Male's Privacy Invaded by F2M Transgender Observation

F2M Transgender Is Still a "Female" Regarding Interest in Privacy
WASHINGTON - Sept. 28, 2022 - PRLog -- Male's Privacy Invaded by F2M Transgender Observation
F2M Transgender Is Still a "Female" Regarding This Interest

WASHINGTON, D.C. (September 28, 2022) -  In a ruling which might have implications regarding whether transgender persons should be permitted to use restrooms for persons of the opposite biological sex, a federal appeals court ruled that a male's privacy is invaded if he is required to expose his nude body to a search by a F2M transgender person.

Although the strict holding of this decision is limited to the facts of this case - a male prisoner with religious objections to being observed in the nude and stripped by a guard who is biologically female but self identifies as a male - the principle that the sexual/gender privacy interest depends on the biological sex of a person, and not his perceived sexual identity, could have wide ranging implications regarding restrooms, locker rooms, showers, etc. where people must expose themselves to others.

The ruling came despite the fact that federal law prohibits discrimination because of sexual identity.

The judges recognized a very strong, well recognized, and legally protected interest in not being required to have one's body observed by a member of the opposite biological gender.  More specifically it said:

"Courts have long recognized that sex is a trait relevant to inmate privacy. '[W]hile all forced observations or inspections of the naked body implicate a privacy concern, it is generally considered a GREATER INVASION to have one's naked body viewed by a MEMBER OF THE OPPOSITE SEX. . . .   ('The desire to shield one's unclothed figure from [the] view of strangers, and particularly strangers of the OPPOSITE SEX is impelled by elementary self-respect and personal dignity. That 'basic fact of human behavior' sometimes allows or even requires sex-based adjustments to prison guard duties." [emphasis added]

Here the prison sought to justify the invasion of privacy by arguing that "gender" "means something other than biological sex":

"The undefined term 'sex' presumably takes its ordinary meaning that refers to male and female biological traits. . . . a prisoner's right to be free from highly invasive intrusions on bodily privacy by prison employees of the opposite sex—whether on religious or privacy grounds—does not change based on a guard's transgender status."

If a person's right to privacy, from observation of nakedness by a person of the opposite sex. depends on that person's biological sex and not sexual identify, females would have a legally as well as a logical basis in complaining about having to share a restroom, shower, locker room, etc. with a M2F transgender person.   @profbanzhaf

Location:Washington - District of Columbia - United States
Account Email Address Verified     Account Phone Number Verified     Disclaimer     Report Abuse
Public Interest Law Professor John Banzhaf PRs
Trending News
Most Viewed
Top Daily News

Like PRLog?
Click to Share