ACLU sues Alaska DMV over transgender's driver's license

[Asfsd4214]

Before beginning medical transition I was male bodied, I was physically male with as much testoserone in my system as any other male. My body slowly began to change through hormones. I was a male to female individual. I became female bodied on completing SRS.

If a person has not undergone medical intervention to change their sex, they are still physically their birth sex. If the person has a penis they are male bodied, if vagina then female bodied. If hrt only somewhere in between. That seems pretty commonly understood whether it is unpleasant to hear or not.

I would object to being detained with male bodied people.

Commonly understood is irreverent. Male and female are words with varying definitions. And considering this is a transgender forum with so many conflicting definitions, maybe you should keep yours to yourself.

You perhaps are under some misguided notion that by conforming to some of societies standards you will be accepted by them. Make no mistake, there are a lot of people out there who's personal definitions consider you, and me, nothing short of abominations.

Fact of the matter is, under most inmate housing policies, in cases of indeterminate gender, detainees are to be kept isolated from others until appropriate (another word with differing definitions) housing can be determined. Usually determines on a case by case basis according to individual needs and safety.

[tekla]

The other thing is the VAST majority of the public will NEVER be sent to jail

The United States has more people in jail (either in raw numbers, or as a percentage of the entire population) than any other nation.  About one in every 100 people is in jail, and 1 out of every 32 Americans is under some form of correctional supervision, meaning they've no doubt been in jail before.  Not as rare as you think.

[Annah]

The other thing is the VAST majority of the public will NEVER be sent to jail

The United States has more people in jail (either in raw numbers, or as a percentage of the entire population) than any other nation.  About one in every 100 people is in jail, and 1 out of every 32 Americans is under some form of correctional supervision, meaning they've no doubt been in jail before.  Not as rare as you think.

kinda close:

In the US, 1 in 136 people have been to jail at one point in their lives.

Currently, 3.9% of the United States is in jail, on probation, or on parole and from those numbers:

4.2 million people are on probation
1.6 million people are in prison
900K are on parole
900K are in local and county jails (misdemeanors)

That's still a lot of people tho!

Source: US Bureau of Statistics

[tekla]

Those seem to be 2002 numbers, the 2008 numbers are closer to the ones I had.  That's prisons and jails (jails tend to hold people for less than a year, prisons are for a year plus one day)  And those numbers seem to be one or the other depending on wether you take the total population (1 in 140something) or just the adult population (1 in a 100).

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/02/28/ST2008022803016.html

http://babyboomeradvisorclub.wordpress.com/2008/03/04/1-out-of-100-americans-are-jail-birdsincarceratedis-there-justice/

Which also has these fun facts:

In 2007, according to the National Association of State Budgeting Officers, states spent $44 billion in tax dollars on corrections. That is up from $10.6 billion in 1987, a 127 increase once adjusted for inflation.

It cost an average of $23,876 dollars to imprison someone in 2005, the most recent year for which data were available. But state spending varies widely, from $45,000 a year in Rhode Island to $13,000 in Louisiana.

The cost of medical care is growing by 10 percent annually, the report said, and will accelerate as the prison population ages.

About one in nine state government employees works in corrections, and some states are finding it hard to fill those jobs.

[Annah]

Those seem to be 2002 numbers, the 2008 numbers are closer to the ones I had.

The numbers I had used was taken from the 2009 statistics

[tekla]

Yeah from the entire population, just use the adult population.

[Asfsd4214]

In the U.S. drivers license's are used as the primary form of identification. This is different in many other countries where there can be a National Identification Card. The U.S. doesnt have this. Moving the sex marker to a magnetic strip or to some other form of identification the police, other government agencies, employers and gender restricted businesses can access seems a reasonable solution. Though, how is gender determined if not on some form of documentation where gender determination is needed by those agencies I mentioned? Would all these agencies and business have magnetic card readers? And if so, what good is changing where it goes.

Australia does not have a national identification card, closest thing would be the medicare card which says nothing but your medicare number and your name, and as such isn't considered a primary identification document legally. The only primary identification I carry or need to carry is my aforementioned drivers license.

Personally, a magnetic stripe to enable visual identification of some details but not others stored on the card seems an interesting potential solution for some. But it still doesn't change the fact that I don't think it should have to say gender at all. People should be handed on a case by case basis, with a policy framework to support it, I think that would result in the fairest outcome for as many as possible.

Changing the sex marker to an "Other" is not reasonable, which could potentially happen to trans people. Which is why I quoted that reference by a trans blog advocating it as an alternate solution in an artice directly discussing NSW, Australia.

I should keep my views to myself? I was responding to Stephe where she asked me my definition of 'men', is why I quoted her question. My definitions are as valid as anyones, my point of view as valid as anyones. The view I expressed is the mainstream transitioning MtF and FtM transsexual experience. If I cannot speak on that, then we are not free to speak at all.

You are free to speak whatever you want as far as I'm concerned, but maybe just be careful about what you say when it might hurt someone.

I tried to be very careful with my wording, using 'I', instead of 'you' and male-bodied/female-bodied instead of identities. If some found what I wrote offensive, I dont know what to say. I know the question presented to me was a trap and that in answering it some would object. But I have a right to my view and to be able to express it as sensitively as possible.

Of course I realize this. Every day I leave my home I am at risk to be murdered.  Every time I go out on a date with a man I am at risk of being killed. Every day I go to work I face potential subtle discrimination from a management team that knows my past. Every day is a challenge not to be afraid. Every day my phone is silent from family who have rejected me.

I have paid the price, I continue to pay the price every day. And because of that my place here on Susan's is as valid as anyone elses.

I don't think I said it wasn't, but really, if you go around calling people male/female-bodies who don't identify as that, as matter-of-factly as you did. You should probably expect it to provoke a negative reaction, regardless of its validity.

[Stephe]

Fair points about sensitivities. That's what makes it difficult to discuss matters such as law changes where gender is involved. Anatomy is a sensitive topic for most everyone here. Even so, anatomy is part of our life and when discussing the legal system it is potentially a factor to discuss, as society will certainly discuss it.

If societies are willing and able to function without gender markers, I certainly fully support it. I do not wish for anyone to be oppressed.

Actually you don't support this. You stated you would not want to be detained with a transgendered person unless they were post op. You proclaiming how others must identify is no less insulting than the people who will say "I don't care what kinda surgery you have had, you're still a dude." I doubt you will ever see it though.

[Ann Onymous]

holy thread necromancy...this one should have been left dead. 

[tekla]

how would you protect females from a predatory minded or simply aggressive heterosexual crossdresser male in a prison system?

I know who hasn't been in jail/prison.  I put you in jail/prison in Texas/Cali and you'll be trying to buy aggressive heterosexual crossdresser cellmates.

[Morrigan]

I fail to see how one can be so deathly afraid of a person, without more facts than "person is male/female". Being sexually assaulted is not exclusive to gender, by victim or assailant. I could say with certainty that I would be less afraid of an effeminate male in close proximity than a large and rowdy female.

It seems that everyone jumped to the prison system topic, and as was said before, no this isn't a majority of people. Where do you go every day that puts you at risk for close encounters with trans or crossdressing individuals? Public Restrooms are used by far more people on a daily basis than county jail holding cells. While having an ID that states proper gender would not assist with angry restroom users, it would be at least reassuring for authorities and business owners. Arguing with post-op individuals is relatively pointless, as they have already completed the hardships. If they have not come out publicly they are likely afraid of doing so for one reason or another.

It would be easier to gain support from sympathetic cis-gendered individuals who have a smaller risk of alienating friends or family. I'm not familiar with all the latest trends in teens these days, but I recall people standing up for their LGBT friends to be a common, noble, and totally acceptable action.

[Stephe]

It would be easier to gain support from sympathetic cis-gendered individuals who have a smaller risk of alienating friends or family. I'm not familiar with all the latest trends in teens these days, but I recall people standing up for their LGBT friends to be a common, noble, and totally acceptable action.

I have found by far the most aggressively 'anti-trans rights' people I have run across online have been either FAR right wing religious people who assume all transgendered people are "->-bleeped-<-s and worship the devil" or they have been from -some- of the stealth post ops. Both groups seem to cook up these insane cases like the "prevent abusers from making false claims of being transgendered so they can be intentionally housed with their victims", like why would the victim be in jail? And how many cross dressing males are "predatory and aggressive?  That doesn't fit any I have ever met..

We are already require to be diagnosed as having GID to get hormones, wouldn't be that hard to have this same letter allow for gender change on your ID. Not that I am a fan of the GID and DSM but this would be a compromise that would eliminate someone fraudulently using "I am transgendered" so they would be jailed with females. I doubt predatory males wanting to be jailed with females would be taking estrogen or seek out a GID diagnosis in case they got arrested? BTW seems some jail systems already have a clue about how to deal with this http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/07/cook-county-jail-transgender_n_846404.html

  These people here are using something that happens to less than 4% of people (most of which are drug dealers) as a reason for a large majority of transgendered people having to deal with the wrong gender marker on their ID.  This defeats the whole purpose of having a gender marker on your ID, unless they are gonna start sticking their hand down your pants to ID people! If you don't wanna risk being thrown in jail with a transgendered male, don't deal drugs or drive DUI cuts the likelihood of that possibly happening to less than 1%.

While this perceived risk they preach may or may not exist in reality, the reality of the current state of affairs is 59% of trans people are going to be sexually assaulted now compared to 4% for non-trans.


http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/3372/transgendered_behind_bars/

And you are almost twice as likely to be sexually assaulted in a women prison right now anyway, so don't assume you are safe just being with other women. ""An estimated 5.1% of female inmates, compared to 2.9% of male inmates, said they had experienced one or more incidents of sexual victimization."

http://www.prisonpolicy.org/scans/bjs/svljri07.pdf

The likelihood of a female being sexually assaulted by a "aggressive heterosexual crossdresser male" is so small I really question this being the reason they stand up for the idea that transgender people be forced with the choice of either have the operation or live with the wrong gender marker for the rest of your life.

[SandraJane]

Valerie, I bet this was more exciting than your date last night!

[Stephe]

If you dont define gender legally, then how do you separate people? That starts with drivers licenses where the U.S. is concerned since that is the primary means of identification. And I already said if it can be moved to the magnetic strip for police officers use only, then that seems to be a good option. ...but then how would people obtain health and other services folks of different genders need, if noone had gender markers? Do males start going to gynecologists for exams and getting mammograms? Sounds ridiculous, but from a billing perspective, how would you deny coverage if there were no gender markers?
Where is the requirement of a non-op to be on HRT? What of the non-op's that dont believe in hormone therapy?

As far as CD's, they are males, as any other males. They just enjoy dressing on occasion, which is their business and cool for them. But you fail to answer where they should be housed in a prison environment. Does someone who dressed once or twice in their girlfriends underwear qualify for being housed with females? Where do you draw the line if you deconstruct gender? And being umbrella advocates, dont you consider CD's transgender people?

I made a statement of people pretending to be transgendered to be housed in a different environment. How would you separate them from the "true transgendered"?  An HRT letter would include some but not others. How do we diagnose gender variant people? Do we tell those non-op friends, sorry you have to go on hormones whether you like it or not.

OK first the ridiculous argument about health care and they would start scheduling men for female medical procedures and they would start being sent to a gynecologist. How do you dream up this stuff?

On your second argument about part time c/d who dresses a couple of times a month, do they ID to the world as women? Would these people be applying to have their gender marker changed on their ID? Maybe some would like to live full time but IMHO if they still live the majority of their life as a man, I don't see how they can expect to be treated as a woman once they have been arrested. That seems pretty absurd doesn't it? And given they would NOT have changed their gender marker to female before they were arrested anyway, how does that argument even apply? It doesn't..

On the non-ops who don't believe in hormones. No where does the DSM require someone to be on hormones or that they must -want to take them- to be diagnosed with having GID. I didn't say someone who is diagnosed with GID is required to take them either. If we are going to have this GID/DSM requirement, which you have said you support many times in the past, why couldn't they add a letter that said "this person is living and ID's as the gender opposite their birth sex" to allow a gender ID change? Or simply have a doctor write a letter like this?

There are many people who live as women who either can't or don't choose to have -the- surgery you have had. For a FTM top surgery is all they require. If I have "Top surgery" that still isn't enough! Some states already don't have these surgery requirements, are the people in those states now in danger of these things you posted? of course not.

You forget there was a time and there were people who fought to not allow post-ops to have the gender marker changed but that fight was won. I'm at a loss as to why you would want to keep other people, who may not choose your exact path, from being able to live a happier life.

[Ann Onymous]

On the non-ops who don't believe in hormones. No where does the DSM require someone to be on hormones or that they must -want to take them- to be diagnosed with having GID. I didn't say someone who is diagnosed with GID is required to take them either. If we are going to have this GID/DSM requirement, which you have said you support many times in the past, why couldn't they add a letter that said "this person is living and ID's as the gender opposite their birth sex" to allow a gender ID change? Or simply have a doctor write a letter like this?

If someone wants to have the sex designator changed then they need to be prepared to have some modicum of irreversible process.  Simply saying "I am..." and having a shrink sign off on it should NEVER be sufficient to change something that law enforcement relies upon many times EVERY DAY.  And no, HRT is not something I consider to be an irreversible process insofar as a change of designator would be concerned. 

You seem to forget that MOST law enforcement agencies out there have very specific processes that come into play when they have contact with a female.  We are not talking something limited to the grope-n-scope that a quasi-agency such as the TSA does but rather events that have the potential to result in arrest and detention (and yes, every time someone gets stopped at the side of the road -at least in the US- there exists the prospects of a trip to jail). 

Transgender /= transsexual when it comes to the legal distinctions or protections conferred vis a vis the sex designator on a DL.

As I noted the other day when the thread was revived for what appears to have been the sole purpose of another backhanded slap at Val, this one should have been left dormant.  Hopefully a mod will come along with the key and lock it down...