Seriously? What does this expression even mean? Gay people are still male or female. Straight people are male or female. Trans people have biological male or female parts. The only people exempt from this classification of male/female are hermaphrodites. In our quest for inclusion of all has our sexual identity become "it", rather than the sex we were born with? Isn't that what neutral implies?
I'm not against homosexuality. I understand how you could be attracted to the same sex as yourself. Transgender? This one I don't understand - not that I'll be an asshole simply because you're different. I do my damnedest to treat all people with respect. However, no matter how much I read about this issue, transgender seems to be more of a psychological confusion than an actual identity with the opposite sex. Bruce Jenner. Need I say more???
That brings me to the current hot topic in Alberta -- the need our ridiculous NDP government feels to force everyone to accept boys and girls changing and using the washroom together based on gender identity. Do I understand the premise for this policy is inclusion? Yep. Do I agree every child should feel included? Yep. However, I think we can all agree we are born male or female.
This policy also states students and staff must use "gender neutral" pronouns when addressing people. Mr. and Mrs. will no longer be acceptable if said person doesn't think he/she is a he/she. If a teacher has gender identity issues, "Hey, You, I need help!" is acceptable and respectful? I don't think so. But, hey, what does a backwards thinking person like me know?
It will also become acceptable for that boy - who thinks he's a girl today (trans fluid) - to come into the change room with your daughters and strip down. Most people are more sexually open than generations past, however, this is a very uncomfortable situation for teenage girls who identify as girls. According to this policy, my daughter must be the one to leave the room if she's uncomfortable. Self-induced exclusion is still exclusion. Explain this: if each and every girl leaves the change room because one boy -- who identifies as a girl -- decides to change with them, how will this person feel? Probably more excluded than they did before this policy was put into play, and they were the ones using a separate change area. Better or worse psychologically? I'd say far worse.
With this policy, we've also just opened the door for blatant sexual harassment to occur at older grade levels. Teens are very bold. To realistically think the boys won't go into the girls wash/change room simply to sneak a peek as a practical joke -- or vice versa -- is naive in the extreme. They merely have to claim they are unsure of the sex they identify with; therefore, they have the to right to go into this change room. Zero repercussions. Is this what we want? Sexually disrespectful kids? We often spout about the lack of respect in society's younger crowd. This policy will create more...
I also believe it will cause confusion for younger children who simply cannot understand this type of difference. I can hear a child in grade two coming home now, "Mommy, lil Jill peed in our bathroom today, and she came out of the stall with her penis showing. Teacher says he identifies as a girl but he has a penis. Am I a boy now???"
The policy states over and over that schools must keep each child safe and comfortable while implementing it. That each child has the "right" to feel safe and comfortable in the school environment. When a child simply has to identify with the sex opposite of their biological sex -- without having had medical/psychological or parental help first -- there is no way this will protect anyone's child. There really is only one solution to inclusion for this type of issue: individual washrooms and change rooms, such as the ones we have at home.
Personally, this policy completely stomps on each and every child's right to privacy and throws society back into the stone age. Enter the Jian Gomeshi's of the world...
No comments:
Post a Comment