Trans

A Quarter of Transgender People Report Restroom Confrontations

New poll gives insight in what has become a national debate.

|

restroom
Jennifer Walz / Dreamstime.com

Public policy on how and where to accommodate transgender people ballooned into a national debate this year and may well have contributed to the defeat of incumbent North Carolina Republican Gov. Pat McCrory. McCrory put it all on the line defending HB2, the state law that both requires transgender people in public schools and government buildings to use the restrooms and facilities of the gender on their birth certificates and forbids cities within the state from passing their own accommodation regulations.

But this debate, while taking up plenty of media real estate and undoubtedly at least influencing some voting choices, has been notable for how much of it is based on emotion and fear and not facts and data.

The results of a new poll of transgender Americans put together by the National Center for Transgender Equality aims to give a better sense of what these people actually experience in the world. The survey of 27,715 was organized in 2015, greatly expanding on the 6,400 transgender people surveyed in 2011.

Since bathrooms seem to be the point of conflict at the moment, it's worth noting that 24 percent of transgender people say their presence in a restroom has been questioned or challenged in the last year and 12 percent say they were verbally harassed there. Outside the bathrooms, 46 percent say they were verbally harassed in the past year.

As for the rest of their lives, close to a third of transgender people said they've been homeless at some point of their lives and close to a third say they're currently living in poverty. A full 40 percent of transgender people say they've attempted suicide in their lives—seven percent say they've tried in just the past year.

But a comparison between the polling from 2011 and 2015 shows signs of improvement in some areas. The comparisons aren't perfect because the questions are a bit different. But in 2011, 26 percent reported losing their job because of being transgender. In 2015, and given a much larger sample size, only 13 percent reported losing their job. The number is cut in half. They didn't focus on just bathrooms in 2011 (because it hadn't become a thing yet), but 53 percent reported being harassed in areas of public accommodations then. That's still a larger percentage than the general harassment (46 percent) reported in the new poll.

But some issues—particularly mental health and family acceptance—haven't changed that much. The high rate of suicide attempts is unchanged, though logically it will take years for that number to shift if the poll is asking over a lifetime as opposed to the previous year. A higher percentage of transgender people (23 percent) report facing housing discrimination in the more recent poll than the older one (19 percent). Though again the questions aren't apples to apples. Another 11 percent in the previous poll also reported getting evicted because of their transgender identity.

The most recent poll results can be viewed here and the numbers from the 2011 poll are here.

What should the average (likely non-trans) libertarian or liberty-minded reader take away from this? Maybe a better sense of why there's such a push to use government regulations to fix some of these issues but also some knowledge that culture is showing signs of becoming friendlier to trans people even in just a short time frame.

It's important when attempting to make the argument that additional government intervention in business and private spaces isn't needed or justified—and brings about harm to individuals' right to freedom of association—to be able to show alternative ways that culture is getting better for transgender people. Though many of these numbers are improved, they are still remarkably high.

It's also a good reason why it's important to support transgender people's right to their self-identity vis-à-vis their relationship with the government. When both sides in this struggle are lumping private and government regulations together, it is really important to highlight and embrace reforms that will require the government to respect identity choices. Transgender people report terrible relationships with government authority figures like the police, prisons, and Transportation Security Administration (TSA). Transgender lives can be improved by reforming the way government treats them, and we'll be able to make a better case for not using fines and systems of punishments in the private sector to force culture shifts. As this election may well have shown, the result could be a backlash if people start believing that acceptance of others comes at the expense of their own personal liberties.

NEXT: Dana Rohrabacher Doesn't Want a Cold War With Russia—He Wants One With China

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. the result could be a backlash if people start believing that acceptance of others comes at the expense of their own personal liberties.

    WHITECIS-LASH

    1. Late at night, all systems go
      You’ve come to see the show
      We do our best, you’re the rest
      You make it real, you know
      There is a feeling deep inside
      That drives you fuckin’ mad
      A feeling of a hammerhead
      You need it oh so bad

      Adrenaline starts to flow
      You’re thrashing all around
      Acting like a maniac
      Cis-lash!

      1. \m/ \m/

      2. my proudest moment as a father is when my 5 year old daughter started begging me to play Whiplash all the time. Sure, she’ll probably end up listening to whatever the 2023 version of Bieber will be, but I’ll always have these moments of awesomeness to cherish.

    2. The strange thing is that Pat McCrory probably lost his reelection bid because of his support for HB2, which might be a frontlash.

      Also, for those interested in the survey design, the full report is online here.

  2. Bullshit. Absolute bullshit. Don’t believe this self-reported crap for a second. Special snowflakes probably think someone looking at them askance is a hate crime. God, we are a nation of pussies – GRAB US!!!

    1. I’d like to see the same survey results for cisheteroshitlords.

    2. Even if the self-reported rate were reliable that’s 25% of 0.03% of the population at a maximum. 0.0075% of the population as a maximum value. And that is probably a high number. 24,000 people out of 320 million as an upper bound.

      1. By the same logic we should definitely put all libertarians in slave camps.

        1. You should try that.

          1. It’s just a small minority, so it doesn’t matter what happens to them, right?

            1. Oh yes, being asked if you’re in the wrong place is so equal to internment.

              1. How would you take it if someone bothered you in the restroom like that?

                1. I’d shrug and check to see if I had wandered into the wrong door by mistake. It’s such an insignificant affront as to not be worth even complaining about.

                  1. The survey does not refer to friendly interrogations. Stop playing dumb. Or is the fact that you’ve never experienced anything remotely like being a trans person trying to use a public restroom make you even more knowledgeable about their life experience than they are?

                    1. Oh really? You found the actual question asked? It was specific enough about how harsh the treatment was that it was the pollsters being disingenuous by labelling the positive responses as “questioned presence”?

                      The vague, weaselly phrasing is indicative of the fact that their wording was open to letting even being asked “you know we’re closed right?” be called “having their presence questioned”.

                      I’d say you’re the one playing dumb, if I wasn’t convinced you’re not playing.

                    2. But why do you care so much?

                    3. I’m bored, and I like arguing. Even if it’s more like kicking a legless cat at the moment.

                    4. From the study methodology:

                      20.1 In the past year, did anyone tell or ask you if you were using the wrong bathroom?

                      20.2 In the past year, did anyone stop you from entering or deny you access to a bathroom?

                      20.3 In the past year, were you verbally harassed, physically attacked, or experience unwanted sexual contact when accessing or while using a bathroom? (Mark all that apply.)

                    5. Thank you, kV. I couldn’t find that.

                      Did they break down the responses by how much of that 24% was a yes on 20.1?

                2. I’d leave them in there with the rest of the excrement.

            2. Allowing businesses to discriminate as they see fit is 100%, completely synonymous with forcing people into slave camps at gunpoint.

              Completely infallible analogy. You win again.

              1. The point was that it was a small minority so it doesn’t matter what happens to them.

                You people suck at freedom.


                1. performing on a stool
                  is a sight to make you drool
                  Tony’s mother and a mule
                  keep it cool, keep it cool.

                  Greg lake, RIP

                  /sniff

            3. Ugh, D- trolling at best. Work on your game, shithead.
              IF WE DON’T PASS LAWS FOR THE .0001% THEN ISIS HAS WON!!!!

            4. Alternately, let’s shit all over property rights and freedom of association, two cornerstones of American ideology, for what amounts to half of a large college’s student body, or the attendance at a single NBA game.

              1. What the fuck does harassing people in bathrooms have to do with any of that?

                I’m for freedom. If that makes some people clench up in fear over a trans person in their bathroom, well freedom isn’t free.

                1. “What the fuck does harassing people in bathrooms have to do with any of that?”

                  It was plain language.

                  1. So freedom of association = forcing trans people to use the wrong restroom?

                    1. You’re the one using force guy.

                    2. The only force present in this conversation is the harassment by people who should be minding their own business.

                    3. Let’s leave the people passing the laws you want out of this.

                    4. The only ones passing laws are Republicans having one of their genital-based moral panic moments.

                    5. “Tony|12.8.16 @ 1:17PM|#

                      The only ones passing laws are Republicans”

                      “California Gov. Jerry Brown waded further into the national debate over transgender rights Thursday as he signed a bill requiring that all single-stall toilets in California be designated as gender neutral.Sep 29, 2016”

                      Republican as fuck.

                      So, we’ve proven you can’t discuss this without lying.

                    6. Fine, the only ones passing laws that actually attack anyone’s freedom are Republicans.

                    7. Who cares what you think liar?

                    8. They are minding their own business dumbshit. It’s their bathroom in their business and they can mind It however the fuck they want.

                    9. If you own a business that lets customers in the door, Tony is allowed to make any demands of you that he wishes because you’re a “public accommodation”.

                      (Pay no attention to the fact that the public doesn’t own your business.)

                    10. So clearly your main problem is with ousted Gov. McCrory and his insistence on dictating how bathrooms are used despite the will of the people administering or using them.

                    11. Fine, the only ones passing laws that actually attack anyone’s freedom are Republicans.

                      HB2 was created in reponse to Ordinance 7056 passed by the Charlotte City Council, which specifically limited the freedom of association of private business owners.

                    12. Business owners don’t have an absolute freedom of association and never have.

                    13. Move those goalposts a little further. I’m sure it will distract everyone from how dishonest you are.

                2. “You have a penis, so please use the men’s room” is a very low bar to qualify as harassment.

                  1. I’d rather share a restroom with a trans person than any of these self-appointed genital police and I think you would too.

                    1. This does not merely apply to restrooms and you know that.

                    2. Sure, maybe you have no problem, but perhaps an adolescent girl would prefer not to share her bathroom with a middle aged guy…. sorry I mean woman with a penis.

        2. Start with the New Zealand libertarians all around you, T-bone.

          1. The closest Tony will ever get to NZ is his mum’s basement. I would actually pay for him to move to Canada… ok, I would actually pay for ANY prog, just one of them, to move to Canada. But Canada won’t take them and they won’t even try to go, so it’s a moot point.

            1. I believe the official response of the Canukistani immigration office was “We’re all full up on stupid.”

              1. I believe the official response of the Canukistani immigration office was “We’re all full up on stupid.”

                “But, the Jerk Store called and said they’re all outta me…no, you, wait, dammit can I call back?”

            2. No, Hyp – he said he moved there. Tony would never lie.

              1. What? Wait… he actually said that?

                1. I wish I’d bookmarked this stuff, but in one of the Election Night threads Tony said that if he thought Trump had a chance in hell of winning, he’d be on the first plane to New Zealand. I called him on that about a couple of weeks ago and he claimed he was already there.

                  1. Their path to citizenship is rather arduous. Interestingly, it is advisable to apply for firearms permits as part of the process. As part of their factors analysis, having issued permits is useful to demonstrate your commitment to citizenship.

            3. Yeah, NZ isn’t a cheap flight, I’m skeptical he could scrape up the funds necessary to even fly there.

              1. Every proggy has a solution to that kind of problem. Take it from someone else.

            4. Not true – he watches Lord of the Rings movies from time to time.

        3. Someone points out that a tiny fraction of a percentage of the population (if self-reporting is to be completely believed) is being harassed and you immediately jump to putting your political opponents (and moral betters) into camps.

          I appreciate that this is your default position.

          1. I appreciate that the default position of libertarians is that it’s OK to harass and terrorize people if they belong to a small enough minority.

            1. “terrorize”

              The word has lost all meaning when uttered by a proggy.

            2. Also, nobody said they were “OK” with it, just that legislating isn’t a good solution to social problems. It generally leads to unintended consequences.

              Just you watch when the legislators twist themselves into knots trying to define “trans” in a way that lets actual trans people take advantage of a law by self-identification that doesn’t also permit a bunch of perverts self-identifying so they can creep the bathrooms of the opposite gender and not run afoul of peeping tom laws.

              1. What legislation are you talking about? Are you people capable of realizing when Republicans are the ones targeting people’s freedom, even by accident?

                1. You damn well know that some proggy moron is going to try to create a “protective” law for trans people that ends up being abused. You know that because you are a proggy moron and you’d do it if given the chance.

                  1. So a hypothetical liberal law is what we’re talking about instead of the actual Republican law that targets a suspect minority class for abuse? How productive.

                    This place has become even more of a rightwing shithole since Trump got elected.

                    1. Nobody is talking about the NC law, you smelly little twatwaffle. Also, it applies only to government buildings, and the law is stupid and will probably end up defeated in a courtroom.

                      We were talking about discrimination, which your authoritarian nature immediately screams “LEGISLATE!” and never takes into account any possible unintended consequences.

                      People don’t need legal protection from dirty looks or nasty comments and there are already laws against assault.

                      I know you’re a troll, which is why you don’t ever even try to defend your own words and perpetually twist other people’s words to mean whatever you want them to. Isn’t there a warehouse fire in California somewhere that you can go attend?

                    2. I’ve specifically said I don’t think there needs to be any legislation here, except when necessary to respond to asshole Republicans who never met an oppressed minority whose face they didn’t want to shove a boot in. So I don’t think you’re talking about anything except to blow off steam generated in your brain stem from the meddling genital panic you just can’t help but fall victim to what with being less than a fully civilized person.

                    3. meddling genital panic

                      You’re talking to a libertarian, but you probably forgot that. There shouldn’t be a law either way.

                      The end game for your brand of politics is tens of millions dead due to starvation and being sent off to the gulags. “Civilized.”

                      Yep, I’m a total beast for wanting people to be free. You got me, Tony. I was secretly an authoritarian the whole time! Where do we meet up? We can shine our jackboots together.

                    4. What hypothetical? The NC state law was,in direct response to Charlotte’s ordnance to grant you protected status to transgenders.

            3. My default position is that words are not the same as internment camps or firing squads. But then, good luck getting someone like you to recognize the difference.

            4. I appreciate that the default position of libertarians is that it’s OK to harass and terrorize people if they belong to a small enough minority.

              This- from the same guy who will happily let the government terrorize 49.9% of the population because they were outvoted…

    3. My thoughts exactly. You’d think realize Reason would see the bullshit considering thry recently ran an article on the whole hate crime hoax epidemic post election.

  3. “agender” is not an abbreviation of “all gender”?

    What do these people want?!?

  4. Would this issue qualify as Fake News? Fakie-ness?

    1. I suppose fakiness is the opposite of truthiness. But worry about truthiness is the same as worry about fakiness, so I guess the derivatives match.

      See, I can make up shit too!

      I AM PROGMAN!

    2. I’d file this here chatroom story as Fluff, file under Fluff section.

  5. So crazy people acting crazy in pubic have problems dealing with the public.

    1. Nice.

  6. My having to read about this on the Internet is by far the bigger oppression!

    1. We know, reading is hard for poor Tony. You should just go lie down.

  7. Since bathrooms seem to be the point of conflict at the moment, it’s worth noting that 24 percent of transgender people say their presence in a restroom has been questioned or challenged in the last year and 12 percent say they were verbally harassed there. Outside the bathrooms, 46 percent say they were verbally harassed in the past year.

    As for the rest of their lives, close to a third of transgender people said they’ve been homeless at some point of their lives and close to a third say they’re currently living in poverty. A full 40 percent of transgender people say they’ve attempted suicide in their lives?seven percent say they’ve tried in just the past year.

    People with serious mental problems and who engage in anti-social behavior have hard lives. That’s not a surprising find.

    This is a libertarian site, right? “Verbal harassment” is still protected speech, right?

    1. People with serious mental problems and who engage in anti-social behavior have hard lives.

      Which is exactly what was said about gays not so long ago, in between the chemical castrations and the electroshock therapy.

      1. Yeah, and now look, they’re forcing people to bake them cakes.

        1. Well, one of them is.

      2. It’s almost as if certain mental illnesses do not have objective and scientifically valid diagnostic criteria.

        It’s still worth considering, though, that literally every other variety of body dysmorphia without exception is dealt with by the medical and psychiatric community completely differently than gender.

    2. I think being trans is less indicative of a mental disorder than arguing with the same troll for the better part of a decade and expecting him to either change his mind or leave such a rich feeding ground.

      1. Take a lesson Tony’s of the world (and we know Tony is just a regular posing, but I digress) THIS, right here, this guy just showed you how to troll.

        Sublime. Extremely high quality effort.

        1. Tony is definitely not “posing”… I saw a thread at Slate that had a libertarian arguing against something, A dude named “Tony”- who made sure you knew he was gay and from Oklahoma- made the exact same arguments as our resident retard.

  8. “The results of a new poll of transgender Americans put together by the National Center for Transgender Equality aims to give a better sense of what these people actually experience in the world. The survey of 27,715 was organized in 2015, greatly expanding on the 6,400 transgender people surveyed in 2011.”

    And for other non-fake 100% factual news, I bring you:

    4 out of 5 women who attend college are raped.

    97% of scientists agree that global warming will kill us all, any day now!

    99% of Americans want ‘common sense’ gun control.

    18% of Americans report having been abducted by a UFO.

    Need I go on?

    1. A millionty percent of Mexicans are rapists because that’s what someone said for real!

      1. No one said that, now you’re just making shit up. Oh yeah, that’s what you always do.

        1. No one said any of the shit you claimed people said either.

          1. Can you use the internet for anything besides acting stupid, Tony? Apparently not.

            1. Tony disavowed the 97% of scientist AND the 99% of Americans wanting common sense gun control!

              1. And that 4 out of 5 women are raped while attending college. That one was repeated so much for the last 5 years, it’s impossible for anyone not to know about it, even someone as dumb as Tony.

                1. I’ve heard 1 out of 5, or even 1 out of 4, but never 4 out of 5.

      2. A millionty percent of Mexicans are rapists because that’s what someone said for real!

        Yeah, “Tony” is one guy and not operated by several different people at Correct The Record. This reads like everything else he’s ever posted.

        If you’re looking for feedback, there was a Tony here about two weeks back I liked better. More good humor, less snark, even acknowledged some common ground. Bring him back.

        1. They had to put that one down, can’t have them agreeing with us horrible libertarians.

        2. I like the Tony who freaks out and claims that he’s calling the president to ask him to kill libertarians with missiles.

        3. More good humor

          Strawberry shortcake bars all around!

  9. Since bathrooms seem to be the point of conflict at the moment, it’s worth noting that 24 percent of transgender people say their presence in a restroom has been questioned or challenged in the last year

    Oh it’s such an indignity to be asked if you’re in the wrong room. That’s pretty much what it would take to count as their presence having been ‘questioned’.

    1. Almost as much of an indignity as it is to share a restroom with someone who makes you feel weird in your private parts.

      1. Can I share a shower with the chicks at Bally’s? A lot of them are pretty hot.

        Don’t mind me or my raging erection, I’m choosing to identify as a lesbian.

          1. “A transgender woman would be much more at risk for her safety if she had to use the men’s bathroom,” he said.

            Yea because all fem looking dudes and women who accidently walk in get raped in men’s gym locker rooms…

            1. All men are rapist or would be rapist. It is known.

  10. Excellent Alt-Text, Scott.

    It’s almost as if you read the many H&R comments regarding journalists basing their stories upon Twitter posts.

    … the result could be a backlash if people start believing that acceptance of others comes at the expense of their own personal liberties.

    I, for one, certainly hope that more of us see this as a feature of these policies rather than a bug. Then perhaps enough of us will oppose the use of governmental force on principle, regardless of who the victims are.

    A man can hope, can’t he?

  11. Welcome to “World War T.” Having run every other type of identity politics into the ground, let’s find the smallest possible group that provokes the most visceral reaction among normal people, and promote the shit out of their psychological issues….

    I used to be more sympathetic to transgender people, but now that the insane political demands have escalated, not so much. In Canada now, even questioning whether a young child should have hormonal treatment and surgery is basically a hate crime. In New York, they want to fine you if you don’t use someone’s preferred pronoun. These things are bullshit and not libertarian in the slightest.

    I reserve the right to be grossed out by gender-bending. I understand why many women don’t want someone with XY chromosomes and a dick to be in their bathroom, or in a bathroom with their daughter. I think “gender dysphoria” is a thing, and don’t think we need to remake society so that people suffering from it are never uncomfortable.

    1. The trans won’t have much special snowflake status with the left for long. The new special snowflakes are Muslims. Whether they want to be, or not.

      1. I wonder how tolerant the Muslim community is of the Trans-gender folks.

        1. Very mostest tolerant ever in all the world. Progs know this, or surely they wouldn’t tolerate the intolerance, right? If they happen to throw a few off of a rooftop, that’s ok, because it’s their culture and they’re being misunderstood.

          1. Is it really that difficult to differentiate between trans and gay? I mean they don’t even sound similar…

        2. “At least we’re not as bad as ISIS!”

          –the defenders of freedom on earth

          1. Tony’s flailing has become downright pitiful.

    2. SECONDED!!! Which makes me – to Tony, anyway- LITERALLY HITLER!!!!

    3. I used to be more sympathetic to transgender people, but now that the insane political demands

      I wonder how much of that is coming from transgenders vs cis-leftoids. Gotta be at least 2-to-1 non-trans.

      1. “Let me shit in peace” is not an insane political demand.

        1. But the demand is: “Let me shit wherever I decide.” And: “Even though I have a beard, you must refer to me as ‘she’, or you are guilty of a hate crime.”

          1. You exaggerate almost as much as Hyperion. Similarly, all libertarians are crab people because they are people with shells and claws and are crabs.

            People are entitled to be referred to how they wish. It’s just manners. Your lizard-brain genital-based moral freakout is your problem.

            1. People are entitled to be referred to how they wish.

              Henceforth I will call you Betty. And Betty, when you call me, you can call me Al.

              1. I prefer Tony, thanks, and my pronouns are he and him.

                Now, did I just practically enslave you forever? Or are you gonna be OK?

            2. People are entitled to be referred to how they wish.

              How many people have you called racist? Did you ask them first if they were okay with that?

              1. None to their face. That would be very rude.

                1. So you are dishonest. That is not news. But the short of it is that you have no intention of referring to people how they want to be referred to unless it serves some leftist agenda.

        2. I was actually commenting on the likelihood that transgenders probably don’t think in lockstep, not the validity or not of the demands- oh, why do I bother?

          1. Well you’re smarter than most of the people here so why aren’t you realizing that “cis-leftoids” aren’t even a part of this article or discussion? Why is every fucking thing about the goddamn leftists? Do you want to be indistinguishable from Limbaugh bootlickers or what?

            1. Limbaugh bootlicker

              I’m sure Rhywun posted somewhere that is how he wants to be known, because you wouldn’t dare call refer to somebody in a manner that they didn’t wish, right?

              1. Only PhDs who insist on being called doctor.

                1. What happened to their entitlement to be referred to as they wish?

                2. Leave it to Tony to take exception to the classical meaning of the term rather than the modern bastardization.

                  1. Fun fact: sensei means teacher and (medical) doctor in Japanese and nobody gets butthurt about it.

          2. I was actually commenting on the likelihood that transgenders probably don’t think in lockstep, not the validity or not of the demands- oh, why do I bother?

            I wonder how they verified the trans status of all the respondents to the survey?

            Probably something smarmy like being able to pay for their magazine subscription fees or something.

            1. “I wonder how they verified the trans status of all the respondents to the survey?”

              We use hidden messages on this website and secret decoder rings, silly!

          3. Well, one of them is.

            I thought this was cogent and direct of you, Rhyuen, when you responded up-thread. I also understood your point regarding how individuals probably don’t think in lockstep.

            As long as you continue contributing salient points to the discussion, I hope that you continue to “bother” posting your thoughts.

        3. The problem, Tony, is that women don’t want a person with a penis in their bathroom or locker room. Is that hard to understand?
          Also, it is not just “courtesy”–in NY a business can get a huge fine for using the wrong pronoun and people could lose jobs over something that most people simply don’t understand or have knowledge of. Do you personally know the pronouns that every person you encounter wants you to use? You won’t until it is too late.

    4. In Canada now, even questioning whether a young child should have hormonal treatment and surgery is basically a hate crime.

      So if kids take a drug for a temporary alteration of their bodies, then it’s a serious crime. If they want to take a hormone for permanent alteration of their bodies, no problem.

      Nobody is comfortable in their own bodies growing up. I’m not sure it’s the best plan to alter hormones in a child given that their bodies are already going through that.

      1. In Canada, the parents cannot even stop it if their 7-year-old decides they’re “the wrong gender” and wants medical intervention. It’s insane.

        1. What?? Do you have support for that?

          Pre-pubescent children should not even be part of this issue, no matter where you stand.

          1. So she didn’t sweat the small stuff ? things like her middle daughter Mia’s insistence on changing her clothes multiple times a day, or her tantrums. Or even her announcement, around the time she turned 3, that she was a boy.

            That moment started Lemay on a journey she’d never expected to take ? one of consulting with doctors and psychologists and the transgender community, and one that eventually gave her and her husband the understanding they needed to give Mia the choice of whether she wanted to continue her life as a boy.

            Mia, not even yet in kindergarten, declared that she did want to be a boy, that she always wanted to be a boy, and that she wanted to be a boy named Jacob.

            Welcome to Munchausen by proxy, conversion therapy central.

            1. ALWAYS. like, fucking forever, man. Hey, 6months is practically an eternity when you’re 3.

              1. a unique child, a very deep child

                Oh FFS.

                Tell her to nut up and wait until she’s grown to make that decision. We treat kids like they’re this delicate Christmas ornament. Hell I had Jumanji of all things on in the background the other day and I heard someone say “Kids are a lot tougher than we think.” and I thought my ears deceived me. That was 1995! Can you imagine anyone saying that today?!

                1. “Kids are a lot tougher than we think.”

                  They sure are! After working my orphans to near death in the monocle mines, they still have the fortitude to take a beating.

                2. When my daughter was that exact same age, she did the exact same thing.

                  But instead of embarking on a journey of consulting with doctors, psychologists and the transgender community, I shrugged and asked her if she wanted Apple Jacks or Cheerios.

                  The more I read and hear of this case, the more creepy it gets, and it really…REALLY smacks of conversion therapy.

          2. The whole interview is great, but here’s one part:

            There’s even an anti-psychology program at OISE [Ontario Institute for Studies in Education]. It started when they got rid of [Ken] Zucker, and you don’t stop with one person. Zucker was a more than credible psychologist. He ran a very good program for people who had gender dysphoria, and he was conservative. Zucker’s attitude was that if you’ve got a kid who is complaining about their gender, you follow them up, and you see what happens, and you derive your conclusions from the research. Eighty percent of them declare themselves as homosexual, ninety percent settle into their biological identity as adults. His logical conclusion is to keep the goddamned surgical knife sheathed, and don’t bring out the hormones too soon. Well that’s all gone ? it’s illegal now for doctors to question the decision of a three-year old child that he is a she. And if the parents want to start biological transformation, it is illegal for the doctor to reject that.

            P.S.: I did misremember part of it: it’s the child and parents who can overrule the doctor. But I would not be surprised if, sooner or later, child and doctor can overrule parents.

            1. TL;ML (maybe later)

              But that’s scary. Kids don’t know anything – how have we forgotten this?!

            2. Eighty percent of them declare themselves as homosexual, ninety percent settle into their biological identity as adults.

              If this part is true, then I could see some tension between the pro-gay and pro-trans movements over the issue of pre-pubescent sex change prep (identity, hormones, etc). This looks to be saying that most gender confused kids are cis-gendered homosexuals, so transgendering them would be turning them into trans-gendered heterosexuals, which would mean that supporting pre-pubescent transgenderism is essentially trying to turn gay kids straight.

              1. all I keep thinking about is cochlear implants.

  12. Since bathrooms seem to be the point of conflict at the moment, it’s worth noting that 24 percent of transgender people say their presence in a restroom has been questioned or challenged in the last year and 12 percent say they were verbally harassed there. Outside the bathrooms, 46 percent say they were verbally harassed in the past year.

    So, less likely to be harassed in a sex segregated bathroom! The only reasonable outcome is to segregate all of society by sex.

  13. it’s worth noting that 24 percent of transgender people say their presence in a restroom has been questioned or challenged in the last year and 12 percent say they were verbally harassed there.

    Confronted and harassed by whom?

    When my daughter was around 8 yrs old, she had a very short pixie haircut, she used to get “questioned, challenged and confronted” when she’d go into the bathroom– by other 8 yr old girls.

  14. Transgender people report terrible relationships with government authority figures like the police, prisons, and Transportation Security Administration (TSA)

    To be fair, everyone reports terrible relationships with government authority figures like the police and certainly the TSA.

  15. “A Quarter of Transgender People Report Restroom Confrontations”

    .3% transgender *.25 bothered = 7.5 * 10^-4 (7.5 ten thousandths of 1%).

    Don’t tell the social justice warriors, but investing a lot of press into that issue probably isn’t going to sway the results in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin or Michigan.

    Was there a study on the percentage of Americans who were bothered by transsexuals?

    1. That’s different. If they were attacking and beating CIS shitlords in the street, the left would say it’s ok because it’s only protesting. They’ve already said that about BLM doing the same. Wait until they get the Muslims all fired up and they start blowing up people, they’ll defend that also and blame the NRA.

  16. A quarter, hey?

    That gives us a total number in the low dozens, I suspect.

    TO THE BARRICADES!

    1. We should pin the next election on this issue!

    2. Thry can all share the same van to the protest.

  17. “Never-nudes” demand private locker rooms at the gym!

    1. Sounds like someone needs to spend time with a good analrapist.

      1. Whatever you say, anustart.

  18. it’s worth noting that 24 percent of transgender people say their presence in a restroom has been questioned or challenged in the last year and 12 percent say they were verbally harassed there. Outside the bathrooms, 46 percent say they were verbally harassed in the past year.

    Another way to look at that is: 76 percent have not been questioned or challenged, 88 percent were not verbally harassed in the bathroom, and 54 percent were not verbally harassed outside the bathroom.

    So the vast majority of transgendered people are just living their lives with no real harassment and the media can shut the fuck up.

    1. But if it saves just one chillins!

  19. What should the average (likely non-trans) libertarian or liberty-minded reader take away from this? Maybe a better sense of why there’s such a push to use government regulations to fix some of these issues

    I think we already knew that perceived offense was at the root of the call for government cram-downs, thanks.

    Here’s the question, though: So we pass the public accommodation law requiring some businesses to allow tranny access to the other bathroom. Great. That doesn’t solve the problem of members of the public objecting. What percentage of these reported incidents are business owners/employees who work in public accommodation businesses, and what percentage are members of the public or owners/employees of businesses that would not be subject to an expansion of public accommodation law to include trannies?

    1. So we pass the public accommodation law requiring some businesses to allow tranny access to the other bathroom.

      There is no law that can be crafted on gods green earth that can achieve this. All you can do is declare all bathrooms unisex, or leave things the way they are. That’s it.

      As for the rest of your post, I agree. There’s this perception that owner/operators are standing by their bathrooms, throwing people out. it’s the patrons who are objecting, so any law actually targets them.

      1. “All you can do is declare all bathrooms unisex, or leave things the way they are. That’s it”

        They can do that. The result will be to piss off most of the country. Then you will have businesses maintaining public bathrooms for customer’s convenience and no one using them except a few trans and a bunch of pervs. Sounds like a brilliant plan, just like everything the left comes up with.

        1. The only people acting poorly in this matter are Republicans passing bigot-baiting laws and people in restrooms harassing trans people.

          But of course the real villain is “the left” as usual.

          You’re dumb and probably beyond help.

          1. The left are the problem. They’re the ones who stated all of this identity politics stupidity, because they have nothing else except a century old failed ideology. You know what, Tony? I don’t want Democrats OR Republicans passing any legislation as far as this goes. That’s the difference between you and I, I mean besides your IQ probably being 100 points lower and you being a total net drain on society. You’re a biased hack who latches onto every stupid thing the left comes up with and yet cannot form a logical argument about any of it.

            1. I just take the side of freedom, normally. I don’t think any laws are necessary either, provided Republicans stop using the force of state to harass people and single them out in yet another in a neverending line of pandering moral panics.

              If trans people say they have an issue with being bothered in restrooms, then the polite thing to do is believe them and not say you know better from your armchair.

              1. Tony|12.8.16 @ 1:33PM|#
                “I just take the side of freedom, normally”

                You lie even when you’re ‘explaining’ your lies.

                1. But say more about how polls are false because you simply declare them so but whatever comes out of Sean Hannity’s fat face is the wisdom of ages.

                  1. But say more about how polls are false because you simply declare them

                    Polls are very accurate, which is why Clinton handily won the Presdential election…

                    1. Clinton lost therefore all polls forever are wrong!

                    2. Clinton lost therefore all polls forever are wrong!

                      Do you ever not engage in sophistry?

              2. If trans people say they have an issue with being bothered in restrooms, then the polite thing to do is believe them and not say you know better from your armchair.

                And then happily face prosecution for it. The same way you should never mistrust a woman who identifies as a rape victim.

              3. A majority of trans people AREN’T saying they have issues with being bothered in restrooms (if the polling is accurate) so maybe you should shut the fuck up too.

          2. So you think women have no right to object to a physical male sharing their showers? Because this is what this means, even for schools.

  20. Rejecting your gender seems to be a pretty pointed type of suicide. Is it any wonder that other types of self-rejection are also present?

    Probably the question that should be asked is “If you were 100% accepted as the gender you choose, do you think you would be happy?”.

    My guess is that the honest answer in 95% of cases would be “no”.

    Having the government involved just is a distraction.

    That all said, I don’t care who uses any public bathroom. When my kids were little, I treated all spaces as potentially problematic. Trannies are no more a threat than all the other low probability threats in life.

  21. The high rate of suicide attempts is unchanged, though logically it will take years for that number to shift if the poll is asking over a lifetime as opposed to the previous year.

    This isn’t exactly true unless you make some rather unfounded assumptions or just blindly accept polling as fact. Huge numbers in the polling and various other groundswell or confounding effects can easily shift the numbers.

    A bajillion new people who’ve never thought about suicide but suddenly decided to start acting and dressing like the opposite gender could sign up as being trans tomorrow and eradicate the number. Every threat or attempt could easily contain an emotional plea or rider that instantly converts it to a heavy-handed negotiation tactic rather than a suicide attempt. The 2011 survey indicates that 32% attempted if their family accepted them and 51% attempted if their family didn’t. Last year’s I’ll commit suicide if my family doesn’t accept me poll respondent is this year’s “It wasn’t a serious attempt and they invited me to Xmas this year.”

  22. All we’re seeing here is the left’s new strategy of identity politics. No one is buying socialism so they have to hide it in something else. Climate change didn’t work, so now it’s identity politics. Who know’s what it will be next. Putin is hacking our elections? Oh yeah, they already tried that.

  23. I really only good into public bathrooms to fart, so I don’t care who else is in there.

  24. Outside the bathrooms, 46 percent say they were verbally harassed in the past year.

    I tried to find the Repo Man clip, but failed.

    “Hey, Kid- wanna make ten bucks?”

    “Fuck you, queer.”

  25. All you can do is declare all bathrooms unisex

    Exactly. Replace all genderiffic signage with “toilet” signs, and let the patrons fight it out amongst themselves.

    1. Except, this is wrong.

      Reality at large is unisex or intrinsically the opposite of whatever sex segregated restrooms are and the harassment rate is higher.

      This data (if it is to be accepted as such) kinda indicates it’s a first amendment issue with bathroom (and cake) laws being little different than a sort of peacetime quartering act.

      You can’t create unisex bathrooms allowing transgendered people to go wherever they please without allowing these harassers to pursue the transgender people wherever they please.

  26. My favorite part of this article will be in a couple of weeks when John will claim that it is proof “Shacklford (sic) wants to force us all to use bathrooms with tranny molesters!”

    1. Yeah, but won’t it expand your literary inspirations if that happens?

      1. I keep the employees of Reason out of my fictions ever since The Kerry Howley Incident.

        1. I seem to always miss these ‘incidents’. I apparently was the cause of one and still don’t know what happened.

        2. The Kerry Howley Incident coming to theaters this summer!

    2. Probably. Poking John during the times he’s being an idiot isn’t as fun as poking Tony (who is an idiot all the time), but it has its perks.

      1. Except Tony is a troll – poking them is no fun at all because they want it.

        1. I like counter-trolling him. He doesn’t go away whether you feed him or not, so might as well try to offend him. He’s a proggy, there’s plenty of shit that offends them.

    3. Oh come on! It’s not that the trannies are molesters, it’s that molesters will pretend to be trannies. That is a big difference.*

      (*I think this whole thing is fucking stupid.)

    4. Are public schools not government fascilities? Scott is all about forcing public schools to shove this down people’s throats. And his only reason for not wanting the government to do it everywhere is he doesn’t think it’s necessary.

      1. shove this down people’s throats

        Do you prefer to take them post-op or pre-op?

  27. John will claim that it is proof “Shacklford (sic) wants to force us all to use bathrooms with tranny molesters!”

    GAY AGENDA, dude.

  28. “libertarians”

    *shakes head*

  29. “The results of a new poll of transgender Americans put together by the National Center for Transgender Equality aims to give a better sense of what these people actually experience in the world.”

    I’m saying the “aims” here are nothing like what that sentence says, and I’m also not buying the self-reported data.

    1. I’m saying the “aims” here are nothing like what that sentence says, and I’m also not buying the self-reported data.

      I’d be interested to know how the National Center for Transgender Equality screened respondents to determine their transgenderness.

  30. I just take the side of freedom, normally.

    Stick with the believable ones, Tony; like when the aliens abducted you and put the supercomputer chip in your brain.

    1. +1 anal probe.

      Proggies always have their hearts in the right place. Their brains are in their asses, though.

  31. I have nothing but sympathy for the minuscule number of people who are truly transgendered. That must be a really rough way to live.

    I have a suspicion (based on my own limited interaction with the community) that the majority of people who now self identify as trans are actually 1) acting out against societal norms or playing one-up games with their peers 2) socially signaling being a member of an oppressed minority or 3) otherwise mentally ill and just expressing it this way.

    I fear that by making this a huge issue, we are enabling those who are essentially just playing around with this and doing no good at all for the people who actually suffer.

    I feel that it might help this issue and shrink it if government run public bathrooms were to become unisex. Private businesses should be able to deal with it in any way they wish but I fell that many of them would “solve” the problem in the same way.

  32. Tranny rights; why no one takes libertarianism seriously, the mystery continues.

    1. If the conversation makes it that far, you’ve already winnowed down the pool of listeners considerably.

  33. It looks to me like this isn’t a scientific survey. Where are the error ranges? How was the survey conducted? A self-interested group did the survey. Was there any control for biases in the questions?

    If not, then this survey is bunk.

    1. The huge increase in respondents makes me suspicious that a lot of respondents weren’t trannies at all, but were activists trying to spike the poll numbers.

      1. Right, and I didn’t even mention the biggest problem – that it was all self reported. There is not much to see here.

      2. Since there’s essentially no metric for “transgender” then anyone could have responded to the survey.

  34. Under what theory of rights is there a right to not be questioned when using a facility designated for the opposite sex?

    Also keep in mind that unisex facilities are not the answer transgenders bringing lawsuits are looking for.

    1. What theory of libertarianism is it that y’all employ it to constantly look for liberties to deny people? How about don’t talk to strangers in the bathroom? If everyone followed that basic rule of civilization, no lawsuits or legislation would ever come up.

      1. How about don’t talk to strangers in the bathroom? If everyone followed that basic rule of civilization, no lawsuits or legislation would ever come up.

        Nothing builds social cohesion quite like alienation.

        1. There is no bigger freak in this conversation than the person starting a conversation with strangers in the shitter.

          1. You have this incredible ability to completely miss every single point, even your own, while still parading around like a self-righteous know-it-all twat, that has to be seen to be believed.

          2. What kbolino ended with up there.

            I’ve met some great people and had fun conversations in public bathrooms. But then, I’m a girl, in a girls’ restroom, talking to girls. Real girls.

            Tony, you sound really freakishly anti-social there.

            1. *edit* Maybe it’s a girl thang

      2. Re: Tony,

        What theory of libertarianism is it that y’all employ it to constantly look for liberties to deny people?

        Which liberties are being denied? You have the right to your life, your property and your freedom to act. Exactly what are you talking about?

        1. And you have the right to read a fucking book and figure out that just because something is simple enough for you to understand doesn’t mean it’s cosmic truth.

          1. Re: Tony,

            And you have the right to read a fucking book and figure out that just because something is simple enough for you to understand doesn’t mean it’s cosmic truth.

            What is it that is not cosmic truth, Tony? If you don’t believe you don’t have a right to your property, or your life, or your freedom to act, then let me know and I will concede it is not cosmic truth because you’re the exception. In the meantime, sod off.

            1. And, by the way, you did NOT answer the question. You merely obfuscated.

            2. One has the right to property if society is set up to establish such a right, but only in feudal societies has that right been even close to absolute, and then only for the people doing all the enslaving. Whether you have a freedom to live or act is really dependent on whether anyone or anything is impeding on such freedom.

              Not that any of this has anything to do with what’s going on, as much as you need it to be so that it’s simple enough to fit into your crayon drawing of a worldview.

              Separate genders in bathrooms is a cultural convention, not even legislated for the most part. So the core issue is whether trans people are entitled to identify as they wish or if assholes like you in positions of power get to force them to use the wrong bathroom so that your precious provincial comfort isn’t minutely affected.

              1. so that your … comfort isn’t … affected

                The entire issue is about comfort on both sides.

              2. Re: Tony,

                One has the right to property if society is set up to establish such a right,

                Societies don’t form absent the will of the individuals that conform it. A person comes to a society already with his or her rights. If the indivoduals decide to deny the existence of these rigbts, they do so at their peril, as the spectacular failure of socialist societies throughout history have shown.

                You can’t have a society without individuals and these cannot eschew their own rights any more that they could drop their skins; at most, each individual participates in an orgy of wholesale violations of each other’s rights in a socialist society. That includes rules that purport to transfer the title over a restroom from the owner to the patron.

                1. I suppose that once people start feeling put-upon by business owners constantly checking their pants before they use the restroom, the market mechanism will simply put such places out of business.

        2. Honestly, I find it amusing that the one person who completely disagrees with Tony (John) is the only one he won’t engage. Fight! Fight! Fight!

      3. I was looking for some explanation of how such is a liberty at all. Shackford’s articles always seem to assume it as a conclusion, without any explanation of how one gets there.

      4. How about don’t talk to strangers in the bathroom?

        Tony says, “Fuck you closeted homosexuals!”

        1. Did I say anything about fucking in public restrooms? I said no talking. Let’s have standards.

          1. Did I say anything about fucking in public restrooms? I said no talking.

            Rape it is then!

            I’d suggest you could fashion it up as a safe space from Title IX but then that sounds *exactly* like a gay agenda.

      5. It isn’t just bathrooms tony, it is locker rooms. And even in bathrooms people change and adjust their clothing. While YOU don’t care who comes in to the bathroom, women do.

    2. Also keep in mind that unisex facilities are not the answer transgenders bringing lawsuits are looking for.

      No, it’s not, but it’s the essential result they’re going to get.

  35. I keep asking who decided to let the sideshow freaks run the circus.

    1. The white working class, so I’m told by the punditry.

      1. Paying attention to the punditry is one of your problems, especially the pundits whose vaporings you parrot.

  36. Since bathrooms seem to be the point of conflict at the moment, it’s worth noting that 24 percent of transgender people say their presence in a restroom has been questioned or challenged in the last year[…]

    Since the survey doesn’t seem to make a distinction between public restrooms (located in government buildings) and privately-owned restrooms, then my conclusion is that the result is meaningless.

    What should the average (likely non-trans) libertarian or liberty-minded reader take away from this?

    It doesn’t matter, Scott. Opinion is MEANINGLESS when it comes to our rights. Private Property is sacrosanct, whether transgender people feel entitled to pee on one specific restroom or not.

    It’s important when attempting to make the argument that additional government intervention in business and private spaces isn’t needed or justified[…]

    Then what are we arguing about? Remember that this whole brouhaha came about after proggie city councils tried impose their restroom rules on private property owners, going to such extremes as to harass those publicly speaking against them, like in Houston TX. So it is silly to argue about an issue that was completely made up a few years ago as if it was some big crisis in need of a national debate.

    1. So patrons harassing other patrons in restrooms are defending the private property rights of people who aren’t even in the room?

      I think the problem started with conservatitties decided that trans people were their minority legislative pinata du jour and started forcing people to use bathrooms in a certain way. But for some reason you’re completely ignoring that part of the story.

      1. Re: Tony,

        So patrons harassing other patrons in restrooms are defending the private property rights of people who aren’t even in the room?

        What are you talking about? Please be specific. I’m talking about using a restroom the OWNER intended for someone else. Period. End of story. If you want to use a specific restroom, buy the place out.

        I think the problem started with conservatitties decided that trans people were their minority legislative pinata

        That’s actually a clumsy lie, but then again, it’s you, so….

        1. So you’re talking about something that has nothing to do with anything in this article but some scenario you just made up so that it fits into your preferred way of handling discussions such as these: “How property rights mean members of minorities get to be shat upon every day of their lives.” Always the freedom minimalist.

          1. members of minorities get to be shat upon every day of their lives

            Did you ever think some of them might be scat fetishists? It’s like you don’t even care about society’s marginalized.

      2. Tony, you’ve got the order of events wrong. This started in Houston when trans people started demanding the city council to pass an ordinance to all them into the opposite gender’s restroom.

        The trans people picked this fight. Everything was fine – trans people used the restroom and no one noticed. If it was noticed it was because the person was acting in a way that is basically a giant fuck-you to the norms of politeness and decorum.

        Now, the trans people demand that no matter how fucked up they are, normal people just have to accept them as normal. Doublethink is what they are after.

        1. Norms of politeness and decorum do not permit us to refer to trans people as abnormal anymore. Try to keep up. You wouldn’t want anyone thinking you’re a horrible moron.

          1. You wouldn’t want anyone thinking you’re a horrible moron.

            And yet, you keep posting anyway.

          2. Tony, you didn’t engage the point I made at all. Do you really believe that no matter how bizarrely a person is acting that we just have to accept them as normal?

            Do you really, honestly, believe that it’s ok for some flamboyant, obvious drag queen to go into a women’s restroom? Do you not care about the rights of women to use that bathroom?

            1. Is a flamboyant drag queen going to feel or be safer in the men’s restroom? I don’t know what’s OK. Who cares, actually? I think the idea of sharing a restroom is the real abomination, but if we must have public ones, why can’t we do our best to maintain what privacy we can? Does anyone need to be confronted, really? Just do your business and wash your hands and get out.

              1. I agree it’s hard to figure out what the right thing to is. Actually, I think the right thing to do was to do nothing.

                I don’t think we should care as much about the drag queen’s feeling of safety as we do about the 5 women in the restroom that feel unsafe when he’s in there.

                1. Drag queens, I’d think, are more likely to be victims of harassment than they are to rape anyone in a women’s restroom, especially considering drag queens are gay men.

            2. You do know the difference between drag queens and transgenders, right? The whole point of transgender is they don’t want to be “flamboyant and obvious”. In fact, as some have mentioned here many times, you’ve probably done your business right next to transgendered over the years and never knew it.

              1. Rhywun, that’s what I mentioned above, that this had been fine and no one knew if there was a trans person next to them in the restroom. But then the trans people picked the fight and it all went to shit.

                The drag queen example is a bit of reductio ad absurdum, but not that much. It’s what the law demands now.

              2. In fact, as some have mentioned here many times, you’ve probably done your business right next to transgendered over the years and never knew it.

                As someone who has knowingly used the restroom in the presence of the opposite gender and willfully used it in the presence of someone giving every indication (as well as eavesdropped suggestions) that they were transgender I say; given self-selection, I’m guessing the odds are probably against that. The true and earnest converts are more rare than the drag queens and the social malcontent wannabes.

          3. Also, the main point was just a point of fact – the trans people started this fight.

            1. I don’t know if that’s true but I know it’s irrelevant. Maybe they wanted a law to preempt any problems with them using the bathroom that corresponds to their gender identity, maybe they were responding to attempts in motion. Who cares? Two wrongs make a right?

          4. Norms of p ol iteness and decorum.are cultural constructs. Such constructs can as pparently be changed at a moments notice for vaguely defined rationales.

  37. From a libertarian point-of-view, this is a non-issue.

    I have a problem with anyone who initiates force against me or tries to take my property – period. What you look like or call yourself, so long as you are not doing me harm, is irrelevant.

    So let’s say I’m in a public restroom, and in walks someone who looks like Pat from the old SNL skits. Who cares? Now if this person proceeds to grab my wallet, or grab my ass, or grab my toddler — we have a problem. But that is true regardless what the person looks like.

    If anything, I tend to feel sympathy for people in such situations. It’s one thing to be an effeminate man or a masculine woman. But someone who feels the need to try to alter their perceived gender is, 9 times out of 10 from what I’ve seen, someone who likely has some kind of medical issue. I feel no more need to make special laws for them than I do for someone with diabetes or Parkinson’s.

    Of course some so-called “trans” people may just be spoiled SJW kids acting out. Let them! It’s no different than if they sport many facial piercings and crazy tattoos when it comes to using the john. If they allow me to piss in peace, I will afford them the same courtesy.

    1. So you would be ok with a high school kid using the opposite sex locker rooms in school, like in the recent court case? I’m not talking about how YOU feel but most people and their kids.

  38. http://www.c2cjournal.ca/2016/…..-peterson/

    This is a very interesting interview on the nature of this nonsense. it is an interview with a guy named Jordan Peterson who is probably going to end up in jail in Canada for refusing to use the PC proscribed pronouns. In the interview he is talking about an appalling Canadian law similar to the one in NYC that demands that you use whatever gender pronoun the other person calls themselves. But his points about the underlying insanity of all this apply to any debate about the transgendered


    I was also quite profoundly influenced by [Alexsandr] Solzhenitsyn’s book The Gulag Archipelago. People say that real Marxism has never been tried ? not in the Soviet Union, in China, in Cambodia, in Korea, that wasn’t real Marxism. I find that argument specious, appalling, ignorant, and maybe also malevolent all at the same time. Specious because Solzhenitsyn demonstrated beyond a shadow of a doubt that the horrors [of the Soviet system] were a logical consequence of the doctrines embedded within Marxist thinking. I think Dostoyevsky saw what was coming and Nietzsche wrote about it extensively in the 1880s, laying out the propositions that are encapsulated in Marxist doctrine, and warning that millions of people would die in the 20th century because of it.

    1. There are bleak things going on. To start with, Bill C-16 writes social constructionism into the fabric of the law. Social constructionism is the doctrine that all human roles are socially constructed. They’re detached from the underlying biology and from the underlying objective world. So Bill C-16 contains an assault on biology and an implicit assault on the idea of objective reality. It’s also blatant in the Ontario Human Rights Commission policies and the Ontario Human Rights Act. It says identity is nothing but subjective. So a person can be male one day and female the next, or male one hour and female the next.

      Are you suggesting they’ve altered the rule of law as we traditionally understand it?

      They have. They say ‘what you said hurt my feelings’ ? and this is part of the assault on the objective world ? your intent is irrelevant. My subjective response is the determining factor. The idea that they would dare to undermine the doctrine of intent is beyond belief.

      1. If I had a nickel for every smarmy academic out there who tries to get around objectivity by claiming his own preferred fairy tales were objective truth.

        That guy is obviously a ridiculous alarmist (pronouns will cause Nazism to come back!). All that Canadian law does is add gender identity to the list of traits that are protected from discrimination. Now, that includes adding it to relevant parts of the criminal code that would run afoul of the First Amendment if they existed in the US. But that’s a general discussion about whether Canada should have American-style speech freedom.

        Or maybe the trannies are turning us all into commies. That could be it.

        1. Yes Tony, you will believe any totalitarian nonsense fed to you. We already knew that. You don’t have to tell us again.

          1. Tony has not read the link, or he wouldn’t say it’s “alarmist” and “all it does is….” Those points are dealt with in the interview.

            Or maybe he read it, and just prefers to lie.

            Do you believe that you or others could be imprisoned for refusing to comply with these laws?

            There’s no doubt about that. The human rights tribunals have been given the right to hold people in contempt. Well, you’re going to be in contempt if you don’t pay the fine. My opponents say ‘you’re just scare-mongering. We don’t really have that much power.’ Then why change the criminal code? Why put the hate speech amendments in there? The final word in law is incarceration. There is no question about this. When I made the video on September 27th, and I said, ‘probably making this video itself is illegal’. Not only that, the university is as responsible as I am for making it, because that’s in the human rights code. The university read the damned policies and had their lawyers scour it, and concluded exactly what I concluded. That’s why they sent me two warning letters. They’re on the hook for everything their employees say, whether or not the consequences of what they say were intentional or unintentional, regardless of whether or not there was a complaint.

            1. Does that include things that my employees say in their private time?

              It includes everything they say. It doesn’t matter whether people complain or not. Even if no one complains, or even if the effect is unintentional. The other thing that’s built into this law and the surrounding policies ? and this is also increasingly the case in sexual harassment tribunals on university campuses which the [Ontario Premier Kathleen] Wynne government is pushing like mad ? they’ve changed two legal principles. It’s not ‘innocent before being proven guilty,’ it’s ‘preponderance of evidence,’ and it’s not intent, it’s outcome. Those transformations are so far reaching, it’s almost unimaginable.

              Are you suggesting they’ve altered the rule of law as we traditionally understand it?

              They have. They say ‘what you said hurt my feelings’ ? and this is part of the assault on the objective world ? your intent is irrelevant. My subjective response is the determining factor. The idea that they would dare to undermine the doctrine of intent is beyond belief.

    2. o maybe some of them voted for it because they don’t understand the philosophical issues and just didn’t want to offend anybody?

      That’s why I’m trying to take these arguments apart. First of all, “he” and “she” are not marks of respect. They’re the most casual terms possible. If I refer to someone as “he” or I refer to someone as “she,” it’s not a mark of respect, its just categorization of the most simple and obvious kind. There’s not anything about it that’s individual, or characteristic of respect. Second, you have no right to demand from me that I do anything with regards to you that’s respectful. The best you can hope for from me is sceptical neutrality and courageous trust. That’s it. That’s what you get from me.

    3. So we shouldn’t call someone ‘your majesty’ just because they ask for it?

      Well that’s another problem that’s lurking under the subjectivity argument, once you divorce identity from an objective underpinning. These people [advocates for multiple gender identities and laws to protect them] claim that identity is a social construct, but even though that’s their fundamental philosophical claim, and they’ve built it into the law, they don’t abide by those principles. Instead, they go right to subjectivity. They say that your identity is nothing more than your subjective feeling of what you are. Well, that’s also a staggeringly impoverished idea of what constitutes identity. It’s like the claim of an egocentric two-year old, and I mean that technically. Your identity isn’t just how you feel about yourself. It’s also how you think about yourself, it’s what you know about yourself, it’s your educated judgement about yourself. It’s negotiated with other people if you’re even vaguely civilized because otherwise no one can stand you. If your identity isn’t a hybrid of what you are and what other people expect, then you’re like the kid on the playground with whom no one can play.

      1. Plus, your identity is a practical vehicle that you use to manoeuvre yourself through life. In your real identity, you’re a lawyer, you’re a doctor, you’re a mother, you’re a father, you have a role that has value to you and others. None of that’s subjectively defined. So that’s completely absurd, and philosophically primitive, and psychologically wrong. Yet it’s built into the law. I think the law makes discussions of biology and gender illegal. I think we got a taste of that in the TVO Agenda interview I had where [U of T transgender studies professor] Nicholas Mack said ‘well, the scientific consensus in the last four decades is that there’s no biological difference between men and women’. It’s an absurd proposition. There are sex differences at every level of analysis. There are masculinity/femininity scales that have been derived; they’re basically secondary derivations of personality descriptors. There are huge personality differences between men and women. There’s literature looking at differences of men and women in personality in many, many societies throughout the world.

      2. I think the biggest paper examined 55 different societies. And they rank societies by sociological and political equality. The hypothesis was that if you equalize the environment between men and women, you eradicate the differences between them. In other words, if you treat boys and girls the same, the differences between them will disappear. But that’s not what the studies showed. In reality, they get bigger. Those are studies of tens of thousands of people. The social constructionist theory was tested. It failed. Gender identity is very much biologically determined.

    4. In a National Post op-ed you wrote that ‘words like zhe/zher are the vanguards of a radical left wing ideology that’s frighteningly similar to Marxism’. Can you elaborate?

      Assigned identity is oppression. Assigned identity is the identity that’s assigned to you by the power structure ? the patriarchy. The only reason the patriarchy assigns you a status is to oppress you. And so the language that frees you from that status is revolutionary language. So, as an example of revolutionary language, we’re going to blow out the gender identity categories, because the concept of woman is oppressive. The anti-patriarchy philosophy is predicated on the idea that all social structures are oppressive, and not much more than that. Then to assault the structure is to question its categorical schemes at every possible level of analysis. And the most fundamental one that the anti-patriarchy radicals have come up with is gender. It’s a piece of identity that children usually pick up on around two ? it’s pretty fundamental. You could argue that there isn’t anything more fundamental. Though, I don’t know of anything that’s more fundamental, more basic, and that would have been regarded as more unquestionable, even five years ago.

    5. There are two genders, this I know, because the jeebus told me so.

      1. Jesus teaches you about DNA? Do tell.

        1. Marriage is between one man and one woman. There’s nothing there about any others. The animals on the ark – pairs of both genders.

          Noah’s ark also had a separate men’s room and ladies’ room. It is known.

          1. Yeah, that takes care of it. Is it hard going through life being a moderately functional retard? Or do people look out for you?

        2. People are required to get a DNA test before using the shitter where you live?

      2. There are two sexes, and M-F bathrooms are sex-specific. Gender ain’t got nothing to do with it.

        This entire dispute is a huge stolen base, linguistically, which erases the real difference between males and females and replaces an objective biological fact with subjective feelings.

        1. Yeah, that is the point this guy is making. He uses big words, however. So, that prevents zero sum game from understanding it.

        2. The larger/more important issue is that it’s also a couple stolen bases legally as well; that you have the right to demand someone else’s property for your purposes and that your purposes automatically trump someone else’s in the use of said borrowed (possibly mutually) property.

          If I make fun of/question/harass transgendered people for using the same restroom as me, granting them *and* myself the ability to use the other restroom doesn’t make the harassment go away nor really narrow the opportunity for it to occur. The only way it works to address harassment is if they get to use whatever restroom they like *and* make everyone else in there shut up about it *and* keep other harassers out.

          Which, as I said above, would’ve been hilarious to propose in the 80s because if you said, entirely contextually, that you felt bathroom behavior should be controlled and limited to strictly bathroom related activities and nothing else you were implicitly suggesting that homosexuals get the fuck out.

      3. There are two sexes, and M-F bathrooms are sex-specific. Gender ain’t got nothing to do with it.

        This entire dispute is a huge stolen base, linguistically, which erases the real difference between males and females and replaces an objective biological fact with subjective feelings.

      4. There are 31 genders. This I know because the State of New York told me so.

        1. I think the biggest paper examined 55 different societies. And they rank societies by sociological and political equality. The hypothesis was that if you equalize the environment between men and women, you eradicate the differences between them. In other words, if you treat boys and girls the same, the differences between them will disappear. But that’s not what the studies showed. In reality, they get bigger. Those are studies of tens of thousands of people. The social constructionist theory was tested. It failed. Gender identity is very much biologically determined.

          In many ways that is the money quote. But remember, people like zero sum game “fucking love science”.

          1. Which would explain why people whose outer appearance and gender identity don’t match tend to fall into gender roles all the same. What’s not explained is why it’s any of your business what other people do with their bodies during their most private moments.

            1. Tony you can pretend anything you like. Just don’t demand other people play along.

              1. The only thing that demands that you have good manners is the threat of social ostracism. So by all means go around public restrooms demanding to see people’s genitals. See how popular that makes you.

            2. What’s not explained is why it’s any of your business what other people do with their bodies during their most private moments.

              So, should John have:
              A) Greater access to restrooms at large?
              B) The same ‘restricted’ access as he currently has?

              1. John should recognize that navigating the world of public restrooms, while a source of constant anxiety for trans people, is something he should be used to by now. Maybe someday when he’s developed the ability he’ll manage a bit of empathy for people who have actual problems.

                1. Good thing I didn’t offer you two titles to address me by. Refusing to use either might be construed as an ‘actual problem’.

          2. Gender identity is very much biologically determined.

            This statement would seem to support the idea that some kids were born with the “wrong” gender.

            1. I think it’s a very sloppy way to make the statement and, a bit, falls into the ‘science as morality’ or ‘science as fact/edict’ trap.

              Hair color is very much biologically determined. Cancer is very much biologically determined. Gills are very much biologically determined.

              Nobody’s ever born with gills and nobody cares if someone changes hair color every day of the week. I think the implication is that the individual’s physical body is the strongest indicator of gender identity, rather than or even in spite of their mind and/or society at large.

              He’s not driving at the biological underpinnings as much as rebutting the notion of a strict social derivation.

              1. I think he’s trying to say people should be forced to identify as he decides rather than as they decide.

        2. Heheh, at least someone got that I was trolling the fundies.

          Man, oh man, watching the proggies go apeshit about that SNL skit. The tears never stop flowing these days.

          1. So believing in an objective truth makes one a “Fundie” whatever that is?

            1. You know, Jesus had way more to say about helping the poor and being kind to everyone than he ever said about homosexuality. Trans people never came up, so maybe he was cool with ’em.

              Besides, a guy who spent all his adult life around twelve other dudes might have had need of those carpentry skills. Maybe he specialized in closets.

              1. To believe in transgender is to effectively believe in a man’s soul trapped in a woman’s body or vice versa. The idea embraces a dualism consistent only with a soul and the supernatural. And if you believe that, you also have to believe God doesn’t make mistakes and stick the soul in the wrong type of body.

                1. I seem to recall him cursing a fig tree to death for not bearing fruit out of season. He supposedly created both the tree and the seasons, so I guess somewhere along the way he fucked up. If he really had to have fig newtons, maybe he should have made a better fig tree.

                2. That’s more or less how they put it, only science wouldn’t use the term soul. Do you even know any trans people? If not, what qualifies you to speak for their experience?

                  All the trans people I know simply want to get on with their lives as normally as they can. Mostly the goal is to successfully pass so that even you and your fellow genital police can’t tell.

                  1. Do you have something like a Baskin-Robbins for all those genders, Tony? Can you pick a new one each day or do you kinda have to stick with one once you’ve chosen?

                    1. Do you think there’s some kind of tribunal for such things or what?

                    2. Should there be? You’re the authoritarian.

                    3. I’m one of the few people here arguing that people’s genitals shouldn’t be inspected by vigilantes every time they use a public restroom.

                    4. “one of the few”

                      lol

                      If you keep straining on that rectum from all your pants-shitting, your brain’s going to come out of your ass.

  39. The regulatory hammer is real and it can hit really hard. It can shut people’s livelihoods and businesses down.

    The Great Transgender Panic isn’t about crazy so-cons worrying about their wives and daughters being perved upon by “fakers” sneaking into the wrong bathroom. The problem is the Transgender activist community have purposely created a moving target definition of “gender”, and they aim to put a regulatory hammer behind it. That’s the fear that people have. Very few people in this country really care who uses what bathroom.

    There are some studies that show that men don’t care, but a higher rate of women care.

    Unfortunately, the few conservative politicians that make this about perceived safety or perverts masquerading in the “wrong bathroom” are actually fueling the regulatory angle. They become caricature that lawmakers and activists are attempting to punish, when business owners who merely want to cater to their customer’s needs without getting killed by frivolous lawsuits are running for cover.

    1. You’re right. Regardless of the issue, the problem is almost always the State.

    2. Why do people keep saying just bathrooms? It is also about locker rooms, including in elementary and high school. And, importantly, if you are forbidden to ask for proof that a person is trans when they come in, how do you keep out the non-trans creepers without getting arrested? If women can’t object to a man in the showers, then how can we object to that same man walking down the street naked? What is the difference?

  40. This all started in Houston with the city council trying to pass some ordinances (I live in a suburb). I remember Texas socons going apeshit about how liberals and Obama were going to force people to accept men into women’s restrooms. I remember thinking, you silly socons, just shut up this isn’t going anywhere, and besides it’s not that big a deal. Don’t be paranoid.

    Except, what the socons were saying started happening all over. Obama gave guidance to public schools to let boys into girls’ locker rooms. I guess you’re not paranoid if they really are after you.

    1. The Obama administration’s guidance was feckless, and the administration literally had no idea what they were doing or demanding. It was a reactionary response to noisy activists, which yes, spooked a bunch of so-cons.

      The Zombie Apocalypse can’t come soon enough.

    2. The one consistent thing in politics: authoritarians are going to authority, whether directly or in a pants-shitting frenzy against the other guy.

    3. This all started in Houston with the city council trying to pass some ordinances (I live in a suburb).

      Technically, it all started in John Lawrence’s apartment in ’98 outside Houston. SCOTUS, rather than telling Texas to fuck off because people have a right to congregate and be secure in their belongings, decided to steal a couple bases and say that anti-sodomy laws could be interpreted and to be anti-gay or implemented in an anti-gay fashion and, thus, selectively violate homosexuals due process rights and that those rights need protecting distinctly.

      It certainly wasn’t the first time the law took a back seat to subjective interpretation and teh feelz, but both sides rather unequivocally cite it as the watershed moment in this regard.

  41. Re: Tony,

    So you’re talking about something that has nothing to do with anything in this article

    It has everything to do. If transgender people are harassed in restrooms by strangers, then the situation is only one where you have idiots acting like idiots and nothing more.

    Yet this is not what Scott is talking about:

    “McCrory put it all on the line defending HB2”

    That law was legislated and approved as an answer to the decision by the Charleston council to impose a restroom rule on BUSINESS OWNERS. On private property owners. So my comment is totally relevant. I didn’t make anything up.

    Always the freedom minimalist.

    I guess that you felt the compulsion to remind everyone here that, as a Marxian, you see things exactly backwards: up is down, white is black, employment is slavery and advocating for total individual freedom is being “minimalist.”

    1. To people like Tony, “freedom” is a basket full of positive rights.

      1. Oh, beneficent state, I pray to you and thank you for your blessings each day, amen.

    2. Total individual freedom… minus the freedom to use the appropriate restroom. Private individuals and entities can restrict freedom just the same as governments can. Only you people don’t seem to get that.

      1. The basic disagreement here is what is the appropriate restroom. Society had decided that the distinction was to decided on differences in sex (which is an objective standard, addressing concerns privacy between the sexes) You are arguing that it should be made on differences in gender, which as it is defined here is objective, and addresses the concerns of an exceeding small percentage of the population while ignoring those of the larger majoriity Plus you are not making a case how that would be an improvement or even a sideways move for the majority of people affected. Social conventions exist to lubricate the areas of friction in society, what you want seems to throw sand in the machinery for most people.

        1. We don’t get to tell a minority, however small, that it has to accept harsh burdens placed on normal life activities because of the bigotry of the majority. This way of doing things has worked out pretty well.

  42. I’ve been hiding in women’s restrooms for years and I never heard any of these confrontations.

  43. Let’s see…25% of .7% is…

    1. A moral super-majority?

  44. Uh, wait a few minutes before you go in there. I had a “restroom confrontation”.

  45. “Since bathrooms seem to be the point of conflict at the moment, it’s worth noting that 24 percent of transgender people say their presence in a restroom has been questioned or challenged in the last year and 12 percent say they were verbally harassed there.”

    Considering that they have no business being there in the first place, I’d say that 24 percent is pretty darned low. If I suddenly decided to use the women’s restrooms, I’m pretty sure I would be “harassed” nearly 100% of the time.

    Being transgender is simply a self-identified construct that people have created. Anyone can be trans. There is no objective test. However, one’s sex is not open to self identification, it’s coded in your genes.

  46. I guess letting the property/business owner decide the bathroom policy is just too much for this publication to advocate.

  47. from the article:”

    “The results of a new poll of transgender Americans put together by the National Center for Transgender Equality”.

    Once you named the source of this “research” you lost me… do you REALLY believe an organisation PROMOTING this phoenomenon will design and execute a “survey” that is truly neutral and accurate? I don’t…….

    I’ve studied statistics as a discipline and a tool long enough to know a skilled individual can craft a set of survey questions that will prove/disprove nearly anything they desire to prove/disprove. There is NO WAY an organisation dedicated to promoting this business will be “fair and balanced”, let alone accurate

  48. Disappointed. Why has reason.com not examined 4-5 cases that were “false reports” and declared that no transgenders are being harassed?

    As this election may well have shown, the result could be a backlash if people start believing that acceptance of others comes at the expense of their own personal liberties.Because announcing that people can do what they were always doing, in secret, without being fearful of being charged with a crime is, likely, really bad.

    Piss the bully off by saying you should not be bullied and you are responsible for what the bully does to you next?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.