DEBATE: Should congressmen be allowed in women’s bathrooms?



House Speaker Mike Johnson has announced a new policy that explicitly states that transgender women must use the men’s bathroom and transgender men must use the women’s bathroom while in the Capitol.

This was in response to Representative-elect “Sarah” McBride, who identifies as a transgender woman, winning the Delaware seat.

“These are women’s spaces, and we should have a say. We shouldn’t have to bend to the rules of men who wear a skirt, who say that they have a right to infiltrate our spaces. I mean, these are private, sex-segregated spaces for a reason,” Allie Beth Stuckey of “Relatable” comments.

Brad Polumbo of the “Brad vs. Everyone Podcast” disagrees.


“I just see the whole thing as a solution in search of a problem. Basically, they’ve been using the facilities of their gender identity for years and years,” he tells Stuckey. “Even when you zoom out and look across the country, instances of physical assault or voyeurism or harassment in bathrooms are incredibly statistically rare.”

“And these gender identity ordinances that they’ve passed in many blue areas that allow people to use their preferred bathroom, those don’t correspond with any increase empirically in those crimes, in those offenses, according to a whole host of studies,” he continues.

“So I view the whole thing as kind of a culture war outrage that’s solving a problem that isn’t really there,” he adds.

However, Polumbo appears to be making the mistake of seeing the situation solely from a male perspective — as there are legitimate reasons a woman wouldn’t want to share a bathroom with a man who believes he is a woman.

“We’re talking specifically about women,” Stuckey responds. “No man is really afraid of the 5'4” guy, or actually female, with a beard, because he’s been on testosterone for a few years coming into his bathroom.”

“It is, of course, women who are justifiably nervous about the 6'2” guy who happens to be wearing a skirt and lipstick coming into her bathroom not only with her, but also with her 10-year-old daughter. Also, while she may be breastfeeding, also while she may be pumping, while she may be changing, she may be doing things that, of course, require privacy. That’s why we have bathrooms,” she continues.

While Polumbo goes on to claim that conservatives' fear of transgender women in women’s bathrooms is the same as the fear of a Catholic priest molesting a child, Stuckey couldn’t disagree more.

“I don’t think that’s a good analogy, because it’s not only that we are saying that men who identify as women may violate these girls. I understand that not every man who identifies as a woman is going to inflict violence upon a girl or a woman. It’s not only that though. It is in violation of reality, it is in violation of the truth,” she explains.

“There is a cost to saying that ‘two plus two equals five.’ Now, you could say it doesn’t really harm you to say that ‘two plus two equals five,’” she continues, “but I believe in violation of the rules of nature and the laws of reality.”

Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?

To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

TikTok deletes — then restores — journalist's defense of Kyle Rittenhouse without explanation



A columnist for the Washington Examiner said that he was "censored" by TikTok after a video he posted defending Kyle Rittenhouse was removed from the platform.

Brad Polumbo, a policy correspondent with the Foundation for Economic Education, wrote in an op-ed Monday that a short video he posted to TikTok over the weekend defending Rittenhouse was "bizarrely" removed for violating the app's "harassment and bullying" policy. The video was later restored without explanation from the company.

Rittenhouse (18) was accused of murder after he shot three people, killing two, at a Black Lives Matter riot in Kenosha, Wisconsin, on Aug. 25, 2020. A jury found him not guilty on multiple felony counts last week after his lawyers argued he acted in self-defense.

On Sunday, Polumbo posted a TikTok video arguing that Rittenhouse's case exposed the hypocrisy of many people on the left who support criminal justice reform but demanded that the judge and the jury unfairly throw the book at Rittenhouse.

"Hakeem Jeffries, a progressive congressman, literally tweeted while the trial was still going on: 'Lock up Kyle Rittenhouse and throw away the key.' And he's the same guy that rails against mass incarceration — and I agree with him sometimes — but now, before the trial was even over, they were calling for this guy to be locked up and throw away the key … like they've already reached their conclusion. And they lied about it being a 'white supremacy' thing when it's a white dude that shot other white people [thing]," Polumbo said.

He continued: "You don't have to either think that he's a hero who did everything right and made amazing decisions or he's an evil white supremacist who should go to jail. The truth is, I would never let my teenager go to a riot zone with a weapon — that was a bad decision to make — but in the moment, he defended himself. He wasn't some mass shooter white supremacist, and he should be acquitted."

After Polumbo posted that message, he reported on Twitter that his video had been removed by TikTok for violating the platform's guidelines on "harassment and bullying."

pic.twitter.com/hMyxdDMHzM
— Brad Polumbo \ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\uddf8\u26bd\ufe0f \ud83c\udff3\ufe0f\u200d\ud83c\udf08 (@Brad Polumbo \ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\uddf8\u26bd\ufe0f \ud83c\udff3\ufe0f\u200d\ud83c\udf08) 1637547067

His appeal was reviewed by TikTok and denied.

"What part of that constitutes 'bullying' or 'harassment' in any form?" Polumbo asked in his op-ed.

"And this bizarre censorship decision by TikTok wasn't an error or mistake," he added. "I appealed the removal of my video, and my appeal was denied."

TikTok's Community Guidelines on harassment and bullying state that the company believes "in an inclusive community and individualized expression without fear of abuse."

"We do not tolerate members of our community being shamed, bullied, or harassed. Abusive content or behavior can cause severe psychological distress and will be removed from our platform," the company says.

The website prohibits content that insults or disparages other people for their appearance or intelligence, encourages coordinated harassment, disparages the victims of violent tragedies, engages in intimidation or cyberstalking, or wishes death, serious illness, or other serious harm to another individual or public figure. TikTok also prohibits sexual harassment, hacking, doxing, and blackmail.

It is not clear which of these policies were violated by Polumbo's video. TikTok did not respond to a request from The Blaze for comment.

Polumbo told The Blaze that he wasn't really bothered if all that happened was his video was flagged by an algorithm.

"What blows my mind is that a human reviewed my appeal and decided that my video making extremely mainstream arguments about the case is 'harassment and bullying,'" he said. "That shows just how skewed the woke information bubble is that these people operate in."

After his appeal was initially denied, Polumbo said Monday that TikTok restored his video "with no message/notice from them regarding the deletion or denied appeal."

I appreciate it, but this doesn't solve the problem. \n\nMost people don't have a blue checkmark and big accounts to RT them to get attention and get absurd censorship decisions reversed. \n\nThey need to address their bias so this kind of insanity doesn't happen again.
— Brad Polumbo \ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\uddf8\u26bd\ufe0f \ud83c\udff3\ufe0f\u200d\ud83c\udf08 (@Brad Polumbo \ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\uddf8\u26bd\ufe0f \ud83c\udff3\ufe0f\u200d\ud83c\udf08) 1637616949

While he's thankful his video is back up, Polumbo emphasized that other people who are wronged by social media censorship don't have the reach or influence a verified journalist like himself has to pressure TikTok or any other company into reversing their censorship.

"How many random people had their opinions on Rittenhouse deleted yet can't get it reversed because they aren't blue check journalists?" he observed.

"That kind of inconsistency is really horrible."