Transexuals

[LadyForCamus]

That sounds very progressive, except if someone is indeed suffering from a mental disorder it is not noble to allow them to irreversibly harm themselves. For example, it is right and proper to intervene when a severely depressed person tries to commit suicide rather than respect their personal autonomy. Likewise, it is right and proper to treat substance abusers rather than make it easy for them to poison themselves in the name of liberty.Right now, some people feel virtuous because they believe they are opposing bigotry and ignorance. They see themselves as fighting oppression. Their virtue signalling has nothing to do with compassion. Calling Drich a bigot only makes them feel good about themselves.

But Drich did raised the cultural issue in a clumsy fashion. Cultures do not self-segregate the sexes purely out of modesty, moral sentiment, or taboo. Many social practices evolved to protect people in situations where they may be vulnerable, like states of undress. Sexual predators taking advantage of a misguided law to remove sex segregation is a legitimate concern. Also state mandates to alter public and private infrastructure just to sooth the feelings of a tiny minority would divert resources away from more worthwhile pursuits.

I agree that unless you have a penis, you should not go into a woman's bathroom/lockerroom, and vice versa. If we allow anyone to go into any bathroom/lockerromm so long as they say "I identify with this sex", this opens the doors to fakes who are sexual predators. Bathrooms wouldn't be as big of a deal for me personally, but I respect that there are women who understandably are not comfortable with it. As for lockerrooms, I'm sorry but I would not feel comfortable with a man going in there while I'm in there changing/showering/etc... even if he did say he identified as female. I have no problem with a 3rd option of "gender neutral" bathroom/lockerrooms though. 

I do think there is a difference between intervening when someone is upset and trying to hurt themselves, and intervening when someone has gone through therapy and has decided to go under the knife for extensive surgery. At that point I see it as them being under the care of professionals and doctors, and though I may not agree that it's the healthiest course of action, I would not feel like it is in my authority to stop it from happening. 

The point where the lines may get blurred though, is when we are dealing with people who "feel" they should be blind/deaf/legless/armless/etc. There really are people out there who feel they are in the wrong body and that they should be in the body of someone who is blind, or an amputee or something. Should doctors help them out with that by blinding them? Or cutting off their legs? Obviously the answer is no. But then the question is, how is this different then, from a man who feels he should be a woman and wants to get his penis cut off? If we are being completely objective here, how is this different? I think the difference is that a person who undergoes sex change surgery is still able to function completely properly and normally with all their body parts (at least outside of the bedroom, but inside is not our business).... unlike the person who is unable to see because they had their eyes poked out by a doctor or something. Thoughts?

Well, like I said, I don't think the two are analogous at all, because it's not simply an amputation of the penis (in a male to female case), it's a reassigning; a reconstruction. It's surgical change, not mutilation. Will it be perfect? Not likely. Neither are breast implants, and many times women lose sensation in their nipples as a result. But I haven't heard anyone up in arms over boob jobs lately! [emoji6].