The Instigator
ERnursebyday
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Leugen9001
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Transgender individuals using bathroom they identify with

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/9/2016 Category: Society
Updated: 5 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 181 times Debate No: 92532
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

ERnursebyday

Pro

I attempted to have a mature debate regarding the transgender bathroom dispute, however, the individual who accepted the challenge has not responded.
Leugen9001

Con

In this debate, I shall be playing Devil’s Advocate; thus, what I’m arguing for isn’t necessarily what I actually believe in in real life.

Introduction

We live in a world where transgender individuals are a minority. Under the utilitarian principles under which our world operates, we must put the interests of the majority before the minority. Due to the fact that the proposal has a potential to endanger the majority just to—ostensibly—uphold the rights of a minority, this side is proud to propose that this house would not allow transgender individuals to use the washrooms of the gender as which they identify.
Signpost

In this debate round, I shall put forth two arguments: firstly, the room for abuse, and secondly, why the majority matters more than the minority.
Constructive points

Room for abuse

While there have been no instances of transgender individuals assaulting another in a washroom, there have been instances in which pro-transgender washroom laws have allegedly been used to justify unsavoury acts. For instance, in Seattle, a man allegedly abused transgender washroom policies to stay in a female washroom to watch women change. [1] If transgender people were allowed to use their perferred washroom, the policy would also allow for abuse by perverts who simply claim to be “trans”. This could lead to abusive behaviour.
Passing pro’s policy would trigger large-scale coverage from the media. Even if the policy couldn’t be abused to allow for deviant behaviour, deviants who inevitably notice the coverage might mistakenly believe that the deviant behaviour can be allowed under the policy, leading to assaults in washrooms.
As you can see, if we let this proposal pass, our washrooms would be much less safe.
Utilitarianism

Everybody is equal in society. Thus, we must do what benefits the most individuals, and not count some individuals as more important than others, meaning that utilitarian principles ought to apply to society. If we allow this proposal to pass, then the majority would be harmed in favour the rights of a few transgender people who comprise a small fraction of the population. Thus, we see that under a utilitarian point of view, this proposal should not be passed.
Conclusion

Today, I have shown to you that this proposal would benefit a small fraction of people only to harm the majority of people through less safe washrooms. Thus, let it be resolved that this house would not allow transgender individuals to use the washroom of the gender as which they identify.
Sources

Debate Round No. 1
ERnursebyday

Pro

ERnursebyday forfeited this round.
Leugen9001

Con

Extend all arguments.
Debate Round No. 2
ERnursebyday

Pro

ERnursebyday forfeited this round.
Leugen9001

Con

Leugen9001 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.