Transgender rights taking priority over sanity, safety

The Los Angeles Times editorial board recently printed an op-ed in which it noted that "The rights of transgender people to act in accordance with their gender identity is fortunately gaining acceptance in many corners — including at the U.S. Supreme Court, which just last week handed a major victory to transgender students seeking to use the school bathrooms of their choice."  Fortunately, indeed.  Everyone should have the right to use the bathroom of his choice.  A 250-lb. bearded man who plays varsity football and sports a penis and a scrotum who says he is a female has the God-given right, granted by his Creator, to share bathrooms and locker rooms with budding young teenage girls, right?

Right, according to the L.A. Times editorial board.  In fairness, the Times op-ed did admit that "the fracas over a transgender woman [sic — referring to a man] using the clothing-optional women's area of a Koreatown spa is more complicated than it might seem," in reference to the recent appearance of a naked transgender "woman" with male genitalia in the women's area of the nearby Wi Spa.

Actually, this is not complicated at all: the "transgender woman" should never have been allowed into that area...period.  Placating one man who thinks he is a woman at the expense of making countless real women uncomfortable is not a rational approach to the issue.

The Times magnanimously admitted that "everyone who feels uncomfortable in such scenarios" is not necessarily "a bigot."  What insight!  What tolerance!  What empathy!  They gave the example of "women who have been through personal experiences such as sexual assault who might find such a situation intimidating" and also allowed that "[i]t could go against the convictions and traditions of observant Muslims and Jews, who have a conservative or orthodox interpretation of gender norms and might themselves feel marginalized for their traditionalist beliefs."  You think?

Yet the Times' would-be opinion-shapers went on to aver that "it is clear where the rights in this matter land.  Everyone — transgender customers, members of every faith and women who are upset by the sight of penises — has the right to use the spa and other public accommodations."

Catch that?  The editorial board of the pre-eminent newspaper in the second largest city in the United States just said that women who are upset by the sight of other women's penises should just suck it up...their feelings, that is.  This is the mother of all oxymorons, one that could be uttered only by morons.

Not content to leave bad enough alone, the board added, "[N]o one has an absolute right to feel comfortable all the time.  People have a right to use the spa, but that doesn't include with it a guarantee that they all will feel at ease with everything they see.  Anti-discrimination laws stand for the principle that all are welcome, whether we are comfortable or not."  Surely, the same tolerance then applies to students on college campuses.  There is no need for "safe spaces" if no one has an absolute right to feel comfortable all the time.  All should be welcome on campus, conservatives included, no?

The op-ed noted that "[t]his doesn't solve the issue of where offended people go if they want a group experience in keeping with their religious traditions."  One might suggest a church, but so many Christian churches in the West have been victimized by arson in recent years that it may be difficult for a person to find one still intact.

One might attend church to seek the truth, which is probably why so many are being looted and destroyed.  The left detests the truth.  And one can see why.  I may wish to be a woman or identify as an astronaut/a goat/the Eiffel Tower, but that doesn't mean I am any of those things.

To comment, you can find the MeWe post for this article here.