The prime operative these days is that anything conservatism tries to conserve is tainted by Euro-normative patriarchy / sexism and racism, and thus ought not be conserved…. Funny how that works.
Intellectually I’m in a place where I’m OK some of this. Like, I’m fine with gay marriage cuz there’s a greater wisdom that says it’s wrong to expect the bible to forever define marriage in this country. And, the bible should no longer be used to cudgel the gays, who are not insignificant in the population. And that the whole thing is a tax issue where you ought not treat such a large part of the population disparately. We can accommodate modernity and cosmopolitanism there, and ought to.
The trans-bathroom movement lacks any sensibility like that.
IE, having biological gender defined bathrooms is not a remnant of malevolent Euro-normative sexism and homophobia. That ought to be laughable everywhere. It’s merely a function of accommodation made to classical modesty and discretion. Ya know, the fairer sex can have their own bathrooms where men not intrude. That’s not wrong.
Bigger thing is, such that this be upended, it’s a… contrivance.
You go a little 21st century Archie Bunker saying something like this, but…. Transgenderism ain’t a thing, not really, not when you’re talking way less than a million people who cross dress that do actually have chromosomes that align with their sex parts.
It’s a mental dysphoria. PC prevents acknowledgment of that, but to be real, that’s what it is… dysphoria of some type. When you have dysphorias you create coping mechanisms, which in this case is the false reality that you’re a woman. And fine, by the way. This particular dysphoria probably deserves no more assumption of weirdness than some of my own or some of the other common dysphoria’s you see in people. And live, let live baby.
Now, trans people probably do get a short end here insofar as society accommodates a lot of other common dysphorias, mostly in ways subtle I’d guess. But ya know, tough bananas. The number of people needing accommodation here does not justify a reinterpretation of bathroom rules.
This does not mean I’d like to see transgendered people subjected to criminal court proceedings for trespass etc when they use the wrong bathroom.
This does not mean if you are a restaurant in Minneapolis that you can’t have multi-sex bathrooms. Go right ahead.
I’m bewildered Target chooses to get into this fight when they don’t have to. They violate a rule of good commerce doing so. Not that the boycott will crush them, but they made people choose sides over their business… It was a virtue single to a particular clique, and they shouldn’t do that.
It’s just that whatever civil rights ground is being broken here does no positive societal good given the small amount of people being say ‘enfranchised’. The people being pissed off by subversion of the norm far outnumber them, and they’re not bigots for clinging to this conservative value that women use the ladies room and men do not.
And if that’s true then it would seem this movement’s purpose is almost singularly provocation rather than progress.
I would say I am regularly enlightened to the altruism and value of the various progressive movements, and am impressed as they keep winning. I remain dubious about this one, am dubious about the value in them winning it. Sometimes you don’t need to win.