Trans

Let's Not Treat Transgender People Like a Joke

Gender is not as straightforward as some would like to depict.

|

Caitlyn Jenner
Credit: US Mission to the UN

When I was a lad, I often heard jokes about blacks, Latinos and gays, who were regarded as amusing because of their supposed inferiority and defectiveness. Today most people would be embarrassed and offended by such humor. But, at least in some places, there is one group that is still a safe source of yuks: transgender people. 

Recently, Time magazine reports, Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick told a gathering in Dallas, "It is great to be in the largest Republican convention on the planet, and not one man wants to use the ladies' room." He advised, "When you go to the restroom, the M does not stand for 'make up your mind,' and the W does not stand for 'whatever.'" 

His stand-up routine is nearly as sharp as that of Ted Cruz, who in the closing days of his campaign often quipped, "Even if Donald Trump dresses up as Hillary Clinton, he shouldn't be using the girls' restroom." His audiences would laugh till their ribs ached. 

This jocularity relies on the belief that anyone who is transgender is bizarre, dangerous and mentally ill. The comedy expresses contempt. These conservatives firmly believe that anyone born with male genitalia is a male and anyone born with female genitalia is a female. End of story. 

If only humans were so simple. Right-wing culture warriors have long tried to depict gays and lesbians in similar terms. If you have a penis, you should not be attracted to men. If you do, you're a deviate—akin to someone who engages in bestiality. 

But reality indicates that heterosexuality is not quite universal. Neither is gender dysphoria—the intractable sense that you are fundamentally different from what your body denotes. 

The Justice Department offered a more rational understanding in the lawsuit it filed against North Carolina for a law requiring people to use public restrooms corresponding to the sex on their birth certificate. 

The state's mandate makes sense if you assume that gender is a straightforward matter of plumbing equipment. For most people, it may be. But for a small segment of the population, it isn't. 

"An individual's 'sex' consists of multiple factors, which may not always be in alignment," the Justice Department explained. "Among those factors are hormones, external genitalia, internal reproductive organs, chromosomes, and gender identity, which is an individual's internal sense of being male or female." 

It may seem absurd that someone could be born with a penis yet feel female. But University of Chicago law professor David Weisbach offers an illustration that helps to make sense of it. 

Suppose a heterosexual male were captured by a James Bond villain and subjected to surgery to replace his penis with a vagina. Would he then be a woman even though his mind tells him he's a man? Would he embrace being female? Wouldn't he want the change reversed to make his body match his gender identity? 

That, says Weisbach, is how transgender people feel. When someone who lives, identifies and presents as a woman is required to use the men's restroom, it humiliates her. And it does no good; it's not as though men will be comfortable having someone who appears to be female in the next stall. 

But to understand what it's like to be transgender, you have to want to understand. People like Patrick and Cruz don't. They would rather depict this group as perverted and predatory—and therefore undeserving of any accommodation from normal folks. 

It's an old tactic used against despised minorities. Southern whites once recoiled at the idea of sharing water fountains with African-Americans. Straight men blanched at having to shower alongside gays. Nazis perceived Jews as parasitic vermin. 

"For a long time, our society, like many others, has confronted same-sex orientations and acts with a politics of disgust, as many people react to the uncomfortable presence of gays and lesbians with a deep aversion akin to that inspired by bodily wastes, slimy insects and spoiled food," writes Martha Nussbaum (also a University of Chicago law professor) in her book From Disgust to Humanity: Sexual Orientation and Constitutional Law

Their habits, she says, are said to "contaminate and defile society, producing decay and degeneration," and that perception is used to justify their mistreatment. The same language is now aimed at transgender people. 

They, like those other minorities, merely want to be treated with ordinary respect rather than baseless hostility. Isn't that hilarious?

© Copyright 2016 by Creators Syndicate Inc. 

Advertisement

NEXT: Lying By the Government is as Terrifying as it is Contagious

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. Mr. Chapman. You have obviously never worked in a kitchen.

    1. Meaning if you do a good job, and are cool you will be defended, you will also be unmercifully fucked with, for whatever reason.
      =D

  2. This is probably another reason why I’d choose Clinton over trump. I don’t think trump is bigoted– indeed, I don’t think he has any core convictions other than the worth of his self-promotion– but some of his comrades-in-arms in the RP certainly are bigoted. Why give those assholes any political power at all?

    1. What makes you think Clinton’s hate of anything having to do with, say, rural Midwest culture is any less reprehensible than Republican hate of transgenders? Both are hating on an outgroup, and both types of hate are equally likely to lead to suffering when held by someone in power.

      1. As long as you hate the correct group all is good.

      2. AS doesn’t actually think, is the problem.

        1. hatey, hate, Mchate…

      3. The only time I hate trangendered folks is when they get all self-centered and whiny and insist that the whole world has to revolve around their comfort and happiness. But that’s not a transgendered trait, that’s a liberal/progressive one. Grow up snowflake. Defining your personal happiness by the degree that others treat you as you wish is guaranteed to leave you fucking miserable.

        What I hate more is the proggie leftists who pander to this narcissism by passing new laws and regulations to fix a problem that doesn’t exist, and in the process leave the door wide open to unintended consequences. For them it’s an opportunity to fundamentally transform societal norms, because “FYTW, you cis POS”

        So again, it’s not what anyone is, but what they say and what they do.

    2. Congratulations on being a sucker for wedge issues in an election year. Because that’s all the transgender bathroom brouhaha is, a wedge issue to distract from all of the other crap going on.

      But we already knew you were a chump, so….

    3. It’s amazing how much socialists project and they have no clue…priceless.

    4. No, you’d choose Clinton over Trump because you believe she is more likely to bring us closer to your Soviet Socialist Paradise.

      1. I would say more of a neo-nazi paradise.

    5. Is that because clinton is soooo much better from a libertarian viewpoint?

    6. As if you were ever actually going to vote for anyone other than whatever progressive piece of shit served up to you by your DNC masters. Now go pay your fucking mortgage deadbeat.

  3. I see no real issue in the discussion of bathroom usage. My problem comes in for locker rooms and shower facilities. I can’t find my way around my daughters showering with a 16 year old with a penis. There have to be some comprises. It seems pretty obvious from the postings of high school girls that have come out that they are not very comfortable either. I am not saying that the trans person should be put in the awkward situation of showering where they do not feel comfortable either, but concessions can made. As 0.3% of the population, the situation is not even going to present itself in every school necessarily.

    1. Maybe you shouldn’t have raised a transphobic child, you dirty conservative.

    2. Single stall showers.

      1. So, remodel school bathrooms on the taxpayer’s dime to not necessarily make 0.3% of the population feel better?

        As long as beatings aren’t happening; Fuck You Cut Spending. If beatings are happening; shower earlier, later, or not at all and Fuck You Cut Spending, and since if fundamental biology isn’t a constraint; don’t sweat at all and Fuck You Cut Spending.

        1. If beatings were happening wouldn’t that be a violation of the law anyway?

      2. Exactly. I mean, how hard is it to just say, “Hey, wild idea, let’s not make kids in high school shower like inmates in prison”?

      3. And single person restrooms while we’re at it. Bathroom stalls should have been phased out years ago. If the issue is incidental exposure to another person making someone uncomfortable, would that not apply to any person at all? Under the best of circumstances, herd lot bathrooms offer too little privacy anyway, regardless of who is nearby.

    3. Why are you ok with your daughters showering with women who might be lesbians? If the issue is that it’s not ok for young adults who may be sexually attracted to each other to share showers, why is her showering around lesbians and bisexuals ok?

      Are you actually worried about the boys assaulting your daughter, or your daughter … erm… assaulting… the … erm… 16 year olds with … erm … penises? Maybe your daughter is a lesbian and likes girls, probably best to keep her from seeing their naked, nubile, glistening bodies too, while you’re at it!

      (Man where is OMWC when you need him?)

      1. Why are you ok with your daughters showering with women who might be lesbians?

        TBH, that’s actually kinda hot.

        1. That depends on the lesbian.

            1. I dated two softball chicks. Crazy? Sure. Worth it? Definitely.

              1. field hockey chicks?

                1. Lacrosse or GTFO?

          1. Hillary and rosie?

            1. Was just about to eat dinner and you make me have to to visualize this. ^%#$%$%$ you!

      2. Walk into the women’s gym at Ballys dude. I’d love to see how that works out for ya.

        1. or at the NRA convention………

      3. Why are you ok with your daughters showering with women who might be lesbians?

        Risk of accidental conception: 0% – As if this were the only possible explanation or that the arguments in opposition weren’t equally irrational and deluded. The issue is about the ‘right’ to *p*rivacy/Right To Privacy vs. compulsory association, with the transgendered situation inherently violating one or both of the right and The Right of greater numbers of people for no real or guaranteed benefit to any all individuals.

        1. Hmmm. I went to school long before this controversy. Yet I still remember having NO right to privacy and being subjected to “compulsory association” anyways.

          You ever think that some people don’t want to shower with other people regardless of the gender of other people??

          Why was it OK for the state to deny my “right” to privacy and compel my association to shower nude with other people??

          I don’t get why THIS is the line that MUST NOT BE CROSSED. It’s TOTALLY okay to force kids to get naked in front of ADULT school teachers assigned to “supervise” the shower room and in front of other students and force them crowd into a cramped shower room. There’s somehow NOTHING wrong with THAT. But if we cross the streams about gender, THEN, suddenly, the right to privacy MAGICALLY becomes IMPORTANT. Privacy is ONLY important when Penises and Vaginas are both together. If it’s all penis or all vagina, then privacy for some reason doesn’t matter.

          How about just end compulsory nudity in schools, or install private showers??

          1. “How about just end compulsory nudity in schools, or install private showers??”
            Because “private showers” would also require “private changing rooms”, which would break the bank of most school systems and take up too much room.
            Maybe we could end the sports teams almost all schools have, because there has to be a place that the kiddies change from their “street clothes” into the appropriate gear, and back.
            That whole “competition” thingie is so judgey.

        2. TL:DR; It seems you people only care about “privacy” when it trans people are involved. Kids in school shower rooms have NEVER had privacy, they’ve ALWAYS been forced via threats to their grades to get nude with others, but you guys only care NOW.

          1. It seems you people only care about “privacy” when it trans people are involved.

            Who’s ‘you people’? I have no problems showering in public and I don’t have daughters or kids for whom this is an issue. I didn’t/don’t care now because I didn’t pay for the showers and they’re already built. ‘You people’ only care about libertarianism and rights up until the next pet issue comes down the pike. As long as I don’t own and/or am not directly responsible for the penis/vagina/cloaca/other and *am not paying for the facilities (etc.)*, I don’t care.

            I’m invoking privacy (as escalating to Privacy) because it’s a negative (or less positive) right. You don’t have to lift a finger for me to maintain or increase my privacy. You, on the other hand, will propose ‘ending compulsory nudity’ and ‘installing private showers’ despite one requiring less positive action and the other increasing regulations and taxes while not directly or exactly addressing the very same problems you initially brought up (administrators will still be or ‘need’ to be watching). You say you don’t get why ‘THIS is the line that MUST NOT BE CROSSED’ while wholly acknowledging, affirming, and even invoking that it’s really ‘THIS is the line that MUST NOT BE CROSSED AGAIN’.

            I don’t know what school you went to but mine was exceedingly accommodating of privacy wrt showers in this regard. Showering wasn’t in any way compulsory and 90+% of the time the showers were devoid of members of either sex.

            1. I didn’t/don’t care now

              In the sense that, I couldn’t care when/if transgender or transphobic kids were being “forced” to (not) shower (separately) and, arguably, administrators were thereby violating federal policies.

              Now that administrators and the policy are (once again) explicitly enforcing inclusion, I’m (still) opposed.

          2. TL:DR; It’s been ruled that my right to own/carry a gun is intrinsic needn’t have a reason. The idea that, even if trans people have a reason why they must explicitly use the restroom with a particular group of people doesn’t overrule that group of people’s right to exclude them for no reason at all and, intrinsically, requires greater compulsory force to overcome and building walls only lends credence to the notion that it should.

      4. What are the statistics of a woman forcibly abusing another of the same sex or women abusing children? I don’t know, just wondering. As far as possible abuse in a restroom, I can be with my son in a men’s room, I can’t be with my daughter in the ladies room when a man who want’s to be a woman goes in. Also, if I think some guy is following my daughter into the ladies room, I’m stopping him. I’ll worry about the consequences later. New restaurants should just build uni-sex bathrooms with locking doors, one in, one out.

        1. OH, you’ll worry about the consequences, later, all right, if you get the “right” kind of SJW prosecutor.
          You see, that’s the problem with these “laws”: what used to be the simple “No men in girls’ bathrooms” has now allowed the nuance of “I don’t identify as a man, even if I’ve got a raging boner from being in there with your daughter”. The actual assault will still be illegal, but the opportunity for it happening will be increased.
          And an SJW prosecutor or media outlet will make you suffer the consequences, when sane people know you are right as rain.
          This isn’t about restaurants so much as for places where lots of people might want to use the restroom at the same time – like at school between classes, at stadiums between innings, bars between trolling for the night’s entertainment, etc.
          But, as “Lee G” says, earlier, this is one of those wedge issues the progs use, all the time, so their fellow progs can get all judgey, even though, to a prog, judging is so intolerant (unless it is they who are doing it).

        2. “What are the statistics of a woman forcibly abusing another of the same sex”

          Ask someone who went to Penn State.

      5. Why are you ok with your daughters showering with women who might be lesbians?

        I’m not worried about that. I’m worried about my daughter showering with men who are women who likes other women.

    4. What kind of sick fuck allows their daughters to shower in public anyway?

      1. swim team at the pool? Gym class at school? The fitness club?

  4. “These conservatives firmly believe that anyone born with male genitalia is a male and anyone born with female genitalia is a female.”

    FFS, Ahahahaa

    1. Fucking troglodyte conservatives actually believe in reality!!

    2. I Fucking Love Science!

    3. Yes, conservatives and biologists, the two most bigoted groups in America today…

    4. bastards, all of them.

  5. If you have a penis, you should not be attracted to men. If you do, you’re a deviate

    Is that really inaccurate, as far as it goes? Perhaps Chapman, like the rest of America, sincerely believes the gay population is somewhere around 25%. But that’s just not the case. At 4% of the population, sociopaths are actually slightly more common than gay people. Most of them are utterly harmless. Prejudging a sociopath as a dangerous criminal would be inaccurate. But describing the behavior as “deviate” would not be inaccurate. “Deviate” means “characterized by deviation or departure from an accepted norm or standard, as of behavior”. If 96% of the population behaves in a different way than you do, then you’re a deviate. And there’s nothing wrong with that. In and of itself that tells us nothing. Acknowledging it doesn’t require condemnation. Everyone, deviate or otherwise, should still be entitled to the same rights.

    1. Which brings us around to the subject of comedy. One of the purposes of humor is to confront and acknowledge society’s eccentricities, hypocrisies and – yes – deviances. Things that would otherwise make us uncomfortable to discuss or acknowledge. Often that’s going to entail violating somebody’s concept of good taste. And those people are more than welcome to raise their objections, at the risk of coming across as stuffy, humourless twats. But understand that no person, no group, no topic is beyond comedy, and proscribing certain types of jokes or certain types of speech is orders of magnitude worse than offending someone’s sensibilities.

      1. Based on the monthly article about comedians and college campuses, the prevailing notion is that no, people are *not* “more than welcome to raise their objections”.

    2. Aren’t you ignoring connotation? Everyone deviates to some extent yet most people wouldn’t call the left-handed, green eyed, red haired or very tall and short people deviants. They are, sure, but the connotation is that a deviant deviates in a bad way. I find most people using the above argument are being insincere or pretending ignorance.

      1. How dare you imply that sinister people aren’t deviant!

        1. narrows green eye’d gaze…

        2. Also very tall and red-haired…that’s a 3fer of deviance…WIN

          1. Blue eyes with red hair would be an even larger deviation!

            1. I’m a blue-eyed, left-handed, red-haired person with libertarian tendencies. I’m about as deviant as it comes in the natural world.

              1. that’s very unnatural.

              2. I don’t want you coming into a restroom with my daughter, i don’t want her to get infected with gingery soullessness

        3. I understand this reference.

      2. Yes, to be sure, we would do well to discard the actual meanings and definitions of words in favor of the meanings we may intuit by way of dog whistles and sneaky connotations, lest the narrative become hazy. But let’s be fair about connotation then too. Chapman argues that there is some substantial group of “right wing culture warriors” that make a routine practice of comparing homosexuality and bestiality as a co-equal class of “deviate” behaviors. Which might be true if the Westboro Baptist Church was a good, representative sample. In point of fact, not one of the people he cites actually even uses the term, or compares homosexuals or transgenders to zoophiles. I find most people using the above argument are being insincere. Which in and of itself doesn’t bother me, it’s the follow-up proposals for speech restrictions and self-censorship as a means to containing this ostensible scourge of society that is systematically oppressing the entire LGBTQ community by making jokes about ladies in the men’s room.

        Even if Chapman’s boogeymen actually existed in the pure-evil state of motivation that he imagines them to, his conclusion still doesn’t follow. Why shouldn’t we treat transgender people like a joke? We should (and do) treat everybody else – including the cited gingers, lefties and giants – like a joke. That’s what comedy is. Whether any particular joke works or not is a matter of personal taste. And often, as with Chapman in this instance, of whose ox is being gored.

        1. We should (and do) treat everybody else – including the cited gingers, lefties and giants – like a joke

          You left out the dwarves and sheep-fuckers.

        2. meanings we may intuit by way of dog whistles and sneaky connotations

          This is the exact bullshit I’m talking about, you know well and good that the term deviant has negative connotations, if you don’t then you are a fool. Furthermore I don’t give a fuck whether you use the term or not, or make fun of cripples or mud people or anyone/everyone else, just don’t expect me to believe people don’t chose words for both explicit and implied reasons.

          1. So it isn’t what people say that bothers you, it’s your own preconceived biases that lead you to infer things about what’s being said ‘in between’ the lines. I.E. You hate yourself for your own innate racism, and see yourself in others therefore you hate others.

            Lets be honest if these views were not in your heart, or if you didn’t think so lowly of another group of people, you wouldn’t make the connection yourself and therefore there would be no implication. Plenty of people don’t ‘get’ dirty jokes at all, and if you’re ‘hearing’ the dog whistle what the fuck does that say about you?

            1. Yes it’s all in my head, my head and the heads of 19 out of twenty people* who if asked ‘is deviant a positive, neutral, or negative term?” would say negative. Again I don’t care if you denigrate people just be honest about it. This is not akin to the niggardly fiasco where people are ignorant of the term, it’s like the retard bugaboo, sure their is a clinical definition of retarded but when someone says you’re shits all retarded you know what they are saying. Also the fact that I hate myself has nothing to do with this, and my hatred of others is entirely justifiable, I mean have you seen people? They suck ass.

              *number pulled straight outta my ass but I’d bet it’s close.

              1. It is because of your and yours’ delicate sensibilities that words like retard, niggardly and deviate/deviant are offensive to you.

                Deviation is pretty big in mathematics. Can we still use it there?

                1. That would be a nice argument if I were offended or calling for censorship, try reading what I wrote not what you want me to have said.

                  1. Maybe not, but the “slippery slope” is just ahead.

      3. Specifically you’re decrying the connotation that buying a backwards set of scissors or shopping at a special clothing store, is somehow less notable than wanting to carve off your junk.

      4. Well Gingers don’t have souls, so it’s ok to make fun of them.

        1. It’s true, we don’t.

          We do, however, get a freckle for every soul we steal. It’s how we know which ginger in the room is alpha.

      5. Deviation in society usually refers to extremes compared to normative social behavior or experience. Imagine a bell curve. 95% of data will fall within 2 standard deviations from the mean, 99.9% within three standard deviations from the mean. Now, a deviation can be good (such as an extreme genious) or bad (such as a serial killer). Left-handers are 11% of the population – not an extreme. Albinos, conversely, are about .017% – an extreme. Transgenders are .3% of the population or less. Should society make sure all sidewalks are covered because albinos might sunburn, or mandate businesses only allow a certain amount of light in?

        It is estimated that at least 3% of the population has severe electro-magnetic hypersensitivity. That’s not an extreme, but you don’t see anyone advocating that we ban electricity. Or how about this dilemma: Putting beeping sounds at crosswalks helps the disabled who are blind, but can send the neurologically disabled into seizures.

        1. I am part of a multiple system. While it’s unknown how many multiples are in existence, it’s far less than 1%. That’s an extreme.

          When we start discussing actually changing the functioning of society, we should be careful that it is something that is actually good for society. As a multiple, we have to in a sense democratically agree on who we will vote for, as we only have one body and only get one vote, despite that we are separate, self-aware people. Yet I do not support voting rights for multiples. We have separate identities, but only one body. Biology and societal order, in this case, trump identity.

          Bathrooms are places where people can form private functions that would expose their anatomy (such as changing or relieving themselves). They are places where the physical counts more than the mental. If a 50 year old man self-identified as a preschooler, should he be able to sign up for preschool and use that restroom? If a woman self-identified as President of the United states, should she be able to use the White House restroom? If a high school girl self-identifies as male, how is urinal superior than a toilet?

          A transgender can already switch the sex on their birth certificate legally, and then use the restroom that conforms to their legally identified sex. Is letting anyone use whatever bathroom they feel like, no questions since that would be discriminatory, really the best solution for society?

    3. Someone who “identifies” as Napoleon Bonaparte doesn’t get treated as though they are the Emperor of France, they are directed to mental health professionals.
      Though it is harmless, unless the person thinks it is time for battle, it is pretty close to human cruelty to let someone go through life with this delusion.
      Gender dysphoria is a recognized condition, pandering to it borders on cruelty.

  6. People’s lives and challenges are not a joke

    Well, actually, yes, they are.

    “Hire the handicapped, they’re fun to watch.”

    1. The left really is humorless.

    2. “How did her parents punish Helen Keller?”

      “Rearrange the furniture.”

      “What do you call a one-legged girl?”

      “Eileen.”

      1. What do you call a guy with not arms or legs in the water?

        Bob

        What do you call a guy with no arms or legs on the ground?

        Matt

        1. What do you call a guy with no arms or legs on the wall?

          Art.

          What do you call a one-legged Asian girl?

          Irene. (Twofer because it’s offensive to an ethnic minority as well as to the differently abled.)

  7. Let’s Not Treat Transgender People Like a Joke

    Why? Because someone’s feelz might get hurt?

    Anyone who, as a principle, advocates for fredom of speech should really think about whether telling someone “don’t joke about that” is really consistant with that principle. Nothing is off-limits for people to attempt humor with. A skilled comedian can make it work, the unskilled won’t be getting laughs anyway.

    1. Your mistake is assuming Chapman is a libertarian who favors free speech.

      1. Yea it’s all about cocktail parties from here till November.

    2. Yep – Chapman playing the PC scold.

      I’ll laugh at anything I want, midgets, trannies, libertarians, whatever.

      1. But midget tranny libertarians are completely off limits…

    3. This was precisely the point I was driving at above.

    4. You can defend someone’s Freedom of Speech to be a horrible person while still exercising your own Freedom of Speech by telling them they’re a horrible person.

    5. I worked with a transgender. When you closed your eyes he, she, heshe, it, sounded like a guy. She?, made an ugly woman. Funny thing, in 50 years when they dig up his bones they’ll identify heshe as a “male in his x number of years.”

  8. “This jocularity relies on the belief that anyone who is transgender is bizarre, dangerous and mentally ill.”
    That may be true. But it also clearly points out that how you choose to identify is your choice BUT mandating the state force others to accept your choices is definitely wrong.

    If I identify as a car, will Reason magazine writers promise not to laugh ?

    1. I hope you run on ethanol.

      1. I know I do. Run on ethanol, that is.

  9. This jocularity relies on the belief that anyone who is transgender is bizarre, dangerous and mentally ill.

    Well, words have meaning so lets see:

    Definition – bizarre: markedly unusual in appearance, style, or general character and often involving incongruous or unexpected elements; outrageously or whimsically strange; odd:

    Transgenders and cross-dressers certainly fit into that definition of bizarre when compared to rest of society.

    1. The jocularity doesn’t rely on any of those things anyway. Some of the people cracking the jokes may, in fact, hold those beliefs. But the comedy itself doesn’t rely on it. It relies on transgender people being out of the ordinary and small in number compared to the general population, and the practicality of accommodating them given those facts. Which one may still find distasteful. But poor Chapman, by mistaking the very nature of the joke, doesn’t even understand what’s offensive about it.

      1. Not a single argument for why we can’t accommodate trans* students wasn’t applied to why we can’t accommodate gay students and before them black students.

        Interestingly, the only “accommodation” that needed to be made was not harassing them as they went about their business.

        1. One of those things is not like the other.

          (And before you get your panties in a twist, I don’t give a flying fuck what bathroom the transginger kids use.)

          1. Same fears, same concerns, same blowhards espousing them. And seeing as we already have case studies in the schools, cities and states that have let trans* folk use whatever bathroom is appropriate, same lack of validation for the fear-mongers.

            So in relevant characteristics, looks like a pretty good comparison.

            As to panties and twisters therein, I may be wearing briefs today, but that’s only ’cause I won’t wear my kilt on the motorcycle.

      2. I don’t think that’s necessarily accurate, either. There is certainly some mean-spirited jocularity in some of the comments, but much of the opposition is directed at would-be authoritarians dictating how transgendered people should be accommodated, not transgendered people themselves. And joking about Trump dressing up as Hillary relies on the incongruity of the scenario, not on the actual assertion that Trump dresses up in a pantsuit and identifies as a woman. This is what insecure, hysteric lefty twits fail to understand about humor, that a good joke relies on improbability and incongruity rather than eliciting specific truths about its subject. People falling down isn’t funny because someone gets hurt but because it’s an unusual and unexpected departure from the norm.

        This isn’t to say people don’t often tell jokes meant to ridicule its subject, and there’s a reason enlightened people find those jokes unfunny.

        1. Yep – they attempt to take away all judgement and authority from the local school leadership. They couldn’t just leave it to the Principle to make a judgement call – is this kind really transitioning to a female, or just a pervert?

          They also take away all authority on how the kid would be accommodated – private locker room or bathroom maybe?

          1. To be fair, the states started it.

            In various states the local schools *were* dealing with it, on a case-by-case basis. And then the conservative state government found out, wigged out, and started meddling. The NC law was just the final straw.

            1. Wrong!
              N.C. was “meddling” because a city did their own “meddling” by making it a requirement, taking away the ability for local authorities to “deal with it, on a case-by-case basis”.
              You display the well-worn prog propensity of beginning an argument in the middle.

  10. Chapman is gonna Chapman…

    Next up Shikha Dalmia will explain why you are all horrifying bigots and Sheldon Richman will tell you why you are worse than Hitler.

    1. But what thing will then be compared to Adam Lanza?

      1. Comedians who make transgender jokes.

      2. Chris Kyle = Adam Lanza = Hitler = Reason Commenter!

        /Richman

    2. Well…they’re not wrong.

  11. While I do agree that the jokes made by Lt Gov Patrick and Sen Cruz were disgusting and that they should apologize, let’s stop pretending that a person’s sex or gender is determined by anything other than a person’s chromosomes, which were determined at the moment of conception. Hormones, external genitalia, and internal reproductive organs are determined by chromosomes.

    Gender identity is some weird new term that people use to convince themselves that issues going on inside someone’s head is the result of having the wrong chromosomes. Do you tell people who honestly believe that they are Abraham Lincoln that they are indeed Abraham Lincoln or do we compassionately try and get them help?

    There is a big difference between homosexuality – being attracted to the people of the same sex – and transgenderism – thinking you are a different sex than basic biology says you are.

    1. As someone who lives in Massachusetts, I had to do a double take when I saw “Gov Patrick”.

    2. Even if sex and gender are strictly determined by chromosomes and nothing else, that’s not something that’s always right on a birth certificate.

      To put it simply, your high school biology class gave you rules of thumbs and a general overview. It did not go into unusual and rare cases.

      1. But those rare cases are even more rare that the people afflicted with gender dysphoria.
        To make public policy based on the needs of such a minuscule portion of society is going too far, and that includes the minuscule portion that are gender dysphorics.

  12. Who cares? It’s just waste evacuation. First world problems.

    1. Well sure, in some parts of the world instead of being told what bathroom to use, they get half buried in the ground and pelted with stones until dead #thirdworldproblems

  13. Oh Christ, grow some thicker skin you whiny little shit.

  14. Gender is not as straightforward as some would like to depict.

    Now, THIS is a fine example of what begging the question actually is.

  15. Things that can never be used to oppose our Progressive overlords:

    1. The black letter of the law
    2. Longstanding mores and traditions
    3. The Constitution
    4. Their own hypocrisy
    5. Humor

    What did I miss?

    “It sometimes seems like Reason spends a great deal of energy distancing themselves from and disavowing people who share *some* libertarian views in order to remain congenial with those who share none”

    1. Something else borrowed from another article

      “Progressives like to say government is just a word for things we all do together, but that misses a crucial point. Left to their own devices, a lot of people would choose not to do certain things at all?or would choose to do them less, or differently, or with somebody else. Government actually is the way some people get other people to do things without their consent and even in the face of their strenuous objection. If the non-consenting people object too obstinately, the government will bring physical violence to bear. Government is not in the habit of taking no for an answer.

  16. “An individual’s ‘sex’ consists of multiple factors, which may not always be in alignment,” the Justice Department explained. “Among those factors are hormones, external genitalia, internal reproductive organs, chromosomes, and gender identity, which is an individual’s internal sense of being male or female.”

    What are type and degree of intoxication, chopped liver?

    1. Only if you’re drunk enough often enough.

      1. What are type and degree of incarceration, chopped liver?

        1. “Detained”, “Arrested”, “Jailed”, “Imprisoned”, “Renditioned”, “Disappeared”.

          Nope, chopping liver doesn’t show up until the last two grades, and it’s not a universal feature.

    2. Like I’m supposed to give a rat’s ass about how the Justice Department defines transgenderism. Why are they involved again? Oh, that’s right.

      This shit is pissing me off. This article is pissing me off. Why is it even here? Yeah, I know, different perspectives, etc. There is nothing libertarian about this article. It’s just Chapman being a little cunt and chastising people because we might hurt someone’s wittle feewings, and we can’t have that.

      1. Chapman, like the good proggy he is, is not so much concerned about the feelings of the ‘transgendered,’ they are merely a tool in their arsenal.

        What he is really concerned about is that humor could be a very effective way of blunting that tool.

      2. This is the predicted progression of the takeover of the “education” system.
        Once the progs got hold of it, allowed open homosexuals to teach our children that there was nothing wrong with their, particular deviancy, the kids were put on the path to this kind of progressive bullshit.
        Ask yourself: why has all this become such a cause celebre?
        Because the indoctrinated-by-progressivism kids are coming of age and their warped sense of what is “normal” is coming to the fore.
        A recent article reported on a survey that had only a bare majority of high-school kids identifying as “solely heterosexual”. That spells the sure destruction of the human race, at least in the “enlightened world”, something the progressive movement, as espoused by their “environmental” zealots, has desired for decades.

  17. Let’s not treat pratfalling as a joke. Physical mobility is not as straightforward as some would like to depict.

    Let’s not treat clowns with red noses as a joke. Rosacea is not as straightforward as some would like to depict.

    Let’s not treat cream pies to the face as a joke. Euphemisms are not as straightforward as some would like to depict.

    1. cream pies to the face

      That’s an oxymoron.

      1. Depiction is not as straightforward as some would like to depict.

        1. Exactly. Nothing is straightforward so can we just leave it at that and stop joking full stop?

            1. I assume you suffer from some condition which causes involuntary pointing and laughing. My thoughts and prayers are with you.

    2. Let’s not treat government as a joke. Our overlords are working as hard as they can to make your life better.

        1. But not a funny one.

  18. I treat everyone with respect to their face. I also tell vicious joke sometimes to their face if I know them well, sometimes behind their backs. I don’t advocate restricting their natural rights in any way. I have the right to say whatever the fuck I want. You have to right to say whatever the fuck you want. I tell jokes, you’re offended. So what? We both spoke.

    And?

    1. Eliminashunist rhetoric!!!!11!!!!

  19. Why the hell are people letting a bunch of pols do this to our country? Skyrocketing debt, murderdrones patrolling the skies, black kids choked out for selling cigarettes and overall a government that can sick thousands of alphabet soup functionaries on you for failing to know one of a million obscure regulations- for fucks sake, those are problems!

    In the grand scheme of this country’s problems, bathroom policy is the equivalent of a pretty woman used as a distraction while pickpockets take your wallet. In a sane world, everyone- from Republican to Democrat to Libertarian would be condemning the shit out of anyone who thought this issue warranted a nanosecond of national or federal attention. Instead, this idiotic, insignificant issue warrants articles and 2 minute network news bits up the goddamn gazoo.

    It is Simpsonesque how easily the Dems and GOP can set us at each other’s throats easier than that bitch girlfriend who loves nothing more than to get two guys fighting at a bar. Truly we as a country are fucked.

    1. murderdrones patrolling the skies, black kids choked out for selling cigarettes

      The murderdrones have not yet started operating in domestic skies. And the black kids were shot, the cigarette seller who got choked to death was an adult.

      1. So I never said anything about domestic vs international, I said “Patrolling the skies.” As to the accuracy of kids vs adults (and I call 20-somethings kids these days), I’ll get around to correcting that commenting fauxpas, Mr Net-pedant, as soon as it rates higher on my giveafuck meter than how some school in North Dakota prefers to accommodate Jack-who-would-be-called-Jill’s bathroom habits (i.e. probably never).

        I swear, the way people let themselves get distracted from real issues would be hilarious if it weren’t so sad. It’s like the proverbial prozac-addled housewife who would rather talk about that neighbor’s noisy dog than answer her friend’s questions about why her husband keeps gut punching her.

    2. You haven’t noticed that more and more people are starting to get fed up with the present status quo?

    3. If you’re the parent of a trans kid in high school, talking to (and possibly sueing) the school to get their gender identity respected is something you can do, with reasonable rates of success to improve your childs life.

      Skyrocketing debt, murderones, police violence, and so-on? That’s something most have very little hope of doing anything about, and certainly not doing anything in a timely fashion. You may argue that they have a better chance of affecting change then their hopes give them credit for, but that’s the way it is.

      So given the choice… devote your time to something you have a pretty good chance at winning and improving the life of someone dear to you, or devoting your time to something you don’t have a good chance at winning this decade and impacting people you’ve never met or seen?

      You may not like the calculus that people make, but don’t act like it’s incomprehensible.

      1. No amount of pandering to a child’s mental illnesses, regardless of how it makes you feel, is “improving your child’s life”.
        You are not doing your child any favors, in fact the opposite since these confused people are far more likely to take their own lives than almost any other identifiable group.

    4. the equivalent of a pretty woman used as a distraction while pickpockets take your wallet.

      More like paying attention to the woman in the red dress right up until Agent Smith blows your head off.

  20. Just like politicians that would rather fight culture wars than focus on something important, Reason has jumped on the transgender bandwagon I see. Being weird in itself isn’t a crime. Being transgendered isn’t a crime, but its still being weird.

  21. If you don’t want to be treated like a joke then stop already with supplying the punchlines.

    http://dailycaller.com/2016/05…..dentities/

    1. Is there one for “Normal”?

  22. Am I the only one who thinks the whole “transgender bathroom” shit has little to do with transgenderism? Sure there are people who for whatever reason do have a serious issue with being in the “wrong” body, but what do we do about it? If accomodating a few means disaccomodating many times that number how do you justify it? There are far more grievance-industry attention whores and perverts and trolls wanting to use the opposite-sex bathroom than there are actual transgendered people with an issue. For every one transgendered person actually made more comfortable being able to use the bathroom of their choice, there’s ten or more just wanting to fuck with people over the issue.

    Look, goddammit, if you’re transgendered or blind or retarded or whatever, I understand you’ve got a pretty fucked-up life – but there’s only so much I can do about it or so far you can go in telling me somehow I have to care and have to get involved in unfucking your life and the line starts right about where my life has to get fucked up for “equality”. If you’re fucked up, you’re just going to have to learn to deal with a certain amount of shit – that’s what “fucked-up” means. Being left-handed is a bit of a handicap, we can figure out how to work around that. If you got no legs, well, there’s only so much we can do. You got no fucking legs! How we gonna fix that?

    1. There are far more grievance-industry attention whores and perverts and trolls wanting to use the opposite-sex bathroom than there are actual transgendered people with an issue

      By some statistics, perverts and sex offenders alone far outnumber trans without including attention whores.

      1. “…without including attention whores.”

        I don’t know, have we included the entire tumblr, imgur, and livejournal userbase in that calculation?

    2. If you got no legs, well, there’s only so much we can do. You got no fucking legs! How we gonna fix that?

      +1 Lt. Dan

      1. And these days the prosthetic technology is getting pretty darn good. They’re close to neural interfaces that would let the mechanical legs respond like real ones.

        1. And then along will come the concern trolls yowling about how the cyberneticists are destroying “no-legs culture”. Don’t believe me? Google “cochlear implants” and “deaf culture”.

          Progs depend on an ever-more-granular population, and anything that adapts the person to the environment, rather than demanding the environment, and everyone in it, adapt to service them.

    3. “For every one transgendered person actually made more comfortable being able to use the bathroom of their choice, there’s ten or more just wanting to fuck with people over the issue.”
      If that were true, the cities and states that have trans* friendly policies would demonstrate it.

      Not a one has. The only complaints about straight perverts using trans* friendly policies to harass women have been *political statements*.

      That said, you do realize that forcing transmen into the women’s room is more likely to make it easy for straight perverts, right? Which situation makes it easier for a pervert to use the women’s room without comment? Buck Angel in the women’s room, or Laverne Cox in the women’s room?

      1. These new edicts not only make it “easy for straight perverts” but actually gives them legal cover.
        You can no longer simply state that a man can’t be in a women’s restroom.
        While an actual assault would still be illegal, the precursor – allowing a straight pervert free access – is not only condoned but institutionalized.

  23. Oh hey… another “ally” interchangeably using sex, gender, dysphoria, and dimorphism.

    I bet Chapman “fucking loves science” too.

    1. Chapman and Bailey fucking love scientism.

  24. Solving the bathroom issue.

    1st recognize that ALL public facilities/properties (except cash) are built and used for a purpose. That means they are INHERENTLY discriminatory in some fashion.

    2nd, BASED UPON THE ABOVE, as long as all people are allowed the possibility of accessing public properties/facilities (no apriori discrimination), the fact that there are rules for public facilities/properties should be no surprise – and while this may qualify as discrimination; it DOES NOT qualify as inequality before the law IN THIS CASE.

    Unless one wants to conclude that equality before the law and public property are contradictory concepts !

  25. When Caitlyn Jenner is named ‘Woman of the Year,’ it isn’t us making the punch lines.

    1. Hey, don’t say bad things about the greatest female Olympic athlete of all time!

  26. “…North Carolina for a law requiring people to use public restrooms corresponding to the sex on their birth certificate.”

    North Carolina (my new home) screwed up, in my opinion. I am all for what they wanted to accomplish, but they went about it in the wrong way. They should have passed a law that threw the book at perverts who would take advantage of the “Target policy” for their pleasure. But besides that, NC has the ability to pass any kind of stupid law they want. God knows California does and you don’t see the feds swooping down on them.

    If a girl-trans-to-dude goes into a men’s room, quietly uses the stall next to me and gets out, I could care less. But if a perv goes into the ladies room and tries sticking cameras under the stall at my wife, daughters or granddaughters. I’ll gladly act like a Bond villan on him. And there’s the whole locker room/shower deal.

    “They, like those other minorities, merely want to be treated with ordinary respect rather than baseless hostility.”

    I’m an old fart who could care less what you “feel” like today. I’m not going to ask you what you wish to be called today. If you look like a dude, I’ll call you “Lad”. I call everyone Lad, even guys older than me. I don’t care if you have purple hair, eye makeup and two dozen piercings. You’re Lad, to me. If you look like a girl, I call you “Kid”. If I can’t tell, it’s “You”. Easy peasy. Now get off my lawn!

    1. “I am all for what they wanted to accomplish […]”
      Early on, the governor made it clear that their law was about trans people. The “we have to stop the straight perverts” line only cropped up later on after the backlash started.

    2. If a girl-trans-to-dude goes into a men’s room, quietly uses the stall next to me and gets out, I could care less. But if a perv goes into the ladies room and tries sticking cameras under the stall at my wife, daughters or granddaughters. I’ll gladly act like a Bond villan on him.

      What is preventing such a “perv” from doing this now?

      1. Nothing. Did I somehow imply they can’t do this now? The premise of my comment was A) NC screwed up and B) Pervs who take advantage of unsuspecting victims should be punished big time.

        The article mentioned a Bond villain removing a guys gentles. I simply stated that I’d be glad to do the same to a perv who attempts something with my family, or any victim for that matter.

      2. Before all of this, it was simple: if you looked like a dude, you couldn’t go into a women’s restroom.
        If you were so into your gender dysphoria that you dressed and looked like a woman, or into your perversion of looking at little girls in the restroom, that you did the same, no one noticed, and generally didn’t mention it if they did.
        In the new-and-improved Amerika, you somehow have to know what that person “identifies” as, even if he is dressed like Aqualung. Otherwise it is hands-off you bigot.
        The SJW’s win another round of “let’s destroy America’s social culture”.

  27. Gender identification is the perfect place for some new government regulations. If you want to change equipment, you have to register with the government that you are in the process of transitioning. At this point you will be issued new identification paperwork indicating that you are transitioning in an unambiguous way, such as having the sex on your drivers license listed as M-F. At this point you must begin hormone treatment (after all, the government and SCIENCE! define what qualifies as being of a different gender, not your own preferences) and start dressing as a member of the opposite sex (we’re monitoring which side of the shirt those buttons are on). After 3 years if you have not transitioned fully (as in having an adadictomy or lopitophomy) you can reapply for the same transitional status. If you do transition fully, then you get your paperwork changed to your new gender. During the transitional period, some issues are tied to the ‘left side’ gender: sports teams, locker rooms with communal showers, and marriage. Other issues are tied to the ‘right side’ gender: bathrooms, private changing rooms, and social acceptability of watching The View. It’s perfect, and given that the left is pushing the transgender issues, it’s shocking they haven’t proposed more government regulations on the transition process.

  28. “Among those factors are hormones, external genitalia, internal reproductive organs, chromosomes, and gender identity, which is an individual’s internal sense of being male or female.”

    OK, just as an experiment, let’s pretend to take this seriously. When individual has an “internal sense of being male or female,” what exactly does he or she mean by “male” or “female”? Those terms obviously don’t mean anything that’s indicated by genitalia or chromosomes. I also presume they don’t mean “person who behaves and dresses in the way that persons of that gender normally behave and dress,” since that would entail buying into invalid stereotypes, and would falsely assume that “normality” has any objective content. As far as I can figure, the gender theorists define “male” (noun) to mean nothing more than “a person who identifies as male,” and “female” to mean “person who identifies as female.” Which, of course, means that the definitions are circular and that the terms are meaningless.

    1. It’s all question-begging bullshit.

    2. I think there is a biological basis for gender in brain sexual dymorphism, and further that brain sexual dymorphism probably doesn’t always match the outward sexual dymorphism of the rest of the body, hence the transgendered.

      Of course this is inconsistent with what the Left has been spouting about everything being a “social construct”, but the fact that they’re full of shit doesn’t mean I have to be.

      I also presume they don’t mean “person who behaves and dresses in the way that persons of that gender normally behave and dress,” since that would entail buying into invalid stereotypes, and would falsely assume that “normality” has any objective content.

      In terms of gender, male and female would be two different clusters of behaviors and preferences. Little boys liking toy trucks, and little girls liking toy dolls is not an “invalid stereotype”, but a demonstrable statistical pattern, that according to a recent Stossel, holds in other primates as well.

      Children *learn* to associated “male” and “female” to these clusters, but that doesn’t make the clusters “unreal”.

  29. I came here expecting some better jokes.

    1. A Republican, Democrat and Libertarian go into a bar…

  30. At some point, many moons ago, an enterprising capitalist, having noted the long line outside the single-hole outhouse in town, decided to build a two-holer, and charged a fee for its use (he was summarily stoned to death by leftists outraged at his charging an admittance fee for something that was a basic human right, but I digress). One day, a woman was using the facility, ever so daintily, when a large man walked in, dropped trou, and proceeded to relieve himself of the copious quantity of beer and cabbage that he had recently consumed. The woman, outraged, demanded that womens-only outhouses be built, and that all acts of non-bestial copulation would be withheld until such time as they were. Thus, separate restrooms were constructed.

    While I may be somewhat fuzzy on the exact historical accuracy, the point is that “society” declared the need for people with different plumbing to use different restrooms *for a reason*. Unless that reason had changed, this issue is a non-starter. Logically, it does not make sense to mandate separate restrooms based on someone’s self-identification. If the *reason* that the need for separate restrooms no longer exists, then all restrooms should be open to all to use. If the reason for separate restrooms does exist, then no exception should be made for those who don’t identify with their own then-existing plumbing.

    1. The reason was Victorian morality. This entire argument could be solved by replacing urinals with stalls and calling it a day.

      1. You say that like morality is a bad thing.

        Anyway, who’s going to pay for that?

        Guys are pretty gross even with a urinal… No aim, I guess. Or a short hose. I’d hate to wade through the mess if every dude pissed in a toilet. Especially in a bar around midnight.

  31. I wouldn’t mock someone just because they’re confused about reality – I doubt they *chose* to be confused that way, and I don’t believe in cruelty.

    But when it comes to activists and powerful people with guns insisting that we pretend 2+2=5, I have no problem mocking *them.*

    1. Punching down versus punching up.

      1. Likewise, there’s a difference between mocking someone for being a given race, and mocking someone who uses “racial justice” as an excuse to burn and loot a store.

    2. I wouldn’t mock someone just because they’re confused about reality

      I would. Like mocking conservative Christians and progressives, for example. Both of those groups are even more confused about reality than people who are confused about their dangly bits.

  32. Are we not doing alt-text:

    Kim Guilfoyle

  33. Let’s also pretend to take seriously the claim that there’s something called “gender” that’s different from biological “sex.” Assuming this to be true, where did the idea arise that bathrooms and locker rooms are segregated by “gender” rather than by sex? And not only that, but that they are required by Title IX and Title VI to be segregated by “gender,” regardless of sex?

    1. “where did the idea arise that bathrooms and locker rooms are segregated by “gender” rather than by sex?”

      People’s reactions?

      Face it, if you didn’t know Buck Angel was trans, which bathroom would you say he should use? If you didn’t know Laverne Cox was trans, what bathroom would you say she should use?

      1. I don’t know either of those people, so I have no idea. A more interesting question would be what locker room shower they should use.

      2. I don’t know either of those people, so I have no idea. A more interesting question would be what locker room shower they should use.

  34. I looked at the headline and thought…yes it is…and yes it is.

    Then I clicked the link and see it is Chapman.

    Shocked, I am.

  35. there is one group that is still a safe source of yuks: transgender people.

    To be fair they’re not the only group that it’s still safe to make fun of. Poor white trailer trash, for example. Also, fat people. I really doubt we’ll ever run out of “out groups” to laugh at and make of.

    They would rather depict this group as perverted and predatory..

    I thought most of the predator panic is more aimed at the idea that a straight cis-gendered man could use the trannie bathroom policies as cover to disguise himself as a woman and sneak into the woman’s room to rape women or young girls (or a woman to disguise herself as a man to sneak into the men’s room and molest boys).

    Which is an overblown fear, IMO. There’s never been anything to really stop a pervert from doing that before. It’s not like there’s bouncers at the restroom door doing crotch checks to make sure everyone has the right wedding tackle before letting them in. But now, every time that happens, especially if it’s in a Target store or somewhere else that allows trannies to use the bathroom of their choice, it’s gonna be national news even if there’s (probably) no actual increase in the number of incidents.

    1. Poor white trailer trash, for example. Also, fat people. I really doubt we’ll ever run out of “out groups” to laugh at and make of.

      That is such a dudebros/frat boy mentality!

      1. dudebros/frat boy

        I forgot about the dudebros and frat boys. We can totally make fun of them too! What a great time to be alive!

        1. We can totally make fun of them too!

          Nerd! …This could go on all day.

          The idea that humor and transgender (or any topic) should be mutually exclusive is unabashed thought policing of the highest order and is just as much, if not more, insidious/obnoxious than most any fantasy about bathroom policing. The old statement ‘It’s okay laugh with someone, not at them.’ ignores the idea that people routinely and deservedly mock themselves and that you can laugh both with and at someone simultaneously.

  36. Let’s Not Treat Transgender People Like a Joke

    That’s a rather tender subject. Another slice, anyone? – Dr. FrankNFurter

  37. the whole transgender thing is proof that both sides of an argument can be completely wrong.

    to the left – transgenders are bizarre and they are mentally ill. stop trying to pretend they are just like everyone else, and that those who even make jokes about them are heartless bastards. and stop trying to use the power of the state to force people into acceptance. especially when we are talking about the schools. the local school should be free to judge each situation individually. these kids are still young and confused about things. over half don’t stick with the trans status when they grow up. most end up realizing they are just gay. forcing a blanket policy ignores the very real, and complex mental issues at play.

    to the right – every nightmare scenario you are worried about (sexual assault, voyeurism, lewd behavior), is already illegal. letting a guy in a dress take a pee in a closed stall– while bizarre — creates absolutely no risk, and keeping them out creates absolutely no new security. there are more legitimate concerns with locker rooms and showers … especially in schools… but it seems to me that the schools have been pretty aware of those, when dealing with these kids…. so same thing i said to the lefties— let the local schools handle these situations. for the general public, transgenders — while bizarre (and often unconvincing)– do not harm anyone by peeing in the “wrong” bathroom… so let their crazy asses alone.

    1. the local school should be free to judge each situation individually

      And of course it goes without saying, but I’ll say it anyway, that parents should be free to choose which schools their children attend. So if they don’t like the policies of their “assigned” school district, they should be able to send their child to a different school.

      1. absolutely. not an option if you set a federal level policy.

    2. to the left – transgenders are bizarre and they are mentally ill

      True, but so are followers of the Abrahamic religions. So what? In a free society, people have a right to be bizarre. Who goes to which bathroom shouldn’t be part of political discourse at all

      stop trying to pretend they are just like everyone else, and that those who even make jokes about them are heartless bastards.

      It’s more like a pot/kettle kind of thing, actually.

      1. True, but so are followers of the Abrahamic religions. humans, inherently

        FIFY

        Humans aren’t born rationally all-knowing and if a “human” were, it’s firmly established that, from the lowest hardware levels on up, your brain is designed to lie to you redundantly.

      2. ” So what? In a free society, people have a right to be bizarre. Who goes to which bathroom shouldn’t be part of political discourse at all”

        i can only assume you didn’t read the whole way through. that we should not be passing laws on this one way or the other…. and that both sides of the argument are out of line…. was kinda my point. of course people have the right to be bizarre… and other people have the right to think they are bizarre.

  38. a lecturing finger raised y Steve Chapman. Ho hum.

    Martha Nussbaum is an example of altering identites, in that she was born into a wealthy WASP family but converted to her then-husband’s more academically prestigious Judaism. She says she is not actually a religious persn, however.

  39. Every single piece on reason revolving around transgenderism is filled with anti-libertarian perspectives. I am growing so tired of ignorant progressives writing pieces in reason under the cover of libertarianism while actually championing Larger Government overreach into State arenas.

    1. The author has bought into the sex and gender are the same idiocies. While an argument can be made for gender as a social construct, a person’s damn sex is permanently set at conception by those irritating little X and Y chromosomes. You can admit this irrefutable absolute reality without being anti-transgender or anti-privacy, or anti-freedom. I do not fault “Conservatives” for pointing out a biological reality and being skeptical about a sudden surge in social justice. I fault you for appearing to ignore natural skepticism in favor the “let’s talk about feelings” bandwagon.

    1. Every single piece on reason revolving around transgenderism is filled with anti-libertarian perspectives.

      Steve Chapman isn’t a libertarian writer, he’s a crappy, progressive journalist who holds Reason and libertarianism in disdain. God knows why Reason keeps republishing his junk.

      1. It isn’t that I don’t appreciate Reason’s efforts to bring in other perspectives. We do need to stay sharp regarding how progressives attempt to think. I’m just getting tired of the fact that at this point it’s only the progressive perspective being offered. Even supposed a supposed libertarian like Robby Soave spent his article on the subject more worried about Trans-feelings than potential federal overreach in the area.

        Surely there’s a few good libertarian philosophers who will address the federal black mail issue in the Fed’s dear colleague letters to the states and hospitals without pulling out the same tired “Feelings” and “stupid right-winger” bullshit to cover their lack of investigation.

        1. Well first thing you need to know about Robby, he’s a feelstarian.

        2. It isn’t that I don’t appreciate Reason’s efforts to bring in other perspectives.

          I think it’s fine to bring in other perspectives. But it would be better if those other perspectives came from honest people who can make a coherent argument; Chapman misrepresents himself and he’s incoherent.

  40. 2. I continue to be amazed by Reason’s Libertarian Writers’ abilities to insist on reason, scientific knowledge, and critical thinking yet also take endless shots at conservatives as ignorant fools when those people speak skeptically about oft socially driven practices that defy natural selection or ignore environmental factors. Nature designed a human dong to enter a vagina in terms of propagation of the species. If there is a genetic change or mutation outside of that natural selection, it is recessive and would after a few generations be removed from the species. This is a base natural fact upon which all thinking people regardless of political or philosophical persuasion can agree. However, the issue persists, so “reasonable thinking people” remain skeptical of genetic predisposition.
    The same goes for environmental factors. Since non-heterosexual feelings persist in spite of natural selection, environment may very well remain a factor in play. So it is perfectly reasonable to remain skeptical of social justice overreach in the form of a Federal Government black mailing states by inferring that support may be withheld and to pursue answers to unanswered questions.

    1. 3. The State’s mandate makes sense because it treats every human being equally based upon the absolutes of those damn irritating chromosomes. As long as it provides public facilities without question for use by all according to that absolute chromosome standard the treatment is wholly equal. Hetero, Trans, Queer, etc., no one is treated any differently from anyone else. Everyone is equally free to use the restroom assigned to their chromosomal reality. What the author is arguing is for the support of special exception and a support for the sake of Trans-feelings. When the hell did we Libertarians start caring about feelings over facts? Feelings get in the way of facts without fail. Does Reason have a single Libertarian writer who isn’t bent over backward trying to appease feelings on this issue, support federal expansion of law, and disapproves of a state’s right? Did you freaks just forget about the 10th amendment? Why don’t you all just pack up and join the Progressive Left at this point?

      1. 4. Where the hell is Reason in regards to the federal government using blackmail with state’s education budgets? That should fly in the face of our Libertarian values. Where the hell is Reason in regards to the federal government using blackmail with hospitals. That should fly in the face of our libertarian values. I never see these points in the debate addressed here. Every article I’ve seen is open biased support for larger government over states and private companies all in the name of feelings and a consistent knack for name calling on conservatives who are actually acting a hell of a lot more libertarian than we are at the moment in this particular debate.

        1. I don’t care what anyone does behind closed doors in their private lives. It is their life and their right to choose to do what they wish so long as the “no harm” principal remains un-breeched. That doesn’t mean I throw away my skepticism when I view their life and come to a conclusion that not everything makes sense about it. I do need to make decisions for myself and for my family that will have life-long impacts and bandwagon jumping does not go well with diligent research and responsibility. When I chose to put my hope in libertarian ideology I had thought most of us were capable of critical thinking. All I ever see any more in this publication is progressive bullshit cloaked with a skin of liberty. You’ve proven nothing other than that you are no libertarian, just a progressive in libertarian clothing.

          Damn fools.

          1. Chapman, you really drew a comparison between straight men and Nazi’s? “Straight men blanched at having to shower alongside gays. Nazis perceived Jews as parasitic vermin.” Your definitely a Progressive Ass, no intellectual curiosity or critical thought processes at all.

  41. When I was a lad, I often heard jokes about blacks, Latinos and gays, who were regarded as amusing because of their supposed inferiority and defectiveness.

    No doubt you did, Mr. Chapman, given what a rotten social environment you apparently grew up in and what a jerk you have grown up to be.

    They, like those other minorities, merely want to be treated with ordinary respect rather than baseless hostility.

    Being a member of one of those minorities, I really don’t care. But I will treat you, Mr. Chapman, with quite justified verbal hostility for the crap you write. How about that?

  42. Chapman and the other idiots are arguing that a person’s mindset or “feelings” are “reality”,while the actual physical state of their bodies is not reality. That’s delusional. Then they mention some outliers and rare exemptions as “evidence” to support their nonsense.
    The vast majority of these people are mentally ill,delusional,period.
    Many of them ARE a “joke”,especially in their exaggerated idea of what constitutes a “woman” or a “man”.

    You cannot tell me that a woman living as a “man”,that’s kept her reproductive organs and later decides to obtain sperm,impregnates herself,bears a child (the act of a woman),and returns to “living as a “man”” is NOT mentally ill.
    it’s certainly not rational.

    1. “You cannot tell me that a woman living as a “man”,that’s kept her reproductive organs and later decides to obtain sperm,impregnates herself,bears a child (the act of a woman),and returns to “living as a “man”” is NOT mentally ill.”

      Yeah, the like, one person who’s done that is clearly mentally ill!! You show ’em!!

  43. Fact: Unless you’re an intersex person (intersex people were previously referred to as hermaphrodites), you’re either male or female.

    Myth: Gender is based on belief, the gender a person believes he or she is.

    No one has to accept the myth. I don’t have to accept a male is actually a female and vise-versa on the basis of belief.

    Where is there any evidence that XX or XY chromosomes have anything to with belief; “an individual’s internal sense of being male or female.”

    I personally wouldn’t object to being the opposite unless I’m anatomically a male or female.

    However, I seriously object to the idea of being a cross between the two, in other words, a mutant.

    1. No one has to accept the myth. I don’t have to accept a male is actually a female and vise-versa on the basis of belief.

      No, you don’t have to accept someone else’s beliefs, and you can go out of your way to contradict and offend them. But that doesn’t make doing so a good way to live together.

      In the real world, many people hold irrational beliefs, and it’s generally a good thing to accommodate them in day-to-day life. On a political discussion site, I will tell you that conservative Christians are delusional and mildly insane. But that doesn’t mean that I go out of my way to offend them or contradict them every day in interpersonal interactions, or that I think the state should prohibit churches from being built.

  44. Can we make fun of transvestites and not transsexuals? – Cuz I like Scottish kilt jokes.

  45. But to understand what it’s like to be transgender cisgender, you have to want to understand. People like Patrick and Cruz Chapman don’t. They would rather depict this group as perverted bigoted and predatory?and therefore undeserving of any accommodation from normal transgendered folks.

    What I generally hate about the sexual preference and gender wars is that the consideration is all one way. The majority is supposed to be “accommodating” to the minority, but not the other way around.

    Where is the “wanting to understand” in Chapman of women who don’t want to look around at schlongs in the shower? Of parents who don’t want their children exposed (literally) to adults of the opposite sex exposing themselves?

    Sorry, Chapman, but parents who don’t want a man’s shlong waggled in the faces of their daughters in restrooms are not evil, hateful, predatory bigots.

    Personally, I really just don’t care if a woman wants to sashay about the men’s room..

    That, says Weisbach, is how transgender people feel. When someone who lives, identifies and presents as a woman is required to use the men’s restroom, it humiliates her.

    And when cisgendered women have to put up with shlongs in the “ladies” room, they may feel humiliated. Why don’t their feelz warrant any consideration? Why is it only the feelz of the 0.3% that matters?

    1. it is already illegal to waggle your junk in the face of a little girl. keeping a guy out of the stall (with a closed door) to pee does not change that fact. ladies rooms don’t have urinals. (of course, the other way around seem slightly plausible…. if the woman has mastered the art of using a urinal…. but i don’t think I’ve ever heard anyone seriously concerned about women in the men’s room.

      1. Showers. Changing.

        1. again, it is already illegal. called indecent exposure. that’s why the transgender kids in those schools have been getting separate changing areas. still nobody trying to show their dong to the girls.

      2. but i don’t think I’ve ever heard anyone seriously concerned about women in the men’s room.

        Pretty much. I’m sure some parents might be concerned about their male children in the restroom with adult women, but that’s not the big concern, which is the evil enpenised exposing their junk to woman, or encroaching on their sexual privacy.

    2. The majority is supposed to be “accommodating” to the minority, but not the other way around.

      And only in *this* pet case, transgender people frequently enjoy situations that are actively denied to smokers despite revolutionary leaps at accommodating the public at large (this statement should not be misconstrued to mean that we should ban trans-individuals from owning e-genitals).

      The smoker’s can fuck off at the curb in weather or other conditions that would kill the average mammal but expecting the girls to cut their shower time in half so that the trans-girls can shower separately, but earlier/later, violates some retarded abstract notions about “separate isn’t equal” and a positive right to inclusiveness.

      The idea of setting up smoking booths to accommodate trans-respiratory individuals or even allowing trans-respiratory individuals to access to public facilities while smoking, even if there were no cis-respiratory individuals present, would be laughed out of every municipality in the country.

    3. Which do you think is going to be more disruptive in the women’s room. If Buck Angel walks in, or if Laverne Cox walks in? You’re gonna get one or the other.

    4. What I generally hate about the sexual preference and gender wars is that the consideration is all one way. The majority is supposed to be “accommodating” to the minority, but not the other way around.

      WTF are you talking about? Religion has been part of civil rights legislation since the earliest days. It doesn’t matter how mad I think Catholics may be, or how many crimes their religion and church has been responsible for throughout history (including some against my family), I’m obligated by law to accommodate these people.

  46. More idiocy from Chapman.

    If we are now agreeing/admitting that gender is a person’s choice, then it DESERVES mockery and joking! There is no reason why it’s perfectly OK to make fun of people’s individual choices in every other regard but have this one stinking exception.

    Birth defects aren’t a choice. I won’t make fun of those.

    1. Birth defects aren’t a choice. I won’t make fun of those.

      Meh. As long as it wasn’t painfully swollen like a football or prevented him from having a family, I’d make fun of a guy with only one working testicle and I’m far from alone in this. There are a lot worse (birth) defects to have/be made fun of and I’m certain that, for most all of them, awkward tip toeing is far worse. More importantly, however, I don’t think the idiocy that is transgender intrinsically encompasses hermaphroditic individuals (and similar). Hermaphrodites aren’t “trans” any more than a person with one arm is left or right handed (or an ambidextrous person “becomes” left/right handed if an arm were removed) and the very notion of trans is, rather explicitly, applied to gender/ideation not sex/biology.

      Even the N.C. law explicitly correlates to birth certificate and, IMO, you’d be loathe to find a doctor who would loose an maniacal laugh and put and wrong gender on the birth certificate of a hermaphroditic (or other) individual and then laugh again at any and all pleas to amend it (outside James Bond villains, of course).

  47. Why does it have to be “one or the other”? I understand that transgendered people may have a real psychological/medical issue, and I would not begrudge them the ability to pursue happiness however they see fit. I also will never look at people like Caitlyn Jenner and think that he’s a woman. He has XY chromosomes? He’s male…full stop. But if he want’s to attempt to change his outward appearance to “look” like a woman, I’ll play along to a point, but the minute some SJW tries to use force to make me change my mind, I’ll respond the same way I would to the right-wing bigots who attempt to ostracize transgendered people.

  48. ..the belief that anyone who is transgender is bizarre, dangerous and mentally ill.

    Well, two out of three. They’re not all dangerous.

  49. hese conservatives firmly believe that anyone born with male genitalia is a male and anyone born with female genitalia is a female. End of story.

    How could anyone believe such a thing? It’s not as if we’re a biologically two-sex species in which all be a very, very tiny percentage of genetic defectives are born with a clearly identifiable set of sex organs. Oh, wait…

  50. Curse you, Goldnoodle, for replacing my genitals!

    Chapman’s wrong. This is a joke.

  51. Here’s a woman who’s pretty obviously suffering from body dysmorphic disorder of some type.

    http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/ho…..ageandlink

    I don’t think it’s controversial to regard her as mentally ill (and the plastic surgeons who take advantage of her mental illness as evil). How are transgender people any different?

  52. So…this is no longer considered funny?

    1. (This is mockery of an imaginary person, which I presume is still OK)

      1. “Symbolic of his struggle against reality.”

        I am positive this would hit too close to home and be considered hate speech, were any SJW/WW-T types cool enough to watch Monty Python.

  53. Does this mean I’m not supposed to laugh at John Waters films anymore?

  54. I’m as empathetic as I can be but I have to 100 % disagree with Chapman on this one. If you’re a man but feel like a woman, until you get the surgery done to become a woman, tough shit, suck it up and use the men’s restroom. Is this really complicated? What am I missing?

    1. Nothing, in my opinion. Not complicated at all.

    2. That many transmen don’t end up getting “bottom surgery”, so by your reasoning should use the women’s room even after they’ve bulked up and are going around with big bushy beards.

  55. To answer Chapman’s question: Yes.

  56. These conservatives firmly believe that anyone born with male genitalia is a male and anyone born with female genitalia is a female. End of story.

    End of story indeed.

    If I were to go about convinced I am an elephant and demand others regard and treat and relate to me as an elephant, I’d likely end up in a mental institution. What’s the difference?

    If someone has male genitals, then they ARE, by definition, MALE. End of story. The difference between the sane government of the State of North Carolina and our Fumbling Justice Department centres round this truth.
    Perhaps the wise and sane folk in North Carolina prefer to designate which facility is open to which people precisely on the qualifying factor of “plumbing equipment”. What is wrong with this? So what if perceived gender folk are “uncomfortable” with that concept. Does that make it wrong? No one is labelling the gender-confused as crazy, unacceptable, or denying them their right to relieve themselves when necessary, or cleanse their bodies when desired. The ONLY restriction is that such things need to happen within the space designated for those of like “plumbing equipment”. the realtiy is that males can do certain things with females that, no matter how desparate, deluded, perverted, two females cannot do. And THIS makes them different, and establishes the need to separate the two types of outward equipment for certain activities.

  57. But stevie, bruce gender is a joke, as are all who can’t make up their mind what to be, based on their plumbing. If they aren’t lying to themselves and really are confused they should be on serious medication.

  58. These conservatives firmly believe that anyone born with male genitalia is a male and anyone born with female genitalia is a female. End of story.
    Granted there are exceptions in biology, but for 99.9% of humanity, that belief is true. Those born as males are males and those born as females are females.

    Yes, there are exceptions. But the exceptions are exceptions. Gender is more than just wanting to be a different gender. One can have an operation to change the sex and gender, but mere choosing is not enough. I can choose to be wealthy but that does not make me wealthy. I can choose to be a descendant of a black man but that does not make me a black man.

    Am I treating sex and gender as synonymous? YES I AM! That’s because they are synonymous. Gender has different meanings when applied to linguistics, or social roles, but when applied to human beings themselves, it always refers to ones biological or morphological sex.

    Again, there are exceptions, but culture is not founded on the exceptions but on the norms. We should not ban peanut butter because someone might be allergic to it. Likewise we should not be banning gender segregated restrooms become someone somewhere might find it nebulous as to which they should use. We must protect the rights of the minority, but that does not mean we we must orbit about them.

    1. One can have an operation to change the sex and gender, but mere choosing is not enough.

      I disagree that mutilating your body to appear as the opposite sex makes you actually the opposite sex.

  59. I’m rather curious what Gad Saad would have to say about this article.

  60. 1) The transgender community has never shied away from publicity and self-deprecating humor. Campy acts and behavior are common enough to be a stereotype.
    2) There is nothing wrong with racial or gender jokes. We all know when it is funny and when it crosses a line to be hurtful. Doesn’t matter who is the target.

  61. Easy solution.
    Since “gender” is somehow a social construct that is basically whatever anyone says it is, and being subjected to plumbing with “men” on the door while you feel like something else is so traumatic and discriminatory let’s get rid of those sexist evil discriminatory signs and make it all about plumbing.
    Change the signs to “Innies” and “Outies” and PRESTO! All bathrooms are now gender neutral, sex neutral, etc.

    Use the plumbing that matches your plumbing.

  62. Oh lord in heaven, transgendered people are SO PERSECUTED!!!

    Get real. No one gives a flying fk. The leftist Marxist progressive pieces of trash on the left are just using this, along with every other non-issue as something to cause a stink about.

    No one cares.

  63. My Co-Worker’s step-sister made $13285 the previous week. She gets paid on the laptop and moved in a $557000 condo. All she did was get blessed and apply the guide leaked on this web site.
    Browse this site….
    This is what I do,—————– http://www.earnmore9.com

  64. My Co-Worker’s step-sister made $13285 the previous week. She gets paid on the laptop and moved in a $557000 condo. All she did was get blessed and apply the guide leaked on this web site.
    Browse this site….
    This is what I do,—————– http://www.earnmore9.com

  65. Start working at home with GOOGLE!YAHOO. ABCNEWS AND MORE GLOBAL SITES.It’s by far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this 4 weeks past. I began this 7-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $97 per hour.

    I work through this link.——————— http://www.earnmore9.com

  66. “Let’s Not Treat Transgender People Like a Joke”

    Why not?

  67. “An individual’s ‘sex’ consists of multiple factors, which may not always be in alignment,” the Justice Department explained. “Among those factors are hormones, external genitalia, internal reproductive organs, chromosomes, and gender identity, which is an individual’s internal sense of being male or female.”

    It is the height of absurdity that anyone would try to slip “gender identity” into the above list and attempt to claim that mental illness is not involved. Let’s simplify this bullshit shall we? If I “identify” as a cow and start acting like one and/or living like one, I would rightly be considered to have a mental illness. If I insisted that I was not mentally ill but was simply “a cow, trapped in a human’s body”, I would still be considered, at least by any rational person, to be mentally ill. But I claim instead that “I’m a woman, trapped in a man’s body”, and suddenly that’s just a totally normal thing that sometimes happens. Are you kidding? That isn’t totally normal, and doctors who perform surgery on mentally ill people should be locked up for taking advantage of someone who clearly cannot make decisions for themselves…continued…==

    1. …continued…We can clear up all this controversy and mess by thinking about it for 30 seconds, realizing just how ridiculous the idea of giving special privileges to insane people is, and just let them be crazy if they’re happy that way (unless their psychosis makes them dangerous, I mean). What would a reasonable person say if I said that I identified as a cow and therefore insisted on either being allowed to just shit on the floor wherever I was, or asking that special bathrooms be built for me where I could shit on some sort of artificial turf product? I would hope that they would recommend that I get help, as opposed to taking me seriously. And I would especially hope that no one would let me get species reassignment surgery; after all, I would clearly be out of my right mind.

      Let’s try to think logically about these things, just once. Let’s not give in to ludicrous political correctness. Let’s exercise our ability to reason. You know, like in the name of this website.

  68. My Buddy’s Mother Makes $96/hr on the laptop. She has been out of work for six months but last month her paycheck was $15480 just working on the laptop for a few hours.
    I work through this URL.
    Read more on this web site.—– http://www.earnmore9.com

  69. My Buddy’s Mother Makes $96/hr on the laptop. She has been out of work for six months but last month her paycheck was $15480 just working on the laptop for a few hours.
    I work through this URL.
    Read more on this web site.—– http://www.earnmore9.com

  70. up to I looked at the check of $4791 , I did not believe …that…my neighbour could actualie earning money in there spare time on their laptop. . there friend brother has been doing this for less than 7 months and resently cleard the morgage on their mini mansion and purchased a great Bugatti Veyron . you could look here ……..

    Click This Link inYour Browser….

    ?????? http://www.Reportmax20.com

  71. Make 7500 bucks every month? Start doing online computer-based work through our website. I have been working from home for 4 years now and I love it. I don’t have a boss standing over my shoulder and I make my own hours. The tips below are very informative and anyone currently working from home or planning to in the future could use this website??

    ~~~~~~~~~ http://www.NetSelf70.com

  72. Transgender people are not a joke. They need psychological counseling or a psychiatrist not a quack surgeon or the MSM peddling it as a normal sexual dysfunction..

    Johns Hopkins Psychiatrist: Transgender is ‘Mental Disorder;’ Sex Change ‘Biologically Impossible’

  73. Make 7500 bucks every month? Start doing online computer-based work through our website. I have been working from home for 4 years now and I love it. I don’t have a boss standing over my shoulder and I make my own hours. The tips below are very informative and anyone currently working from home or planning to in the future could use this website??

    ~~~~~~~~~ http://www.NetSelf70.com

  74. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, go to tech tab for work detail.

    Click This Link inYour Browser

    ========== http://www.path50.com

  75. Chapman: In my life I’ve heard some ‘joking’ about cross sexuals but more expressions of compassion and ‘there but for the grace..’ I believe Reason and all other media for money and power should show income tax returns for authors or not publish the author’s work. Goes to motive which is huge in criminal activity but often disguised in media. Why? Mostly MONEY?

  76. This application is really good and very easy to use because you can never get an app which streams way of the latest and even the oldest videos. showbox

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.