Remember all those movies in which a man and a woman are having an argument at the office--and one of them runs into the restroom to end the argument? If this law, which we lucky Montgomery Countyites have just had imposed on us, spreads across the country, film writers will have to come up with new plot twists.

Comments

[taj]

Just a heads up, I'm not sure the link points to the right place.

[Editor]

Link corrected - thanks!

[Brian]

Seriously? The bill

“prohibit discrimination in housing, employment, public accommodations, cable television service and taxicab service on the basis of gender identity.”

Yet the article linked to sums it up as "allow 'men' to have open access to women's and girl’s public restrooms, locker rooms and showers by simply stating that they self-identify as (read: feel like) a woman."

That "summary" not only misrepresents the focus of the bill, it also misrepresents the condition of being transgender. The link might not be an outright lie, but it is misleading to a dangerous degree. It's an attempt to stir up emotions rather than accurately discuss the law. I expect more from The Point.

As for your concern that movies will need to come up with new plot twists, those twists were never grounded in reality anyway:

“No trans person in the midst of transition, before genital surgery, goes and exposes himself or herself in any public facility,” says Dana Beyer who works for a Councilwoman. “It’s never happened. There’s never been [such] a police report filed in the United States.”

[Brian]

PS I'm from Montgomery County and I don't feel imposed. I'd appreciate it if you didn't speak for the entirety of the county.

[Brian]

I just realized that I did not explicitly state:

References to private facilities such as health club locker rooms do not appear in the bill.

And I also just realized that "locker rooms" is cited in the article, so I guess it *was* an outright lie.

I also found this information from a WaPo article:

Cynthia Goldstein, an attorney with San Francisco's Human Rights Commission, said that city's law has not been used as a cover for criminal activity since it was enacted more than a decade ago.

Anne, I'd like you to offer a correction/clarification.

[Walter]

Ann,

Now you're repeating flagrant lies. See:

www.teachthefacts.org/vigilance.html

I'm with Brian. Please correct you position.

[Gina Dalfonzo]

Let's keep it civil, folks, please. You can argue about the meaning and interpretations of the bill all you want, but the next comment that calls someone a liar gets deleted.

A link from the Montgomery County website that may help sort the matter out is here:

http://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/content/council/pdf/agenda/col/2007/071113/20071113_11.pdf

[Brian]

Thanks for the link, Gina. Really helpful stuff there.

[Steve (SBK)]

Yeah Anne! Didn't you know it's a crime to continue a discussion in a restroom or to theorize about new plot twists?

And didn't you know that imposition only occurs if you "feel" imposed?

[Walter]

Gina,

Anne is promoting an untruthful campaign. Thanks for posting the Montgomery County link. Facts are helpful.

For example, the Mike Adams piece states:

"The bill had disturbed many women because it would allow “men” to have open access to women's and girl’s public restrooms, locker rooms and showers by simply stating that they self-identify as (read: feel like) a woman."

Let's count the problems in the above statement:

1. The group CRW has only 17 members. Calling that "many" is a stretch.
2. The term "men" is inflamatory. Respectful people do not refer to FTMs as "men"
3. FTMs don't "feel like" women, they *are* women.

Anne,

Do you know any transgender people? Do you know what they go through? Do you know that Mike Adams is a virulent anti-trans activist? Who do you think is in more danger, a transgender person because of the lies (yes, I said it) spread by Mike Adams or everybody else in the surrounding community?

Montgomery County just caught a serial rapist. That man was a real threat to women in the community, not a "headless monster". Was he an FTM? No. When was the last time you read about an FTM rapist?

Did you read the article about the Oxnard, CA youth (gender identity non-conforming) who was murdered for being out? That's why the Montgomery County Council voted unanimously on this legislation. It adds legal protection for people who need it.

[Gina Dalfonzo]

Walter,

man
Pronunciation:
\ˈman, in compounds ˌman or mən\
Function:
noun
Inflected Form(s):
plural men \ˈmen, in compounds ˌmen or mən\
Etymology:
Middle English, from Old English man, mon human being, male human; akin to Old High German man human being, Sanskrit manu
Date:
before 12th century
1 a (1): an individual human; especially : an adult male human

wom·an
Pronunciation:
\ˈwu̇-mən, especially Southern ˈwō- or ˈwə-\
Function:
noun
Inflected Form(s):
plural wom·en \ˈwi-mən\
Etymology:
Middle English, from Old English wīfman, from wīf woman, wife + man human being, man
Date:
before 12th century
1 a: an adult female person

(Merriam-Webster Online)

You'll pardon the dictionary definitions, I hope; it just struck me that if we can't tell a man from a woman anymore, it's time we went back to basics. A man is a man and a woman is a woman, whatever they believe in their hearts that they are or whatever they are feeling. I could go around saying I was the queen of England -- I could even be convinced in my own mind I was the queen of England -- but if I showed up at Buckingham Palace and demanded entrance to her private rooms, I'd be thrown out on my ear.

In short, we don't get to make up who we are. I'm sorry if that's politically incorrect. It happens to be the truth. You said it yourself: Facts are helpful.

[Walter]

Oh, Gina

I pointed out the teachthefacts.org web site to give you the opportunity to educate yourself and this topic and this is what you came up with? Did you read some of the testimony on TeachTheFacts? After reading that testimony, do you continue to support Anne's link to the Mike Adams piece?

Here is one example of the personal testimony of a woman who fought against the petition drive. Please, for the love of God, stop the cruelty.

"svelte_brunette said...

I just wanted to personally thank all of those who helped battle the preposterous mis-reprenation of the non-discrimination law. I have only had the honor of meeting a few of you personally, but maybe I'll have the pleasure of meeting more of you in the coming months. I am humbled by the vociferous efforts of activists on behalf of people like myself and my friends. You did not have to or need to go out of your way to speak up for an already much-maligned and misunderstood minority, but some unquenchable streak of righteousness called you forth to. I am in awe of your humanity. Thank you.

If you are sitting at your computer reading this (and most likely you are, or printed it out from one) you might be interested to know that deep in the core of your machine is a multiple-instruction per cycle execution unit. This may not mean much to you, but several decades ago the dogma of computing professors and engineers was that you can only execute one single instruction per clock cycle. One engineer showed this was entirely wrong and laid out the groundwork for significantly increasing processor speed and efficiency by showing how to perform several instructions at the same time. Unfortunately she was fired from her job at IBM when she broke news of her medical condition.

Despite this setback, and numerous others, she went on to co-author the book that became the bible for VLSI (Very Large Scale Integrated-circuit) design. This was the basic tool thousands of engineers across the world have used to design and build the ubiquitous electronica we depend on for our daily lives.

Here story is perhaps the one that those opposed to protections for people with Gender Identity fear most, as she went on to become Professor Emerita at a major public university. You can learn more of her story here: http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/BioSketch.html
You can learn more about T issues in general from her main site here:
http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/conway.html

From some of Jim’s comments I suspect this is one of the first times some of you have dealt directly with trans folks. I hope you have found it educational. For those interested in a further peak into “T world,” you might find the video at http://youtube.com/watch?v=8iDpx2PEM3E interesting. It was done by a friend of mine and is a biography / introspective / rockin’ look at her life and transition. Warning: if your not from the MTV generation, your eyeballs might start spinning – watch out for symptoms of epileptic seizures!

Peace,

Cynthia
February 20, 2008 8:20 AM"

[Walter]

Gina,

You admonished me for "tone" on the "Re: Hardened to Violence" thread. Did you read the Mike Adams piece? As editor, do you have anything to say about the tone and the dehumanizing language in his article?

[Gina Dalfonzo]

No, because I don't see any dehumanizing language in his article.

[Walter]

Gina,

I'll list a few for you.

1. "The bill had disturbed many women because it would allow “men” to have open access to women's and girl’s public restrooms"

I assume that Adams was referring to Female To Male (FTM) transexuals as as "men". Why the scare quotes?

2. in order to protect transgendered “persons”

Notice that "persons" is in scare quotes. Why did Adams employ them?

3. "One would expect such a proposal from a committee of professors"

Are you lending support for the dumbing of "regular" Americans?

4. "Perhaps those who fancy themselves to be unicorns or Martians will receive protection from “discrimination” in the near future."

Do you support the tone of this comment? Do you agree with the underlying message? Do you think this message is not dehumanizing?

5. "Furthermore, I asked whether I could peek over the bathroom stall and watch the attractive lady urinate."

Do you consider this to be a slur? Isn't Adams implying that FTMs are predators and perverts?

6. "But, now, as “liberals” add transgendered bathrooms to their workplace diversity agenda I understand why they were reluctant to answer my question."

Did you know that transgender people use public restrooms all the time? Did you know that gender identity and political persuasion have nothing to do with each other? Adams' use of the "liberal agenda" label abstracts a very real issue for transgender people - they have to pee just like you.

7. Transgendered bathrooms will undoubtedly be supported by pedophiles and perverts everywhere.

No comment. Your thoughts?

8. It is too easy for sexual predators to feign gender identity crisis. And too likely their victims will be real women.

Your thoughts?

Anne, I'd like to hear your thoughts on the piece you linked to. After reading about it and thinking about it, do you still defend it?

[Walter]

Gina and Anne,

I read a very poignant analysis which gets to the root of the issue:

"They aren’t actually afraid of a “genderless” society at all, since that is impossible. Gender is real, not a social construction that can be eliminated through social engineering. This is the ultimate irony: What they fear is the very realness of gender, and its visibility. They don’t fear a society that’s “genderless,” they fear a society in which gender is no longer hidden behind the artifice of compulsory roles and modes of expression. Let’s take gender out and look at it, let’s learn everything we can about it, and let’s apply that knowledge to building a beloved community in which every single person is cherished for who they are. Uh-oh, scary."

As the writer says, this is a conversation we need to have. What we don't need is the promotion of fear, ignorance, dehumanizing language and downright hate. Please read this article (and drill down through the links). Study the issue and share your thoughts.

http://www.equalityloudoun.org/2008/01/16/conversations-we-need-to-have/

[Gina Dalfonzo]

Walter, I did read the article. I simply do not agree that criticizing is necessarily the same thing as dehumanization.

[Gina Dalfonzo]

Sorry, Walter, but that quote makes no sense at all. What on earth is "take gender out and look at it" supposed to mean? To be frank (if not flippant), it sounds like something you DON'T want someone doing in front of you in the bathroom.

[Walter]

Gina,

Gender and biological sex are different things.

Anne,

Are you there?

[Gina Dalfonzo]

Walter, it's possible you haven't been here long enough to be aware of this, but repeatedly calling on a blogger to respond to your comments is not considered acceptable behavior at The Point. You're allowed to ask for a response once, and then you are to let it drop unless and until the blogger chooses to respond. Our bloggers are very busy and don't have time to respond to every comment, so it's up to them whether they decide to do so. Getting a response is a privilege, not a right.

I thought this was in our comment policy, but it doesn't seem to be. It is something we've discussed here before, though. I'll try to get it added to the policy as soon as possible, but in the meantime, you now know that any further comments badgering Anne for a response will be deleted. Thanks for your cooperation.

[Steve (SBK)]

To be honest, this:
"Gender is real, not a social construction that can be eliminated through social engineering. This is the ultimate irony: What they fear is the very realness of gender, and its visibility. They don’t fear a society that’s “genderless,” they fear a society in which gender is no longer hidden behind the artifice of compulsory roles and modes of expression."

is complete nonsense. The even more ultimate irony is that gender cannot be real if it has no defined role or mode of expression - or these are constantly shifting through social engineering.

[LeeQuod]

A question, in the tradition of trying to lighten up on Fridays: Cate Blanchett is nominated for a Best Supporting Actress Oscar for portraying the young Bob Dylan. Shouldn't she be entered in the category for Best Supporting AcTOR?

[Brian]

How are we so sure that "a man is a man and a woman is a woman?" (and this can be answered by anyone, not just Gina)

Is a man an individual with XY? What about men with de la Chapelle syndrome who have XX chromosomes?

Is a woman an individual with XX? What about girls/women with Swyer syndrome who are later found to have an XY karyotype?

How do we classify an intersexed person? Or anyone who exhibits physical characteristics of both?

Is "maleness" and "femaleness" determined by primary physical characteristics? secondary physical characteristics? hormones? chromosomes? brain activity? self-perception?

It is easy for me: I look male, I have male chromosomes, and I perceive myself to be male. But given the above cases, I think we can all agree it is not *always* so simple.

[Walter]

No problem Gina. I won't ask you for an answer either. You've already stated your opinion and you've demonstrated an attitude of proud and willful ignorance. The truth is that you can't promote the mindless nonsense articulated by Mike Adams and the Not In My Shower clan *and* be a Christian at the same time. You've chosen to be "Un-Christian". Please don't lecture me about tone. I won't waste time attempting to have a conversation with you. It's futile.

Brian,
Good luck. You've got more tenacity than me. Please don't be disappointed if you can't get Gina and Anne to think.

[Brian]

I don't often interact with Anne, but Gina stimulates my thinking often. Hopefully you'll stick around (if silently) and see more of her in action! She's also the hyperlink guru and that comes in handy;)

[Steve (SBK)]

Some thought provoking questions Brian.
I'll provide some of my thoughts (and this is only a mental exercise, not knowing anyone, that I know of, who is 'transsexual').

I think we're more sure that "a man is a man and a woman is a woman" than we are sure that "a man is not a man and a woman is not a woman". In fact, we're "so sure", that we could leave the bulk of the decisions up to 3 year olds. But of course, the difficulty arises in the difficult situations...

Your criteria questions are essentially asking: is masculinity or femininity determined by the biological or mental state of an individual. (Seeing those states as somewhat discrete, and that our brains aren't the sole cause of our minds). The simple answer is biology, which influences our later-developed mentality (for of course it can't be vice versa). Society can also influence, but of course only build upon (or damage) what is already there.
In the special cases of those with physically-debilitating ambiguous abnormalities (for these syndromes you listed have serious biological consequences), I have full sympathy (more on that later). In the cases where biology is normal, but the mind is not, I have less sympathy. If the mind has been damaged by abuse in some way, then my response is to get help, not treat the damage as acceptable. If a mind has not been damaged (somehow) and a man just 'feels' like a woman, I think he's just delusional, perverted or narcissistic (and so is very well in need of serious help), and should not be given any lawful comforts that help the problem persist.

Back to the sympathy, or more rightly, compassion. Lets help those in any way who need and want our help (because of serious, physical problems). But, I see no reason why we should accept, nor especially approve, of those who want to transfer genders.

I see problems, and degradation, and imperfection in this fallen world. But I see a lot more unity and order. The brokenness needs to be addressed, and as Christians we should be in the front lines. But that doesn't mean God's plan is for Femininity or Masculinity to be liquid states. These characteristics are deep symbols that God has given us, easily united, but not easily crossed.

So, I agree Brian, that the cases are not always simple... but they aren't overly complex, or at least, we shouldn't give wisdom credits to sophists.

And Walter, grow up. You're the one who's specifically degrading the homosapienity of Gina and Anne.

[Jason Taylor]

Steve is right. And the idea that what is inborn is good, and societies influence necessarily tyrannical is curious. Sometimes it is but sometimes it isn't.
And on this issue the influence of society tends to work the same way. There are more societies where men talk about war, politics, hunting, fishing, work, sports, machines and tools, and sex; and where women talk about human relationships; then the reverse. Though of course that is not a monalith, it is a tendancy.

[Bruce Robertson]

Brian and Walter,

Would it not be possible to interpret the concern expressed in the article as concern a concern that sexual predators might use the law to masquerade as people with gender identification issues in order to get closer to children? In the story below, a 39 year-old man uses a wig and attempts to get near some school girls. They drove him off because they were alarmed and screamed.

http://www.reuters.com/article/oddlyEnoughNews/idUSN2257905520080222

With the rate at which children go missing and are sexaully abused in this country, isn't it reasonable to be concerned about training chldren that it is okay for males to use female restroom facilities? If a child sees a man enter a ladies restroom, I want that child thinking, "this is strange and I should be alarmed" not "this is completely acceptable".

In an ideal world, we would not have to worry about such unintended consequences of a law meant to help people. Unfortunately, it isn't an ideal world.

God Bless,

Bruce Robertson

[Brian]

Bruce,
I believe such fear is unfounded. As I've previously mentioned, no jurisdictions with similar laws have been used as cover for crimes. The man in the article you referenced was trespassing which would still be a crime under these laws.

Furthermore, we should teach our children that a man loitering in a wig and leering a children posses a potential threat just as a man (or woman) loitering and leering not in a costume. II think we're all in agreement here.

A child SHOULD still raise eyebrows if she sees a man entering a woman's restroom, but that is not what we're talking about here. We are talking about individuals who live their lives as women (or men). Who have probably been prescribed hormones, who by external appearances and internal understanding are the gender they assert, and who have little on their minds besides using the facility and getting out.

If anything, this law clarifies life for transgender individuals who may be unsure as to where they should go. If transmen are prohibited from using male restrooms, the result will be men in women's restrooms. Which, as has already been expressed, might raise eyebrows.

All of this being said, we are griping over one small portion of a law which doesn't even extend to private facilities. If we value honesty and forthrightness, we will discuss the actual substance of the law and not fantastical creations of what it is thought to be.

[Bruce Robertson]

Brian,

But even laws with the best of intentions can produce consequences which were not envisioned by those who were only doing what they thought was right. I have, for example, argued strenuously with fellow conservatives that creating an organ of state security with sweeping powers (The Department of Homeland Security) and suspending habeus corpus rights for Islamic terrorists will eventually have unpleasant consequences. (Not to mention allowing the state to use torture.) They respond to me in much the same way you have responded to me. I hope for everyone's sake that I am wrong.

Even while hoping that I am wrong, however, I must oppose efforts that I think will have harmful longetrm consequences. You have two choices when faced with this kind of opposition. First, you can charitably assume that the opposition arises from a genuine Christian concern for the overall wellbeing of people in society. Second you can assume that the opposition stems from an ugly prejudice which allows no concern for those who are in painful circumstances.

As a person who has a long history of assuming the worst in people and attacking them in consequence (just ask Lee and Faith), I am slowly learning that it is best to put the most positive spin that you can on other peoples motivations while seeking to correct them as gently as possible. I thought, perhaps, you might benefit from that experience and interpret the resistance of your fellow Christians to laws attempting to aid trans-gendered individuals in as positive a light as possible.

God Bless,

Bruce Robertson

[Brian]

I do understand--and hope that I have conveyed--the sincere intentions with which bloggers and commenters here approach their discussion of this legislation. There is room for unintended consequences of any action and I feel secure that this particular bill minimizes the opportunity for exploitation, especially given our ability to observe over a decade of similar legislation in this country.

This bill will ensure transgender individuals have access to the same necessities of life that we all take for granted: housing, employment, television service, transportation, and access to public accommodations. I am proud of my county and hope that those with concerns will spend getting to know the transgender community members who live in Montgomery County.

Regardless, I respect the faith-guided processes we have all taken to arrive at our respective conclusions.