Dept of Education declares that school must allow boy to shower with girls

[viper37]

Isn't "pretend to be gay to get a chance of coping a feel with girls" sort of a high school trope already? Or maybe I'm seeing the wrong films.

You are seeing the wrong films, clearly.

[Berkut]

I don't see anything remotely bigoted about the belief that guy guys will try to take advantage of this.

Nor is it moronic to think so.  After all, the only objective way to prevent it would be to create a test of female identification.  I presume the plaintiff in this case was not given one.

Of course a rather impartial test would be if the dude gets a woodie in the shower, but at that it's already mission accomplished.

I figure that if you pretend to be transgendered, then you have to at least cross-dress, no?
Basically, if a straight boy is willing to dress as a girl to attend school and then get in the girl's shower, than the ridicule might be worst than the gratification he would get.

I think if the captain of the basketball team announced that he was going to dress up as a girl and claim gender-female status so he can go shower with the girls basketball team, he would not get any ridicule at all.

[Martinus]

Precisely.

You are arguing that one's own definition of their own gender is irrelevant, and it is the outside world that should determine in it for them, just like it has always been. Except for the possibility to file a complaint.

And once that complaint has been processed and approved then the outside world has determined that they are legally a different gender and entitled to all the rights that go with this.

What if the complaint is rejected?

You do realise that every right or privilege we have in a society is, ultimately, subject to a court review, right? I fail to see how this issue is any different from the question whether you are free to live, work, marry etc the way you like. If someone challenges that right (like the school did in this story) you either reach a compromise or go to court and live with the verdict.

[Martinus]

Alright but that has nothing to do with this scenario. The only people involved here are the ones who identify with one of the two possible gender identities. Even if we made a few more I presume these trans-girls would still be trans-girls.

Yes, and that is exactly the problem - the trans-girl in question (and the administrative authorities) are insisting that her identification with one of the two possible categories is a human right that is violated by "special" treatment, presumably because this singles her out as "different".

Thing is, she *is* "different". No amount of pretending is going to make a person with a dick into a "girl" for all purposes, just the same as every other girl born without one. Anyone looking at her naked (like in a locker room) will know, at once, that she is "different". 

This isn't the school's fault, it is the fault of cruel nature, that evidently gave her a mind that didn't match her body. To my mind, it makes less sense to pretend it isn't so, and makes more sense to accommodate that difference by admitting that not everyone fits neatly into "a" or "b".

Replace gender identity with race and you just made a great argument for segregated showers.

[Valmy]

Replace gender identity with race and you just made a great argument for segregated showers.

Um we already have segregated showers based on gender. If you replaced it with race it would be a discussion of trans-race people which is a topic but really does not have anything to do with arguing, in a great or non-great manner, for segregated showers based on race

[Martinus]

I kinda agree with Malthus, though, but I think the conclusion should be the abolishment of segregated showers - this is because the idea of segregated showers presupposes a cis-hetero-normative vision of the world (I assume the key is not to prevent people from seeing "foreign body parts" but to stop them from being aroused by each other), so this obviously does not work when you have trans or gay kids.

The alternative is to create separate showers for everyone, including other-kin.

[Malthus]

Replace gender identity with race and you just made a great argument for segregated showers.

We *already* have "segregated showers", as Valmy notes - boys and girls. That doesn't mean we have to segregate by race as well.

Now, one possible solution would be to end that and go the Scandinavian route - I understand there it is common to have one set of facilities.

[Martinus]

I wonder to what extent having gender-segregated showers strenghtens the rape culture. 

[Martinus]

What I mean by that, insisting on gender segregated showers seems to rest on the implied assumption that boys are natural sexual abusers who are unable to control themselves when in the presence of naked girls - so, in a sense this also lifts responsibility from them and puts them on others (the girls, the school, the environment). So when they finally are in a situation where they have access to vulnerable women, they rape them.

Perhaps instead we should be teaching the kids self control.

[Valmy]

I wonder to what extent having gender-segregated showers strenghtens the rape culture. 

Does having gender-segregated showers make gay rape less likely or more?

[Malthus]

I kinda agree with Malthus, though, but I think the conclusion should be the abolishment of segregated showers - this is because the idea of segregated showers presupposes a cis-hetero-normative vision of the world (I assume the key is not to prevent people from seeing "foreign body parts" but to stop them from being aroused by each other), so this obviously does not work when you have trans or gay kids.

The alternative is to create separate showers for everyone, including other-kin.

I think the "key" or reason isn't to stop people from getting aroused (we have no way of doing that), but rather, feelings of comfort and safety - particularly on the part of women. Men wouldn't care nearly as much as women would: for men (at least hetero men) it would be more a concern about ridicule, but for women, it would be more a concern about (perceived) safety, as well as deeply ingrained cultural notions of modesty.

Fact is that women are far more likely to be the victims of sexual aggression, and cultural norms re modesty reflect that fact.

I don't think it would be really necessary to create separate facilities for each "flavor" of difference. There is already a lot of reasons to have one "separate" facility in major venues - for example, in our local municipal pool, there is a men's, a woman's, and a "family" change-room - the last a response to people with children who are too young to go into the gender-appropriate facilities on their own, but too old not to make others uncomfortable for various reasons (no man really wants to be in a shower room with a seven year old girl). There are other reasons for usoing a separate facility - crippling shyness, for example. Being trans would just be another. 

[Valmy]

What I mean by that, insisting on gender segregated showers seems to rest on the implied assumption that boys are natural sexual abusers who are unable to control themselves when in the presence of naked girls - so, in a sense this also lifts responsibility from them and puts them on others (the girls, the school, the environment). So when they finally are in a situation where they have access to vulnerable women, they rape them.

Perhaps instead we should be teaching the kids self control.

It could just as easily be to prevent tons of completely consensual sexual acting out by teenagers in a public place. That might be awkward.

As far as self control well we have a long and proud tradition of abstinence based sexual education. That has a great track record.

[Razgovory]

Alright but that has nothing to do with this scenario. The only people involved here are the ones who identify with one of the two possible gender identities. Even if we made a few more I presume these trans-girls would still be trans-girls.

Yes, and that is exactly the problem - the trans-girl in question (and the administrative authorities) are insisting that her identification with one of the two possible categories is a human right that is violated by "special" treatment, presumably because this singles her out as "different".

Thing is, she *is* "different". No amount of pretending is going to make a person with a dick into a "girl" for all purposes, just the same as every other girl born without one. Anyone looking at her naked (like in a locker room) will know, at once, that she is "different". 

This isn't the school's fault, it is the fault of cruel nature, that evidently gave her a mind that didn't match her body. To my mind, it makes less sense to pretend it isn't so, and makes more sense to accommodate that difference by admitting that not everyone fits neatly into "a" or "b".

Replace gender identity with race and you just made a great argument for segregated showers.

And you could replace "gender identity" with "ability to taste aspartame" and mean nothing.  I'm not sure why gays and lesbians have hitched their wagon to transsexualism.  It certainly doesn't help their cause.  It's not much like homosexuality and is considered a certified mental illness.  Sex changes are unsatisfactory solution due to the high number of people who express unhappiness after having the procedure.  It's much closer to Body integrity identity disorder then being gay.

[Malthus]

What I mean by that, insisting on gender segregated showers seems to rest on the implied assumption that boys are natural sexual abusers who are unable to control themselves when in the presence of naked girls - so, in a sense this also lifts responsibility from them and puts them on others (the girls, the school, the environment). So when they finally are in a situation where they have access to vulnerable women, they rape them.

Perhaps instead we should be teaching the kids self control.

The problem isn't the actual occurrence of sexual violence (I assume it is very unlikely to happen in a public facility filled with people), but the fear of it on the part of the vulnerable, which has led to a culture of female modesty.

I agree in an ideal world this should not exist and no-one should feel such concerns. But it strikes me as a trifle harsh to force women to 'get over it' and shower with men in the name of that ideal.

[Valmy]

The problem isn't the actual occurrence of sexual violence (I assume it is very unlikely to happen in a public facility filled with people), but the fear of it on the part of the vulnerable, which has led to a culture of female modesty.

I agree in an ideal world this should not exist and no-one should feel such concerns. But it strikes me as a trifle harsh to force women to 'get over it' and shower with men in the name of that ideal.

It would only happen in a few extremely progressive communities over here anyway. What is needed is a standard even bumfuck Texas can do to accommodate trans kids since their school board will likely vote in the uni-sex locker room sometime after they stop teaching creationism.