View Single Post
07-16-2005, 11:45 PM
The Nemesis
Global Moderator
Semper Tyrannus
The Nemesis's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Langley, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 57,385
vCash: 500
Lol, I didn't think I would be coming back to this , but I guess the situation warrents some more discussion.

1) Equality means that all things are treated equally. This is not what is happening with this girl and her mother. Equality in this situation would demand that she be treated just like she were one of the boys. No clothing rule, no showering rule, no nothing unless it was in place before hand and is the standard in a locker room that is single gender. What this mother is fighting for is sort of an "equality +1" where she gets her daughter all the same rights as any boy, and then some extra ones to "protect" her. If she really thought locker room equality was a good idea, there should be no need for that protection.

2) I don't think everyone who's made the point of saying that something bad could conceivably happen expects the locker room to be some sort of rampant underage orgy or house of future sex offenders. We all understand that on the whole, 99% of kids are generally well behaved with a good set of moral values. The problem is that 1% that isn't or that indeterminate percentage that let their teenage hormones override their moral judgement. All that needs to happen is 1 kid pulling an inappropriate prank. 1 kid making a particularly obscene remark. 1 kid screwing it up, and then all hell breaks loose.

3) We live in a time where people will sue at the drop of a hat (almost literally. "Man sues restaurant for fallen hat" would not surprise me as a newspaper headline). If the above mentioned 1 kid does something stupid, any number of people could wind up suing. The girls family could sue for harassment. Hell, some lawyer could convince one of the boys' families to sue for the mental anguish of being emasculated by the presence of a girl in that locker room. Yeah, it all sounds ridiculous, but doesn't it sound equally ridiculous to sue a restaurant because you don't have the common sense to realize that the coffee you ordered just mightbe hot if you spill it on your lap? Or that someone might sue because a casino let them gamble away their money? Or that someone might sue another family because they feel that their son was unfairly robbed of their youth hockey MVP award? (btw, these are all real cases). Stupid lawsuits like this will usually go for the big bucks, and since no one family that would likely be involved in this hockey league is going to be filthy rich, it would mean attacking the league itself. If that happens, the league loses a lot of money, and then it might not have enough to continue funding the hockey programs to the depth and breadth that are normal for it. Then everyone loses.

4) As stupid as they all sound, I think the "why can't men use the women's bathrooms" arguments have some grounds. Yes I understand that the locker room includes coaching and team bonding, whereas normal use of a washroom doesn't. But what if I go into a store and need to use the washroom, only to find out that the mens' room is out of order. In these extenuating circumstances, am I allowed to use the ladies' room? Certainly not. I could easily argue that I would see less in a ladies room than this girl will see in the boys' locker room, since all the toilets are in separate stalls (unless women strip down as soon as they enter a washroom ).

I again want to say that I'm in no way trying to be chauvanistic, nor am I opposing equality or women's rights. If women want to be treated completely and totally equally, by all means go for it. It's just that this particular situation holds a higher than normal degree of probability of something bad happening, and a greater than normal set of consequences. Instances like this just have to trump individual rights. Think about it. What if you knew of a friend who is a visible minorty, but wanted to attend a KKK or similar meeting for some sort of sociology project? Sure they'd be wearing uniforms the whole time and there's a good chance that your friend doesn't get caught, but the possibility exists that he does, and given that possiblity wouldn't you do everything in your power to prevent them from putting themselves into a potentially harmful situation? Of course this is a far more extreme example than the locker room, since the consequences of racial hatred could only possibly be matched in a co-ed hockey locker room by a possible incidence of ****, but the point stands. In both situations, the party involved as every right to make their own decision and to put themselves into this situation, but common sense would probably say that it's not likely to be the most sensible idea.

The Nemesis is offline