Instead of assuming that some level of government can make this decision for all of society, there is the alternative solution of defending the right of the property owner (of the bathroom in question) to make this decision. After all, someone actually paid for the bathroom in order to satisfy his preference. And there are precedents.
Mises.Ca: The current tempest in a teapot among the “rights” advocates is that no one should be restricted from using the gender specific bathroom of his choice. The “rights” advocates want to use the police power of the state to ensure this outcome. The federal government has come down on the side of the “rights” advocates, with regional and local governments sometimes taking the opposite side. Once again, Americans are being told that there are only two sides to this issue, and both sides claim to defend what is proper.
But are there only two sides? Perhaps we are looking at this issue in the wrong way.
The BIGGER problem, the 800 ton gorrelephant in the room, is those areas that would be very difficult to be make solo and private, such as locker and shower rooms. Especially for public schools.
Just put a 12 foot python in every toilet.
Property rights are passé.
izlamo delenda est …
This writer makes a very valid point.
Several years ago the New York City Council outlawed ALL smoking in ALL restaurants and bars. I always thought that this issue called out for a more fair way of address.
Why not let the individual restaurant and bar owners decide whether smoking should be allowed? A placard in the window could indicate whether the establishment was smoving or non-smoking. Customers could choose according to personal preference, and everybody could be happy.
But nanny government.