As a Colorado Springs resident, I sent the following letter to the News Director on the day the story aired:
As a local transgender activist, I was morbidly offended by your story about the man in the women's restroom at the mall. You are just stirring fear that a good law is not perfect. I would like the opportunity to educate you and your newstaff in regards to this law, so you can better educate the community.
First, I suggest you cover an opposite story, where the law was applied as intended. In July, I was ejected from a bar for using the restroom that matches my gender identity and my gender presentation, but not my driver's license. I live as a woman, I work as a woman, everyone knows me as a woman - but the evolving laws about ->-bleeped-<- are such that it's not feasible to change my driver's license. I'm female by state law, but not federal law. I could change my driver's license, but not my social security or bank information. To become female by federal law would require thousands of dollars in expenses for counseling that I don't need, that I would find onerous. I would have to prove to two doctors that I am transgender, and literally get their permission to be myself.
Colorado Springs police filed a complaint with the DA, seeking criminal charges against the bar that ejected me. Whether the DA follows through with the case is probably a news story in itself.
What I found so offensive in your coverage was that the story presented that the person in the restroom was "a man." Was this somebody who was genetically male, and dressed as a male? Or was this somebody who was presenting as female, that your complainant gendered as male? Because these are two entirely different situations, by common sense and by law.
It strikes me that simple questioning of the complainant could have illuminated this issue, to make your story more accurate..
Security forces are not prohibited from inquiring why someone is in a place where they might not belong. If this was indeed a man in the ladies room, as opposed to a transwoman - simple questioning may have determined this. "Are you female?" is a simple question. If the person answers "yes" that's the end of it. If the answer is "no," then the situation goes in another direction.
Let's take the worst-case scenario. A male pervert wants into the ladies room to molest somebody or violate their privacy. He lies, and claims a female gender identity. He could still be charged with felony sex crimes, and let the jury decide the facts of the case based on police investigation and expert testimony, the same as any other crime. Does the defendant have a criminal record? Does the defendant work as a woman, do people know him as a woman, has he sought counseling? Does he have a counselor to back up his claim, or does the police psychologist support his claim? Does he testify, and is his testimony convincing? These are all factors that a jury could consider when determining the facts of a given case, specifically, does the defendant have an innate sense of gender identity that is female, as he claims?
I have every confidence that, in a case like this, the justice system would send this worst-case offender to prison. Colorado Anti-Discrimination Law, and the affiliated regulations, do not give Get Out of Jail Free cards to sex offenders. However the law does give needed protections to an oppressed minority. Your story implies the former, but does not illuminate the latter. I think it was bad journalism and harmful to the community. I would like to see you attempt to amend that.
As yet, no reply.
