway trailed by two equally fast-talking subordinates?

    1. Funny, I had the exact same mental image.

      1. I think Sorkin peaked at A Few Good Men. After that, all he wrote were annoying parodies. (Well, maybe that play was all parodies, too, but they weren’t annoying.)

        1. I just discovered The West Wing a few months ago (wife’s uncle gave us the entire series on DVD last Christmas). I can only handle one episode at a time. The feel-good awesome-power-of-Democrats-and-government high-handedness is intolerable.

          I went to law school with way too many people who either aspire to make life like this show or already believe it actually is. Good people, generally, politically moronic.

          1. If that show had toned down some of the “we must stop the incessant bombing in Vieques” stuff it would have been even better.

            But, I like how the “issues of the time” pre-9/11 were small and petty compared to the shit that has been happening in government.

          2. Just repeat after me — government is the brain and we are but cells of the body operating on the brain’s instructions.

      2. Funny, I had the exact same mental image

        Me, too.

  12. Just a thought: with the whole new “flexible sexual identity” craze going on, I see a lot of money-making opportunities for discrimination cases. Makes me wish I were an entrepreneurial lawyer about right now.

    1. It is fabulous isn’t it? And I think you are right. There is going to be a massive backlash against this shit. Even liberals I know think it is horse shit and are tired of hearing about it. If the Progs think the next culture war win is going to be for the transvestites, they are in for a rude surprise.

      1. Yeah, that’s been my take as well. I’ve said before, if the far left wants to make tranny bathrooms a major platform of the 2016 campaign, I doubt we’ll hear President Walker complain too much.

      2. What’s super cool? You can make money on BOTH SIDES of the complaint!

        Deny gender-flex person their preferred identity facility? Discrimination lawsuit!

        Allow gender-flex person their preferred identity facility? Harassment lawsuit by everyone offended!

        This is a fuckin’ goldmine!

      3. With gay marriage, straight people could be convinced that it wouldn’t affect their lives at all. As we know from the new round of anti-discrim lawsuits, that’s not always the case, but still for most people it is not going to affect them.

        This stuff is another matter entirely. If they succeed here, that’s going to mean every father in the country has to accept that his teenage (or even younger) daughter has to share a locker room with older persons who appear male, were born male, and have the complete anatomy of a male, but checked the box next to “F” on some form.

        Not. Gonna. Happen.

  13. Sounds like the judge is kind of a dick, but right on the merits: the school provided 3 unisex bathrooms. What the hell else are they supposed to do?

    1. Force people to accept this girl. This is just gay marriage all over again. The point isn’t to help anyone. The point is to find a new culture war weapon to enforce more conformity. That is it.

      1. You mean the left is not satisfied yet?

        Maybe if we let them win one more time they’ll stop bothering us over this stuff.

        1. Maybe if we let them win one more time they’ll stop bothering us over this stuff.

          Well played, sir!

    2. ” What the hell else are they supposed to do?”

      “‘I don’t know’ – how much can we extort from the system?””

      /Activists

      1. I don’t know about activist, but all this boy has stated (at least in the parts quoted above) is that he simply wants to use the boys’ bathroom like all the other boys, which wouldn’t cost the taxpayers anything extra. Show me how this isn’t boilerplate culture war antipathy towards transgendered individuals.

        1. ” Show me how this isn’t boilerplate culture war antipathy towards transgendered individuals.”

          Why was the unisex bathroom insufficient, again?

          1. because you seemed to suggest above (below?) that unisex bathrooms were “an easy” solution.

            But then you pivot here and suggest that people should be able to have their “chosen” gender catered to even when unisex options are available.

            Are you *trying* to prove my point, above, that ‘activists’ have no real goal other than to gain as much leverage as possible for its own sake, despite getting nominal ‘accommodation’?

            1. by that token, i’d think women would have a better case to demand Equal Bathroom access for all, at all times, everywhere.

              I’m thinking in particular of a bar where I used to play pool a lot, where the bathrooms had “boy” or “girl” signs, and where there was always a gigantic line for the girls room, but men just zipped in and out of the pee-pee hole and ne’r was there ever more than a few seconds wait.

              On more than a few occasions I’d look at a girl in line for the bathroom and say, “just use the boys room, there’s no one in there!”.

              The reply was always, “UGH! Yuck! cooties” or something thereabouts.

              they eventually de-sexed the bathrooms in there, fwiw. Which just meant men now had to wait everytime a (often *pair*) of women went into the toilet.

              re: the pairs – they don’t do it because they’re blowing lines off the toilet lid. Girls pee in pairs sometimes. God knows why.

              1. Modern plumbing codes usually require almost double the number of toilets for women as men. In New York they actually passed one of those “named” laws to enforce their version of equal access. The “Women’s Restroom Equity Bill” passed in 2005. Sometimes they even limit the number of urinals allowed for men as well – I suppose in the interest of wait time parity. I think these requirements might be the impetus that brought about the return of the piss-trough. A stadium that requires 400 toilets for women and 230 toilets for men but is limited to only providing an additional 100 urinals might navigate this problem by installing the wall-length trough urinal.

        2. Show me how this isn’t boilerplate culture war antipathy towards transgendered individuals.

          A neutral rule is being applied without bias. I have no idea what you’re talking about.

  14. Transgender bathroom panic

    great band name

  15. WHAT IF PEOPLE START USING WHATEVER BATHROOM THEY WANT REGARDLESS OF THE PICTURE ON THE DOOR IT WILL BE ANARCHY

    1. But if you have to pay to enter the bathroom it will be capitalist anarchy. Someone should come up with a catchy moniker for that…

    2. It wouldn’t be anarchy, it would just make a lot of people uncomfortable. I don’t see why their interests in not being made that way is outweighed by this single person’s interests. Why does everyone always have to bend over backwards for whatever the fashionable cause of the day?

      1. Take heart. One day soon, prudishness will be fashionable again, and then you can have all the revenge you please.

        1. Prudishness is already back, just in different ways.

          1. Good point. But the traditional prudishnesses will come back in vogue soon enough.

            1. I hope it is at least accompanied by an increase in witch-burnings.

          2. Lena Dunham agrees!

            1. Warty is Lena Dunham? It all makes sense.

        2. First of all, the human species has two sexes:
          male and female.
          If an adult wants to change their body to make it look like the other sex, fine. That is between them and the doctors. But is a person’s chromosomal patter equals XY, their testosterone to estrogen ratio is high, and the brains gray matter to white matter ratio is also high, THEY ARE MALE. Cutting off their penis and testicles and injecting them with estrogen doesn’t make them female. But again, not an area for the govt to decide. (That doesn’t mean that standards of care don’t apply).

          I promise you, I am no prude. But FFS, boys use the boys’ room and girls use the girls’ room. If a place offers unisex or single stalls, so much the better!

          1. Nope. Prude.

            1. Prude? Why not Poopy-head? Too many letters? Why not “stupid”? You seem to think that one carries some kind of weight.

          2. What you say about genetics is certainly true for the vast majority, but is it so in every case? Pretty much all sex-linked traits are on the X chromosome, if i recall correctly. It isn’t so hard to conceive that an XX person could develop a brain that is more like that of a typical male.

            1. Let’s not even get into Klinefelter syndrome and the like.

            2. But gender isn’t based on brain development. There *may* be significant correlations between gender and certain brain characteristics in large enough populations, but at the individual level that’s all bullshit.

      2. It actually makes a lot more sense to bend over forwards for gay rights.

        1. Heheh, I see what you did there…

      3. There’s a hierarchy to Uncomfortabilitynessification. We need Oliver Wendell Holmes to judgesplain it to us.

    3. *finger snap applause*

      What I love about this culture war? No matter the outcome, I’m not offended. But I sure have money on who WILL be offended, and You Won’t Believe What’ll Happen Next!

      1. “*finger snap applause*”

        UGH. Oppressive?

        Jazz hands are the only acceptable form of social recognition.

        1. I refuse to give credit to Occupy Wall Street for anything.

    4. Anything I want to claim as mine is my bathroom.

    5. It won’t be anarchy. It will be sexual assault( insert scare quotes if desired) followed by even bigger lawsuits than this one.

      1. Women in bathrooms will be subject to the Male Gaze. You know where I’m going with this, right?

        1. If you’re a lawyer, I assume you’re going to court and then to the bank with this.

          1. Damn, I knew I should have taken that “Rainmaking in the Culture War” CLE.

        2. Men in bathrooms are already subject to the Male Gays’ Gaze. Doesn’t seem to be much of a problem.

          1. It’s not a problem. For two reasons:

            1. It’s not a problem.
            2. If it were, refer to 1.

            But if you’re in an oppressed, protected class…

      2. So, is there something magical about a “ladies’ room” sign that prevents someone from going in there and assaulting someone?

        Seems like the same kind of thinking that convinces people that handgun permits will stop unsuitable people from carrying a gun.

        1. Way to confuse the issue. If the school administrators tell a girl to use the boys restroom and she is assaulted, they will be held liable in court.

        2. So, is there something magical about a “ladies’ room” sign that prevents someone from going in there and assaulting someone?

          To me, no. To the indignation industry, not only yes, but fuckin’-a yes.

    6. Having spent some time as a part time janitor, I absolutely do not want a bunch of women ruining my bathroom at work.

  16. Just make them all stalls. Problem solved.

    Jesus F. Christ, it’s not difficult.

    1. Paging Gilmore and Antilles, please pick up the bile-colored courtesy phone…

      1. I like how you criticise anyone pointing out your illogic as “bilious” and hate-filled.

        because anything less than complete and total accommodation to the most extreme minority view is somehow a Hate-Crime.

        And, by the way – what you suggested was not simply “making all bathrooms unisex” – you specifically said, “Single Occupancy-bathrooms”. A la, no more “public” toilets.

        If you don’t want your balls busted, be more precise in your language.

        1. Don’t you see. We had to compromise on gay marriage because it was impractical to remove marriage from government control, but God forbid we compromise on letting trannys piss wherever they please with a handful of unisex stalls. SJWbertarians tried to get their pony under the guise of pragmatism, but the mask has slipped. It’s all about that forced tolerance pony.

      2. You’re making a lot of baseless assumptions. For the record, I don’t care how individuals choose to live their lives and would not personally care if a woman who identified as a man chose to use the same restroom as me. Live and let live. My criticism is that Grimm is making a huge issue out of something that should not even be an issue. If the other boys in the school have a problem with him using the restroom then they’re the problem and they should be dealt with accordingly. In what way is my belief hateful?

        1. “In what way is my belief hateful?”

          Its just an easy way to avoid having to justify his feels-based non-logic. “you’re a hater, hater”. then run away.

          1. It’s funny how just about every regular has one topic where they lose their minds.

            1. It’s funny how just about every regular has one topic where they lose their minds.

              For me it’s soccer, along with most professional sports.

              1. Go Patriots! And Free Tom Brady!
                Anything?

            2. That’s probably true.

              I don’t know what mine is, but it probably exists.

          2. Yes, it’s disappointing because Tonio’s posts normally seem intelligent and rational.

  17. Look, we’ve got Progressive Heroes named.. Lena Dunham howling bloody murder about the threat of legalized prostitution…

    This fight’s gonna be better than The Thrilla in Manila!

  18. I wonder if the school is worried about the student being raped. Not how dangerous the school is, but rapes have happened in school bathrooms of non-transgendered women. Maybe they are worried about liability or that they would have to provide security.

    1. I wonder if the school is worried about the student being raped.

      You’re close. They’re worried about the Gavin Grimm reporting a rape once he/she uses the all-male bathroom. Once Rolling Stone gets hold of it…

    2. The school board is worried about their jobs. If you read some background on the story, the kid was in fact using the boy’s bathroom no problem until some parents found out and started demanding the school board do something or they would find a new school board. Which is when the school board decided they needed the ‘separate but equal’ bathrooms.
      .
      I’m old enough to remember the push for the ERA and the “but the ERA will lead to unisex bathrooms” scare-mongering that wasn’t really scare-mongering if you realize that once you accept the principle of the thing this is where it leads. If a trans-gendered person has the right to use the bathroom they feel most comfortable using, then why the hell wouldn’t everybody else?
      .
      Personally, I think we need a good plague or something. If half the population died of disease and starvation and the other half were in danger of dying of disease or starvation maybe it would put things in perspective a little bit and I wouldn’t have to listen to so many whiny-ass crybaby shitheads bitching about shit just like this. Look, fucker, if the biggest problem in your life right now is not being able to pee standing up then you’ve got it pretty goddamn good and maybe you should get your fat lazy stupid ass to sub-Saharan Africa to see some people who really have something to complain about.

      1. then why the hell wouldn’t everybody else?

        Because women’s bathrooms are disgusting?

        1. Because women’s bathrooms are disgusting?

          As a former janitor, I can attest. However, in every school I attended the boy’s restroom always had the stall doors removed, whereas the girls did not. Is it still like that?

          1. I wouldn’t know. Haven’t been in a school bathroom since I was a kid.

          2. orly? I always seem to think the boys’ are worse.

            1. I always seem to think the boys’ are worse.

              Yes, most people assume this. I used to joke that the reason women’s restrooms have a bed or sofa is so they can rest after messing up the place. I assume their lack of regard stems from the fact that women are often tasked with cleaning up after others. So, when they’re in a position where someone else has to clean they get their revenge. I could be wrong, but it’s the only explanation that makes sense to me.

              1. Lmao.

          3. Women bathrooms can be pretty gross if the women are the kind who don’t want to sit on the toilet directly, and instead cover it with toilet paper before sitting down. Or squat over the toilet and hope the stream lands over the toilet.

            There tends to be a grossness threshold that once the bathroom gets sufficiently messy, the whole thing collapses because the women don’t want to touch the toilets with their asses.

  19. This thread is why the Singularity isn’t going to happen.

  20. I’m just curious, how many people like this are there, anyway? Like, I have always been under the impression that, statistically speaking, people who suffer from gender dysphoria or whatever are extremely rare to begin with. Or have the perpetually aggrieved progtards en masse all decided to play dress-up in order to increase their victim cred? I’m willing to accept that people suffering from gender dysphoria are a sympathetic lot (and though I don’t have the medical knowledge to opine, I suspect the solution is NOT to entertain their delusions), but I get the latter explanation is more likely.

    1. I don’t know. But I would imagine that more people suffering from gender dysphoria would be open about it, and open to the possibility of living as the other gender now than pretty much anytime in the past.

    2. munchausen’s gender dysphoria

  21. Is Shackford saying that someone suing under Title IX for being accommodated, but not entirely to their liking is a thing that should be cheered?

    I presume the judge’s bitching out the Justice Dept attorney over outside issues was for reasons Shackford disagrees with, as it is not clear what exactly the judge’s gripes were from the way the description is written.

  22. make him sound like an Aaron Sorkin-written parody of an embittered social conservative

    You think?

    To say nothing of the fact.

    And not for nothing.

    You bet.

  23. If someone else posted this, I apologize, but this story sounds like we are back to arguing about the difference between “sex” and “gender.” If sex and gender are truly different, it does not follow that a law preventing discrimination on the basis of sex would necessarily apply equally to discrimination on the basis of gender. In fact, it could be argued that for public accommodations like restrooms, either a transgender person’s sex or gender would be prioritized, but both could not be prioritized simultaneously.

    Given the impossibly of any public accommodation to meet the fickle identity demands of 300+ million people, especially when even unisex bathrooms are being portrayed as insufficient, it is not unreasonable to stick to the traditional bathroom paradigm. If a transgender person is far enough along in his or her transformation to use the opposite sex bathroom without any complaints, no one should attempt to proactively root him or her out.

    1. That fine distinction between gender and sex only seems to come up when it is convenient to a progressive argument. When it comes to areas where the segregration is clearly based on sex (like sports) it does not seem to matter.

      1. This is an area where the whole LGBTQ….can devour itself. Arguing that there are dozens of different sexual/gender identities conflicts with the binary sex differences. If it is impossible to create an accommodation system that will fairly cater to all different identities, why should we force businesses or schools into an ultimate failing position?

  24. Title IX is starting to sound like the new Commerce Clause.

    1. The difference is that stuffing everything under the sun into the commerce clause could be criticized by reasonable people….

      …and no one called you a sexist/transphobic racist hater for daring to suggest it was a shitty application of law

      1. False. If you think the Commerce Clause doesn’t give the federal government the power to compel people to engage in commercial transactions, you are a RACEIST who wants to take away healthcare from poor people. You probably enjoy watching them die in the streets, as they did back in 2009 before we had the ACA.

        Also, it means you like waronwomenz and want to take away free birth control.

        1. Oh, fine. Yes, they’ll pull that card on any given *policy* its applied to.

          I was saying you could (in theory) criticize commerce-clause misuse writ large in the abstract….

          … while Title IX is by definition a “Gender Equity” law, and no rational discussion of the limits of its application is possible.

          1. WHY DO YOU HATE BLACK PEOPLE, GILMORE?????

  25. So, let me get this straight. Now we no longer say gender is a social construct and sex is biology, sex is now an option too, and one you switch simply by making a decision.

    Also, actually assigning different bathrooms to different sexes is fine, but telling people who identify as the other sex that they have to use the one for their biological sex is discrimination. That’s like saying that segregated bathrooms are ok, but it’s discrimination not to let the blacks who can pass as white use the white bathroom.

    1. sex is now an option too, and one you switch simply by making a decision.

      Works for frogs.

  26. The school board had set up rules requiring students use the bathrooms of their birth sex but also provided three unisex bathrooms for transgender students or others who wanted them. That accommodation was not enough for Grimm.

    Fuck this asshole.

    1. Indeed. See, also “civil unions”.

  27. “Gender identity” is the new closet.

  28. This is what is the problem of the Federal level intervention in same sex marriage a few weeks ago that Sheldon said shouldn’t be a problem. The problem is the issue was “Title IX’d” by being passed the way it was. It gives federal level hammers to those who want to pound nails from this point forward. It creates DIVISION instead of letting the normal course of inclusion occur apace. It might suck to have to wait, but real integration is what is needed, not federal mandating that simply swaps new bosses for old bosses and uses violence and threats all the while.

  29. So, some chromosome-science denier haz a sad because he can’t go potty where he wants to and goes to court about it and loses and now we all should haz a sad?

  30. “Sanctuary cities. Where are we going?”

    So it was drunk uncle?

  31. It always amazed me to read Immanuel Kant — one of the greatest, most careful minds in the history of philosophy — writing about racial matters. All the logical rigor, the skepticism of unproven assumptions, flew out the window whenever he wrote about black people, presumably because he had so deeply embraced the racist ideology that he really thought he was being logical when he spewed bigotry.

    I get the same feeling when reading Reason writers (and other transgender supporters) write about transgender issues. I’m curious as to how they would define gender. Because if a person can just declare themselves to be one or the other, and everyone else has to agree with their decision, without there even being a criterion given for how one is supposed to know which gender one is… then forget about the two terms we have for gender. Just replace them with “dromung” and “klufabus” from now on and what you’re saying will make as much sense, possibly even more, because the terms have lost all meaning.

    1. Look, until we have an all-transsexual special operations unit, America is a recalcitrant hellhole of bigotry

  32. Feelin’ good on a Wednesday

    Ya ya ya

    (hell, it even is wednesday!)

  33. “Transgender bathroom panic”

    “The comments from Doumar, a Reagan appointee who is now 85 years old, make him sound like an Aaron Sorkin-written parody”

    Ha ha, Shackford, you seriously think that it’s the *other* side which is vulnerable to mockery?

    A high-school girl thinks she’s a boy, so she wants to use the boys’ bathroom. It’s not enough for her to use the unisex bathroom the school has provided to both sexes, no questions asked. No, she wants the government to affirm her delusions, and she’s willing to invoke the power of the law to do it.

    Even SouthPark, not exactly a social conservative bastion, unleashed savage mockery on the transgender movement with an episode about a guy who had surgery giving himself a blowhole and then demanded that he be treated like a dolphin.

    Sorry, Scott, it’s not *your* side which gets to amuse itself by making fun of the absurdities of its opponents’ behavior.

    1. Yeah, here we go: Kyle’s dad realizes he’s trans-species, a dolphin in a human’s body, and gets surgery to turn himself into a dolphin.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJH5AR0CuRI

      Wow, SouthPark is even nastier toward the trans community than I am.

      1. A friend of mine has been very encouraged by the “pick your whatever ya wanna be” climate of recent years. He’s always wanted to be a Negro. Good for him. He’s going for it. Full racial reassignment operation. Not even the Rachel Dolezal incident could dissuade him.

        Me. I think I’ll just get a tattoo. Maybe a monkey. Or a dolphin. Possibly a tiger. On my face.

    2. Old news. Ever heard of “Stalking Cat”? (Unrelated to Cecil the Lion AFAIK)

      Many of Stalking Cat’s body modifications were performed by Arizona-based artist Steve Haworth. The first artist to begin the extensive tattoo work on Stalking Cat’s face was Larry Hanks in San Diego, California, who started the work in 1985. The modifications included:

      Extensive tattooing, including facial tattooing
      Facial subdermal implants to change the shape of his brow, forehead, and the bridge of his nose
      Flattening his nose, via septum relocation
      Silicone injection in his lips, cheeks, chin, and other parts of his face
      Bifurcating (splitting) his upper lip
      Filing and capping his teeth
      Surgically shaping his ears, making his ears pointed and his earlobes elongated
      Surgical hairline modification
      Piercing his upper lip and transdermal implants on his forehead, to facilitate wearing whiskers
      Wearing green contact lenses with slit irises
      Wearing a robotic tail

      Future modification plans included a plan for implants on top of his head, for mounting tiger-like ears.

      1. Wow.

        Why do satirists even bother, when they know that there will be a real-world version of their satire sooner than they know?

  34. So Gavin Grimm urinates standing up. Just like Janet Reno.

    1. Anybody can urinate standing up. The question is whether it goes downward or forward.

  35. The world has gone completely mad. From a girl that wants to pee with the boys to the outrage of some jerk killing a lion he thinks it is sport. Where is the outrage when some liberal asshole has a baby elephant for birthday dinner or a liberal presidental candidate who would sell out her country for a few extra donations when she already has more money than she can possibly spend. The greatest thing about life is that someday it ends.

  36. “Sanctuary cities. Where are we going?”

    People who get all their information from FOX News are so easy to spot. They all freak out about the same nonissue at the same time.

    If you ask me, having to share a bathroom with anyone is a barbaric abomination.

  37. Try this one:

    If a female transgender student’s discomfort with sharing a bathroom with women entitles them to special accommodation of some kind,

    Why doesn’t a male student’s discomfort with sharing a bathroom with a transgender student entitle them to special accommodation of some kind?

    1. Have anyone uncomfortable with it use the alternate bathroom.

  38. Although born a genetic giant tarantula, but now living as a hampster , our summer camp mascot wants to lurk in both the boys and girls outhouses.

    Can you recommend a Libertarian animal rights lawyer?

  39. Those who think Grimm should be allowed to use the men’s restroom, some follow on questions then:

    1. Would you have any problem wtih Grimm using the men’s locker room and communal showers after sports/physical fitness?

    2. If Grimm was arrested on some charge, would you insist that s/he go to a juvenile facility for boys? How about a men’s prison?

  40. The thing that chaps my ass is that the big whooptydoo wasn’t even based on any complaint at the school. He had been, with the principal’s permission, using the boys room for 2 months prior to a parent getting wind of it. At that point people who didnt even have kids in school got involved. Then it went to the school board.

    “The school board caved, voting 6-1 to pass a new policy that limits access to the communal restroom based on “biological gender” and relegates students with “gender identity issues” to “alternative” restroom facilities. As a result, Gavin has been effectively banished to an alternative bathroom and conversations about his body and his personal medical information have been held in public in front of his classmates and the larger community.”

    I don’t think any of us, for any reason, would enjoy using an “alternative” bathroom. All eyes on you, whether sympathetic or gloating or indifferent, as you make a private sojourn amidst your peers.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.