Question about Gainesville and Gender Identity
TNG reader BlueSeqPerl submitted this post about the Gainesville discrimination vote.
I wanted to ask The New Gay readership how anti-discrimination laws on gender identity move from theoretical to practical implementation. In Gainesville, far-right groups are saying men will use women’s restrooms and not get arrested, claiming they feel like they are women that day, which I know is total BS. I guess my question is how do we educate the general public on implementing gender identity anti-discrimination in practical terms.
I know some people think I am might be wasting my and others’ time, but no matter what topic I like to think in real everyday examples, whether it be physics or promoting diversity. My knowledge on gender identity and gender expression is very theoretical. It is partly due to the fact that I do not have any openly trans people in my life. Mara Keisling spoke at my college on gender identity and inclusiveness. She was the first open trans individual I had met, and she brought trans issues to my level.
Last Tuesday, I participated in Human Rights Campaign’s (HRC) reach out to absentee ballot voters to vote no on Charter Amendment No. 1. The HRC staff had a very useful FAQ and language denouncing the aforementioned bathroom scare tactics. My only problem is the language was a little vague. I ended up arguing with a voter for 15 minutes about the bathroom issue. I know it was not an issue, but I didn’t know how to explain how trans folks use bathrooms in a binary gender system. To say it was not an issue without some explanation about how trans folk work through a binary gender dominant world seemed like a weak argument. I just wish I had more education on how trans folk adapt and evolve a binary-gender-dominant world to fit their needs in practical terms, so I can be a stronger proponent for trans folk.
I know you might think that my question is pointless, but having a queer sexual orientation (e.g., lesbian, bi, gay) has its own nuances in a heterosexual-dominant world. For example, who is the man/woman in the relationship? I have had to educate people on those nuances. To say it is not an issue without any real explanation makes the discussion lose its honesty in my opinion.
So, please let me know what you think. I do apologize if this message is too frank, but that is how I communicate.
As a side note, most of the voters I spoke with opposed Charter Amendment 1, which is great. I realize there might be a little bit of the Bradley effect there, but we will find out on March 24th. I do want to thank Karl and his colleagues for orchestrating this event.
5 comments:
"how do we educate the general public on implementing gender identity anti-discrimination in practical terms"
one thing those not living in DC can do is talk to our state legislators. (in maryland, i was absolutely shocked at how little my senator and delegates knew about transgender issues. many of them still do not know the difference between transgender and homosexual.) since they are ultimately the ones to support or vote on transgender anti-discrimination bills, we should work hard to make sure they KNOW what they are voting on.
of course, they probably still wont vote progressively if their constituents are just as ignorant.
"I just wish I had more education on how trans folk adapt and evolve a binary-gender-dominant world to fit their needs in practical terms, so I can be a stronger proponent for trans folk."
Kate Bornstein wrote a lot about this. Also, have you ever attended an even where trans folk might show up? Im sure you can find events like this, and hear some of their stories.
I dont know how much information you are looking for. Just remember that you dont have to explain every little nuance about transgender issues in order to fight discrimination.
This reader submission Answers About the T would be a good starting point.
Actually, depending on how a statute is written, it very easily could permit a trans person to use different restrooms depending upon how the person is presenting at any given time. The slang term for this is "flip-flopping." If people are concerned about that issue, they could write the law to address it. For instance, in an employment setting, they could require employees to choose and stick with a particular gender identity for purposes of restrooom use, etc.
Scare-mongers like to throw out red herrings and invoke the ick-factor of "man in a dress", and it's important to recognize those and point them out for what they are.
The easiest way, I think, to phrase what gender identity protections are and are not is to ask "Could someone reasonably/acceptably do [behaviour in question]?" For example:
Could someone use the women's room? Yes, women do all the time. Therefore, transwomen and other gender variant people should be allowed to, too.
Can someone wear a dress to work? Depends where you work. Women construction workers don't; women office workers might. Transwomen construction workers shouldn't, etc.
Can someone wear a gold lamé thong to work? Probably not, unless that someone is a dancer or swimsuit model. It wouldn't be acceptable for non-trans office workers, and no one is arguing that transpeople would be allowed to do so.
(I picked these because they are "arguments" I have actually heard. Obviously, female-bodied trans people face issues, too, but "man in a dress" is more icky than "woman in pants", so that's what bigots use.)
Post a Comment