Now, before you tell me that the word "interesting" and the phrase "Michigan Secretary of State" syntactically can't be in the same sentence together, bear with me, and let me introduce you to Representative Paul Scott:
Seems a charming enough fellow! Step right up, sir, and let us know what you're planning to do for the people of the great Wolverine State! Let's see, I have his website right here...
"I will stand strong against illegal immigration by verifying a valid social security number before issuing anyone a driver’s license, an issue Representative Dave Agema has been pushing for 3 years.
I will actively push to encrypt the traceable RFID chip in the enhanced driver’s license.
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.
I will work tirelessly to repeal the over $100 million dollar tax increase on drivers in the form of driver responsibility fees."
Well, not my platform (I am a godless hippie Chomskian socialist; it's not a powerful political party, but we do lead both major parties in smugness), and isn't it hypocritical for conservative Republicans to even have an RFID chip in their driver's license? Though maybe that driver's fee thing is a bad deal and...
Wait a minute...what was that third thing?
"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."
Hold on. Under any circumstances? Even if the birth certificate of your home state has been amended? Even if your passport, social security card, phone bill, all your credit cards, and your Price Chopper card all have you down as your new gender? Seriously?
That, as we say 'round my parts, is some seriously frakked up stuff. (Actually, we don't say that, but I'm trying to preserve family values for this post.)
What on earth could his rationale be for this?
“It’s a social values issue. If you are born a male, you should be known as a male. Same as with a female, she should be known as a female,” he said.
When asked to explain how such a mandate from the Secretary of State would benefit Michigan, he said it was about “preventing people who are males genetically from dressing as a woman and going into female bathrooms.”
Aw frakkin' stuff, the bathroom thing again.
For your convenience, here's a handy chart of where some people will have to pee,under a Paul Scott administration:
Well, that seems logical, doesn't it? (As you might have noticed, the last two are "ringers" and not transgendered at all: Rachel Maddow and Johnny Depp, in his "21 Jump St." days. But they both might not make the cut for Paul Scott's bathroom patrol.)
I'm being facetious. I have to be; it's the only way to deal with the pain. This is the old "bathroom libel," the idea that somehow a transgendered person peeing near you is...well...something. Dangerous? Catching? Damned if I know.
And it's not just conservative Republicans who get in on this act! Anti-trans radical feminists can't resist either!
"If the MTFs use the male restrooms they may be subjected to harassment, even, rape? Well, exactly how are females supposed to know which of these MTFs will not take that male characteristic/behavior with them when they start using female restrooms? Should we assume/believe that the male’s urge/behavior to rape women is going to disappear simply because his penis is removed?"
The truth is that no one has ever tried to use a transgender identity as a cover for raping people in the bathroom of their gender presentation. It's never happened. And part B of that is, of course, that the little signs on the bathroom doors are not Glyphs of Warding, cast by 27th-level wizards; there have been cases of women being raped in bathrooms, but it's never been by a transgender woman.
But that's logic. Hearken, Starbuck, to the little lower layer and you'll see why it is that conservative Republicans and radical feminists make common cause on this issue. It's truly simple, actually: they don't want transgender people to exist. So they try to make it impossible for trans people to live their lives, mostly by denying them "special" (read: human) rights. If we can't see the problem, it doesn't exist. If trans people can't live a normal life, then there won't be trans people.
Sadly, for them at least, trans people persist in existing.
And sometimes they have to pee.
And since they can't use the proper bathroom, in Michigan at least, they'll have to find another place.
I suggest right on top of Representative Scott's shoes.
|