I see no problem with the new wording.

My understanding is that crossdressers do not differ in their gender identity from cispeople.  They do differ in their gender expression because they like to wear women's clothing.  The new language protects gender identity, but not gender expression. 

The original definition of "gender identity" was as follows:  (E) "GENDER IDENTITY" MEANS A GENDER–RELATED IDENTITY, APPEARANCE, EXPRESSION, OR BEHAVIOR OF AN INDIVIDUAL REGARDLESS OF THE INDIVIDUAL'S ASSIGNED SEX AT BIRTH.  This definition is more or less standardized in laws of this type around the country.  Some add language dealing with how the gender identity can be proven.  There are minor variations (and bigger ones in older laws on the subject).  But not that gender identity includes both identity and expression.  Thus crossdressers would be protected.  But not if we are only talking about identity without expression.

I am concerned about this bill setting a precedent elsewhere that leaves crossdressers in the cold. 

As one of the lawyers who is likely be get asked to represent trans* people in Maryland under this statute, I am also a little concerned about Maryland adopting its own, unique definition.  If they followed along with everyone else, then explaining the statute to a court would be a lot easier.  If just pointed at what courts elsewhere have done with similar language.  But with this language being different, it means I have to deal with explaining to a court what the differences mean.  But that gets technical and it's basically my problem.  I don't see it as a reason to oppose the bill.  And I'm already thinking about how to argue that expression really does fit in anyway.

Quote from: peky on February 27, 2014, 05:08:17 PM
Why would a cross-dresser want to go in a women's locker room?

Beside they do not fulfill the ^^ definition. Most cross dresser do not have a problem with their gender identity or sexual orientation, Most are cis heterosexual males who like -for whatever reason_ dress as women every once a while

This bill is not a locker room/bathroom bill.  I assume that crossdressers would like to not get fired from their jobs if they are found out.  I also assume that they would like to not get thrown out of restaurants and shops if, for example, they are out and about while dressed.  Those typed of issues are what this bill is about. 

I agree that crossdressers don't meet the definition of gender identity.  That's my point.

I am confused, are crossdressers crossdressing, at work?

Perhaps I am a bit ignorant of the issue, but wouldn't that be like saying people who vacation in Ocean City shouldn't be fired because of it? Like what would it have any impact on the workplace where someone went to vacation or more to the point, what they wear when they aren't there.

I was under the impression gender expression protections were to prevent employers from requiring for example, female employees to wear skirts, as they would be free to express their gender with pants if they saw fit.

Not saying they shouldn't have protections for expression as that would be good (and doesn't impact me in any way since I have a gender identity issue), but I am just a bit wondering how much it would really effect crossdressers.

Quote from: Hikari on February 28, 2014, 11:12:33 AM
I am confused, are crossdressers crossdressing, at work?

Usually not.  There are (very rare) cases where an employer allows that.  But generally not. 

The bigger issue would be that a person crossdresses outside of work, the employer finds out, and takes action against them.  This happened to an acquaintance of mine who was publicly crossdressed while out with friends over the weekend, during non work hours, but got spotted by coworkers who spread around what they saw, and was promptly called in and fired when the work week resumed. 

Here is a useful link to give kind of a very basic explanation of how the issue works: 

http://www.tgender.net/taw/cd.html

Quote from: Hikari on February 28, 2014, 11:12:33 AM
I was under the impression gender expression protections were to prevent employers from requiring for example, female employees to wear skirts, as they would be free to express their gender with pants if they saw fit.

Nope.  Think of it this way, if an mtf trans* person was seen dressed in women's clothing, then an employer might not know she had a gender identity issue going on.  Under this definition, the employer might fire the trans* person and then defend on the ground that they thought the person was a crossdresser and did not know she was trans*.  For trans* people (not crossdressers), having protections for gender expression as well as gender identity prevents that scenario because it doesn't matter whether the person was fired because of their gender identity or their gender expression.   

And we are on to third reading.  Third reading is the final vote in the senate. 

The amendment offered yesterday has been withdrawn.  A new amendment to the definition has been adopted, which is available here:

http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/2014rs/amds/bil_0002/SB0212_90372102.pdf

This means that the definition of "gender identity" will be:
THE GENDER-RELATED IDENTITY, APPEARANCE, EXPRESSION, OR BEHAVIOR OF A PERSON, REGARDLESS OF THE PERSON'S ASSIGNED SEX AT BIRTH, WHICH MAY BE DEMONSTRATED BY:
(1) CONSISTENT AND UNIFORM ASSERTION OF THE PERSON'S GENDER-IDENTITY; OR
(2) ANY OTHER EVIDENCE THAT THE GENDER IDENTITY IS SINCERELY HELD AS PART OF THE PERSON'S CORE IDENTITY".

This seems like a good thing in that it gets us back to gender expression being protected again.  It also gets us more consistent with other bills in the country.  Crossdressers, for example, would be protected.  This type of language about how a person's identity is to be proven is something that opposition legislators have been successful in putting into gender identity bills lately.  This is actually less onerous than some.  In Delaware's bill, adopted last year, for example, the definition of gender identity reads:

"(10) "Gender identity" means a gender-related identity, appearance, expression or behavior of a person, regardless of the person's assigned sex at birth. Gender identity may be demonstrated by consistent and uniform assertion of the gender identity or any other evidence that the gender identity is sincerely held as part of a person's core identity; provided, however, that gender identity shall not be asserted for any improper purpose."

Note the lack of an improper purpose prong in the Maryland language. 

I know where Im moving too.

Quote from: Tic Est Ipse on February 28, 2014, 05:30:24 PM
I know where Im moving too.

DC is winning out over MD for me right now, due to healthcare policy, but MD isn't a bad place... I did see a great apartment in Silver Spring a while back that was quite cost competitive (for a Studio apt)

Thank you again ThePhoenix. I really appreciate your keeping us aware of developments.

Quote from: Tic Est Ipse on February 28, 2014, 05:30:24 PM
I know where Im moving too.

Please allow me to be the first to roll out the welcome mat 

Quote from: Hikari on February 28, 2014, 05:47:35 PM
DC is winning out over MD for me right now, due to healthcare policy, but MD isn't a bad place... I did see a great apartment in Silver Spring a while back that was quite cost competitive (for a Studio apt)

DC has some of the best law around on trans* issues.  But the enforcement has been weak.  The discrimination stats are some of the worst in the country as a result.  So I'm not sure I would recommend it necessarily.

Quote from: suzifrommd on February 28, 2014, 05:47:53 PM
Thank you again ThePhoenix. I really appreciate your keeping us aware of developments.

You're welcome.  I can't really do much right now as I am quite sick.  So I don't have much to do besides sleeping, reading (and posting on) message boards, and listening in on the Senate online.    Other typical things like conversation, walking around, and so on are pretty much off the table.  But it occurred to me today that not everyone else is in that same position, so maybe I was boring people, especially with the technical legal explanations of how this all works.  I'm glad to know someone is interested.

Quote from: ThePhoenix on February 28, 2014, 06:00:35 PM
DC has some of the best law around on trans* issues.  But the enforcement has been weak.  The discrimination stats are some of the worst in the country as a result.  So I'm not sure I would recommend it necessarily.

I find, sadly that if you are in an affluent neighborhood in DC, the police go out of their way at least to ensure homosexuals are not discriminated against. I haven't really seen other people I knew were trans in Dupont Circle, Adams Morgan, etc but I do know for a fact that in places like Benning Road or Congress Heights the cops believe all trans people are prostitutes (but to be fair there are actually quite a few prostitutes out there). The way I see it I would much rather pay $1500 for a Studio in an alright area of DC than live in the parts that are unsafe. Though, I saw a great studio not far at all from the Metro in Sliver Spring, which was only $1200 a month.

The way I see it the best thing Maryland has going for it are relatively low rents, much more bang for your buck than Arlington or Alexandria at least. I do find it doubtful that places like the eastern shore of Maryland will be able to really enforce any laws like this though, so I don't know just how much cheaper it would be safe to go in Maryland either though.

Quote from: Hikari on February 28, 2014, 06:25:23 PM
The way I see it the best thing Maryland has going for it are relatively low rents, much more bang for your buck than Arlington or Alexandria at least. I do find it doubtful that places like the eastern shore of Maryland will be able to really enforce any laws like this though, so I don't know just how much cheaper it would be safe to go in Maryland either though.

I hope you'll let me disagree. The area where I live is incredibly TG-friendly - as evidenced by the fact that my transition as a classroom teacher has basically been a non-event. My employer was VERY SERIOUS about the anti-discrimination laws in our county.

As for the rents - well unfortunately they're less than you'll find in DC suburbs, but not a whole lot less.

Quote from: ThePhoenix on February 28, 2014, 06:10:38 PM
You're welcome.  I can't really do much right now as I am quite sick.  So I don't have much to do besides sleeping, reading (and posting on) message boards, and listening in on the Senate online.    Other typical things like conversation, walking around, and so on are pretty much off the table.  But it occurred to me today that not everyone else is in that same position, so maybe I was boring people, especially with the technical legal explanations of how this all works.  I'm glad to know someone is interested.

There are quite a few of us that appreciate your posts Phoenix. They always seem very informative especially for us Marylanders. Especially the ones that get super lost when legal terms and information starts to roll out. I've listened to the state Senate the past two days and it just sounds to me like a bunch of older people congratulating each other and their old high school sports teams.

Quote from: Hayley on February 28, 2014, 06:53:51 PM
There are quite a few of us that appreciate your posts Phoenix. They always seem very informative  especially for us Marylanders. Especially the ones that get super lost when legal terms and information starts to roll out. I've listened to the state Senate the past two days and it just sounds to me like a bunch of older people congratulating each other and their old high school sports teams.

Now can I get y'all involved in my org?

<insert Maryland Trans*Unity commercial here>

Quote from: ThePhoenix on February 28, 2014, 07:07:47 PM
Now can I get y'all involved in my org?

<insert Maryland Trans*Unity commercial here>

I'm more than willing to get involved.

Quote from: Hayley on February 28, 2014, 07:25:58 PM
I'm more than willing to get involved.

On a more serious note, we would be happy to provide support for anyone who would like us to do so.  Right now the member we have who is furthest away actually lives in New York, but frequently comes down to our support group meetings.  We have others via our online presence who are further away. 

If people want to get involved in the work we are doing, then we welcome that as well.  But the first order of business is always to make sure that people have what they need to make it through this journey.  So please do come visit our support group (next meeting is the day after tomorrow).  Please do come to the big picnic we hold in the summer.  Please do join us and find whatever role works best for you. 

Everyone is welcome (and we really do mean everyone).  The only thing we ask in exchange is that everyone protect the safety of the space. 

Quote from: Hikari on February 28, 2014, 06:25:23 PM
I find, sadly that if you are in an affluent neighborhood in DC, the police go out of their way at leastsi to ensure homosexuals are not discriminated against. I haven't really seen other people I knew were trans in Dupont Circle, Adams Morgan, etc but I do know for a fact that in places like Benning Road or Congress Heights the cops believe all trans people are prostitutes (but to be fair there are actually quite a few prostitutes out there). The way I see it I would much rather pay $1500 for a Studio in an alright area of DC than live in the parts that are unsafe. Though, I saw a great studio not far at all from the Metro in Sliver Spring, which was only $1200 a month.

Just three days ago, a report was issued criticizing the D.C. police for their poor treatment of trans* people.  The latest problem with D.C. police occurred last night near Columbia Heights.  Police stopped a car full of people, became aggressive and abusive upon discovering the driver was trans*, and at least one arrest was made.  Details are still coming out and I'm not sure how much I will be at liberty to share.  But suffice to say that D.C. is not nirvana for trans* people.  The law may be great, but it's the people who enforce it that scare me.

The bill passed the senate by a vote of 32-15 just a few minutes ago.  There was only one senator who rose to speak against it and two others who did not. 

Tomorrow at 1 pm there will be a hearing on the House of Delegates version of this bill in the House Health & Government Operations Committee.  So if you are in Maryland and wish to come see some history in the making, come on down.  I'm going and would love the chance to say hi to people before or (more likely due to a doctors appointment) after the hearing.