Susan's Place Transgender Resources

Is this a harbinger of what we will see in the near future?

http://michiganmessenger.com/33506/paul-scott-targets-transgendered-people-in-race-for-secretary-of-state (http://michiganmessenger.com/33506/paul-scott-targets-transgendered-people-in-race-for-secretary-of-state)

State Rep. Paul Scott, (R-Grand Blanc), announced his candidacy for the GOP nomination for Secretary of State just five days ago, but he's already caused a shock wave.

Scott, who just completed the first year of his first two-year term in the state House, is rankling feathers with a promise he made in his Jan. 15 announcement letter, which listed four top policy priorities, including:

    "I will make it a priority to ensure transgender individuals will not be allowed to change the sex on their driver's license in any circumstance"

Paul Scott targets transgendered people in race for Secretary of State
(http://michiganmessenger.com/33506/paul-scott-targets-transgendered-people-in-race-for-secretary-of-state)Prohibiting gender change on licenses a top priority
By TODD A. HEYWOOD 1/21/10 6:50 AM

State Rep. Paul Scott, (R-Grand Blanc), announced his candidacy for the GOP nomination for Secretary of State just five days ago, but he's already caused a shock wave.

Scott, who just completed the first year of his first two-year term in the state House, is rankling feathers with a promise he made in his Jan. 15 announcement letter, which listed four top policy priorities, including:

· I will make it a priority to ensure transgender individuals will not be allowed to change the sex on their driver's license in any circumstance

In an interview with Michigan Messenger, Scott said the issue was about "values."


edited to comply w copyright

Forgive me if I am being naive here, because I don't of course live in the US, but wouldn't this effectively contravene your civil rights under federal law?

Denying someone the right to live in a way deemed necessary by medical diagnosis and treatment would seem to me to amount to oppression of the worst possible kind and in fact in Europe and many other parts of the civilised world would certainly be illegal under human rights legislation.

Heck even in Iran Transwomen are now afforded basic civil rights which leads me to wonder just what sort of backward third world type of place this guy wants Michigan to look like to the rest of us?

Quote from: rejennyrated on January 22, 2010, 01:14:00 PM
Forgive me if I am being naive here, because I don't of course live in the US, but wouldn't this effectively contravene your civil rights under federal law?

Denying someone the right to live in a way deemed necessary by medical diagnosis and treatment would seem to me to amount to oppression of the worst possible kind and in fact in Europe and many other parts of the civilised world would certainly be illegal under human rights legislation.

Heck even in Iran Transwomen are now afforded basic civil rights which leads me to wonder just what sort of backward third world type of place this guy wants Michigan to look like to the rest of us?

Transgendered people have no Federal rights in the USA other than having some hate crime protection. In most of the nation, we can be fired just for being trans. In fact, the recent battle for national health care brought up significant opposition to having any of our health care for transition covered. Most of our insurance plans specifically exclude it even though the condition has been formally recognized as medically necessary by the AMA.

Remember, the USA is effectively a theocracy and according to that philosophy, we transpeople are sinning and therefore not worthy of medical insurance. Some doctors and health professionals refuse to treat or will mistreat when they find out we are trans. It happened to me several times. I am extremely worried that I will get sick or get injured as I may not be able to get proper care if I go to a hospital. I stopped getting my teeth cared for after finding that my dentist is a homophobe.

In essence, we are increasingly the target of right wing bigots who plan to demonize our existence for political gain. This year, California made the Driver's license gender marker change more restrictive and temporary pending surgery. Before, it was possible to get the DL changed just by a doctor filling out a form saying the patient was in transition and under care. Now, surgery must be performed in a year or so or the DL reverts to old gender. So non ops are excluded. Given the high cost of surgery, that means only the well off can have legal gender change now in CA.

Maggie

Since when did "Liberty and Justice for ALL" Translate to finding some group of people to bigotedly harass and discriminate against all the time?

I can't get an F on my ID or DL? Look at me!  :icon_burn:

Since when did "Liberty and Justice for ALL" Translate to finding some group of people to bigotedly harass and discriminate against all time?

Since things got much, much worse than anyone is letting on, and anyone who tries to say anything gets dismissed as some sort of left-wing radical.  So finding a scapegoat - bread and circuses, smoke and mirrors - is a lot easier than saying what's really happening, which in Michigan is pretty much that almost 1/2 of the state is not working, money for unemployment is running out, and the Republicans sure can't point any real finger of blame since it ends up in their own face.

Quote from: Maggie Kay on January 22, 2010, 05:21:44 PM
This year, California made the Driver's license gender marker change more restrictive and temporary pending surgery. Before, it was possible to get the DL changed just by a doctor filling out a form...

What inspired CA to make the requirements more restrictive?

Quote from: Marie731 on January 22, 2010, 06:18:02 PM
What inspired CA to make the requirements more restrictive?

California hates queers.

Here in the UK the target for official hate is overweight people.

They are labeled as lazy, stupid, greedy and a drain on tax payers cash.

Quote from: Marie731 on January 22, 2010, 06:18:02 PM
What inspired CA to make the requirements more restrictive?

I don't really know but it seems logical that the persons who did it are anti trans. We do have an ever increasing number of conservatives who are flexing their muscle against LBGT people. Look at Prop 8.

Maggie

Quote from: Maggie Kay on January 22, 2010, 06:45:46 PM
I don't really know but it seems logical that the persons who did it are anti trans.

Well, it's just that I see that until a few years ago, Michigan also used to require SRS to change IDs.

So I'm wondering if these "reversals" back to stricter requirements are part of a larger trend?

Well, let's see, we have the Declaration of Independence, The Constitution of the United States, The Bill of Rights and a few other things.

But still we constantly have some jerk or group of jerks trying to turn our democracy into a bigoted dictatorship

I tend to call them Communazis  :P

Land of the free anyone?

I don't think so! These days that would be Europe.

Some of America is clearly intent on becomming the new Right wing oppressive dictatorship in the world.

Quote from: Marie731 on January 22, 2010, 06:18:02 PM
What inspired CA to make the requirements more restrictive?

Abuse of the system maybe??  like welfare, public benefits & all that?? I'm not American but given the similar situation in my home country, I wouldn't be surprised if there were some "sympathetic" gender specialists writing "change of gender" letters to people that don't qualify to have their gender markers changed.  "You keep on coming to my hourly sessions & I write you anything you want" sorta thing. 

People that aren't serious about transition & aren't in any sorta medical therapy, HRT shouldn't be allowed to change their identity documents anyway, particularly in this day & age & all this airport mess.  I don't see how having ID's that don't match who you are can be beneficial to people.  Your I.D. can say you're F but if you aren't & in the event of a medical emergency or if you get arrested, how do you think doctors & law enforcement are gonna treat you?

Quote from: Pia on January 23, 2010, 05:24:58 AM
Abuse of the system maybe??

In reading around about similar events in other states (such as Maryland), it seems to also be partly due to the "Real ID Act" over here, where states can require that IDs match birth certificates - and most states require SRS to change that.

So I'm wondering if this will be an ongoing trend now (requiring SRS to change documents), although I also read that the transgender community and activists are fighting against it whenever these restrictions are proposed.

Quote from: Pia on January 23, 2010, 05:24:58 AM
Abuse of the system maybe??  like welfare, public benefits & all that?? I'm not American but given the similar situation in my home country, I wouldn't be surprised if there were some "sympathetic" gender specialists writing "change of gender" letters to people that don't qualify to have their gender markers changed.  "You keep on coming to my hourly sessions & I write you anything you want" sorta thing. 

People that aren't serious about transition & aren't in any sorta medical therapy, HRT shouldn't be allowed to change their identity documents anyway, particularly in this day & age & all this airport mess.  I don't see how having ID's that don't match who you are can be beneficial to people.  Your I.D. can say you're F but if you aren't & in the event of a medical emergency or if you get arrested, how do you think doctors & law enforcement are gonna treat you?

The prior system required a doctor to fill out the form with legal penalties assuring the correctness. The DL in California is used for identification when buying goods and services. It is used of course in police actions. If the person is presenting as their internal gender and having a female name, the birth gender marker was allowed to be changed because it protects the transwoman. Imagine buying a dress and having the clerk call you "SIR" because of the gender marker even though you present as a woman. Imagine that the people in line behind you hear it and one decides to beat you up as you go to your car. It happens and that is why the marker has been allowed to be changed without surgery.

I know of no cases where it was abused. In fact because being transgender is so dangerous, there is no benefit to choose it. There are no public benefits that will be accessible from the gender marker change.

As for how the doctors and police treat well, that is dicey anyway. I read that some are abused or even denied life saving medical care. Plus there is the issue that most transwomen can't afford surgery, some cannot have it because of medical reasons. Should they be denied their true gender identification or should the well off few only have complete transitions?

Maggie

I would also like to point out that this guy isn't just talking about making it hard for those in transition. He also wants to make it impossible for a postop person to change it EVER.

In fact he was quoted somewhere as saying that he wanted to make being postop illegal!

Whatever tightening up in CA may or may not have taken place you have to admit that this guy isn't just in a different league, he's playing a totally different game!

Quote from: rejennyrated on January 23, 2010, 02:05:23 PM
I would also like to point out that this guy isn't just talking about making it hard for those in transition. He also wants to make it impossible for a postop person to change it EVER.

He's saying whatever he thinks will win votes from socially conservative voters and get himself media attention. He's even said this is about "social values." He isn't focused on practical legalities.

It may win him votes, but I doubt he'll get (or even pursue it) very far, as the federal government allows IDs such as social security and passports to be changed after SRS. And with this "Real ID" act here, it seems the trend is towards consistency between state and federal IDs, so I'd imagine we'll see more and more states requiring SRS to change documents, rather than banning changes altogether.

Do people in Calafornia need ID to buy things?

Quote from: spacial on January 23, 2010, 02:53:05 PM
Do people in Calafornia need ID to buy things?

I'm not in CA, but I've had to pull out my DL when I forgot to sign the back of a credit card I tried to use, and occasionally have to present it when picking up packages at the post office.

Quote from: spacial on January 23, 2010, 02:53:05 PM
Do people in Calafornia need ID to buy things?

Only when we use a credit card or debit card, often a clerk is instructed to ask for it to verify the ID. Since almost all merchants now accept debit cards, this showing the DL gets pretty common especially when we aren't regulars. I can't remember when I used cash last.

Maggie

You're right Tasha Elizabeth but apparently your government doesn't think so if they're making their laws stricter for pre-op people to get an F on an identity document.  All in all I think that trans people in the US are lucky in that regard.  At least they allow you to change your gender marker whilst you're still pre-op "pending" surgery & there are many laws that protect pre-op & non-op people.  In some foreign countries, you can't even change your name without GRS and in some others they won't allow you to change your gender marker even when you've had GRS, so you're left with a male identity (male name & a big fat M) on your documents even though that's not who you are anymore.  Welcome to reality folks!!  That's life for some trans people!

Trans people in the US should be thankful for what they've got even if it appears to be "nothing" or "little" because they really don't know what they've got.

Quote from: Virginia Marie on January 22, 2010, 09:29:07 PM
Well, let's see, we have the Declaration of Independence, The Constitution of the United States, The Bill of Rights and a few other things.

But still we constantly have some jerk or group of jerks trying to turn our democracy into a bigoted dictatorship

I tend to call them Communazis  :P

We don't have a real democracy anyway... Its all FUNDED.

Quote from: Kara-Xen on January 24, 2010, 10:18:33 AM
We don't have a real democracy anyway... Its all FUNDED.

Actually, thanks to the recent SCOTUS ruling, we appear to be moving towards a corportocracy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corpocracy).

Quote from: MMarieN on January 24, 2010, 12:02:21 PM
Actually, thanks to the recent SCOTUS ruling, we appear to be moving towards a corportocracy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corpocracy).

How long has it been since we WEREN'T?