The Sentinel Digs Into It

Besides their editorial, The Sentinel this week had a news article about the Citizens for a Responsible Whatever's big referendum drive. Most of this we already knew, but the reporter, Nathan Carrick, did interviews with a number of people and got some insightful quotes and details. From the headline on down, you can see they tried to be fair and balanced on this one.

The story is long, I'm only going to copy and paste pieces of it.

Citizens for a Responsible Government, a community group pushing for the repeal of a county bill passed in November guaranteeing the rights of transgender individuals, says it is about 3,500 signatures short of getting a referendum question on the ballot this February. The bill, they say, "grants special rights to cross-dressers, transvestites and transgenders under the cover of granting them 'civil rights.'"

The bill, 23-07, was introduced by Council member Duchy Trachtenberg and was passed unanimously by the Council. "It allows the laws that exist to remain in place," Trachtenberg said. "We wanted to ensure that these people weren't discriminated against in housing, employment or the use of public facilities."

CRG needs 12,500 signatures by Feb. 3, and 25,000 total to get a referendum vote on repealing the bill. A spokesperson for the group says they currently have about 9,000 signatures.

Michelle Turner a spokesperson for CRG says the group is most upset about language in the bill that allows people to choose what rest room or locker room they use according to their gender identity.

"This bill gives transgender people access to private areas that they shouldn't have access to," Turner said. "How do you determine if a person is a cross-dresser or a pedophile? It gives pedophiles an easy pass into someplace they shouldn't be." Prejudice or poor legislation? [pay to subscribe]

Michelle Turner, you might remember, used to be president of the Citizens for a Responsible Curriculum -- she chaired the original organizing meeting of the group that wanted to recall the Montgomery County Board of Education because of a new health curriculum. So it's not like she suddenly became concerned about transgender people in the "areas that they shouldn't have access to," whatever that means. She's opposed to gay and transgender people, no matter whether you're teaching about them in school or granting them equal rights under county law.

And ... do you see the loophole that give pedophiles an easy pass to anything? No, there's nothing about pedophiles in this bill. But that was smart to mention them, they might get a few more signatures on their petitions if people think they are opposing pedophiles.

Now -- watch the logic here:

However, according to Neil Greenberger, spokesman for the county council, says the issue doesn't exist because the bill says nothing about bathrooms.

Trachtenberg says, the original bill did mention bathrooms, but that portion of the bill was removed prior to the measure's passage in council.

That apparently isn't good enough for the members of the CRG. "It still doesn't specifically deny access. It's still pretty broad," Turner claims.

Reasoning with negatives is always difficult, but this one takes the cake. The idea is that because the new law does not specifically forbid people going into the wrong restrooms, it permits it.

In fact, no MoCo law has ever said who can go into what bathroom. This statement is true of every law in Montgomery County -- every single one of them "doesn't specifically deny access." No wonder they're so upset!

And just a minute, don't transgender people have to pee sometimes?

The article talks about the hoax that the CRW staged at the Rio Sport and Health Club a couple of weeks ago, where they had a guy in a dress go into the women's locker room, even though the place actually has a third locker room that can be used by ... guys in dresses. The Sentinel doesn't say it's a hoax, they are trying to be level with this. They let the experts speak.

Trachtenberg was skeptical of the event's veracity. "It's highly suspicious that an incident occurred at a gym and there happened to be a CRG member there almost immediately after it happened. It does make one wonder if the whole thing was a set up."

Dan Furmansky, Executive Director of Equality Maryland, agrees with Trachtenberg. "It's such an obviously fabricated publicity stunt," he said. "These laws exist for the majority of people in the county. Men in dresses and Peeping Toms don't do this kind of thing. These things don't happen."

When asked about Trachtenberg's skepticism, Turner said, "She's delusional. Her poorly worded, unfortunately timed bill is coming back to bite her in the butt. We [CRG] had nothing to do with it [the incident at Rio]."

Hee hee hee hoo hoo hoo. Nothing ... to ... do ... with ... it.

Oh, that's rich. That's good.

A flyer produced by CRG outlines four reasons it is opposed to the law. They are: "Religious organizations such as churches, Christian schools, and book stores are not exempt; Freedom of speech is diminished; Women's privacy and safety rights are jeopardized; Indoctrination of our kids."

Turner said religious organizations, under this bill, are forced to hire transgender individuals who are otherwise qualified for the position. "There are churches that view this sort of thing as sinful," she said.

Greenberger says the claims are bunk.

"Nobody is ever forced to ever hire anyone in the United States. People choose who they want based on qualifications. Similarly nobody should be denied employment on basis of race or gender," Greenberger said.

Mm, that seems easy enough.

This is the first article I've seen that actually talked to people and describes the situation accurately. The CRW wants to pretend the transgender nondiscrimination bill is something it's not.

One thing I would want to point out here is how many people have had to stop what they're doing, often important government business, to address the whining complaints by this nutty group.

Supporters of the CRG are confused as to why the county chose to fight this fight.

"Why did they choose to introduce this bill? There's so much more hate crime related to race and religion. There are more fat people discriminated against than transgenders," Turner said.

Gender Identity Disorder is classified as a mental disorder by the American Psychiatric Association, which Turner points out.

But Furmansky said the treatment for Gender Identity Disorder is gender reassignment surgery. "This law is for people who present themselves full time as the gender they feel they are," he said.

Most of us have not given this whole topic of gender identity a lot of thought, but there are some distinctions that matter.

The Sentinel did a cool thing. They went to a psychologist to get some information about all this confusing stuff.

Dr. Denise Dewhurst, Chair of the Psychology Department at Montgomery College and practicing psychologist, said there are some common misconceptions about gender identity.

"A man with a female gender identity doesn't necessarily cross-dress. Transgender people are people who feel they were born with the wrong body. They're not gay or transvestites. Because a person is a cross-dresser or transvestite don't mean they are transgender," Dewhurst said.

Cross-dressing and transvestism, Dewhurst said, are classified as fetishes. She added, "Pedophilia has nothing to do with cross-dressing, transvestism, Gender Identity Disorder or simply being gay."

Yes, the only reason the CRW mentions pedophilia is because -- everybody is against it. It's just another way they can stir up negative emotion, which is, in the end, their big goal.

"What we have here is a group who don't have a comfort with LBGT [lesbian, bisexual, gay, transgender] individuals. It seems to be a loosely held together group of a few individuals with personal prejudices against LBGT individuals," Trachtenberg said.

CRG is a grassroots group with about 50 members who meet each week at a Baptist Church on Montrose Road. The members then go to shopping centers, grocery stores and other churches to get signatures for the petition, Turner said. The group, however, is not church-affiliated.

That number fifty obviously came from a CRW member. They don't have any 50 members. They might not have a dozen members.

In general, I don't like to see the press give these idiots free publicity. Somebody scanning this article uncarefully might think there's something to it, and it's best just to ignore them. But they're working under the radar, going into the churches and lying about what this law says and what its effect will be, getting people to sign their petitions to put the referendum on the ballot. So if there is going to be publicity, at least it ought to be factual, like this, rather than just repeating the CRW's talking points, like Channel 7 and The Examiner have done.