That’s where S.D. comes in. Its legislature just passed a law that protects the rights and interests of all students. It protects students who, for reasons of faith, modesty, or privacy, don’t want to be forced to change in front people of the opposite sex, while reasonably accommodating transgender students who don’t want to change in front of people of the same biological sex. Instead of a winner-take-all approach, this bill helps create a win-win outcome for everyone.

The nation is primed for yet another clash in the culture war — this time over school bathroom policy. But South Dakota has passed a bill that should be an example for the entire country on how to defuse controversy and craft public policy that creates good outcomes for everyone.

The question is, what to do when it comes to public school bathrooms, locker-rooms and shower facilities for students who identify as the other sex? Some say it would be discrimination to not let them use whichever facility they want. Others object and say the privacy rights of children in vulnerable and intimate settings must be respected.

The flaws with the first approach are obvious. We have sex-specific restrooms and locker-rooms not because of “gender identity” — however one defines it — but because of biology. Because men and women have bodily differences explains why we have men’s rooms and ladies’ rooms. It’s not about gender identity but biology — and protecting privacy related to our bodies.

Just this week we saw what happens when the law ignores this. A middle-aged man in Seattle undressed in a women’s and girl’s locker-room, citing Seattle “gender identity” law as his defense. When women in the locker-room complained to management, the man replied, “The law has changed and I have a right to be here.”

Read More