The Point is Not That Transgenders Might be Predatory

trans bathroomsPart of the joy of defending disinterested citizens from the wolves of the always-on political machine of modern-government is untwisting the machine language used to snooker the sleeping giant. A great example is the recent kerfuffle over the politics of transgenders using public bathrooms, and not just in public schools.

Their argument is simple. Transgenders have “rights” and how dare you deny them. What that really means is that if someone has a penis, society must allow them to pee in public restrooms next to our wives, sisters, and daughters.

Just quote Helen Reddy and you are in.

‘Knock-Knock’

“What’s the password”

‘Helen sent me.’

This only works because the same people who brought you the War on Women (progressives, feminists, the Democrat Party, and the media) are trying to convince you that ‘gender’ is not static and therefore subject to change in a Wheel of Fortune Pat I’d like to by a gender-vowel-free-for-all sort of way, and who are you, or I, or they, to contradict that?

“Spin again!”

So, in the tradition of Jeff Foxworthy’s “you might be a redneck,” if you dare to question the motivations of someone with a penis trying to gain access to the ladies’ bathroom, …you might be a bigot.

You might be, but that’s not the point.

They may accuse you of presuming that all transgenders are sexual predators.

You might think that, and you’d be wrong, but again, that is not the point.

The point is not that transgenders might be sexual predators, it is that sexual predators WILL claim to be transgender.

Could a truly self-identifying transgender person be a sexual predator? Of course. They could also be a fabulous tenor or great with animals or an amazing mechanic, a-sexual, or indifferent, all of which have nothing to do with the threat being blessed by the idiot-left and their cultural pall-bearers when they insist that “men” who claim to feel like women have a “right” to use the ladies’ bathroom.

And yes, it is about that.

There are a great deal more sexual predators (by orders of magnitude) than there are self-identifying transgenders. These predators will use that “loop-hole” as a way to gain access to girls and women in places where they could or may be more vulnerable.

Ignoring this reality makes you many things, not the least of which is pro-rape. Pro rape-rape, to paraphrase Wookie Goldberg.

Not convinced of the risk? Then you must immediately abandon any notion that college-age men are pre-disposed to sexual predation, the foundation of the left-wing-feminist-campus-rape-inquisition. You can’t have it both ways, not even in utopia.

If men are always looking for opportunities to take advantage of women on campus (commit sexual assault), then men must be looking for opportunities to commit sexual assault everywhere else, which means they should not then be given unlimited access to women in public restrooms under any circumstance.

So which is it?  Are men a predatory threat or not?

In the real world, not all men are sexual predators but some men are, so your opposition to men using the ladies room is not about denying manufactured rights to a fraction of a fraction of the population. It is about defending the right of hundreds of millions of girls and women to feel safe in their persons and property in these public spaces.

Something has to give. If history is any guide it will be common sense. Contradictory narratives will not be a barrier to the progressive agenda, and women will be forced to change their behavior or accept the risk and the consequences.

And yes, some men will get shot by women in ladies’ bathrooms. Lawyers are waiting by the phone.

 

Note: there is plenty of room to debate how private property owners (retail, etc.,) could responsibly address any actual need without the use of government force in either direction. I am leaving that discussion, if you wish to take it up, to comments.