Maria wrote:jgress wrote:This is not about fully shared locker rooms; that's an exaggeration. It's about allowing "transgendered" individuals to use the locker room of the opposite sex. Still absurd, but it's not like they're proposing to integrate everyone.
It is the slippery slope: First a forced Co-Ed locker room policy that favors transgendered, then a forced Co-Ed locker room for everyone.
Once you allow a wanna-be girl with boy parts (until the magic age of 18) to enter a locker room and stand stark naked in front of hormonal girls, you have got a problem.
However, a wanna-be boy would be in danger of her life as she could be raped if she stood stark naked in front of a bunch of teenage boys with raging hormones.
What are our elected officials thinking?
They're not. Nothing but brain flatulence on their part as far as I can tell.
Maybe there's a slippery slope, but it's still a fallacious form of argument. The point is that the original piece was highly misleading, making it seem as if fully co-ed locker rooms were being enforced, when in fact that is not the case. Making stuff up is only going to harm your case.