Locker Room Follies

locker_roomLast year, California’s governor signed into law Assembly Bill 1266, which directs that in our public schools gender is something students choose, rather than something they are born with.  If a student with male genitalia self-identifies as a female, he/she is allowed to choose to use the girls’ bathrooms and showers.  The upshot of this law is to respect the feelings of  those who are conflicted with their own gender identity at the expense of the privacy rights of the majority.

In response to this travesty, Privacy For All Students (PFAS) was formed and circulated a petition to get a referendum on the ballot, to give the people of California the opportunity to voice their opposition to this invasive social engineering.

504,760 signatures were needed to place the referendum on the 2014 ballot.  PFAS garnered 619,346 signatures and submitted them to the State.  PFAS even had to take the Secretary of State to court to force the full count of signatures in two counties.  In its examination of the signatures, the State has only deemed 487,484 to be valid, disqualifying 131,857 signatures — a whopping 20% of all signatures submitted.

From their latest email update, PFAS writes, “The law allows for PFAS to now look at the rejected signatures and to challenge the results.  Election officials are not making this easy for the PFAS representatives and attorneys that are seeking to examine the rejected signatures.

But we will not be bullied. We will fight to have fair standards, consistently applied.  And we will demand that all valid signatures be counted.”

In their update, PFAS talks about some of the reasons that signatures have been thrown out:

Woodrow Wilcox


If your signature on the petition looks different from your signature on a voter registration card or even a DMV record, then your signature may have been thrown out.

If the printing of your address looks like the printing of any other signer on that page, then your signature may have been thrown out.

If you left out or transposed any numbers in your address, then your signature may have been thrown out.

If you were mistaken about which county you live in, then your signature may have been thrown out.

Some believe that this is fair, that a signature and all accompanying information should be filled in perfectly by the signer.  Nobody should help fill in the address (or if you had help, you should write a note on the petition that says so).  There should be no leniency for age and infirmity or even cultural issues.  If you signed the petition quickly or your signature has changed over the years, that is too bad.

That may sound good.  We all want to be sure that the system is not manipulated and that all of the signatures counted are legitimate.

But it also looks like the goal is to find a reason to reject–not accept–signatures.  And the results (more than one in five thrown out) show it.

We know that election officials are very lenient on who can vote.  Efforts to assure the identity of voters has been fought throughout the country.  But when citizens want to challenge a misguided law, suddenly these same election officials become experts at handwriting and printing and are not so interested in letting everybody be counted.

For now, it remains to be seen if PFAS will successfully challenge the signature count.  The good news is that AB 1266 will not go into effect until the outcome of this challenge is determined.  Gender selection proponents are pulling out all the stops to see that attitudes toward their agenda become sympathetic.  There was even the recent story of the student who identified as a boy, who claimed to be assaulted in the boys’ bathroom by three intolerant students of the same gender.  Turns out he/she made the whole thing up.  But before that confession came out, I heard one radio talk show say the real problem was parents teaching their children that things like transsexuality and homosexuality are sins.

This LGTBQ ideologue insisted it isn’t a liberal versus conservative issue, but equated the teaching of children that certain sexual behaviors are sins with teaching hatred and intolerance.  (Just a not on tolerance: It was invented by Christians, who were committed to treating with respect those with different religious convictions.  But failing to call sin sin is not tolerance.  It is the loss of all moral compass.)  But that’s where our society is now — well, at least a large part of it.  No individual sexual practice or preference or sense of gender identity is seen as wrong.  And those of us in the morally conservative or traditional majority have no right to say what’s right or wrong, because, “It’s all good.”


The LGBTQ agenda is so important to its proponents that they don’t care about the 15 year-old girl, struggling with her normal (there, I said the word) issues of self-confidence about her own body, being forced to share space in close proximity to someone with a male body who wants to be a girl.  AB 1266 cares only for the gender-challenged teen.  Regular kids will be forced to have their privacy violated.

Privacy was established to protect children from embarrassment and prevent unwelcome and inappropriate scenarios from arising.  In school settings, the practice of privacy and modesty were established to prevent teasing, bullying and other social behaviors that can victimize, humiliate or intimidate innocent children.  What kind of insanity is it that is causing us to sit idly by, while traditional wisdom and prudence are so carelessly discarded?  What do you suppose our Creator is thinking about all this?  And what do you suppose he’s going to do about it?  Shouldn’t that make a difference when we think about what we might do?

Additional information on AB 1266 can be found at

This article is printed with the permission of the author(s). Opinions expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the article’s author(s), or of the person(s) or organization(s) quoted therein, and do not necessarily represent those of American Clarion or Dakota Voice LLC.

Comment Rules: Please confine comments to salient ones that add to the topic; Profanity is not allowed and will be deleted; Spam, copied statements and other material not comprised of the reader’s own opinion will be deleted.

Michael Day is a native Californian and a retired mailman, proud of the fact that while most of his friends were protesting the war in Viet Nam, he volunteered for the draft and served in combat with the U.S. Army Infantry. His diverse life experiences range from singing with the San Diego Opera to doing menial labor and being involved in church leadership for twenty five years. His blog,, is an expression of his deep convictions concerning freedom and Biblical faith.
Michael Day
View all posts by Michael Day
Michaels website
  • DCM7

    Liberal logic:
    Gender is merely a social construct and can be changed at will…
    …but sexual preference is fixed and immutable.

  • Dawn D

    First a disclaimer. As written, I have personal concerns about AB 1266. I feel that without the qualified psychiatric help, there is not enough of a ‘check and balance’ system to be certain that a person who believes in the need to transition is actually doing so with the right reasons.

    I’m not saying that a form of this legislation should not be written, debated, passed and implemented. What I am saying is that - because of the PROVEN track record - I believe in the WPATH “gate-keeper” philosophy of being as certain is possible that a person who needs to transition is doing so for the right reasons. And, that this person actually has the true need to do so, or as close to a true need as can be ascertained with the known science on the subject that there is available today. As such, this legislation should have been crafted with WPATH guidelines as a prerequisite.

    Now, as for this author’s portrayal. Contrary to the author’s writing, he is being just a little ahead of himself and misinforming others in suggesting that this legislation is NOT currently implemented, because it IS! The legislation took effect on January 1 of this year and will remain in effect if and until it can be verified that it qualifies for the November ballot. Which it likely will not.

    Even without this legislation and even IF the PFAS were successful, the numbers of school districts in this State who would not already be implementing a ‘form’ of these guidelines administratively now without AB 1266, would be minimal. For the most part, the majority of school districts in this State currently have transgender/transsexual policies in place. And, they work just fine; which brings me to the last point.

    Showing the example of the young boy in San Francisco making false claims is just a snippet of the reasons I feel the need for WPATH guidance on this type of legislative affair. It’s only too painfully obvious that this child has other, possibly even more significant psychological issues that are being missed and not dealt with. It’s entirely possible that this child is NOT actually transsexual and has an entirely different issue altogether. Yet, extrapolation of this instance is not a good example to use in reflection against AB 1266. Neither is supposition of one person’s being uncomfortable outweighing that of another. There are ways to mitigate circumstances that will/would benefit everyone in such settings and not ‘throw the baby out with the bathwater’ in the process.

    As an alternate POV from that of the author, I can offer an example of Fox News’ host, Clayton Morris’ own reviling comment over the recent facebook changes to gender identification when he mocked people identifying as intersex only to soon after find out that ‘hey!’ it really does exist, ‘sorry for my ignorance’. The damage get’s done and is not un-doable thereafter. Instead of creating a ‘crusade’ because we don’t understand an issue, giving yourself time to reflect on perspective and taking time to attempt some measure of understanding would be more useful. Whipping people into a frenzy over a ’cause’ is dangerous and uncivilized no matter the issue at hand. And, that thought applies to ALL extreme view points.

    Democrats and republicans, conservatives and liberals, all, need to take a chill-pill and stop with the extremes of both philosophies, work together and reach a sensible consensus.

    • When we lived in a mature and responsible world, this was pretty simple: if you were born with a penis, you are a male and you use the male restroom/locker room, and if you were born with a vagina, you are a female and you use the female restroom/locker room.

      That reality hasn’t changed, and the facts remain simple: if you were born with a penis, you are a male and you should use the male restroom/locker room, and if you were born with a vagina, you are a female and should you use the female restroom/locker room.

      If our civilization is to survive and avoid a complete descent into lunacy and anarchy, we must return to that mature and responsible world where people are expected to deal with reality, not where every fantasy is indulged as if it was real.

      • Dawn D

        Those are rudimentary and very basic principles you’re giving analysis of regarding sexually identifying characteristics. Just as Clayton Morris found he was misunderstanding and subsequently apologized for, so might yourself…..someday.

        Is it actual ‘fear’ for our civilization? Or, is it a desire to simply hold to a ‘last bastion’ reflecting tenets of past failures in recognizing the diversity in life at the heart of human existence that fosters that ‘fear’? Civilization has moved forward in one manner or another even while adapting to awareness and recognition of differences. I submit that we - as Americans - will continue to do so. We are not at all, that weak.

        • Reality is reality…just as a penis is a penis and a vagina is a vagina, and a penis indicates a male and a vagina indicates a female.

          It’s not a “fear” of anything or a “desire” for anything, other than a desire to remain sane and in harmony with reality.

          The mature, healthy people are not obligated to humor liberals in their delusions.

          Jeepers, liberals have to make such incredibly simple things so incredibly complex (in their minds, anyway). Un-freaking real.

        • retiredday

          Diversity? You must understand the logical conclusion to looking at this issue as an expression of diversity. How many restrooms, showers and locker rooms will the public schools have to provide, just to keep up with gender identity? Three, four, a dozen? Why not just one? Girls and boys together, singing ah… I don’t think so. This issue is not one of diversity. If it were, there should be kosher locker rooms and Islamic locker rooms with facilities for foot washings. What about conservative and liberal wash rooms? And while we’re all dreaming of our wish lists, who’s going to pay for it all?

    • retiredday

      The POV that girls who think they are boys should use the boys’ locker room, or boys who think they are girls should use the girls’ locker room is extreme, indeed. It flies in the face of historical, traditional, religious, legal and moral standards of Western Civilization. You may reject all that, and you may even reject the Bible and the God of the Bible. But your rejection of them doesn’t make them extreme.

      “Liberty and justice for all” doesn’t mean society should cater to the interests of any one group (especially the sexually or psychologically maladjusted) at the expense of everyone else. Social engineering is incompatible with freedom. It is a perversion of the concept of equality. Gender choice is not about the equality of individuals conflicted with gender identity. It’s about giving certain individuals special rights. It not only forces the vast majority of us to accept and enable a few self-absorbed, problematic individuals but it forces us to change our social norms, whether we want to or not.

      Today much weight is given to the idea that people are “born that way”. But when babies are born with other defects, there is no hesitation to medically correct such defects, if possible. Why? Because just being born that way doesn’t make it right. In the case of gender choice, the assumption Is being made that the physiology is the defect, even in a perfectly healthy body — not the psychological aspect of their sexual identity, but the physical aspect.

      That’s the current “wisdom”. I think they have it exactly backwards. Instead of making the rest of society accommodate to their psychological defects, a more humane (and civilized and caring and wise) thing to do would be to give them the counseling they need to help them understand and accept the body and gender they were born with. But that’s seen as being simple, backward, extreme. Go figure.

      But as to whether AB 1266 is in effect, it is not. Some schools have said that it already is in effect, but they, like the California State government have little respect for the legal process PFAS is going through to challenge this bad law. According to PFAS, AB 1266 is not in effect until their challenge is resolved.