That Transgendered Individuals Should Use the Bathroom They Identify With

Kelnius

I’d like to thank cooldudebro for this challenge, it’s a fascinating one since it’s clearly been lost before by LucasTheLlama to this very challenger. But, with all due respect, I feel that the argument failed to elucidate on certain facts which will confirm that the affirmative case, “That Transgendered Individuals ShouldUse the Bathroom They Identify With” is the correct one.

But I’m not here to dig up old hatchets or to pick up where the last debate left off, this is a different debate, and I will treat it with fresh eyes and a fresh mind, so that we can begin anew, and I hope that not only my debate partner, but particular anyone reading this debate for themselves does the same. So, enough with the preamble.

I like to start by defining terms some.

For the sake of this debate, a “Transgendered Individuals” will be:
 Persons that have been diagnosed with gender dysphoria, such that they feel compelled to transition so as to identify as the gender that is non-correlative to the sex they were assigned at birth.

And “the Bathroom They Identify With” will refer to:
 One of either of the division of toilet facilities divided to separate male and female patrons, which is designed to accommodate persons of the sex that correlates with a transgendered individual’s identified gender.

As for “should use” that relates to my Burden of Proof, which as per the rules, I outline as follows: “To prove my case, I must provide evidence that, by not permitting Transgendered Individuals to use the Bathroom They Identify With, we cause greater risk, upset, disharmony and suffering than we would otherwise. Meaning that, to avoid this risk, upset, disharmony and suffering we should concede the affirmative case for this debate.”

 There are a couple of reasons I believe I can meet this burden of proof, but my first point is that It causes distress to the Transgendered Individual.
 
 According to a fact sheet from the American Psychiatric Association (Publishing division) “[gender dysphoria] causes clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning.” ^[1] I chose this factsheet as it refers to the DSM-V, the leading authority in mental health and psychology. This factsheet explains that gender non-conformity is not in and of itself a mental illness, but the stress suffered due to aspects of a person that do not correspond with their identified gender is. In fact, a transgendered person can live and function as a neurotypical member of society, if their gender dysphoria is treated. And there are available treatments, according to that same factsheet “treatment options for this condition include counseling, cross-sex hormones, gender reassignment surgery, and social and legal transition to the desired gender.”.^[1]

So, to begin with, by refusing to allow transgendered individuals to use the bathroom appropriate to their identified gender, we hinder their ability to be a fully functional and mentally well member of society.

My second point is that, after transition, making transgenderered individuals use the bathroom which is notthe Bathroom which they Identify with causes distress in other people that use those bathrooms.

When a Transgendered Individual transitions from the gender associated with the sex they were assigned at birth to the gender they identify with, this process involves several steps. As explained by Transhealth.org (a website created for the Transgender Health Information Program), transgender transition “refers to the process during which trans people may change their gender expression and/or bodies to reflect their gender, including changes in physical appearance (hairstyle, clothing), behaviour (mannerisms, voice, gender roles), identification (name, pronoun, legal details), and/or medical interventions (hormone therapy, gender-affirming surgery).”^[2]
 Transgendered people, whether just beginning to transition or having transitioned for months, seek to look like their identified gender, and do all they can to achieve that. In fact, as I’ve previously explained, they can suffer from dysphoria if they do not present an outward expression of their identity. So, they will look like the gender they identify with, even if their biology does not.
 We do look at the people around us in the bathroom, but only to navigate our way to the facilities, and I do accept that some transgendered women may have a prominent adam’s apple, and some transgendered men may have feminine hips. However, people going to the bathroom won’t be playing “spot the difference” with other patrons, people enter bathrooms with a goal – to evacuate their bowels and bladders. If, at a glance, someone appears to be the same gender, they will blend in.
 If, however, we do as the negative would imply, and section these people to the bathroom that is not the one they identify with, someone with a miniskirt, long hair, make-up and stockings were forced to enter the men’s bathroom, it _would_ cause distraction. Just as someone with a beard, muscles, men’s boots and a deep voice would cause a commotion by entering the women’s bathroom.

 
 And this would happen, because it’s how transgendered individuals transition, by dressing to fit their gender. To expect otherwise would cause the same distress I mentioned earlier regarding dysphoria.

But more than anything else, the part of this debate I do not understand is the notion that transgendered people would cause some form of disquiet in the bathroom. As I've already mentioned, at a glance most people wouldn't even know they were in the bathroom. The only difference between a transgendered person and a cisgendered person would be their genitals. But, in a bathroom setting, you wouldn't see a transgendered person's genitals. After all, women's bathrooms are comprised entirely of stalls and whilst men's bathrooms do have urinals, due to mechanical issues regarding the female urethra transgendered men would not have easy use of urinals and so would need to use the stall. Even ignoring that, from a psychological standpoint, transgendered people would not want to have others see their genitals, as it would trigger their dysphoria.

I can see no reason why allowing a transgendered person to use the bathroom appropriate to their gender would cause any concern; and I can see several reasons why if you didn't it would cause a great deal of distress and confusion.

So, for those reasons, I submit that Transgendered Individuals should use the Bathroom they Identify with. But, this is just my opening statement. I have more that could be said, but they are contingent upon what my debate partner has to say, and as I said, I am not here to write a sequel to that first debate, so I would not want to just assume his point of view and argue against a phantom opponent when my actual opponent deserves the right to speak for himself.
Thank you for taking the time to read this, and I look forward to the negative side's opening arguments.
 

[1]http://www.dsm5.org/documents/gender%20dysphoria%20fact%20sheet.pdf (author's note: Caution, Initiates Download)

[2]http://transhealth.phsa.ca/trans-101/glossary

cooldudebro

In the United States, problems have already surfaced from allowing a man who calls himself ‘transgender’ to enter a woman’s area. As an example, in 2012 a college in Washington state decided it would not prevent a 45-year-old man who presents himself as a transgender “female” from lounging naked in a women’s locker room in an area frequented by girls as young as six. So “Colleen” Francis exposed his genitalia through the glass window in a sauna to teenage girls on a high school swim team. But police told one outraged mother that the university could not bar the biological male from the premises.

Jack Fonseca of Campaign Life Coalition told LifeSiteNews that it “didn’t take a brain surgeon to predict that letting men into women’s bathrooms and other private spaces would eventually lead to sexual assaults. I wish we didn’t have to say ‘I told you so,’ but Ontario’s party leaders and MPPs were warned that the transsexual ‘Bathroom Bill’ endangered women and needed to be defeated. Of course this lunatic law could only make it easier for rapists and peeping toms to prey on female victims while masquerading as ‘transgendered’.”

Calling for a repeal of the law, Fonseca warned that “If this dangerous law is not repealed, we will only see a rise in male predators attacking women in spaces where they deserve the right to privacy like bathrooms, change rooms and women’s shelters.” (2)

David Takami with the Seattle Parks and Recreation Department said a man arrived at the Evans Pool in Greenlake Monday afternoon and paid to use the lap pool.

Takami said the man then entered the women’s locker room and took off his shirt in front of a local girls swimming team, which had just finished practicing. Several parents and other women using the locker room became alarmed and alerted pool staff.

When staff members confronted the man, he left the locker room and went swimming.

When he was done, Takami said the man went back into the women’s locker room and was again asked to leave. The man resisted, telling staff members the law had changed and he now had the right to use the locker room of his choice, according to Takami.

The man was likely referring to a new rule created by the Washington State Human Rights Commission that requires buildings open to the public to allow transgender people to use restrooms and locker rooms of the gender they identify with.

The man left the pool and staff members didn’t call police.

A similar incident occurred in Olympia in 2012, when a 45-year-old biological male who calls himself Colleen Francis lounged naked in a women’s locker room, in an area frequented by girls as young as six. According to the police report an eyewitness stated, “There were girls 6 to 18 years of age and they were not used to seeing individuals in situations like this.” But the facility gave him the right to continue using its facilities as he wished.

Those who oppose adding gender identity to non-discrimination ordinances and civil rights legislation have long warned the ordinances would be used specifically for that purpose." (3)

Should young women and men (for the reverse happening) have to deal with the constant risk of being raped just to fulfill the desire of less than .3% of the population? (4)