The University of New Hampshire prides itself on the celebration of diversity. This is made apparent by the various student and staff run programs for people who are different, or socially not the same, or whatever is the politically correct term for them. The Office for Multicultural Affairs, the President's Commission on Diversity, the Non-Traditional Student Office and (I made this one up), the "Office for Students Who Aren't Different But Wish They Were," all go to show the schools dedication to people who are different, unique or otherwise not the same.
Diversity is an important thing to develop. Some would even say that America is based on diversity. However, there comes a point when diversity is being created just for the sake of having something different. The quest for diversity stops being about accommodating people's differences and becomes more and more of a trend. Administrations in business and schools across the country seek the next step in political correctness. The University of New Hampshire is no different. Case in point: transgender-friendly bathrooms.
The gender-neutral bathrooms in the MUB have caused quite the stir lately, and for the most inane reasons possible. Most of it is the school's fault. The bathrooms were not created as simple restrooms that anyone could use, rather they were created and advertised as transgender-friendly bathrooms for the bevy of different sexualities, orientations and biological anomalies that the majority of the world was happily unaware of.
Most of this malarkey could have been avoided if they had of just been advertised as general restrooms. A simple sign on the door, blue with white letters, "RESTROOM." But that couldn't be done; there had to be fanfare as the school patted themselves on the back for creating a safe spot that people who were born men but were phenotypically women and identified as both could comfortably relive themselves in the un-walked halls of the lower MUB.
Of course, people became irate over this, mainly because people interpret anything different from what they are used to as a threat. The introduction of the gender-neutral bathroom infuriated so many because it drew a lot of attention to something that previously no one cared about. The bathroom was not the issue. The issue was that whoever came up with the (stupid) idea had to wave a big flag and make sure that everyone knew that these bathrooms were safe zones for people who are gender-different, or have special gender needs, or who don't identify in a way that is culturally common.
The truth about people's views on individuals with different sexuality is that they don't care. No one cares if a person kisses girls, kisses boys, pees standing up, sitting down or anything in between and, therefore, no one wants to hear about it. That is where the ire over the transgender friendly bathrooms sparked from; people didn't want to hear about other people's personal lives and differences. They were fine before, why make a fuss about them? Declare it an open bathroom and leave it at that. No one wants to know about anyone else's sex lives, hetero, homo, trans or otherwise; the same goes for people's bathroom habits.
These bathrooms are designed to be a safe haven for anyone to use. The brains behind them thought that some people might be uncomfortable using the facilities with other people around, and decided to put locks on the door, so if someone goes in and wants to be alone they can lock the rest of the world out. This is an interesting choice, but it begs the question, what is to keep the rapist from locking the rest of the world out of these isolated and underused bathrooms while they accost someone? What is to keep the misguided meathead from locking him or herself in with a smaller person whose sexuality is in question and beating them to a pulp? Assuming that there are no cameras in these bathrooms to witness said transgressions, the locks on the doors seem to be a fantastic way to spawn evil behavior.
Possibly the biggest issue with the gender-friendly bathroom was the utilitarian approach to appeasing those of errant gender. The University figured that some people whom society considered "different" were uncomfortable peeing in the same place as those which society considered "normal," so they made a bathroom that was transgender friendly. The probability of being born with some sort of transgender issue is incredibly small. Statistically negligible is a term statisticians use. A quick search of the Internet found that the probability of being named James if an individual (male or female) was born in the 1980s (i.e. just about every student at this university) is about one percent. Therefore, this humble writer proposes that the transgender bathroom idea is scrapped and that it is replaced with a "James" bathroom.
The "James" bathroom, while predominantly for the James population, will be open to anybody. It will be advertised as such; with no fanfare, nor any attention drawn to the vast variety of different people who potentially could use it. There will be no locks on the main doors, purely for safety reasons. Locks on the stalls will remain. There will be both urinals and bowl-toilets to accommodate all manner of relief from the oppression of various bodily functions. Everyone will be welcome to use the "James" bathroom, because the James population doesn't really care that much to label people who have to pee.
Be the first to comment on this article!