This past week, the Trump administration rolled back an Obama-era federal order at schools that directed them to allow transgender students to use whatever bathroom they pleased; the so-called “Trannies in the Bathrooms” issue of last year. Citing the complexity of the issues involved, the Trump admin offered no replacement for the guideline, and today we are going to talk about why that was precisely the right thing to do and set some guidelines of our own.
The Fed versus the States
Any Constitutionalist worth his salt, and I know we have more than a few here, knows that the answer to “Should the Federal Government do/be involved with X?” is almost always “no.” The USA was not conceived as a monarchy or a centralized government; it was a collection of colonies, started by different countries and commercial ventures, that, after a couple attempts, made a Constitution that preserved the rights of self-governance that the states already had. Basically, if it’s not interstate commerce, money, or military, the Federal government should have no say in the matter.
The Civil Rights Act, among others, has been used to short circuit the states’ rights idea of this nation’s government and has allowed the Federal government to harshly come down on areas of the country that have not fit the definition of proper civil rights treatment as seen by the country as a whole. This has been seen mainly for the benefit of black people after the Civil War and during the 1960s, and later, the gays.
However, the gay rights fight has been fought and is done; now we’re onto the fight for transsexual rights. The typical method for legitimization of an oppressed sex-related group is to politically pressure the psychiatrists to remove your disorder from the next version of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), and then you can cite that as your approval to “be that thing.” This happened in the 70s for gays, and a couple years ago for transsexuals, but the jury is still very much out on the latter, both in medicine, and in society.
This is why there should not be a Federal edict on the issue. The USA is large, and we do not need liberal, urban power centers dictating what parts of the country, thousands of miles away physically, and millions of miles away philosophically, should be doing. This is an issue you leave to the states to decide.
Why different governments in the states are important
I think we, unfortunately, have passed the point of learning from our opponents, and them from us. Nobody wants to change their views on anything, and you usually fall into the conservative, religious, small government, individualist camp, or the progressive, atheist, statist, collectivist camp and nothing anyone can say can change that.
While that is disappointing, one of the many safeguards we have in the American government is that there are 50 states to choose from; if you don’t like the laws of the one you are in, you can move to one that is more to your liking. The states with the really big cities, the ones furthest removed from their frontier roots, and the ones noted for their progressivism have become the gathering places for those with leftist views, and, judging by the electoral map of the last year, everywhere else is on the right.
Progressivism , with its big-government, high-taxes, many laws regulation on peoples’ lives, is causing economic issues in the blue states as people and corporations leave. Similar to a bad workplace, if you cannot make your voice heard and you cannot abide the culture, you pack up and head to greener fields.
The difficulty with this, obviously, lies in when the left short-circuits the natural ways of the American system and claims that civil rights or something else allows them to strong-arm the Federal government into enforcing an edict on the states. You cannot leave the Federal government behind and still remain on American soil, and this is key to liberal politics. You cannot get someone to willingly accept something they know is shit; you have to spring it on everyone at once before they know it is shit by seeing it in a neighboring state.
And it IS shit
Being a transsexual, or a transgender, screws up society for the rest of us. I can get someone being gay. A gay man may like other men, and that’s not the natural way of things, and it may or may not be sometimes linked to being a pedophile, but he and the rest of us can agree that he is a man. I’ve got gay friends; we’re cool with it, and it’s not a big deal.
However, a transsexual who was a man, had surgery, or is intending to have surgery, to become a woman will always actually be a man. All his DNA will be male, and every bit of his body, including the parts he had surgery done on, will be male. So, what you end up with is a surgically altered man taking part in a woman’s role in society, and there are a whole lot more trans-women (meaning dudes that have a dong-ectomy, to coin a term) than trans-men.
Why that is depends on your philosophical views. The progs over at Quora state everything from male gender bias to being easier for a women to play being a man without surgery, and other reasons, while we here at Return Of Kings have posited that, with the cash and prizes available to women in today’s society, who the hell would voluntarily want to become a guy and get, according to Tim Allen, the same two choices we have always had: work or prison.
The real problem is that it is fucking things up. Men, including penis-less men, are going to be better at sports than women, and if you let a man be a trans-woman and compete, he/she/it is going to win. If society regards a penis-less man as a woman, which is does, you’re going to run into them on the dating scene, and they may not tell you what they are. Since the Bangkok Handshake, in additional to being politically incorrect, only works on transvestites and not post-surgery transsexuals, we even wrote our own guide on this a few years ago.
We need to stop enabling this
Rarely is a solution black and white. I’m an engineer, not a shrink, but I know, in my trade, there is a certain “middle” you take in things. Do you need some precision to make a machine? Sure. Does a hammer need to be as precisely machined as a nuclear reactor? No; there’s a middle ground. Does a machine need some periodic maintenance so it does not die a spectacular death someday soon? Yes. Do you need to daily buff polish, touch up its paint and tell it nice things so it doesn’t die on you? Of course not, there’s a middle ground.
I would posit that the same is true for mental disorders, that there’s a middle ground. Starting with monogamous marriage, we can go to sex outside of marriage, then polygamy. After that, there’s being gay, being bi, and being transgender and all the 87 Facebook genders. Moving further along, there’s pedophilia, bestiality, robot love, and even necrophilia. Where precisely does one draw the line on what is a legit sexual preference and what is a mental illness?
My personal take on it is that you are what your hardware is, and you use that bathroom. It is all too easy to claim that you’re a pre-op tranny and get a free pass into the girls’ room; if you’re serious about it, go get your dick cut off so we don’t have to worry about you raping any little girls, and then you can go use the girls’ room all you want.
Like many progressive ideals, sensible people need to simply hold up their hand, let out a “whoa, there, Skippy,” like you’re stopping a kid on a runaway Big Wheel, and let the leftists that want to let anyone be whatever they feel like that day know that not all ideas are good ideas, and they might just want to assume all of theirs are bad until proven otherwise.