Mr. Shawn Adamsson
Chief Culture Officer
Vice President of Strategy and Engagement
rTraction Canada group (Ellipsis Digital & Engine SevenFour)
The London Roundhouse
240 Waterloo St
London ON  N6B 2N4
Tel: 519-438-9064

Dear Mr. Adamsson:

Greetings of the day!

I commend the efforts of everyone who contributed to the restoration of the building that you and your employees are now occupying. Its history, outlined in the Internet posting, certainly affirms the importance of all the work that has gone into preserving such a treasured heritage.

While visiting the website to read about The London Roundhouse Project (http://londonroundhouse.com), my attention was drawn to the posting of your e-mail (subsequently copied herein) having the subject, Roundhouse Restrooms. The move towards gender-neutral washrooms (“Human”/”Human” instead of “Men”/”Women” or “Gentlemen”/”Ladies” for the door signs) reflects how far our society has distanced itself from a Biblical worldview. From this long-standing and enduring (Isaiah 40:8) perspective, I submit the following questions in response to your invitation; that is, if feedback from the general public is welcome.

Does it make sense to turn the world upside down (morally speaking) to accommodate the idiosyncrasies of a small percentage of the population? Wouldn’t it make more sense to provide counselling to these people on an individual basis to help them resolve their problems associated with using public restrooms as these have traditionally existed? If given the choice, I expect that the average woman would choose a restroom with toilets only; while the average man the restroom with urinals. For the sake of a small percentage of the population, is it fair to make everyone else uncomfortable with the use of common restrooms for males and females? What about the effect this has on children and youth? Aside from the potential psychological harm, is their safety at risk as well?

One practical idea—where space and finances permit—is to have a third restroom (in addition to the usual men’s and women’s restrooms), which is specially designed for handicapped people (i.e., wheelchair accessible). However, this solution is not always feasible; consequently, we can do our best to lovingly help those who have gender identity problems overcome these as much as possible, but we won’t be helping them if we attempt to encourage such people to deny the reality of the existence of their problem (as, for example, by providing gender-neutral restrooms). Some problems in life may be unresolvable, and therefore need to be accepted by the afflicted individual while adapting as best that can be done—with acceptance and assistance from others to carry this out.

In regard to fairness for the ladies in terms of the relative number of restroom fixtures as compared to men’s restrooms, one could eliminate one of the urinals for the men to make it equitable. However, considering that traditionally (based primarily on the fact that women are naturally gifted with the ability of bearing children and motherhood), the man is the provider (the “bread-winner”) for the family, the workforce ideally has men in the majority. This arrangement has a sound rationale and substantiates the provision of more fixtures in the restroom for men in this type of society.

In our time society is increasingly drifting away from long-standing values and ways of living. I put to you that people are making a huge mistake by along with this trend, and especially in regard to a sexual identity issue closely related to the one described above; that is, the attempt to have society legitimise and accept homosexual relationships as normal (e.g., we are threatened with a major step in this direction by the pending United States Supreme Court decision on same-sex “marriage” expected in June 2015). The traditional family has been the bedrock of society: we undermine it to our own peril. To substantiate these conclusions, I refer you to the texts in the attachment, along with my comments in the forwarded message.

I hope that my questions—substantiated by the facts presented—can persuade you to reconsider your position on the subject of gender-neutral restrooms for your employees.

Sincerely,
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX