The language, issued by the Departments of Education and Justice, did not carry the force of law, but its point was clear. “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. The Departments treat a student’s gender identity as the student’s sex for purposes of Title IX and its implementing regulations,” the guidance read.
“When a school provides sex-segregated activities and facilities, transgender students must be allowed to participate in such activities and access such facilities consistent with their gender identity.”
The Associated Press has the story about the Trump administration’s pending move:
The decision, not yet announced, would be a reversal of an Obama-era directive issued in May requiring public schools to grant bathroom access even if the student’s chosen gender identity isn’t the same as what’s in the student’s record. That guidance will be rescinded, though anti-bullying safeguards will not be affected by the change, a government official with direct knowledge of the Trump administration’s plans told The Associated Press. The official was not authorized to speak publicly about the plans and did so on condition of anonymity.
White House press secretary Sean Spicer said Wednesday that he expected “further guidance” from the administration to be released later Wednesday. He cited President Trump’s belief in states’ rights as a reason for education and justice officials reevaluating the matter.
The issue of transgender bathroom access has become a polarizing topic at multiple levels of government in recent years, including the city of Charlotte, the North Carolina legislature and its HB2 bill, and the Obama administration. Jonathan Last wrote about the logic of transgender bathroom initiatives in June:
HB-2 was not a perfect piece of legislation. But the reaction to it was illuminating. The Charlotte Observer’s editorial board proclaimed, “Yes, the thought of male genitalia in girls’ locker rooms—and vice versa—might be distressing to some. But the battle for equality has always been in part about overcoming discomfort . . . ” Which brings us to the final bit of confusion in the transgender project. At the heart of the bathroom issue is a simple question: Is there a valid reason for separate facilities for men and women? Is there any rational justification for having separate bathrooms, or locker rooms, or changing rooms, for men and boys on the one hand, and women and girls on the other? The trans argument, per the Charlotte Observer, is essentially “no.” By their logic, if women just need to get over their discomfort at seeing naked men next to them, then there’s no reasonable explanation for why women could want their own facilities. Except that this would mean there is no reasonable explanation for why someone who is transgender should prefer one set of facilities over another. If biologically born women need to “overcome discomfort” about having naked men around them, why shouldn’t a biological man who identifies as a woman not similarly have to overcome his discomfort at being around other naked men? The logical paradox of the transgender bathroom war is that it insists that the type of gender and genitalia in a public facility is completely irrelevant—except to the transgendered, for whom it is of supreme importance.
More here.
