In a much anticipated, and much needed announcement, the Departments of Justice and Education sent new guidance to schools across that nation that rescinds the previous “guidance” provided by the Obama Administration that threatened schools with the loss of federal funding if they did not allow students to use the bathroom of their choice. The new guidance will almost certainly affect the current rash of lawsuits making their way through the court system, including a case from here in Virginia. Naturally, pro-LGBT groups are declaring this move as harmful that will increase harassment and discrimination, totally ignoring the harm and danger they are putting young women in by forcing them to change clothes and shower in front of boys, and possibly even grown men.
While this move from the Trump administration will throw the situation back to the states, I don’t think that goes far enough. I think there is an opportunity to put liberals on the defensive, especially when it comes to Title IX.
When Title IX was first passed back in 1972, it was designed to prevent schools that receive public funding from discriminating against students based on gender, but like all government programs that start out with good intentions, it purpose has been bastardized by the left. The first victim was men’s sports programs that were cut in order to bring more equity to the amount of money spent in collegiate sports. Since its inception, more than 400 men’s athletic teams have been eliminated as a result.
The next area of Title IX abuse came in the form of an assault on free speech. In 2011, the Obama Administration sent more “guidance” to colleges and universities instructing them to “better prevent sexual assault and harassment on campuses.” What this has meant in reality is a trampling of free speech, harassment of professors and students, and caused universities to “fire, threaten, censor, and grossly mistreat faculty members to protect the university’s public image.” Ever heard of “safe spaces,” or “trigger warnings” to protect from “micro-aggression?” Thank Title IX.
This law, and the federal money that is tied to it, has been used as a hammer by the left to push extremely harmful policies on our kids and our public schools, so maybe we should put it to some good use instead. Instead of just rescinding Obama’s guidance to allow people to use the bathroom of their choice in schools, the Trump Administration should provide new guidance that requires schools to intsitute policies that require people to use the bathroom that matches their birth certificate.
The rational for this would be the same one that Obama used for his 2011 guidance. We need to protect women from sexual harassment and abuse, and how could you possibly do that if you are forcing women to go to the bathroom, change clothes, or shower with men? By instituting a policy of allowing men to choose the bathroom based on whether they “think” they’re a girl, you are putting our daughters at risk of voyeurism, harassment, and assault by sexual predators posing as “trans.” Why not use the power of the federal government to good use in protecting our children?
To those who would argue this would be an over-reach of federal power, I totally sympathize with that argument. My counter would be that you need to look at the long game here. What is the first thing that would happen if this kind of guidance were to be handed down by the Trump Administration? Lawsuits, of course. Leftist organizations and Democrat politicians would pound their chests and decry the hostility towards people who are different, and then they would file lawsuits…against Title IX…specifically against the very kind of guidance on governmental over-reach that they have championed in the past.
The result that would come from the courts could only be seen as a win/win situation. If the courts uphold the guidance then a blow has been struck against the rising tide of leftist groups attempting to normalize more and more deviant behavior. If the courts strike down the guidance you will have both the left, and the courts, on record in limiting the power and scope of what Title IX can be used for. In that case, it would make it easier to roll back other onerous regulations put in place because of this rule, and the decision on bathroom policies would be back in the hands of local officials.
For far too long Conservatives have been cowed, playing defense on social issues. We are attacked by fellow Republicans as being “too extreme” and “obsessed with social issues” for simply trying to defend decency and uphold a certain level of moral and ethical behavior. In the meantime, the real extremists on the left have been tirelessly pushing their goals of redefining normalcy to include any radical behavior or practice they can come up with.
It’s time for the right to be on offense for a change, and do a little pushing back of our own.
The left has done a great job of misusing the civil rights act to promote deviant behavior.
Reading this page of comments is funny. Say goodbye to whatever power you temporarily have because you are already squandering it on petty issues like these.
Do you think Marines — to cite just one example — worry about these petty things? No, they are up early and focusing on getting important jobs done. They do not debate bathroom issues. Only the truly petty are mired in this level of discussion.
Drinking coffee is important. Expelling it is not. Ooh-Rah.
Who is a ‘girl:
Etymology online reports:
c. 1300, gyrle “child, young person” (of either sex but most frequently of females), of unknown origin. One guess [OED] leans toward an unrecorded Old English *gyrele, from Proto-Germanic *gurwilon-, diminutive of *gurwjoz (apparently also represented by Low German gære “boy, girl,” Norwegian dialectal gorre, Swedish dialectal gurre “small child,” though the exact relationship, if any, between all these is obscure), from PIE *ghwrgh-, also found in Greek parthenos “virgin.” But this involves some objectionable philology. Liberman (2008) writes: Girl does not go back to any Old English or Old Germanic form. It is part of a large group of Germanic words whose root begins with a g or k and ends in r. The final consonant in girl is a diminutive suffix. The g-r words denote young animals, children, and all kinds of creatures considered immature, worthless, or past their prime.
A ‘girl’ is a young immature child.
The original linguistic roots of ‘girl’ are not gendered.
Who is a ‘boy’?
mid-13c., boie “servant, commoner, knave, boy,” of unknown origin. Possibly from Old French embuie “one fettered,” from Vulgar Latin *imboiare, from Latin boia “leg iron, yoke, leather collar,” from Greek boeiai dorai “ox hides.” (Words for “boy” double as “servant, attendant” across the Indo-European map — compare Italian ragazzo, French garçon, Greek pais, Middle English knave, Old Church Slavonic otroku — and often it is difficult to say which meaning came first.)
But it also appears to be identical with East Frisian boi “young gentleman,” and perhaps with Dutch boef “knave,” from Middle Dutch boeve, perhaps from Middle Low German buobe. This suggests a gradational relationship to babe. For a different conjecture:
In Old English, only the proper name Boia has been recorded. ME boi meant ‘churl, servant’ and (rarely) ‘devil.’ In texts, the meaning ‘male child’ does not antedate 1400. ModE boy looks like a semantic blend of an onomatopoeic word for an evil spirit (*boi) and a baby word for ‘brother’ (*bo). [Liberman]
A ‘boy’ is a ‘servant’ or ‘knave’.
The original linguistic roots of ‘boy’ are not gendered.
The liquistic roots of ‘boy’ and ‘girl’ fully allow a born-with-a-penis to call self accurately’girl’ and a born-with-a-vagina to call self accurately ‘boy’.
People should be allowed to call themselves accurately. American history is full of people who struggled mightily to find a home where they could all themselves accurately: ‘We are Anabaptists’, ‘We are Quakers’, ‘We are Baptists’, ‘We are Latter Day Saints’, ‘We are Puritans’, ‘We are Blues’, ‘We are Grays’, ‘We are Native Americans’, ‘We are Black’, ‘We are White’, etc.
Great post. I completely agree. Trump needs to get rid of Title IX
Dumb bunny?! Title IX is a LAW, not an Imperial Order, of Command from der fuhrer! We Americans are, famously said, a ‘nation of laws and not of men (i.e. dictators)’
So you don’t want the Feds on your farms but you do want the Feds in your bathroom?
Conservatism is good until…..it’s not?
Read the whole piece. What better way for excessive Federal government regulation to be overturned than for Democrats to force its termination in the courts? Sure, Obama’s guidance has been rescinded on this issue, and his previous guidance in 2011 could be rescinded as well, but another Democrat President can, and most assuredly will, put them back in place given the chance.
By using the Democrats favorite weapon against them, the heavy hand of government, you force them to use the courts they love so much to overturn the very government regulations they have forced on us. Once you have judicial rulings limiting the scope of Title IX, secured by the Democrats themselves, you limit the ability of future Obama’s from doing this kind of thing again.
As long as the Feds are nowhere near the Farm bathrooms.
Didn’t Newt say something about using govt for the right just as bad as for the left?
‘Farm bathrooms’? … On our farm we pee outdoors, you dumb bunny.
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
I do not want boys in the girls locker rooms but I want power returned to the people even more.
Wouldn’t you love to see a debate on this subject in Richmond?
They are all such wimps, they will never do it.
ACTUALLY, the Virginia General Assembly took up a couple bills on this topic but kept them in committee.
Yes, more federal intrusion into local politics should solve this issue.
Why stop with bathroom policing? Let’s round them all up and deport them. If they are determined to sin, send them back to where they came from
Why subject young girls to the threat of sexual predators for the sake of a handful of people suffering from a mental disorder? These people should be getting help, not being enabled.
exactly. If those people are going to act in sin, give them a chance to be saved. But never let them pee in the wrong place.
You’re right, why should we bother with getting them help? We’ve haven’t forced any other crazy person to get help, why those who are confused over their gender? They can simply use the ‘family restroom’ since they can’t make up their minds who they are on any given day.
SIN! …. like Adultery? ADULTERY IS A SIN! and A CRIME in Virginia! We should be rounding up Adulterous People and putting them it camps (possibly for deportation to RUSSIA, but Russia has declining population from rampant disease, drug and alcohol abuse, and a sick sick sick society! Russia needs enslaved labor … perhaps that is Trump’s plan with Satanic Lord Putin: deporting Americans as slaves?)! We should charge them VERY HIGH FINES, too, and confiscate all their property (like we do for many drug crimes). AND MAKE THEM PAY for their incarceration (just like we want ‘Mexico to pay for THE WALL’) and pay for their own air travel to enslavement in RUSSIA. That is how we get TOUGH ON SIN AND CRIME under Trump, right?~
Oops, … you just pooped out some illogical BS.
Sexual predation is a CRIMINAL ACT. CRIMINALS should be arrested, prosecuted, and convicted.
Who are the most common sexual predators of children: THEIR FAMILY MEMBERS AND OTHERS TRUSTED BY THE FAMILY. Not Transgender persons.
So it is in the family circle and circe of family friends and acquaintances where the crimes of sexual predation most need to be found out, arrested, and prosecuted. Children should be taught to tell on their parents, family members and others and given plenty of opportunities to tell on them safely.
Privacy rights aside, I am not worried about a mentally ill man who thinks he is a woman molesting or abusing girls. Given that the total population of transgenders in the US is about 0.03 to 0.06 percent of the total population, the chances that you are going to run into an actual transgender person in the bathroom is close to nil.
What I AM worried about are the perverts, and the pedophiles, and the voyeurs, and the rapists, that will take advantage of opening up what used to be a safe space for women at one of their most vulnerable moments, to any man that wants to walk on in and take a gander.
See, being transgender doesn’t mean you dress like a woman, and it certainly doesn’t mean you have undergone surgery to cut off your man parts. You can look like Mr. T and claim to be transgender. There’s just no way to tell. It’s not like you are going to station people outside the door asking to see someone’s psychological diagnosis of gender dysphoria. When you open the ladies room door to men calling themselves women, you open it to all men.
Now normally, if a man walks into the ladies room, he can be immediately removed and charged with trespassing, but once you open that door to men, you have taken that option off the table. There is nothing a woman can do if she walks into the bathroom to find a man standing there at the sink, worried about what he might be planning. There is nothing a woman can do if she walks into the locker room, and finds a man standing by the showers, looking at his phone, wondering if he is filming her as she undresses.
Subjecting women and young girls to that kind of uncertainty, fear, and humiliation, all to enable the mental disorder of a handful of people is simply not an acceptable solution.
DUDE! The ‘uncertainty’ that you speak of is CURRENTLY THE CASE. Obviously you are aware that there is currently no genital check at restroom entrances (and there should not be!). SO UNCERTAINTY actually already exists. THERE IS NO WAY TO TELL …. as you say …. NOW ALREADY! Only a law requiring genital checks at each and every restroom door would satisfy that uncertainty.
DUDE! AND if there were genital checks and only vagina-bodies use the vagina-pee pee restrooms THERE CAN STILL BE DISCOMFORT WITH STRANGERS, VOYEURISM, EXHIBITIONISM …. not to mention LACK OF PRIVACY! ALL THOSE THINGS ALREADY EXIST!
What you say does NOTHING to eliminate those things that you say you don’t like.
THE ONLY sensible response to what you say you don’t like is to hire restroom monitors for each and every restroom! You should DEMAND a law requiring all public restrooms to have monitors. That would mean that many public restrooms would much of the time be closed and locked because it will be hard to hire that many monitors (but that WOULD employ millions of Americans!). And to pay those salaries and benefits public restrooms would need to be PAY AS YOU GO …. or supported by HIGHER MEALS TAXES, there taxes!
So is that you plan?
Please stop with your sexist gender-projecting hate speech.
The Dude abides.
Jeez, I think you gave it away here. Are you getting paid for this?
no need to pay me for doing G_D’s work. If they want to act like that, stay away from my family. No one is going to watch my son pee who doesn’t have the right equipment.
1) when you were mentioning deportation, that seemed a little out there.
2) your last sentence above prob should be rephrased, sounds kinda creepy.
OH, so a veteran with exploded pee pee ‘equipment’ …. can’t pee with your son? AND an elderly person who has to use a catheter …. which is the ‘wrong equipment’ …. can’t pee pee with your son? AND someone with cancer or other illness who has removed ‘equipment’ … can’t pee pee with your son? AND an incontient person … with diapered ‘equipment’ …. can’t pee pee with your son? Pity your son with such an intolerant parent!