Yay For The Press VIII: The Blade

The news reporting on the shower-nuts' petition drive has been wonderful. Some media outlets lean one way, some lean the other, but almost none of them have fallen for the perverted-men-in-the-ladies-room frame that the Citizens for a Responsible Whatever used to scare people into signing their petition. If they continue to present the facts to the public and there is a referendum, then people can vote intelligently, one way or the other.

Debate over the federal employment nondiscrimination act has highlighted both solidarity and differences between gay and transgender populations. The fact is, they're two different things. Sexual orientation has to do with who you feel attracted to, gender identity is about who you feel you are. Different as they are, both groups suffer similar effects as sexual minorities. As I have said here before, I think a lot of the discrimination against gay people actually comes from gender role nonconformity, not their bedroom behavior. Macho lesbians and limp-wristed gay guys who wiggle when they walk have a lot worse problems than "straight-looking" gay people. So as much as some like to think the two things are separate, there is considerable overlap, especially in prejudice and discrimination. All in all, it has seemed that the gay community favors adding gender identity to legal nondiscrimination wording, if only because transgender people are in fact a vulnerable population that suffers from terrible discrimination.

This week the area's gay newspaper, The Blade, reviewed events in our local controversy. They got some new information, too.

A new law barring discrimination against transgender people in Montgomery County, Md., is in jeopardy, after a group opposed to the measure submitted a petition that could force a referendum on the issue.

Citizens for a Responsible Government submitted thousands of signatures Tuesday to county officials seeking a referendum on the law that prohibits “discrimination in housing, employment, public accommodations, cable television service and taxicab service on the basis of gender identity.”

But county officials — required to suspend the law at least until the 32,087 signatures can be verified — said the organization advanced its cause under false pretenses.

Montgomery County Council President Mike Knapp said opponents of the law wrongly represented it as allowing men into women’s bathrooms and locker rooms.

“The misinformation being put out about this law really troubles me,” he said. “We guaranteed that certain people in our county will have the same rights as other residents — and that is all we did. Those who intentionally mislead people about what this bill means will have to explain what is behind their actions, but we want everyone to know exactly what this law is about.”

Knapp said the law allows the operators of public bathrooms and locker rooms to continue to separate their facilities based on gender identity or biological gender. This allows a restaurant owner, for example, to require a biological male presenting as a female to use the men’s bathrooms. Md. trans rights law in jeopardy

This term "biological male" might not be the most solidly grounded concept ever, though the real problem may be that our language assumes that people's minds and genitals will agree, and that there are certain kinds of acceptable explanations for things. Some intersex conditions are obviously "biological," but in cases where genitalia indicate one sex and the individual subjectively experiences the other, what is the alternative to "biological?" It's not "social," and it's not a personal choice. It's certainly not a "moral" decision that a person makes. It seems to me that there is most likely a -- I hate to keep using quotes like this, but the language really isn't well-designed for discussion of this topic -- "biological" cause, whether it has been identified or not.

Knapp then is not talking about transgender people, he's talking about people like the man from Citizens for a Responsible Whatever who go out in dresses and try to use the ladies restrooms. I hate to think this all about that one guy, that they're just trying to figure out what to do with their guy in the blue dress at Rio. Because ... in all my years of living, I have never been in a place where there was a question about what bathroom somebody was supposed to use. Maybe it would be easier for them just to kick him out than to drag us all through this.

By the way, we haven't speculated publicly about which one of them went into the gym at Rio in a dress, but some of the emails have been hilarious.

There is a bigger point here. Petition signatures were gathered using false information. I heard their petition-pushers say things like "This law will force men and women to use the same bathroom." One guy had a sign that said "Protect our children," though there is nothing in the bill about children -- everybody wants to "protect our children," who wouldn't sign a petition to do that?

I'm afraid this reveals a fundamental vulnerability of our democratic process: democracy doesn't work for stupid people. If you're going to let the citizens run things, then you have to count on them educating themselves about the issues and being smart enough to filter out the garbage and make good decisions. You walk out of a store and a guy says, "Sign here to protect our children from predators in the ladies room," you really should know something about it before you put your signature down. Because the law requires some checks on the signatures, validating it was really you who signed, that you're a registered voter, etc., but there's no way they can x-ray your brain to see if it was on at the time.

Theresa Rickman of Citizens for a Responsible Government said a strict reading of the law, however, indicates that a biological male presenting as a female could insist on using the women’s bathroom.

She said the organization misrepresented nothing when it collected signatures and welcomes an open discussion with county officials.
“Name the time and the place and we’ll be happy to debate the law,” Rickman said. “We are happy to meet them anywhere and discuss it.”

Tuesday’s petition filing indefinitely suspended the law, which passed the Council unanimously in November. It did not become effective Wednesday, as was expected, and could remain suspended until a public referendum is held.

Councilmember Duchy Trachtenberg said the law would have a significant impact on transgender people living and working in Montgomery County.

“As the last few months have shown, transgender citizens can be the target of unpleasant invective and misguided fears,” she said. “What this bill does is simply preserve the basic rights transgender people should enjoy along with everyone else — to live and work day to day with dignity, respect and equal protection under the law.”

The shower-nuts would be happy to debate the law now -- where were they while it was being debated in the first place? Were they proposing wording, meeting with council and staff?

America works by a really cool process of representative democracy. We elect people, they conduct legislative, judicial, and executive functions for us. If we don't like them, we elect somebody different. Besides the inherent checks and balances within the system, public officials are motivated to be responsive to the public. If you want to participate in the development of a new law, all you have to do is pick up the phone. The people who make up the CRW believe themselves to live outside that system, however. They refuse to participate in the established processes, and instead try to overthrow the results of everyone's hard work. They believe themselves to be persecuted, they believe elected officials are corrupt and conspiring against them, they believe the system of American democracy is incapable of functioning. I'm as cynical about politicians as the next guy -- more, probably -- but I have had to admit that the Founding Fathers came up with the best system I can imagine. It prevents tyranny by handing power over to the people, but the people don't have to decide every little thing. You want a referendum on how close you can park to a stop sign? No, let somebody else decide that, and we'll live with it. If it's too far, we'll debate the issue and elect a person next time who would propose parking closer. It's a beautiful system, not a perfect one obviously but that's because people are not perfect.

The Blade predictably takes a view that these latest developments are dangerous. Rights could be lost. But again, I can't say this enough, it is really heartening to see the media of the community presenting this story objectively. The Blade writes to its audience, but it is accurate, it has facts, they interviewed Theresa and got her quotes in there, as well as Duchy and others. These guys whining complaining about men in the ladies locker-rooms are trying to hijack reality, they want to scare people and they do succeed in scaring people who aren't paying attention. What people need is clear information, facts, and our media have been great about giving the facts to them. The CRW's mission is simply to force conformity to their expectations. It's plain old-fashioned bigotry, and most people in our county won't go along with them if they understand what the issue is, so we're counting on the press to keep people knowledgeable.