From the right to abortion to “the separation of church and state,” the nation’s courts seem to be in the habit of inventing new “rights,” entitlements, and emanations of penumbrae to justify their predetermined decisions. In that spirit, I propose a new legal doctrine: the separation of restroom and state.
This novel concept is inspired by the Obama administration’s decision to force the University of Arkansas at Fort Smith (UAFS) to admit men into its women’s rooms. Well, one man in particular, “Jennifer” Braly, a 38-year-old psychology major who signed away the rights to his children after his second divorce.
Braly – who is still anatomically male – first felt he had been discriminated against when the university refused to allow him to register as a woman for the campus housing lottery, which randomly matches roommates. University officials required him to find a woman willing to room with a transsexual. “I tried to be creative and work with them on this, but to no prevail,” Braly writes. (All spelling and grammar errors are in the original.)
He again claimed victimhood after he began giving guest lectures on Gender Identity Disorder, insisting an unidentified man screamed “foul” things in two of his presentations. The administration responded, “There is no confirmation that this occurred or the identity of such a student” – no small feat of anonymity since one of the alleged bouts of harassment took place in front of a crowd of 70.
The bathroom prohibition was the coup de grace. Braly writes in pique, “Some saw me using the womens public restrooms and complained to the University that they didn’t think I should be using the restroom with them.”
Mark Horn, vice president of university relations, said, “We tried to make reasonable accommodation and to find a common ground, converting the number of bathrooms on campus to gender-neutral.”
This was not enough for Braly. So, he went from the lawyer to the lift to the loo.
He filed a complaint with the Justice Department’s Office of Civil Rights, which promptly sent a letter to university officials. Its text has not been released, but UAFS bowed to the “advice of counsel” and allowed the man to use the women’s restroom. 
The same department that felt the Black Panthers’ voter intimidation was not worth their time made UAFS an action item.
The DOJ’s priorities would be startling if they applied to this case alone. However, a growing number of American women risk finding themselves alone in the lavatory with a male stranger.
A town in Kansas recently passed a “non-discrimination” measure that deems barring a man from the women’s room – or even asking for proof the individual considers himself “transgender” – as “discriminatory conduct.” If a known rapist claims he’s a woman, employees must step aside. The city of Jacksonville, Florida, is considering a similar ordinance.
Women in Canada, where the social revolution is further advanced, have suffered a flurry of restroom attacks from men.
Although the DOJ’s threats and arm-twisting must have Braly overjoyed, UAFS’s women do not share his elation. Some have begun to grasp, however faintly, that biology and not subjective feelings determine a person’s sex. Amanda Shook, a senior on campus said, “Even if they are a transgendered person, they are still a man, and should have to use the men’s restroom.”
Surely Amanda Shook is not the only woman who feels put upon by a federal decree opening their restrooms to Y-chromosomed-Americans. Where are the feminist organizations protesting politicians using their power to aid another man at the expense of women?
Where are the stalwart feminists who shriek they want to get the government out of their bedrooms? How do they feel about having a team of federal lawyers policing the adjoining stall?
They’re nowhere to be found, because their interest – you must know, gentle reader – is not really enhancing the dignity of women, at all. They’re interesting in advancing a social upheaval against traditional moral order. Their concern is not in righting historical wrongs – why else would they oppose a bill to stop sex-selective abortions that have killed an estimated 160 million women worldwide? They operate by using smear words like “patriarchy” and “chauvinism” in order to degrade the forces of morality, reason, and biological science that hold back their disordered assault.
Nothing else explains an event such as the U of Arkansas water closet jihad, by which the Obama administration expressed its devotion to feminism by aiding false women at the expense of real women.
If this is Eric Holder’s new legal standard, how long will it be until the Justice Department turns to the second half of Braly’s complaint and forces women in their late teens to live with middle aged men with full male anatomy who report they are “women”?
It has become increasingly clear the Obama administration needs to take a bathroom break.
1. Braly can now move on to more pressing issues, like a costly castration. He has chosen another transgender man, Dr. “Christine” McGinn, to perform it. The procedure costs $18,500. As of this writing, Braly has collected $215.
Not to worry; his dance card is full. “I alrready have future speaking engagements here at the University of Arkansas Fort Smith for next year and at the high schools here,” he writes in an online plea for funds. “Your donations will not only help me get the surgery but it will also fuel my passion to continue to educate others of what it truely means to be a transsexual.” (This future educator might look into what it truly means to use spell check.)
Braly is also president of RSO Circle of Hope, “a straight and LGBTQ ministry committed to providing a positive environment for worship and Bible study.”