It should be no surprise that "Autumn" Sandeen is again ranting about how men should have the right to invade the women's room. He is bringing up the issue this time by implying that it is a civil rights issue comparable to Jim Crow laws. This, of course, should not be surprising since Mr. Sandeen sees himself as the transgender Martin Luther King, Jr.
The problem is, his views on this issue tend to prove that Sandeen is not a woman, trans or otherwise. You see, in addition to the very real danger having men free to invade women's restrooms poses, there is another issue that is totally lost on men like Sandeen.
The women's room is, for real women, one of their very few places where they can find sanctuary from men. And, of course, men like Sandeen want to invade this space. They cannot comprehend that their might be legitimate reasons they are not welcome. Ironically, it is the right to privacy, that is often cited in issues like gay rights (sex between consenting adults in private), abortion (the Roe v. Wade ruling is based on a right to privacy), and such. For women, having a right to exclude men from the women's room is a privacy issue.
The simple question, that has to be answered, is does one group's rights override another group's. In some cases, the answer is simple. Clearly, the rights of various races overrode the rights of a single race with regards to Jim Crow laws. While the laws were primarily aimed at African-Americans, they could be extended to exclude others. There were solid arguments for eliminating racial discrimination, not the least of which is that race is inherent, and not a matter of choice or behavior. Another good argument is that there was not a legitimate basis for such laws, other than simple prejudice. Some people did not like having to share space with people of another race. There was not rational basis for such a choice, so it had to be denied legal status.
Clearly, we do need to make provision for those who are legitimately transsexual, as this is an actual medical condition. But, we do not need to pander to the hobby of the transvestite, and the delusions of men like Sandeen. As I have suggested before, for most transsexuals, this is not a problem. I have never been challenged in the women's room. In fact, it is not really a problem for those who actually make an effort to credibly present as a woman. But I also waited until I was sure I would not cause a disruption in the women's room before I actually made a practice of using one. I started out going to ones that were not heavily trafficked. Then, as I became more confident, I would pretty much go in, use it, and get out as discretely as possible. Then, finally, when I knew I would not have any problems, I just joined the rest of the women in going, and when appropriate checked my hair and make up, and even rested in the lounge area some provide.
But, I did not see the women's room as something I had an absolute right to invade, nor did I see it as something of a challenge to be conquered. I got no thrill out of being there. It was simply a part of living my life, and once I was sure that my presence would not upset others, I moved on.
Sadly, those like Mr. Sandeen are more interested in deconstructing gender, destroying the binary, and otherwise eliminating societal standards that they simply don't like. And they don't care how many women are hurt in the process, as long as the boys in the transgender club get their wayA
Now, if we apply these legal standards to transgender males invading women's spaces, things begin to fall a bit short. Even if we set aside the risk of improper behavior (the fact that it is currently rare does not mean it cannot or will not increase as opportunities increase) we still have the privacy issue. Now, most women, including myself, are very uncomfortable with the idea of sharing the women's room, and other women's spaces, with men. I have no problem with someone who is a valid, surgically tracked transsexual who is undergoing the real life test being in the women's room, but I do have objections to crossdressers, and other transgender males invading my privacy.
Now, another issue that much be considered is whether or not transgender behavior should be protected by law. Well, it fails right off the bat. It is often only behavior. Clearly, a transvestite (or crossdresser if we are going to be politically correct) does not have to crossdress. They are not acting on the basis of an inherent characteristic. They may become anxious if they do not crossdress, but there is nothing that arguably justifies their imposing this behavior on others to the extent that they should be allowed to violate the rights of women. So, clearly, transvestites should not be allowed to invade the ladies room.
The next group that has to be considered is full-time crossdressers. This would include men like Sandeen, who has made it clear that he has no desire to actually change his sex, though he does want to force society to pander to his delusions and call him a female legally. Now, I wonder how the vast majority of women would feel about Mr. Sandeen being present in the women's room. His behavior is hardly female, and he is clearly male brained. Personally, I would not be comfortable sharing a rest room with him. I imagine I am hardly alone in feeling that way.
And let's consider the larger implications of the sort of laws that Sandeen others push. They are not content to have laws that address the issue of transgender people in bathrooms. They want laws that are so broad that they would effectively open up the women's room to anyone, provided that they simply make the claim that during the period that they were in the women's room they were identifying as a female. It would not matter how they were dressed, whether they were clean shave, or sporting a full beard, or whether they had a feminine hairstyle, or a crew cut. They simply have to say, even if only momentarily, I FEEL LIKE A WOMAN. and as if by magic, they are allowed to legally enter the women's room. Clearly, unless it could be shown that they engaged in some over the top behavior (i.e. they raped or killed someone, or perhaps groped a woman) they would be immune from challenge.
It would not matter how much their presence upset women. After all, we would just be unreasonably prejudiced. Of course, as I have pointed out, Sandeen is not a woman. The feelings, needs, and security of women is not his concern. All he cares about is the alleged "rights" of him and other men who engage in the same behavior as he does.