College Ok’s Naked Man in Girls Locker. Really.

In a story that could foreshadow future developments should Washington voters approve Referendum 74, a story out of Evergreen State College reveals some of the consequences of attempting to eradicate the significance of gender differences.

According to a letter from the Alliance Defending Freedom, which can be found here, Olympia parents are concerned over the use of a woman’s locker room by an Evergreen student who, though anatomically a man, lives as a woman.

Students from Capital High School and Olympia High School, as well as children with Evergreen Swim Club and Aquatics Academy regularly use Evergreen’s pool and locker rooms.  Most of these students are minors, and range from ages 6 to 18.

On several occasions recently, these children saw a naked man in the woman’s locker room sauna who was displaying his male genitalia. The children saw him through the sauna’s glass door, which allowed him a plain view of the young girls while they were changing.

Student’s notified their coach, who notified authorities, who discovered that the person in question was an Evergreen student named Colleen Francis, 45.

Evergreen State College has indicated that Francis’ use of the women’s locker room is protected by its non-discrimination policy, which protects people on the basis of gender identity.  That means that because Francis wants to be treated as a woman, the school will give him the same access to the women’s locker facility as actual women, even if it makes children, who have no idea about gender expression or identity issues, very uncomfortable.

Understanding that this situation is making children uncomfortable and parents angry, the school did attempt to create an accommodation. Did they ask Francis to understand the uniqueness of the situation and explain that the courteous thing to do is be naked somewhere else?

No.

Instead, Evergreen has made curtains available to any women who would prefer not to dress in the presence of a naked man while in the women’s locker room.

I wish was making this up.

While this appears to represents an obvious violation of Washington’s indecent exposure law, RCW 9A.88.010, Evergreen has refused to take action and local prosecutors have refused to enforce the law. 
 
In doing so, they have unilaterally carved an exception into Washington’s indecent exposure law by stating that it is not only ok for men to expose themselves to young children while claiming to be a woman, it is discrimination to prevent it.  

Can’t imagine any ways this might cause problems.  

In fact, one of the more remarkable parts of this story is that Francis alleged discrimination when asked to leave the locker room. 

While this does feel like an opposite world moment, we should not be entirely shocked by this development.  After all, Washington is about to vote on whether to make marriage genderless.  In doing so, we would be taking the formal position that men and women have no material differences between them that are worth recognizing in relationships.

Once we decide that gender is meaningless in relationships, the idea that men and women would be required to get naked in separate places becomes less obvious as well. After all, separate is not equal.

This is precisely what happened in Massachusetts after marriage was redefined there.  The new legislative priority was a bill affectionately known as the “bathroom bill” which protected the rights of men dressed as women to use women’s public restrooms. 

It can get worse, folks. And it looks like in Olympia, it may already have.                                         
 

Comments:

Posted by William L. Turner on January 29, 2013
I support this for only one reason. It demonstrates to the politically correct, feminazi left that their own BS came back on them. There is ample support for having girls play on boys sports team and use the boys lockerroom. When the boys complain, the response is "suck it up." So ladies, suck it up! And enjoy having your eight year-old daughter share a showerroom with a naked male sexual deviant! Don't blame me... I vote Conservative!
Posted by Jerome M on November 15, 2012
@David: "letting a perverse minority dictate perverse law to the majority?" So, last I looked R-74 passed by a MAJORITY. Because that's how ballots work. And people should "resort to vigilantism" in response to this? What kind of crazy freak show are you? I feel badly for the culture of fear and violence your "offspring" will be raised with.
Posted by David on November 10, 2012
If parents don't agree with the law on the basis of family security, they should either fight to overturn the law or resort to vigilantism. There is no law greater than the right for parents to protect their offspring. Washington's ambition has become letting a perverse minority dictate perverse law to the majority. This is erroneous by any measure except by the perverse rule that current politicians use to measure their fallacies with.
Posted by Joseph on November 7, 2012
SM Avila says: >”Personally I doubt any children were traumatized.” Oh, do you speak for the children? They obviously thought it was a big enough deal to not brush it off and tell their coach about it. SM Avila says: >”Yes I think it is good to question someone who is in a female changing area who has male genitalia but the school looked into it and this person is a woman not a man.” Uh, no, he’s a MAN. Believe it or not, the biological classification of a male or female isn’t a “state of mind”. If he has a penis and testicles and his 23rd chromosomes are XY, then he is a MALE. What this tells me is that this man is very mentally sick and needs to have psychological counseling. It’s time we start to view these as what they are: psychological disorders. A male (or female) doesn’t just get to decide to be a female just because he feels like it. Otherwise, what if a person decided to be a dog? Should we honor that person’s wish and allow him to be a dog? Does his belief that he is a dog make him one? No. SM Avila’s views and mind-set just shows what a cesspool this state (and country) is becoming.
Posted by SM Avila on November 7, 2012
Personally I doubt any children were traumatized. As an anatomically born woman I can tell you that there are always young boys naked in our changing rooms, its not like the ladies and girls in the changing room have never seen a penis. Yes it would be a bit weird having an adult with a penis in my dressing room. This student obviously let the school know they were a woman not just some random dude pretending far before the incident. There are many woman I have met at Evergreen who told me that they are still anatomically male. Yes I think it is good to question someone who is in a female changing area who has male genitalia but the school looked into it and this person is a woman not a man. If I was in this woman's situation I would choose to always use a changing screen to be polite but I would insist to use the woman's changing room because I was a woman. The children and adults can use changing screens if they feel uncomfortable. I know of at least one anatomically female man who has changed in the men's changing room and no one has made a fuss. No one has questioned if they were a pervert since little boys could be in there. I guess some people must believe that if you are born anatomically female that you can't be a pervert and that its fine for young boys to see breasts but it is terrible for young girls to see a penis.
Posted by Kim on November 6, 2012
I am wondering why we don't see any women wanting to be in the men's dressing room. Who's to say that this man woman isn't attracted by women. This opens up the door for sex offenders to put on an act and get admitted to the women's dressing room regularly. This is very scary. If I see this happen, I will quickly choose to boycott that particular place. This is not OK in any world!
Posted by JL HOBAN SR on November 5, 2012
SUBJECT IS NOT A WOMAN JUST BECAUSE HE WANT TO BE TREATED AS ONE. IF HE WANTS TO BE A WOMAN HE SHOULD HAVE A SEX CHANGE OPERATION AND BECOME ONE. HE IS STILL A MAN AND THEREFORE SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED IN THE WOMENS LOCKER ROOMS
Posted by Teresa on November 5, 2012
Doesn't surprise me.We need to protect ourselves and our children in these days that we live in.We need to keep speaking the truth.Prejudice?Nonsense! This is a crime and should be treated as such.Colleen is a man regardless of the fact that he refuses to accept this fact."colleen"the truth is that God loves you and sent his son to give his life for you.He will reveal to you your purpose in this life as the man he created you to be.He said that it is good that you were created in his image and likeness.He loves you and has a plan for you as the man he created you to be.
Posted by Lori on November 5, 2012
MY CHILD would be removed from ANY activity that involved contact with this person. It is traumatic for a child! THAT IS INDECENT EXPOSURE TO A MINOR AND SHOULD BE PROSECUTED BY Law!! TO THE FULLEST AND THE COLLEGE SHOULD BE FINED SEVERELY!!!! ALL WOMEN NEED TO WALK OUT AND REFUSE to use locker room. Dress in bathrooms down the hall!!!! NUMBERS SPEAK and TAXPAYERS NEED TO STAND UP FOR THEIR $$$$!! I have known for the longest time what an aweful place that college is. I DO NOT WANT AN EDUCATION FROM there - EVER! The only reason these people are not afraid of God, is because they do not know history of the Bible and HOW AND WHO God is!! There is NO 100% GUARENTEE that it would be safe for a women, let alone a minor girl. NO Guarentee that he might rape one or insist they play wtih him. NO PROOF that he has no SEX drive and NO REASON IN THE WORLD for MANY to be inconvenienced by ONE! Build him a little shower room and if he cries discrimination...ASK him...as a MALE HUMAN - are you different than those women in there>? YES!!!!!! Therefore you must be where it is SCIENTIFICALLY, HUMANLY, ANATOMICALLY CORRECT!!!!! GOD WILL JUDGE THIS - MAY HE DO SO QUICKLY!!! TOLERANCE is not good. Let us not lie to ourselves, THIS IS WRONG!!! The bible shows SODOM and GOMMORAH is the proof of this!! It at leasst states GOD'S view of this!
Posted by JoAnn on November 4, 2012
You can be sure that my family will never use the facilities at Evergreen (we live nearby), nor will Evergreen be an option when they are choosing colleges. I think these girls' families should be boycotting Evergreen and pulling their girls from their swim teams if the teams refuse to find a better, more suitable location.
Posted by Beejay on November 3, 2012
This is sick. No consideration of the young girls and what it does to their emotions. We have dealt with young kids that saw one of their parents naked as a child or teen. This guy should be sent to the mental hospital.
Posted by Tom on November 3, 2012
Are you people at Evergreen NUTS??? Give the guy a pod or a porta john to change in. I think you are discriminating against the young girls who are subject to this "progressive political correctness". Get your head on straight and use some common sense.
Posted by GR on November 3, 2012
Wake Up Washingtonians!! REJECT R74 or we will see more of this around the state and eventually the nation!. Our appologies to Sodom & Gomorrah!
Posted by tedthebear on November 3, 2012
If this pervert wants a sex change operation, and my kids had to see this, I'd get my huntin' knife and give him the operation for free!
Posted by Ron A. on November 3, 2012
There are two appropriate comments that come to mind. 1. Ro 1:28: And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; (KJV) 2. Liberalism is a mental disease. The action of the Evergreen Officials is proof positive of both.
Posted by Nick on November 3, 2012
This is just a small example when we push GOD and morality out of our lives. If you think things are getting bad, just wait, as things will get worse. We will all be held accountable for all of our thoughts and deeds. You cannot play ignorant and expect to get away with it.
Posted by Nancy on November 3, 2012
This is an example of what happens when narcissism prevails. . . The odd man out (no pun intended) gets all the attention and advancement of his/her/whatever rights while everyone else's needs and wants are set aside and essentially denied. "Colleen" is who counts. Where is the protection for the safety of the children? Answer: That is no longer a priority or relevant in today's liberated culture, freed of the chains of morality. This is a pathetic display of what occurs when sympathies go out in an unhealthy way for those who choose to be "different". The feelers run to their rescue and defense and in the process embrace deviancy. This makes one wonder how much further mankind can decline before the day of reckoning comes. Absurdity and chaos rule. I'd pray that Colleen gets some psychological help but she/he is only likely to be validated under the care of many of today's liberal professionals. I'm sure the ACLU will come to her/his aid.
Posted by Lorraine M Kramer on November 2, 2012
It's to bad that the looney one's (who don't know what they are) get the right to do whatever & young children or whoever is not comfortable with the situation have to just get used to it. maybe it should be a branch of the prison & not a college.
Posted by Rick on November 2, 2012
Why does this surprise anyone? What with the most Liberal School in the State, they push all the limits, they should be sued. It's time the State stop this nonsense called Evergreen State College, you would think all of Washington approves of their actions, I can tell you, most I've talked with, well they think the place should be turned into Prison. The State needs space to handle the overcrowding in our Prisons and Jails.....Good Place to Start, and a Bad Place to Educate our Children.....
Posted by Ralph on November 2, 2012
I would be happy to physically throw Frank out on his behind. Just call me any time.
Post a comment:
Name
Email
Comment:
*
CAPTCHA Image
enter code:
*
reload image