Editorial Board
The School Board’s first step towards converting the two upstairs bathrooms of the high school to becoming gender-neutral has caused a stir among the community. The bathrooms will be opened on a three-month trial period next year.
The status quo is not working. It was a positive step to provide a small, gender-neutral bathroom when the high school was being designed; however, in practice the system has failed to provide the safe space that was promised. In order to access the bathroom, one has to sign up in the office and carry around a special key all day. The resource became quickly stigmatized and students have begun to stop using it.
The reformatting of the bathrooms will grant an important resource to students who don’t feel comfortable using the current gendered bathrooms.
However, many students worry that the removal of gender from the space will potentially force them to use the restroom with other people of the opposite sex, making them uncomfortable.
If the discomfort of students is so important, we should pause to consider the experience of those who currently are not provided a suitable space to use the restroom. Certainly, people were uncomfortable when women started to attend colleges in greater numbers, yet does that make the movement any less valid?
Perhaps being uncomfortable can sometimes be a good thing.
Additionally, the two, gendered bathrooms will remain on the lower floor, only a short walk away, allowing people to choose according to their preference.
Another argument in opposition is that we should just allow people to use the restroom that best fits their gender identity.
In reality, however, that poses a problem. Using a bathroom that matches your assigned sex requires you to come out to your peers as a prerequisite to simply using a restroom. In our opinion, this is a ridiculous burden.
Others say that there is no real problem as there haven’t been headline cases of abuse in the restrooms. Coming from a group of people who do not have to face the experiences of the transgender community, I am not sure we have a right to tell them what problems they do or do not face. QSA has reached out to the administration and made it clear that the current situation does not work.
We should probably listen to this call for action.
The main concern many have is the potential abuse of the system for sexual activity. If this becomes an issue, the administration should punish those who abuse the system rather than take away a much-needed resource from the group of people who would benefit from having it. Isn’t this in the job description?
Another possible preventive measure could be to provide education regarding the bathrooms rather than dismiss the idea out of fear of hypothetical abuse.
Furthermore, if gay and bisexual students have been able to “handle” themselves in segregated spaces, why wouldn’t other couples be able to “restrain” themselves similarly? A more public bathroom, such as the two upstairs, would eliminate the problems that have plagued the much more private and isolated gender-neutral bathroom.
Some people quote statistics in an attempt to minimize the problem that trans people face. To quantify this struggle and weigh it against the potential risk of abuse establishes a harsh utilitarian calculation.
This becomes problematic when we consider what else a similar method of framing could justify — the worse atrocities in history. Just because trans students do not represent a majority of the student population, their problems are no less valid.
It is clear that the administration is wise in recognizing our next step: a reformation in bathroom policy. A student has a right to feel safe in our school. Those of us who feel comfortable in the status quo have an obligation to step outside of ourselves and recognize the problem, even if we don’t personally experience the benefits.