Discriminating against the majority

  • Page Views 4634
  • The first time I stepped into a café where the bathrooms are unisex, I felt very uncomfortable. I grew up with two brothers, but they are relatives, and I had to share the bathroom with two other siblings aside from them. The thought of using a bathroom that was pre-occupied previously by a man did not agree with me, but then again, that is a personal preference. The problem is, when a personal preference is being arm-wrestled into a law,  it only serves a few, and I have a serious problem with this.

    The Rules of Law state that the laws should be “clear, publicized, stable, and just; are applied evenly; and protect fundamental rights, including the security of persons and property and certain core human rights.” They should also be “delivered timely by competent, ethical, and independent representatives and neutrals who are of sufficient number, have adequate resources, and reflect the makeup of the communities they serve.” Using this premise, let me show you why the genderless bathroom law does not sit well with me.

    First, because the genderless bathroom only serves the transgendered, the law does not apply evenly to all. It violates core human rights, like mine and many other women, who have been raised culturally, socially and psychologically to keep our privates private, especially from the opposite gender. It also violates our security and the sad part is, it disables us to behave and react in certain ways in response to our biological systems such as our ovulation and menstrual cycles. Most women, especially young girls, do not like to discuss, much more expose themselves and their period to total strangers, and to think that they have to share this experience with men in the bathroom stall next to theirs is unthinkable.  While transgendered women are surgically-enabled women, they do not share our psychological and physiological systems in order for them to understand what we go through every month. Being a woman is a right, I was born with this right and so did many others, and for that right to be encroached for the sake of political correctness is unfair to my biological gender. Last time I checked, there were more of us than them, which means we constitute a majority, and I don’t remember being asked by lawmakers if we women agreed with this law or not.

    Second, were these laws really delivered by “competent, ethical and independent representatives” and are “neutral of sufficient number”? Do they reflect the makeup of the communities they serve? I live in Surrey, and there are a lot of families in our community that do not agree with laws like these, yet bylaws are enacted despite the outcry of the majority. Take for example the “universal” change room at the North Delta Recreation Center that seeks to provide facilities for whole families, meaning people of both genders can be in the same change room to help with their children. While it all seems harmless and rosy, most residents of Delta wrote, emailed, and sought an explanation of the decision to no avail. They were not consulted, and concerned parents just decided not to use the facilities. If the Rule of Law does seek to reflect the communities they serve, how could North Delta Rec Centre have missed their community?

    And where are the feminists in all of this? Where are the rabid fighters of women’s rights? This is an issue of women’s rights, so why aren’t they fighting?

    When a law is enacted because of the controversy perpetrated by a few, for example, the three same-sex couples who fought the law for civil liberties in 1999, which eventually became same-sex marriage law of 2005, it only sought to answer the needs of six people versus 25 million Canadians. How does that reflect the needs of an entire community?

    I truly understand that the transgendered community wishes to be recognized for who they are, and I am all for it. There are ways for this issue to be resolved and not put anyone to a disadvantage, especially young girls and their parents who worry about predators that may take advantage of this provision of law. Availability of unisex bathrooms should be an option, and establishments just need to fork out a few more dollars to build one. If having just one universal bathroom or change room is a way to penny-pinch, then it does not serve all the members of the community but only a few. I grew up in a democratic system where the rule of the majority is followed. Discriminating against the majority turns all the Greek philosophers in their graves.

    Share

    New Posts Recently publish post More

    • 20 August 2018
      19 hours ago No comment

      Toni Gonzaga recalls hosting tip she learned from Eat Bulaga

      Former Dabarkad Toni Gonzaga still applies the lessons she learned while hosting the long-running noontime show Eat Bulaga. Toni recently appeared in the latest vlog entry of her sister Alex Gonzaga in order to read harsh comments about them. A netizen using the handle @hiponiahypoe wrote: “sorry i dont ...

    • 18 August 2018
      3 days ago No comment

      Caluag named PH standard-bearer

      COMEBACKING Fil-Am rider Daniel Caluag will have two huge roles in the 18th Asian Games in Indonesia. Aside from defending his Asian Games men’s BMX crown, Caluag was given the honor of being the country’s standard-bearer during the opening rites of the meet on Aug. 18 at the sprawling Bung Karno ...

    • 18 August 2018
      3 days ago No comment

      PBA commissioner Willie Marcial, ROS owner Raymond Yu, coach Yeng Guiao consider members of PH Five Heroes

      A day after getting the imprimatur to represent the country in the coming Asian Games, coach Yeng Guiao and members of the Philippine basketball team met for the first time on Monday to start their short but extenive preparations at the Meralco gym in Pasig City. Only light skirmishes were ...

    • 18 August 2018
      3 days ago No comment

      US First Lady, celebs, NBA players, defend LeBron vs Trump’s insults

      United States First Lady Melania Trump, celebrities, NBA players and even media men came in defense of LeBron James against insulting statements after from American President Donald Trump. Melania Trump said, The Guardian reported from New York and New Orleans, “James appeared to be doing ‘good things on behalf of our ...

    • 16 August 2018
      4 days ago No comment

      Bela, JC are back to break hearts

      A year after their first blockbuster team-up via the heartbreaking movie, “100 Tula Para Kay Stella,” Bela Padilla and JC Santos reunite with director Jason Paul Laxamana to tell a different kind of love story in “The Day After Valentine’s,” an official entry to the 2018 Pista ng Pelikulang ...

    %d bloggers like this: