The Absurdity of “Gender Identity”
By Laurence M. Vance
Due to the ongoing transgender controversies at public schools around the country, the U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, and the U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights, have joined forces to issue a “Dear Colleague Letter on Transgender Students.”
The letter begins:
In recent years, we have received an increasing number of questions from parents, teachers, principals, and school superintendents about civil rights protections for transgender students. Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (Title IX) and its implementing regulations prohibit sex discrimination in educational programs and activities operated by recipients of Federal financial assistance. This prohibition encompasses discrimination based on a student’s gender identity, including discrimination based on a student’s transgender status.
That “this prohibition encompasses discrimination based on a student’s gender identity, including discrimination based on a student’s transgender status” is, as far as I know, not yet enshrined in federal law. But let’s continue anyway.
Regarding schools receiving federal funds, the letter goes on to say:
As a condition of receiving Federal funds, a school agrees that it will not exclude, separate, deny benefits to, or otherwise treat differently on the basis of sex any person in its educational programs or activities unless expressly authorized to do so under Title IX or its implementing regulations.
Regarding the definition of the word “sex,” the letter explains:
The Departments treat a student’s gender identity as the student’s sex for purposes of Title IX and its implementing regulations. This means that a school must not treat a transgender student differently from the way it treats other students of the same gender identity. The Departments’ interpretation is consistent with courts’ and other agencies’ interpretations of Federal laws prohibiting sex discrimination.
And as it specifically concerns restrooms and locker rooms, the letter states:
A school may provide separate facilities on the basis of sex, but must allow transgender students access to such facilities consistent with their gender identity. A school may not require transgender students to use facilities inconsistent with their gender identity or to use individual user facilities when other students are not required to do so. A school may, however, make individual user options available to all students who voluntarily seek additional privacy.
But since “gender identity refers to an individual’s internal sense of gender,” and therefore has nothing to do with sex-change surgery, hormones, clothing, sexual orientation, body transformation, sexual practices, or even outward appearance—
Can someone identify as a senior citizen and collect Social Security?
Can someone identify as a resident of Colorado, Alaska, Washington, or Oregon and legally use marijuana recreationally?
Can someone identify as a resident of Missouri and only pay a 17-cents-per-pack tax on cigarettes?
Can someone identify as a college graduate and qualify for a job?
Can someone identify as a new parent and take advantage of a company’s paid family leave?
Can someone identify as a TSA agent and grope people in airports?
Can someone identify as an ex-con and be released from prison?
Can someone identify as a cop and seize cash from motorists?
Can someone identify as a NASCAR driver and disregard the speed limit?
Can someone identify as a minority and take advantage of a company’s Affirmative Action policy to land a good job?
Can someone identify as an unwed mother with three children and get a huge Earned Income Tax Credit?
Can someone identify as a resident of Seattle and get paid a minimum wage of $15 an hour?
Can someone identify as having an income below the poverty level and receive welfare benefits?
Can someone identify as a veteran and get a free or discounted meal on Veterans Day?
Can someone identify as a U.S. Air Marshall and board an airplane with a gun?
Can someone identify as a resident of a state where medical marijuana is legal and smoke a joint when he gets a headache?
Can someone identify as the president and have a hit list of people to be killed?
Can someone identify as a season ticket holder and get free access to Yankee games?
Can someone identify as a senior citizen and get a senior citizen discount?
Can someone identify as a child and take advantage of a “kids eat free” promotion at a restaurant?
If the answer to all of these things is no, then why should a boy be able to identify as a girl and use the girl’s restroom? Why isn’t that idea viewed as just as absurd as all the others I have mentioned?