Comments on: Gender Rights Maryland launches

By: Steve

Steve — Fri, 08 Jul 2011 13:56:57 +0000

["...a public accommodations bill getting further along toward passage (though it ultimately fell one vote shy of what it needed) in the state’s most recent legislative session..."] For the record, the gender identity non-discrimination bill that fell short in the last session did not include “public accommodations.”

By: Sara Brown

Sara Brown — Tue, 05 Jul 2011 00:46:25 +0000

I think it is because gay and lesbian issues have been addressed and covered in such great depth for a long period of time now that compared to TG issues and activities they are pretty much main stream and open publicly. I think until people get a better understanding of the TG community and it is brought up to speed with the gay/lesbian segment of society it will need a lot more press and a better defining of who is who and what is what within this emerging sub-section. If that makes any sense.

By: Peter Rosenstein

Peter Rosenstein — Sun, 03 Jul 2011 16:04:29 +0000

Dana, congratulations and I know with you there this will be successful!

By: laurelboy2

laurelboy2 — Fri, 01 Jul 2011 23:27:16 +0000

You’re dreaming Cathy. Maryland can’t and won’t pass gay marriage because of the black fundamentalist/evangelicals and the fear of the legislators at the polls, so how do you possibly expect something like you’re proposing to garner an ounce of consideration? We have way too many regulations and laws on the books now anyway; we don’t need more.

By: Cathy Brennan

Cathy Brennan — Fri, 01 Jul 2011 21:18:07 +0000

If gender expression means fashion, it has no place in anti-discrimination statutes. There are laws on the books in Maryland that ban discrimination based on sex and sexual orientation. Oftem, those laws are sufficient to remedy someone who identifies their own discrimination issue as one of “gender expression.”

By: Michi Eyre

Michi Eyre — Fri, 01 Jul 2011 19:23:22 +0000

I agree with your definition of gender identity. We must emphasize the medical condition of those with a transsexual medical condition. Where it comes to sex-segregated facilities, this is a medical issue and no more. This is why I feel that gender identity and gender expression need to be separately defined. I agree that “self identification” should not be permitted where it comes to access to segregated facilities. The law does not work that way. Just like in order to get medicare benefits before 65, you have to have a physician prove a disability, a physician should prove a transgender medical condition. Identification would be done through a congruent (MVA) gender marker. Despite what some will say, this will not cause “card checks”, “panty checks”, etc. at public restrooms but it will be the deciding factor when a discrimination case comes before the MCHR.

I feel that those who are (crossdressing) cis-males have no place in the women’s facilities. Despite what some might think, the gender binary still exists and our culture is not ready to tear down that line any time soon. This does not mean that gender expression should not protected in other aspects of non-discrimination law (behavior outside the workplace, housing [remember: shelters are public accommodation], non-sex segregated public accommodation, credit, real estate transactions, business transactions with state license holders, etc.)

By: HelenofPeel

HelenofPeel — Fri, 01 Jul 2011 19:13:13 +0000

I understand where you are going and support your desire to keep out those who might have nefarious motives, such as sexual predators and exhibitionists, etc. But how do you enforce this?

Are you going to do a panty check? Are you going to ask for their papers? What if it is a male-looking woman? Are you doing to stop her and demand id? Exactly how do you propose to handle this in a practical manner? Are you the thought police?

By: HelenofPeel

HelenofPeel — Fri, 01 Jul 2011 19:09:02 +0000

Perhaps because the violence and discrimination and hate is so outside of any semblance of rational discussion. Even for gay people, the violence afforded to trans is 10x worse. 70% have been sexually assaulted. 40% are chronically unemployed. All report harassment and job losses due to being trans.

Trans is where gay was 30 years ago. That’s why. Murder and suicide run #1 and #2 year in and year out. Why is that?

And gay ambivalence, and sometimes, downright intolerance of transfolk doesn’t help either.

By: Cathy Brennan

Cathy Brennan — Fri, 01 Jul 2011 17:00:02 +0000

Feminists in Maryland have formed a group as well in response to the potential negative implications of an overbroad gender identity bill for females. Marylanders United for Fairness for Females (MUFF) affirms its support for a definition of gender identity in Maryland’s anti-discrimination law that (1) protects people who identify as transgender or transsexual and that (2) does not allow for subjectivity that would enable nontransgender or nontranssexual males (i.e., “cis” males) to access sex-segregated spaces, as sex-segregated spaces are currently permitted – for rational reasons – under Maryland’s anti-discrimination law.

We support the following definition: “Gender identity” means a person’s identification with the sex opposite her or his physiology or assigned sex at birth, which can be shown by providing evidence including, but not limited to, medical history, care or treatment of a transsexual medical condition, gender incongruence or related condition deemed medically necessary by the American Medical Association.

We oppose any definition that allows the individual to “self-identify” without any persistence or duration requirement. Further, we oppose any language that suggests or codifies into law that there are ways of expressing one’s self (or behaviors or appearances) that are consistent with or congruent with biological sex, as we believe such language codifies sex stereotypes.

By: David

David — Fri, 01 Jul 2011 16:03:54 +0000

The failed Equality Maryland board did a self evaluation? That’s kind of like examining your own belly button rather than visit the oncologist to have cancer diagnosed. No wonder the trans community started their own group–I want a new gay and lesbian group as well.

Beyer seems to be the only strategic thinker you quote in the article. That’s exactly what is missing from EM in its ‘listening tours’ and biased, un-answerable survey–a real strategic thinker.

Speaking of which, Washington Blade, where’s your journalistic integrity in terms of critically evaluating EM, the board and this 6 month plan? Should you mention how many of the remaining cliche of board members have been part of firing the last two–you only mention one here, but the real number is two–executive directors? Or how the member survey was gamed to give the exactly the responses the board wanted? Or demand to see the financial statements? Or ask how many people actually attended the listing tours? If CNN reported on world politics this way, we’d all think George W. was correct that the mission was accomplished and Barack is correct that the recovery has begun. Use some critical reporting, Blade editors…