More all-gender bathrooms at LMU

Transgender activists prompt president of Jesuit university to change eight restrooms on campus

Loyola Marymount University

In response to events on campus, LMU President Timothy Law Snyder has ordered the Facilities Management to create “additional all-gender restrooms.”  

Timothy Law Snyder, president of Loyola Marymount University. (Loyola Marymount University)

As the Loyolan reported, “The Student Housing Office replaced the traditional signs that depict a man and woman on eight different individual-use bathrooms at the beginning of August in the Leavey apartments, McKay Hall, Tenderich apartments and the Doheny, Desmond, Rosecrans and Whelan freshmen residence halls.”

Rather than following the lead of Pope Francis and urging students to “accept the body God gave them,” President Snyder has decided to institutionally support what the Pontiff calls “gender ideology.” For now, however, it remains the case that “The University is institutionally committed to Roman Catholicism” when it comes to appealing to parents of prospective students, asking alumni for donations, and promoting LMU in PR campaigns.

Full story at Renew LMU.



To add a comment, click on Facebook, Twitter, Google+ icons OR go further down to the bottom of comments to the Post your comment box.


  1. drewelow says:

    once all-gender is accepted, give it a few years and there will be a protest by the gender-confused, demanding recognition and respect for their current claimed identity through the construction of….a separate bathroom. one of the more current forms of gender alphabet soup i saw recently used the letters lgbqtiq+, the final letters ‘iq’ stand for ‘ intersex ‘ and ‘questioning’ the final plus sign might mean ‘string to be added to later as new gender identities are ‘evolved’.

  2. I graduated from LMU in the 1990s. In response to a recent LMU alumni magazine that touted former President Bill Clinton as the commencement speaker and hailed LMU’s “thriving Muslim community” I wrote to Dr. Snyder to express my pointed disappointment with LMU’s weak and weakening Catholic character, and I included the shredded LMU magazine along with my letter to underscore my disgust with the university. I have not received any further magazines nor requests for donations. Mission accomplished!

  3. Your Fellow Catholic says:

    You really have to be a strange kind of catholic to want to keep people from safely performing bodily functions.

    • Steve Seitz says:

      “Safely performing bodily functions”?: I think you’re confused. What’s unsafe about a person who looks like the opposite sex because of deformed genetic instruction using the opposite sex bathroom? Would such a person be offended or would anyone else even notice? If there were a question because one’s sex is difficult to identify, would others get offended? In these cases, prudence dictates the choice.

      However, it’s very unsafe for predators (i.e. younger men and perverts) to use the opposite sex bathroom. Is this about safety or is it about agenda?

      • Your Fellow Catholic says:

        Trans people are not by and large predators. In fact, most predators are not trans. Please stop bearing false witness against your neighbors.

        Prudence dictates that people should be allowed to go to the bathroom freely, and that people should mind their own business while they are there.

        • Steve Seitz says:

          Please go back and re-read what I said. I didn’t say that transexuals are predators. In fact, I inferred the opposite.

          In regard to prudence, you’re incorrect. It’s not prudent that we allow predators to go into whatever restroom they desire. That’s called imprudent.

          • Your Fellow Catholic says:

            Well, Steve, you said that predators shouldn’t use a certain bathroom, and therefore we shouldn’t let trans people use a certain bathroom. If you are not saying that trans people are predators, then why keep them from using their bathroom? Why even mention the word “predators” at all?

            This is a ruse all LGBT people are familiar with. It’s been used for decades to keep us out of jobs, out of homes, and keep us literally beaten up.

          • Steve Seitz says:

            I think you’re still misreading my words. Let me try to explain this a little better.

            I said that a transgender person with faulty genes who uses the opposite sex bathroom because they look more like the opposite sex is not an issue for most people [I presume]. This decision involves prudence and discretion depending upon the person and the situation.

            But others (i.e. not transgender) who because they have an overabundance of testosterone (e.g. young men) or who are perverts (e.g. people with psychological illness) should not be using the opposite sex bathroom. I mention this category because I don’t think any store policy or law should allow this.

            These situations should not be a matter of store policy or law, but…

      • First, if we’re talking about single use unisex restrooms it will be a boon for women. You’ve seen the lines while men zoom in and out. Second, laws in some states now say you have to use the restroom for the gender shown on your birth certificate. At a fundraiser awhile back I met a man and when I googled him, I found out he was transgender. With a beard, balding and a very nice Brooks Brothers suit I never would have known. Believe me, if he’s forced by law to use the ladies room it will freak out the women in there.

        • Steve Seitz says:

          It sounds like we’re in agreement. Prudence should drive the decision.

        • Steve Seitz says:

          I might add: there wasn’t a problem with state laws in this regard until the LGBT community started to make this a political issue.

          • Steve …It’s a chicken or the egg question. As I recall there were some pretty nasty incidents involving transgender youth and then the LGBT civil rights groups got involved, then the red state legislatures started up with the “Bathroom Bills” with all the “Men in the Ladies Room” fear mongering and hysteria and then the Obama Administration issued the regulations and then more “Bathroom Bills” and on and on. Certainly if I were a bishop, I’d say that in every new construction or remodel the design ought to maximize privacy for everyone in restrooms, etc

          • Steve men were using women’s one stall, locked restrooms to change into women’s clothing at the Bart stations in San Francisco, and there were other men hanging around those restrooms waiting for them, so one got the idea that they could be using them for worse (such as prostitution. It was insulting and possibly dangerous for real women. I and a friend had to deal with that once many years ago because I had forgotten use the hotel facilities. YFC can say all he wants too about not slandering, but he is not a woman, and does not have to deal with such situations.

    • You really have to be a strange kind of fellow Catholic to be in a homosexual relationship.

      • Aelred .. A conservative Evangelical friend of my Dad’s said, that after a lot of prayerful thought that the most important question a Christian should ask about same-sex relationships is “Does it honor God.” After a lot of prayerful thought about my time with my late girlfriend, my answer was “yes.”

        • Your answer is wrong, C&H. You are lying to yourself, and what you believe to be “prayerful thought” was nothing more than rationalization of something you already wanted to have affirmed. No sincerely prayerful thought could reach a conclusion so abhorrent to Scripture and Tradition as that a homosexual relationship could possibly honor God. No way, no how. Why not just throw the Bible away while you and your evangelical friend are at it?

        • Steve Seitz says:

          What was the basis for your “yes” answer?

          • Steve – God said the it is not god for man – only one at the time- to be alone. At the time, and for thousands of years thereafter, the masculine assumed the feminine I believe he did not want Helen and I to be alone. We tried to follow the first commandment honoring god, praying, receiving the sacraments -She was Episcopalian, moving toward Catholicism – and the second, we loved and respected both sets a of parents. We were true to each other, forsaking all others etc. In my heart and conseince I believe what we had was as beautiful in the eyes of God as one of the best marriages I’ve seen. that of my parents. I’m greatfull to God for giving her to me and accept that in His own mysterious ways he saw fit to take her from me and our…

          • …families and friends.

          • Steve Seitz says:

            Thank you for sharing your story. It sounds like you learned and practiced Christianity love (charity) through your experience with her. And it seemed that other good things came of your relationship as well. But I didn’t see anything that would affirm the relationship in the eyes of God or the Church even though much good seems to have resulted.

            The Church teaches that one must never employ evil acts to achieve good. It’s also true that a properly formed conscience will not directly contradict Catholic teaching even though the messiness of real world life can sometimes provide situations that appear to be against the Good even though they actually are not.
            [Continued on Next]

          • Steve Seitz says:

            [Continued from Previous]
            In this regard, our conscience becomes like a moral theologian but without the need for decades of study. But our conscience only serves as a correct moral theologian if it has been properly formed.

            In regard to your comment that “it’s not good for man to be alone”, this would be an excellent discussion topic although I’m not sure we have enough room in this area to discuss it.

        • That sounds so similar to the women who have an abortion and say it was such a difficult decision which really forced them to do so much soul searching. I always laugh when I hear that because all they’re really saying it took them some time to rationalize away their conscience. They do what they want. In fact, that’s the same for any sin. Then it goes beyond rationalization to delusion and it becomes God’s will. The Bible says evil will be called good, and good called evil. That day has arrived.

      • With all due respect women and children need to be protected from men pretending to be women. Not all such people are really “transgender”. No matter what operations or hormones they take, a person born a man is going to be much stronger than most women. Some gender neutral locked restrooms should solve this problem and create safety for everyone. No need for a man to go into a lady’s room nor a woman to go into a man’s room. A person going into a men’s room should have men’s parts and visa versa, exempting some little boys of course. Mother do have to take their little sons with them. This applies even more in locker rooms.

        • Dear Anne – It’s not uncommon for men to assault women in ladies rooms. They don’t need to dress as women. The state “Bathroom bills” have nothing to do with that. They force TG people with the “man parts” to go into the ladies room and vice versa. See my exchange above 3/1717 @ 1:48PM.
          If the man I wrote about came into the ladies room, would you be less uncomfortable if he showed you a birth certificate saying he was born female. I sure wouldn’t.

          • Yes many men have assaulted women in ladies’ rooms, but this law gives them carte blanche access to women and little girls because any man who calls himself a woman has access to a ladies’ room, whether he dresses as a man or not. That is just plain not wrong. This is the reason for the need of one stall gender neutral restrooms (at least one) in places. Two places I go to now have two, one-stall, locked gender neutral restrooms for the use of everyone. Never the less, there needs to be some ladies’ rooms just for women as more women have incontinence problems since we are the ones who birth children. Now please leave me alone as I do not want to post on here much any more.

          • I do have to correct the end of the second line in my last post. It should read: “That is just plain wrong.” Also, the law I was talking about is the one for most or all of California. not necessarily what is being done in this university.

  4. Joel Fago says:

    Thomas Edward Miles
    So what and who cares?!
    God created male and female. God cares!!

  5. If there’s no need for separate bathrooms, why not just take a leek on the front lawn ? These people have issues.

    • I agree, a full bladder is an issue.

    • Encouraging people to pretend to be what they are not or/and mutilate themselves in so -called sex change operations is another issue here too. it is a serious sin to encourage people to do this to their bodies. It changes nothing, not their DNA, nor their sex. It just mutilates and most people finally admit they regret having done such a thing. Many have reversed it in time, but for others it was too late to reverse. A man is a man no matter how much he tries to be something that God did not make him, and such treatment costs a fortune when others are without basic medical care. The only people entitled to or should have corrective surgery if they want are those who actually have bodily defects, a rarity.

  6. ann tagonism says:

    Wow ! What an incredible University.
    All that high falootin” knowledge
    and they can’t figure out which bathroom to use.
    Really want to send my kid there !

COMMENTS POLICY: Comments are limited to 750 characters and will be truncated at 750. Comments should not contain offensive or libelous language. Please strive to be civil. All comments are subject to approval by our moderator and to editing as the moderator deems appropriate. Inclusion of your email address is optional.

Speak Your Mind

COMMENTS POLICY: Comments are limited to 750 characters and will be truncated at 750. Comments should not contain offensive or libelous language. Please strive to be civil. All comments are subject to approval by our moderator and to editing as the moderator deems appropriate. Inclusion of your email address is optional.