Introduction

The United States has for an extended period experienced extensive political deliberations on gender and transgender eccentricity youths’ use of public utilities, such as restrooms and locker rooms per their sexual category (Kogan, 2016). In 2016, after numerous cases had been taken to court, and some of the states had tried to generate legislation that limited the use of restrooms by transgender individuals, organizations in the Obama government gave an order that required all public learning institutions in the United States to legalize transgender learners to utilize the restrooms that match their gender personality. In cooperation, the Department of Education in the United States, as well as the Department of Justice, elucidated that the social rights of school children who are transgender people are enshrined in the Education Amendments of 1972, whereby the discrimination of individuals based on their sexual inclination is prohibited. Later on, eleven more states sued the US government over the command. In the meantime, North Carolina had enacted into law House Bill 2, which stipulated that all individuals should utilize public restrooms according to the sexual identity assigned to them at birth, despite their physical presentation or gender identity. As a result, the Department of Justice filed a suit requiring the state to overturn the legislation. There are other states which have recommended the legislation thus raising a public deliberation on this concern. In 2017, the Department of Education and the Department of Justice in Trump’s administration withdrew the former regulation as well as federal support for learners who are transgender people, affirming that they would not follow the federal enforcement which violates human rights.

Thesis Statement

Even though some individuals argue that allowing transgender people to use public restrooms based on the gender they identify raises security concerns, it is essential to comprehend the effects on the well-being and health of these individuals. The law should, therefore, allow transgender people to use public restrooms of the gender which they identify.

Critical Analysis

Some individuals argue that transgender-friendly restrooms may encourage men to wear like women, get into the women’s restroom, and molest the women from inside (Callahan & Zukowski, 2019). Another group of individuals argues that learners who are mischievous might take advantage of the rights of transgender restrooms as an excuse of sneaking into the restroom of individuals from the opposite sex. Old-fashioned people affirm that this is the type of individual that they intend to restrict when advocating for the abolition of this legislation, further claiming that the transgender bathroom laws should be considered as a safety hazard. Nevertheless, the decision to permit learners to use the restroom of the gender that they identify with cannot be used as a way of allowing people to use the restroom without the consequences for bad conduct. In case a man or male student gets into the female bathroom but fails to identify as female, it should be understood that the individual has clearly contravened the policy and has consequently endangered the lives of other individuals. Additionally, no solid proof can be used to link sexual assault marauders to the use of restrooms that belong to the opposite sex. The only thing that this approach does is connecting transgender people to sexual offenders, as a result causing harm to the transgender society. There lacks any proof that transgender people are indeed aggressive attackers. There is proof which proposes that transgender people have a higher likelihood to be assaulted in the restrooms. According to a research conducted in the United States, 70% of transgender people affirmed to have undergone verbal abuse, physical abuse and discrimination in the restrooms thus affecting their lives in unfavorable ways (Weir, 2016). It can further be argued that enactment of laws which hinder transgender individuals from using public restrooms of the gender they identify with contradicts the law of respect for individuals. The law requires that vulnerable individuals should be protected. The administrative features of vulnerability are connected to economic, cultural and social aspects. Therefore, an individual becomes susceptible on the prospect that he or she belongs to a group or population with exceptional barriers or requirements to care from various circumstances or conditions and have a less ability to preserve their interests and qualifications.

Transgender people are susceptible from a political perception mainly because they are exposed to weaknesses that results from the high occurrence of disease, social segregation and lack of health services and social support. The creation of laws which hinder transgender people from using public restrooms of gender which they identify promotes a discriminatory environment and further fuels trans-phobia and stigmatization thus worsening health effects. The introduction of nondiscriminatory laws regarding access to restrooms leads to ethics-related concerns (Hodson et al. 2018). Supporters of the law make arguments that are utilitarian affirming that the most appropriate action is implementing a law because it favors many individuals and increase the principle of harm as the main reason for restraining the autonomy of a transgender person because of how they choose to use the restroom. Those who oppose these legislations argue about the theories of respected individuals and human rights, autonomy and justice and further support these opinions by significant justifications. Opponents, therefore, believe that the legislation is ethically awkward since they harm the transgender people. Despite the arguments from opponents of this law, it is essential to consider the fact that provision of equal admittance to public amenities including restrooms, as well as the creation and implementation of anti-discriminatory policies and legislation that offer protection to transgender people are essential. Equal admittance makes sure that these individuals are accorded the same treatment just like any other human being.

Another issue to consider is that transgender rights should also be regarded as critical human rights (Reed et al. 2016). As a result, transgender people just like other individuals, have necessary rights to liberty, life, expression, privacy, and health. Consequently, legislation that hinders with their capability to securely articulate their gender identity impedes with all these privileges. It can further be argued that the laws allowing transgender people to use public restrooms of gender that they identify with can be supported with the principle of justice. According to law, justice promotes appropriate, equitable and fair in light of what is owed or due to individuals. This theory of truth is obtained from Aristotle’s standard that promotes formal equality, which stipulates that unequals are supposed to be accorded unequal treatment, while equals should be granted equal treatment. Essentially, the principle affirms that individuals should be accorded different treatment only in instances where there is a legitimate reason to do so. The challenge with Aristotle’s argument is that it needs interpretation and specification and does not have the substance required in applying it to more difficult circumstances. People who advocate for equal access of restrooms affirm that women who are transgender cannot be regarded as any different from other biological women and therefore, they should be allowed access to women’s restrooms just like other women. On the other hand, those who advocate for the enforcement of laws that promote equal access assert that the two groups are supposed to be offered different treatment because they are not identical with regards to their biological sex traits.

Conclusion

From a systematic perception, there lacks proof that gives transgender people access to restrooms which correspond to their gender causes an increase in instances of sexual crimes. Nevertheless, the arguments against and for legislation of accessing public accommodations cannot be merely solved through scientific means. The foundation for having different opinions includes the fact whether transgender people are mentally sick and whether there are ethics-related and legal explanations for restrooms which are gender-inclusive. The general public and psychiatrists have made efforts to conceptualize transgender people. DSM-5 approved the word gender dysphoria in replacing gender identity disorder, thus making transgender to appear like a mental disorder (Winter et al. 2016). Psychiatrists should, therefore, educate other individuals about mental illness and the variables which define gender expressions. Essentially, transgender people should be allowed to use the public restrooms of the gender with which they identify and the debates put forward in this issue should be focused on the provision of objective and competent views.

References

Callahan, M. P., & Zukowski, K. T. (2019). Reactions to transgender women and men in public restrooms: Correlates and gender differences. Journal of Homosexuality, 66(1), 117-138.

Hodson, J., Jackson, S., Cukier, W., & Holmes, M. (2018). Between the corporation and the closet: Ethically researching LGBTQ+ identities in the workplace. Equality, Diversity, and Inclusion: An International Journal, 37(3), 283-297.

Kogan, T. S. (2016). Public Restrooms and the Distorting of Transgender Identity. NCL Rev., 95, 1205.

Reed, G. M., Drescher, J., Krueger, R. B., Atalla, E., Cochran, S. D., First, M. B., … & Briken, P. (2016). Disorders related to sexuality and gender identity in the ICD‐11: revising the ICD‐10 classification based on current scientific evidence, best clinical practices, and human rights considerations. World Psychiatry, 15(3), 205-221.

Weir, C. (2016). Violence and experience of transgender individuals: how this impacts their supports (Doctoral dissertation, Lethbridge, Alta.: University of Lethbridge, Faculty of Education).

Winter, S., Diamond, M., Green, J., Karasic, D., Reed, T., Whittle, S., & Wylie, K. (2016). Transgender people: health at the margins of society. The Lancet, 388(10042), 390-400.