The honorable Senator may have ruffled a few feathers with his anti-gay statements but we believe Senator Sotto is a seasoned politician and as such has carefully deliberated over this issue for years. Clearly, he would not make light of an issue that critically affects millions of citizens and human beings without first having developed an informed opinion. Perhaps, then the Senator’s puzzling statements cannot be simply taken at face value but need to be mined for a deeper, hidden meaning. We did just that and found out something you may not have realized.
Senator Sotto recently introduced this thought-provoking scenario which we’re going to analyze in detail:
“When you go to a clubhouse... and you're wearing a collarless shirt and slippers, they won't let you in.”
Let’s interrupt here. As Winston Churchill once said “It is a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma; but perhaps there’s a key.” So we'll naturally start with the enigma: a person wearing a collarless shirt and slippers to a country club or golf course. The Senator is asking us to suspend our disbelief and immerse ourselves in a story where cultivated country club members and their family and friends do not know that such a thing as a dress code exists. We’re intrigued. Please continue, Senator.
“We are straight men. What if a transgender is there? Or a gay person is there? And they're wearing collarless shirts and slippers and they're asked to leave?”
The Senator now presents us with a mystery: a transgender person who is not aware of how their appearance might affect their status in society. A human being whose identity has been subjected to intense scrutiny simply disregarding a lifetime of personal experience by saying ‘whatever.’ There’s also a gay person introduced–a clever diversion? Are all gay people cross-dressers? You’ve reeled us in Senator. Well done.
“With this law, if this gets passed, they can sue the clubhouse. The ones who are at a disadvantage are straight people. Even if we are asked to leave, we can't complain but if it's transgenders who are asked to leave, then they can sue."
Aha! The riddle. Or shall we call it the ‘clubhouse conundrum.’ How exactly are straight people disadvantaged in this scenario? And why do LGBTQI persons always use gender identity to their advantage? Let’s sort out the tangled up strands of this complex narrative. First of all, we now understand that the transgender person was untrustworthy to begin with. We were blindsided by the deceptively worn T-shirt and slippers. This person now either threatens to sue if rejected from entering, or is able to enter while being dressed casually. Either way, they’ve got a real comfy life. Meanwhile, straight people are faced with a severe restriction which prevents them from being comfortable in a place that's clearly meant to feel like home. Why can’t heterosexuals be left alone? Do we really need to be forced to put on clothing that society deems appropriate?
Honestly, we don’t know how to solve this conundrum. But we think the key is asking the right questions. Are we letting cross-dressing fraudsters take over our clubhouses and golf courses? Are transgender people even cross-dressers? Why can’t we all wear comfortable clothing all the time?