It may be a dog’s life for some of us, but …

When it comes to gay owned and/or operated brick and mortar businesses discriminating against transgender people, one just has to look at gay bars as having examples of the worst offenders.

Take Colorado’s Denver Wrangler. They are so brazen in their discrimination against transgender people that they’ve posted their discriminatory policy on their website:

- Gender matching I.D. required.
- I.D. must be state issued photo identification or driver license, military I.D., US passport or visa.
- I.D. must be current (not expired).

Which class of people do you imagine has identification cards where the sex marker doesn’t match the gender presentation? If you guessed transgender people — the same transgender people who are protected against public accommodation discrimination in Colorado’s new public accommodation anti-discrimination law — you guessed correctly.

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that if the Wrangler’s policies were challenged by a complaint to the Denver Anti-Discrimination Office by even one potential transgender patron, the city’s ARTICLE IV (that covers public accommodation) indicates the bar is blatantly violating the law with an unlawful policy — I’m sure one potential transgender patron’s complaint would result in the city suing Wrangler’s. (And geez, that’s not even basing a complaint on the new state public accommodation law, of which Wrangler’s is also in violation of!)

Although…I guess I could ask my rocket scientist friend Zoe Brain to get a her opinion on whether or not unlawful discrimination is occurring. I’m not sure a rocket scientist’s opinion would add anything to the discussion, but I guess it couldn’t hurt to know what a rocket scientist thinks about this.

Wrapping this diary up, let me point out that Pam’s House Blend is going to Denver in late August for the Democratic National Convention. Whatever shall I do should the bar’s discriminatory policy be still in place when PHB makes the trip to the Mile High City? I’m sure my rocket scientist friend could provide y’all with some good guesses about some lawful behaviors I may engage in at the Denver Wrangler’s location.

~~~~~
Related:
* Q Of The Day: When Is It Okay For Gay Owned Businesses To Discriminate Against Transgender People?
* Pam’s House Blend tag for employment - housing - public accommodation
* I’m Going To Colorado In August With PHB; I’m Going To Make Use Of Public Accommodations
* If Dr. Dobson Were King, We’d All Be Wearing Depends
* When It Comes To Transgender People & Civil Rights, It Really Is Always About The Bathroom

* Sigh * — From OneNewsNow/’s Moral debate now a public safety issue:

Citizens in Gainesville, Florida, are trying to repeal an ordinance that lets anyone reject their biological sex simply by stating that they “feel like” a member of the opposite sex. At least one citizen argues that introduces some serious safety concerns for the public.

…In fact, Davis’ group has been collecting reports of such incidents, including one in which an elderly woman using a wheelchair complained when an adult male followed her into the women’s restroom at a local grocery store.

“And the manager said, ‘He can legally do it,’” Davis relates. “The manager didn’t even ask this person if he had a sexual or gender identity issue. So just by having this law, men are walking in — and managers, because of the liability associated with questioning people who are protected by the law, they don’t even ask questions.”

The difficulty with the public safety aspect of this argument is that there have been no news stories — no documentation to support the premise — that predators have ever tried to use a public accommodation law in an attempt to cover sexually predatory behavior in a women’s restroom — despite this undocumented, factually bare anecdote given in this article.

What we’re really discussing here is a fear of predatory behavior by cross-dressed males in public restrooms vice actual, documented examples of predatory males actually engaging in any otherwise unlawful behavior in public restrooms — while at the same time being cross-dressed when they attempt to use public accommodation laws as cover for their predatory behavior.

Let’s be frank, here. If there had ever been any documented examples of cross-dressed individuals attempting to use public accommodation laws in an attempt to cover unlawful predatory behavior, I’m absolutely sure we’d have heard about it — it would be a very, very newsworthy story.

The burden of proof that this happens at all — that crossdressing males going into women’s restrooms constitute a real, documentable public safety issue in municipalities, counties, or states that have passed public accommodation laws, and that these allegedly existing predators used public accommodation laws as legal cover for their allegedly predatory behavior — should be on the conservative Christians who claim it as fact, vice falling on us transgender people and allies to prove the negative; vice falling on transgender people to prove that this scenario has never been adequately documented.

Names, dates and times, incident reports and police reports — If conservative Christians want to claim gender identity and expression specific public accommodation laws facilitate predatory behavior and constitute a real, public safety issue, they need to show us palpable evidence that indicates this really is a public safety issue. Otherwise, it’s just transgender bashing based completely on hearsay and/or fear.

~~~~~
Related:
* White Male Privilege & Women’s Fear Of Crime Intersecting With Gender Expression & Public Restrooms
* When It Comes To Transgender People & Civil Rights, It Really Is Always About The Bathroom
* The Predator Argument Doesn’t Work With Transgender Fifth Graders
* Kevin Moore’s Take On Colorado’s “Bathroom Police”
* I’m Going To Colorado In August With PHB; I’m Going To Make Use Of Public Accommodations
* If Dr. Dobson Were King, We’d All Be Wearing Depends
* The Non-Trans Woman Thrown Out Of A NY Women’s Restroom Sues
* Outing #2: When You Endanger A Child For The Sensationalism Of It
* Latest Attacks Of Teh HomoSEXual Agenda’s Transgenderededs’s Bullet Points

My transactivist friends and I have had some discussion about drag shows over the years, and a significant portion of these transgender folk consider drag shows as a kind of blackface. The reasoning behind that is that there is presumed to be a cissexual privilege*, and that people who have cissexual privilege aren’t fully aware of how cissexual people are often engaged in oppressing transsexual and intersexual people, much as those who experience white privilege aren’t fully aware of how white people in western society are often engaged in oppressing ethnic minorities.

I don’t personally buy into the idea that all drag shows are exercises in cissexual privilege. This is because I’m very aware that although sexual orientation and gender identity and expression are separate structural concepts, there is certain amount of spill over between the two concepts related to gender norms. There are gender norms that gay, lesbian, and bisexual people don’t conform to regarding sexual partners; there are gender norms that feminine/effeminate gay men, masculine/emasculate lesbian women, crossdressing men, genderqueer people, and transsexual people don’t conform to regarding movement, speech, and other behaviors.

And, on top of that is layered a belief among many transgender people and allies that gender is a continuum: male and female are on the end points of a spectrum of gender which includes people who understand themselves to be neither male or female, both male and female, or somewhere between male and female, as well as those who understand themselves to be male but were born female-bodied, those who understand themselves to be female but were born male bodied, and those who consider themselves to be male or female but were born with ambiguous genitalia, or were born with sex chromosomes or sex related genetics that don’t conform to the standard XX or XY dichotomy of sexes. Drag queens and drag kings often express on a personal level how LGBTQQIA (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, questioning, intersex, ally) folk are all, to some extent, gender outlaws.

Again, I personally just don’t buy into the idea that within the LGBT community, drag performances are exercises in cissexual privilege — or excercises in a kind of transgender blackface — instead I believe our community’s diversity is often beautifully expressed in drag shows. I strongly believe in the embracing and owning of community expressions of gender variance.

So when would, in my opinion, a drag show become like a blackface show?

Well, I don’t know in every case; I can’t tell you exactly all of the elements of when drag performance crosses the line to become an exercise in cissexual privilege. I can; however, give you an example from this past week of a drag show which, in my opinion, was such an exercise.

On June 12, 2008 there was a drag show/benefit for seniors organized by Westchester County legislator Bernice Spreckman. It took place at the Polish Center in Yonkers. There, county legislators Ken Jenkins (in a bra, tutu and something looking like butterfly wings), Vito Pinto (in a blonde wig black bra with white fur, furry miniskirt), and Jose Alvarado (in a bra and a Roman Helmet) appeared to the laughter of an audience of seniors. Per the Lower Hudson Journal News:

Already under siege by gadflys who would abolish their jobs and a district attorney investigating alleged misspending among their staff, Westchester County legislators found another constituency to provoke yesterday: transgenders, who rallied outside county offices today to protest a drag show starring three male legislators the day before.

Dressed in boas, skirts, lace, falsies and twinkling lights, the legislators staged “You Gotta Have a Gimmick” from the Broadway legend “Gypsy” as part of a musical review before about 400 senior citizens at the Polish Community Center in Yonkers.

…Jenkins added that the performance was honest to “Gypsy” as it was written, which he said - incorrectly - featured “cross-dressing men” as female strippers in “You Gotta Have a Gimmick.”

The number traditionally includes only women.

In a quote from a New York Transgender Rights Organization [NYTRO] press release, spokesperson Joann Prinzivalli stated:

“The Westchester County legislature has failed for nearly eight years to amend the county human rights law to explicitly protect transgender people … It is shocking to see county legislators who have dragged their feet on this vital issue doing the equivalent of a KKK blackface show to mock my people.”

[Below the fold, some comparisons between how African-Americans were portrayed in relevant news media and popular entertainment in the Jim Crow south and transgender people are portrayed by conservative Christian news media -- as well as in this recent drag show.]

Read the rest of this entry »

I’ll be the first to admit I’m very uncomfortable connecting dots on sensitive subjects — such as on gender related privilege and race — especially when I haven’t seen anyone else connecting dots in the same way I’m connecting dots. And yet, I’ve noticed two articles on natal women being ejected from women’s restrooms, and then further ejected from the business establishments in which the women’s restrooms were located — and I noticed when reading the articles that the women were both African-American.

So let me back up a little bit on what I’m getting at. In broad society, there is the concept of privilege, which is defined as…

A special advantage, immunity, permission, right, or benefit granted to or enjoyed by an individual, class, or caste.

And with that, most folk who’ve studied feminism at even a cursory level are familiar with the concept of male privilege, and it’s related concept of white male privilege. Per Peggy McIntosh, having privilege — and being the victim of privilege’s oppression — is often entwined.

…After I realized, through faculty development work in Women’s Studies, the extent to which men work from a base of unacknowledged privilege, I understood that much of their oppressiveness was unconscious. Then I remembered the frequent charges from women of color that white women whom they encounter are oppressive. I began to understand why we are justly seen as oppressive, even when we don’t see ourselves that way. At the very least, obliviousness of one’s privileged state can make a person or group irritating to be with. I began to count the ways in which I enjoy unearned skin privilege and have been conditioned into oblivion about its existence, unable to see that it put me “ahead” in any way, or put my people ahead, overrewarding us an yet also paradoxically damaging us, or that it could or should be changed.

Well, one of the few areas where I, as a male-to-female (M2F) transsexual, and my friend Travis, who is a female-to-male (F2M) transsexual, have noticed real female privilege is in not being perceived as a predator. I addressed the concept briefly in the piece When It Comes To Transgender People & Civil Rights, It Really Is Always About The Bathroom, and concluded…

In our society, it seems to me that we tend to perceive most men as potential perpetrators. Transgender women, far more often than not, aren’t perpetrators…they aren’t predators of other women or of children. But, because transgender women are perceived as men by conservative Christians and others, transgender women are perceived as perpetrators…predators. This is especially true in the public restroom.

…Which public restroom transgender people who don’t have “passing privilege” should be legally allowed to use usually comes down to this: Is a visibly transgender woman automatically assumed to be a man, and therefore a potential perpetrator in the women’s public restroom? If one considers the transgender woman to be a woman, then public restroom usage by transgender people is considered in terms of a transgender woman’s safety, or in terms of discrimination. If one considers a transgender woman really to be a man — a potential perpetrator — then restroom usage becomes an safety issue for the natal women who use the women’s restroom.

As we’ve seen in the cases of Tanya White and Khadijah Farmer, this isn’t just a transgender bathroom issue — if a female dresses outside of societal gender norms, then they are also are suspected of being predators of women and girls.

And, when I look at Khadijah Farmer and Tanya White, I can’t help but notice both of them are African-American women with “less than feminine” appearance. I think what happened to these two tells us something about our societal expectations regarding those who are perceived to be both black and male — or even black and lesbian if one’s “lesbian presentation” is perceived by others to be too dyke-y or too butch. What my gut level instinct tells me is that people who are assumed to be African-American men, or African-American crossdressed men are more likely to be seen as “more suspect” bathroom predators of women and girls in the women’s restroom than people who are assumed to be white men, or white crossdressed men.

Basically, it appears Khadijah Farmer and Tanya White lost their female privilege by dressing too masculinely, and because they also appeared to be African-American, they also appeared to be the kind of black men (or black, crossdressing men) that are out-of-control evil strangers — strangers who randomly attack their white, female victims.

[After the fold: Are we also unknowingly talking about perceived sexual orientation/heterosexual privilege, race/white male privilege, black male predators and rape/white women's fear of crime when we talk about public accommodation laws and the public restroom?]

Read the rest of this entry »

“To be called an ‘it,’ I’m a human being, not an ‘it.”
–Songwriter Tanya White

Here we go again with bathrooms.

Apparently last September, songwriter Tanya White was kicked out of the Beverly Hills Hotel’s women’s restroom because she looked too masculine. Oh — and apparently hotel security called her the anti-transgender pejorative “it” in the process, even though she’s a natal woman.

Well, now White and her attorney, Gloria Allred, are publicizing the incident. From the Los Angeles ABC affiliate (KABC - video included with the story):

A woman who says she was kicked out of the Beverly Hills Hotel while trying to use the restroom is demanding an apology.

Songwriter Tanya White admits she doesn’t dress like the typical woman, but she says security guards went too far when they confronted her in the women’s bathroom at the hotel last September.

White claims that even after proving she was a woman, they told her to get out and escorted her off the premises.

“The men said, ‘You need to get out of the bathroom.’ When Latrice said, ‘She’s supposed to be here, she’s a woman,’ security responded, ‘It needs to leave,’” said attorney Gloria Allred.

White isn’t asking for money — at this point, all she wants a public apology, and a changing of hotel policy to not discriminate on the basis of apparent gender or perceived sexual orientation.

Very reminiscent of the Caliente Cab restaurant incident.

Some of the “enlightened comments” of the ABC article readers/video watchers after the fold.

Read the rest of this entry »

I’m, pardon the term, all fagged out (too bad some other folks aren’t), so this is going to be a quickie version of FTYNTKT …

#1 - Another original, WingNutDaily Exclusive …

‘Coed showers’ election urged
‘Citizens hurt when judges take away their votes’

#2 - Big news (yes, it’s worthy of an “orgasmic release” from the Empire State Pride Agenda) from New York on the Gender Expression Non-Discrimination Act (GENDA) …

By an overwhelming vote of 102-33, the New York State Assembly early in the evening of June 3 approved a bill affording civil rights protections to the transgender community.

…

“I’m numb, I’m pleased, I surprised, I’m impressed,” said Melissa Sklarz, the director of the New York Transgender Rights Organization, who also witnessed the vote. “I always heard that Albany was the place where good ideas go to die, and I figured even our LGBT elected officials would move the marriage bill, but that our bill would not happen. I’m thrilled that everyone who said they would help helped.”

New York State Assemby Approves Transgender Rights Law

#3 - Still no final results as I write this (Wednesday morning, a little after midnight here on the East Coast) on Victoria Kolakowski’s bid for a judgeship in Alameda County, California …

In Alameda County, four candidates - prosecutor Phil Daly of San Leandro, state Public Utilities Commission Administrative Law Judge Victoria Kolakowski of Oakland, public-interest lawyer Dennis Hayashi of Castro Valley, and criminal defense attorney Dennis Reid of San Leandro - vied for the seat vacated by Judge Kenneth Kingsbury, who retired.

In early returns, Hayashi and Daly had taken the lead in the hotly contested race, followed by Kolakowski and Reid. If no candidate wins more than 50 percent of the vote, the two top vote-getters will face off in a runoff in November.

Kolakowski, who hears cases at the PUC, said she would be the first known transgender trial court judge in the nation if elected.

Incumbent Mellon leading in S.F. judge race

#4 - Some not so good news this evening from Florida regarding transgender civil rights …

A tie vote ended discussion of additional amendments to Pinellas County’s human rights ordinance to include protection for transgendered people.

County says no to more human rights protections

#5 - Wanna bet this story doesn’t get a play from the likes of WWD, FOTF, CRG or such?

A man dressed in woman’s clothing was arrested and charged in the Superior Court of Guam.

Court documents state Ruben Cabral Jr. walked into the restroom at the Tower of London Pub and kicked open a stall door while wearing a high heeled shoe.

The woman inside the stall asked Cabral to leave the restroom because it was the ladies’ room and he was a man.

Cross dresser charged after allegedly assaulting woman in public restroom

This is a post I wrote for the folk at Pam’s House Blend (PHB), where I’m a contributor. So, this is cross-posted from this PHB diary.
~~Autumn~~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Some Blenders have no doubt done the math and realized that, since I’m going to Democratic National Convention in Denver with the rest of the PHB bloggers this coming August, I’m going to be peeing within the state lines of Colorado. So with Colorado’s Public Accommodation law changing to add sexual orientation and gender identity and expression to the list of protected classes…
Well, I’m not exactly sure of the date as yet when the Colorado public accommodation legislation officially becomes state law, but the law as passed apparently directly impacts which set of restrooms transgender people/people of transsexual history are legally authorized to use within Colorado. (I guess I need to ask my attorney friend Kat about what the law actually states, and when the law becomes effective.)

But, let’s assume for the moment that the law is as the Denver Post and Focus On The Family/CitizenLink imply it is, and that one of the major impacts of this law is that people like me will be able to legally share public restrooms with natal women.

One of the consequences of this change in Colorado law will be unwarranted fear-mongering — well, at least what I would consider to be unwarranted fear-mongering. For example, Focus On The Family/CitizenLink puts it in terms of predatory behavior by crossdressed men in women’s facilities:

RADIO: 60 05.07.08 “SB200 - Predator” Draft:

SFX: [screen door closing book bag dropping on table]

ANNCR: If the Colorado Legislature has its way

GIRL 1: Mom! A man in a dress came into the girl’s bathroom at school today!

ANNCR: We could all be dealing with a new type of predator

WOMAN: [ambient sound under of woman getting out of car, door beep and close] Honey, there was a man using the women’s showers today at the fitness center I asked the management why?!…They said it was Colorado law!

ANNCR: And instead of our kids worrying about finals and the prom they’ll have to worry about who’s in the bathroom with them at school.

GIRL 2: [SFX: ambient hall noise, lockers close] No way I’m going in there I’d rather wait all day than go in there if he’s in there, too…

And, Peter LaBarbera has framed this in personal terms. He doesn’t ask what I actually do in public restrooms, but instead he asks:

Should this very confused man, “transgender” activist Autumn Sandeen, be allowed to use the female restroom?

In the way Mr. LaBarbera frames his question, the clear implication is that given the opportunity, he believes I’d do — or already do — sickening and despicable things to natal women and girls within public restrooms marked “Women.”

[After the fold, FOTF speaks; I'm planning have a photo shot of me by a bathroom door at the Democratic National Convention]
Read the rest of this entry »

News and views relevant to (not just) trans people …

#1 - Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter signed Senate Bill 08-200 (”Concerning The Expansion Of Prohibitions Against Discrimination”) into law Thursday. The bill essentially (defines and) adds “sexual orientation” to the state’s existing anti-discrimination statutes, where …

“Sexual orienation” means a person’s orientation toward heterosexuality, homosexuality, bisexuality, or transgender status oe another person’s perception thereof.

… and (I am shocked) Focus on the Family’s James Dobson is trying to whip up some hysteria (”Dr. Dobson Decries Ritter’s Signing of SB200“) …

“Who would have believed that the Colorado state Legislature and its governor would have made it fully legal for men to enter and use women’s restrooms and locker-room facilities without notice or explanation?

“Henceforth, every woman and little girl will have to fear that a predator, bisexual, cross-dresser or even a homosexual or heterosexual male might walk in and relieve himself in their presence. The legislation lists every conceivable type of organization to which this law applies, including restaurants, bathhouses, massage parlors, mortuaries, theaters and ‘public facilities of any kind.’ Those who would attempt to protect females from this intrusion are subject to a fine of up to $5,000 and up to one year behind bars.

“This is your government in action. It represents a payback to Tim Gill and two other billionaires who have essentially ‘bought’ the state Legislature with enormous campaign contributions. Coloradans deserve better!

“And by the way, because of the way this bill is written, it is not subject to the initiative process. There is no recourse.”

Please, when you get down to it, this is about much more bathrooms. It’s really about issues like finding employment or housing, or even about getting someone to cut your grass, and some folks’ perceived, god-given right to say trannies or gays “need not apply.” Every restroom or bathroom in the state of Colorado could be magically transformed today into one’s own little, unassailable fortress, and these folks would be no happier tomorrow. They want their own little “land of the free and home of the brave” all to themselves. That’s it.

Read the rest of this entry »

… and on the lookout around public restrooms for the individual pictured here …

The View intuits from a higher authority that said individual could be “a predator, bisexual, cross-dresser.”

~~~~~

Related …

Ritter signs controversial anti-discrimination bill

~~~~~

Hecuba: Alas! Alas! Alas! Ilium is ablaze; the fire consumes the citadel, the roofs of our city, the tops of the walls!
Chorus: Like smoke blown to heaven on the wings of the wind, our country, our conquered country, perishes. Its palaces are overrun by the fierce flames and the murderous spear.
Hecuba: O land that reared my children!

The Trojan Women

Focus On The Family’s CitizenLink has a warning out about men-in-dresses predators - a new group of predators who will lurk menacingly in Colorado’s elementary school restrooms and women’s locker rooms of public gyms if Gov. Bill Ritter signs Senate Bill 200.

From the article Colorado Legislation ‘Tramples Religious Freedoms’ comes an ominous, audio warning to Coloradans:

Focus On The Family/Citizenlink: Men In Dresses A New Type Of Coloradan Predator

It doesn’t seem to matter to Focus On The Family/CitizenLink that it has no documentation to back its “predator presupposition” regarding “men in dresses.” And yet, Focus On The Family/CitizenLink has no apprehension in claiming that “men in dresses” are going to be “a new type of predator” should Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter sign Senate Bill 200.

* sigh * I don’t believe anyone or any organization has ever studied whether states or municipalities that have passed sexual orientation and/or gender identity and expression inclusive public accommodation laws have experienced any change in the number of predatory actions by crossdressed men. I wish some LGBT organization would fund that study as I’m so tired of hearing this same religious right man-in-a-dress bathroom predator argument over and over again.

Oh…and if the audio wasn’t enough — From the print article:

“With SB 200, we no longer have two ’sexes,’ ” said Bruce Hausknecht, judicial analyst for Focus on the Family Action. “We enter a brave new world with a myriad of ’sexual orientations.’ This bill, unfortunately, is in keeping with a national effort by ‘transgender’ advocacy organizations to accomplish an open-bathroom policy.”

Hausknecht said sexual predators can be expected to use this law as “cover” as they search for their next victims — in any public bathroom they come across.

“SB 200 threatens public safety and tramples religious freedoms,” he said. “This bill needs to be vetoed and sent back to the Legislature with instructions to come back next session with something that all Coloradans can be proud of.”

Per the subheader of the article, apparently the “myriad of ’sexual orientations’” mentioned by Bruce Hausknecht that would replace the two sexes would be some sort of five sexes plan, as all public accommodations apparently would include restrooms that…

…would be opened to men, women, bisexuals, transsexuals and transgendered individuals.

Bisexuals? Huh?

This Focus On The Family/CitizenLink article (and accompanying audio) seems to be fear mongering at it’s near worst — We can only hope the Colorado governor ignores FOTF’s rabid propaganda.

~~~~~
Related:
* When It Comes To Transgender People & Civil Rights, It Really Is Always About The Bathroom

Following state rules with signature gathering is perhaps the key component in referendum and initiative drives. As one could imagine, if petition gatherers don’t follow the rules when gathering signatures, then there is a legal question as to validity of the signatures gathered.

In Montgomery County, Maryland, attorneys working with Equality Maryland and allies have been checking the referendum petitions provided by the Citizens for a Responsible Government. (You know, the Citizens for a Responsible Government that has been working to overturn the county’s recently city council passed protections for transgender people.) Currently, the new law is on hold, as a referendum on the new ordinance is pending for November — the Board of Elections had validated the signatures and petions as qualifying the referendum to appear on the November ballot.

But, the issue of signature validity — and perhaps later the validity of whole, filled out petitions — has been assigned to a Circuit Court judge, with arguments tentatively scheduled for mid-June. The Washington Post gives up this update on where the signature and petition validation is at:

Lawyers involved in a challenge to the referendum on overturning the county’s new protections for transgender people were in court last week to talk about the scope and timing of the case. The issue has been assigned to Circuit Court Judge Robert A. Greenberg, and arguments are tentatively scheduled for mid-June.

Jonathan Shurberg, representing proponents of the protections, has challenged the Board of Elections’ decision to let voters decide in November whether the law should stand. He has questioned the validity of signatures on petitions submitted to the board and the process the board used to certify them.

“We believe we have information that will end this thing if the judge agrees with our interpretation,” said Shurberg, who represents Equality Maryland, a gay, bisexual and transgender advocacy group.

Shurberg said Maryland’s election law requires that a petition signature include all elements of an individual’s name as it appears on the voter registration rolls. If a Montgomery voter registers using his or her middle initial, for instance, Shurberg said the petition signature must also include either the initial or the middle name. Shurberg and his team have reviewed thousands of signatures, and at last count, he said, nearly 4,200 signatures did not meet that standard.

…If Shurberg’s argument fails, he said there is another batch of petitions that fall short of a separate requirement for independent verification from a so-called circulator. When opponents signed petitions printed off the Internet, he said, there was often only the signature of the signer and not the required second signature of the circulator.

The Board of Elections’ decision to let voters decide whether the new law on transgender protections should stand is in serious question — June can’t come too soon.

I wonder if the CRG (Citizens for a Responsible Government) will be taking on another “shower issue” …

As Montgomery County Executive Isiah Leggett works to raise taxes and eliminate 225 jobs, a construction crew is installing a bathroom in his locked suite of offices, complete with a small sitting room and shower. The cost to taxpayers: $65,225.

Leggett’s aides said yesterday that his security detail did not want him using the public restroom because walking to and from the facility could expose him to harm. The shower was included, an aide said, because Leggett lives about 40 minutes away from the Rockville office and regularly attends evening events without having time to freshen up at home. “I don’t see this as a big expenditure,” Leggett (D) said. Describing himself as “the guy who flies coach and spends sparingly,” he said, “It’s not something I asked for.”

The timing of the project could be politically problematic. The bathroom budget was approved in June, but the construction coincides with his proposal to raise property taxes, offer employee buyouts and trim spending to close a $297 million budget shortfall.

“I can’t believe they would do that now. We’re taking it on the chin, and we’re looking for every dime we can find,” said County Council member Valerie Ervin (D-Silver Spring). “I think this is an extravagance, not something that has to be done.”

Ervin said she uses the public restroom on the sixth floor of the council building, although there is a bathroom with a shower available to council members and their aides in their secure suite of offices.

For almost all of his 12-year tenure, Leggett’s immediate predecessor, Douglas M. Duncan (D), used a public restroom. He had a private bathroom when he was first elected but scrapped it to create a kitchenette for employees. A major renovation of the executive’s floor in Duncan’s first year cost more than $1 million.

“We had perfectly good bathrooms right at the elevators,” he said yesterday. When asked whether he ever felt unsafe using the public restroom, Duncan chuckled, “Heck no.”

The rest of “County Executive to Get $65,000 Bathroom” can be read here.

I haven’t kept up with figure skating (since wanting to be just like Peggy Fleming … a long, long ways back), so until yesterday I had never heard of Mark Lund. Well, now I know that Lund evidently is not a fashion maven like Dick Button …

Weir’s outfits often sparkle like disco balls; in his short program he pretends to be a seagull. His total package has not only led to assumptions that he is gay — something not as taboo in figure skating as in other sports — but a controversy over his not being the right type of gay. During a figure skating broadcast last year, the announcer Mark Lund, who is openly gay, said, “I don’t think he’s representative of the community I want to be a part of,” and, “I don’t need to see a prima ballerina on the ice,” before praising Lysacek’s masculinity.

Figure Skating Rivalry Pits Athleticism Against Artistry

There must be some of the same something in the water in Ottumwa, Iowa as in Montgomery County, Maryland (JimK at the Vigilance blog today describes the most recent doings there)…

Listen, reconsider and amend. That’s what the City Council did Tuesday concerning the sexual orientation ordinance.

The ordinance was on Tuesday’s agenda for its second reading. At least 50 people packed council chambers and several spoke, for or against, the proposed city law, which was the last item on the agenda.

Those who favored the ordinance said it’s needed to prevent discrimination in housing and employment.

Citizens who spoke against it said the ordinance would enable a man to put on a dress, enter a women’s restroom and molest or kidnap a female youngster.

Ed Ball of the Ottumwa Human Rights Commission said the people doing that are pedophiles, not gays.

“These crimes are done by ‘normal’ people,” Ball said.

After public comment, Councilman Gordon Aistrope said he was also concerned about who would enter the restroom because the proposed ordinance includes “gender identity” as part of the protected classification.

“This does bother me. Sexual orientation, OK. Gender identity, no,” Aistrope said.

He moved to delete “gender identity” and Councilman Mitch Niner seconded the motion.

Councilwoman Shannon Addison said current medical journals and psychology publications have “clearly stated” it’s “not transgenders, not cross-dressers” who would molest youngsters in restrooms.

“A pedophile is a pedophile,” she said.

Police Chief Jim Clark also told the council that pedophiles and sexual predators are a “kind of their own.”

Clark said he hoped the council would delete either “gender identity” or “public accommodations” from the proposed city law.

Then the question was what happens next to a proposed ordinance that was just amended.

City Attorney Tom Kintigh said if the amendment passes, then the ordinance would move back to the first reading.

Addison said pulling “gender identity” out of the ordinance “won’t hurt.”

“If we do have an issue with gender identity, they can handle it at the state level,” she added.

The council voted unanimously to remove “gender identity” from the proposed ordinance.

On the first reading of the amended ordinance, Aistrope, Addison and Niner voted for it and Meyers and Councilman Keith Caviness voted against it.

Ottumwa City Council amends proposed ordinance — ‘gender identity’ deleted; law moves back to first reading

Speaking of water …

It’s in the Water: We’re All Transsexuals Now