This fucking guy...

I didn't really have a good title, so I just wrote my reaction to the article I am talking about today.

The Counterproductive Politicization of Transgender Rights. First off, this guy is a tool and despite what he says in the article I suspect he actually doesn't support the rights of transgendered individuals "From cradle to the grave".

I suppose I can give a brief overview of the article, basically it describes North Carolina's stupid as hell new law and the Obama administrations recent letter to schools clarifying its position on trans peoples rights and telling them that if they wanted funding, they will follow the guidelines set out, which are pretty comprehensive and useful. The writer of this article is opposed to the administrations guidelines, suggesting that the issue is now about politics rather than the concerns of the public. He references a lawyer who makes the argument that by saying that transgender people have a legal right to use the bathroom of their choice, this means that other people's rights to not be made uncomfortable are not longer something to be considered. Also something something politics, new rules will drive people away, etc.

First, the public as a whole is kind of stupid and its concerns should largely be ignored or at least taken with a grain of salt, paying attention to the concerns of the public gets us things like are stupid as hell restriction on gay people giving blood, or Donald Trump becoming a presidential candidate. The remaining points are interesting, and also stupid, because so far as I know no one has a legal right to be comfortable in all situations, especially when what is making them uncomfortable is something that they shouldn't care about in the slightest. Who gives a shit if the woman peeing next to you has a penis or a vagina? Why are you looking? That seems pretty creepy of you, perhaps you should stop. The fact is a trans person is vanishingly less likely to sexually assault your children than a teacher, or a priest, or a congressman.
The other concerns claimed in the article, privacy, modesty, discomfort, are either not relevant or not actually legal rights and can be dismissed as such.

The magic words of "states rights" is also mentioned, and as usual when the dread phrase comes up, it is in reference to preventing a class of people from having rights, so fuck that.

The article ends with a strange tone argument almost, that absolutist proclamations, such as enforcing guidelines, will end up driving people away from the cause, but this is also bullshit in pretty much every situation, it's bullshit when a man says it to women when they are angry about being treated as second class citizens, it was bullshit when the Equal Rights Act was passed in the 60's. If something is not given explicit treatment and legal protection, it will, not may, will, be abused or ignored until it does get them, we cannot trust the states to do the right thing, fucking hell a good chunk of them had to literally be shot at until they would stop treating people as property, we can't wait until everyone is comfortable, because if no one is pushed then they will have no reason to get used to anything.

This guy is a tool.