To what end?
I read one blogpost that said that Christian people just need to open their minds with regard to transgenderness (is that a word? Pansexual is a word so let’s make transgenderness a word too). How far do you want us to open our minds? We’ve been told by some scientists and Lady Gaga that homosexuals are born that way. Even if you were born gay, you still choose how to dress yourself. So if living as the opposite gender is a choice how far do we need go to accommodate people’s choices? How far do you want us to open our minds? And if you demand that we open our minds to accommodate people’s choices then I demand that you contemplate a world where everyone’s choices need to be accommodated.
Here’s a link to a video (here’s written story as well) about 52-year Paul Wolscht who lives his life as an six-year old girl. If you peel back his rhetoric for a second and you will see that this where we are heading once we accommodate people’s choices in order for them to be happy. The narrator states that Paul is not a cross-dresser, but discovered he was was transgender—which is a person whose gender is different than the sex they were assigned at birth. Wait, what? Different than what was assigned at birth? Is there proof, for this? I’m sorry, but you will have to prove to us that this is not just a choice? Is there a test? Is there a brain scan that peers into someone’s brain and shows that they are actually a woman and not a man? Does their DNA show double X chromosomes instead of an XY? If there is no proof, then it is a choice and if it is a choice then how far do we have to go to support this choice?
So again I ask you where is the end? If I can be a woman, can I be black? Can I be Asian or Hispanic? Can I be a monkey or a dog? Where does it end?
You can’t have it both ways
In the video about Paul he said that he would have guys come over to his house wanting to try on his clothes. At one point he described how surreal it was for there to be a 300-pound man with a goatee asking if he could kiss him while wearing one of his dresses. But wait I thought you were a six-year old girl named Stefoknee. Isn’t that man kissing you committing child rape?
Let’s just Bruce the biker gets picked up the cops and is questioned about his whereabouts.
Cop: Where were you last night?
Bruce: I was with Stefoknee at her house.
Cop: Did you have sex with Stefoknee?
Bruce: Yes
Cop: How old is she?
Bruce: She’s 6, no wait, she’s 52, no wait, she’s, I mean he’s 52.
Paul can’t have it both ways. Either he is a six-year girl or he’s a 52-year-old man. He can’t demand that we treat him how he feels only when it is convenient for him, that’s not how life works. Otherwise I would be a woman when it came time for my annual fitness test or if I wanted to apply for a small business loan or when I wanted to compete in sports.
Safety is paramount
Many of the opponents of the transgender bathroom policy cite safety as their biggest concern. They don’t want their daughters and wives in a public restroom with some dude dressed in women’s clothes. Proponents of this policy argue that this concern is not valid because not all transgender people are pedophiles and rapists. Okay fine, let’s concede that point. In fact, let’s go one step further let’s say that all transgender people in America are fine citizens who have no ill intent. Safety is still a concern, and here’s why.
I would venture to guess that 99% of high school boys have at some time been curious to know what it is like to go into the girl’s locker room at school. I was a high school boy and I wondered. I’m not a pervert, but I sure as heck had hormones and I liked girls in high school. But here’s the thing, I didn’t go into the girl’s locker room because I knew it was wrong and I had enough respect the girls in my high school to give them their privacy.
Now imagine a world where a boy can choose to go into the girl’s locker room simply because he feels like being a girl that day. How about the locker room at your gym or college? Forget all the well-meaning transgenders who are trying to find happiness, but now you have opened the door to scrupulous people who don’t mind exploiting a situation for their benefit and other people’s harm.
This is why people are upset, it’s not because of hate or bigotry, it’s because they realize that there are bad people in this world who want to do bad things. It’s true that a little blue sign may not stop someone from committing a crime, but when we relax social norms it gives the predators a place to operate. And trust me there are predators in this world.
The numbers don’t add up
According to this New York Times Article there is an estimated 700,000 transgender people in America or .3% of the U.S. population. The article also says that since 1936 only 135,000 people have officially changed their name and sex with the Social Security Administration. So here’s my take. A person’s happiness should be subservient to the greater good. If what makes a person happy puts other people at risk shouldn’t that person abstain from the behavior so as to not put others in danger?
Again, if you are asking me to not be so narrow-minded then I implore you to think about the ramifications of accommodating everyone’s choices in order to make them happy. Do we really as a society want to go to that rabbit hole? What happens when people ask to the lower the age of consent from 18 to 16 or to 14? What if a man 40-year old man lives as a 12-year old girl and wants to wants to have sex with a 12-year old boy? At what point do we devolve into looking at people as either the penetrator or the penetrated with no question of age or gender? That is where we are heading if we don’t change course.
The demise of our society will not be guns or the environment; the demise of the American society will be when we exchange moral absolutes for moral relatives.
Leftovers, enjoy
L. Kyle
