Tennessee 1st State to Mandate Restroom Signs About Transgender Use

[Carolyn Marie]

https://omaha.com/news/national/tennessee-to-mandate-bathroom-signs-about-transgender-use/article_a8db75a6-1bba-5daf-99fc-083cb6f956e6.html

 

Honestly, TN seems to be intent on being known as THE most anti-trans, hateful state in the U.S.  The R's love it; everyone else should find it disgraceful.  "Solving Problems That Don't Exist" should become their new State Motto.

 

Carolyn Marie

[Ivy]

I've been following these things.  And to be honest I'm feeling beat down and discouraged.  Some of the hateful reactions on twitter are hard to even read. (I don't often)

Classifying trans health care as child abuse?  Forcing school counselors to out kids?  

 It just doesn't make sense how much we are hated for no reason.  It's like open season in some places - especially for POC.  And don't expect any help from law enforcement.  No wonder our suicide rate is so high.  

[Ivy]

Lavern Cox's Instagram on this…

 

https://www.instagram.com/p/CPFgZLmLUyW/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link

[Carolyn Marie]

A Constitutional law expert weighed in on this onerous and ridiculous law:

 

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/tennessee-law-that-requires-labeling-transgender-inclusive-bathrooms-is-unconstitutional-expert/

 

 

Carolyn Marie

[MirandaB]

Not even Rs at large are for these things.

 

Quote

But two-thirds of Americans are against laws that would limit transgender rights, a new PBS NewsHour/NPR/Marist poll found. That opposition includes majorities of every political ideology from liberal to conservative and every age group. 

 

Americans Overwhelmingly Oppose Anti-Trans Laws

[Ivy]

The only reason for these laws is to discriminate against and oppress trans people.  For example, with the bathrooms, there are already laws against assault (sexual or otherwise)  whether in a bathroom or not.

The criminalization of accepted medical practice is an incredible intrusion into individual rights and privacy.

The sports issue is more controversial, and being used as a wedge to open the door to the others.

[Carolyn Marie]

3 hours ago, Jandi said:

The only reason for these laws is to discriminate against and oppress trans people. 

 

 

I disagree with you on this point:  there is a second and even more important reason for the popularity of these laws among GOP lawmakers.  It is to get and retain power.  I honestly believe most of these lawmakers don't give a hoot about us personally.  These laws are a means to an end, the end being to stay in office or gain office, by appealing to the prejudices of the R "base."  That's why you probably won't see them mention these laws, or us, very much during a general election campaign, especially in mixed or urban districts.  Hate doesn't play as well with the overall population, as the polls have shown.

 

Carolyn Marie

[miz miranda]

@Carolyn MarieThank for posting the article which included the actual wording of the law.

 

All too often laws are despised or glorified without ever seeing what they actually state. All legislation requires interpretation. This particular law seem to fit exactly where you suggest at staying elected. It does not prohibit or allow bathroom use. In practice some places will use it to prevent transgender use of gender affirming restrooms and other (such as Knoxville) will see it as a way to clearly show when rest rooms allow transgender use. As such it really accomplishes nothing that didn't already exist.

 

However, I believe that those who voted it for intend it to be used to restrict. Honestly, can anybody provide a single instance of a bathroom assault of woman by a transgender woman?

 

I can recall being in Bangkok where many bathrooms where unisex and didn't even have toilet stalls. It was awkward at first trying to use the facility in that context. It lost novelty fairly quickly and everyone just minded than own business.

[Ivy]

7 hours ago, Carolyn Marie said:

I disagree with you on this point:  there is a second and even more important reason for the popularity of these laws among GOP lawmakers.  It is to get and retain power.

I do agree with this.  I see it as the oppression of Trans gender people being popular with their base.  It might not be a personal thing, but in practice that doesn't matter.

 

It will be interesting to see how it works out in practice.  It may just be ignored.  How will they enforce it?  Check people's genitals at the door?

 

It all seems so pointless.

[VickySGV]

Their primary party lost an election and made fools of them, now they have to make an act of redemption and show of a questionable strength that made a ruckus but which is almost totally going to be useless.

[MelanieTamara]

I honestly think that the only way to sell "Trans Is OK" to these people is to reframe it as a 1st amendment right. Numerous precedence exists saying that appearance and what one wears is speech and thus is protected under 1A.

 

Although we of the trans experience know that it is much more than that, this simple, constitutional based argument might just resonate with these legislatures.

 

To put it bluntly to these people, compliance with a dress code isn't a necessary prerequisite to pee.

[Ivy]

https://apple.news/Ag-GIc1ZNSNS8k--G0Odz4g

 

 

Tennessee D.A. Won't Enforce 'Hate' Bill Requiring Businesses to Post Signs for Trans Bathroom Access

 

 

[Jackie C.]

1 hour ago, Jandi said:

Tennessee D.A. Won't Enforce 'Hate' Bill Requiring Businesses to Post Signs for Trans Bathroom Access

 

That always blows my mind. I mean if I chose not to do part of MY job, I'd be fired inside of a week. Especially if I was bragging to the media about it.

 

I mean it's nice that these people are holding up their "Yes, I AM a raging ass-jackal," signs so that we know who they are but it's disheartening that they don't face any consequences.

 

Hugs!

 

[VickySGV]

4 hours ago, Jackie C. said:

That always blows my mind. I mean if I chose not to do part of MY job, I'd be fired inside of a week. Especially if I was bragging to the media about it.

This is elected official vs. other elected officials, only their voters can fire them.  He is doing his job since he would have to use financial resources and personnel resources that are not being budgeted and would get in the way of prosecuting other crimes that do in fact have greater community impact.  I do not think that even in Tennessee they consider "Spitting On The Sidewalk" laws to be worth spending money on the D.A.'s recall election.  We had a law out here in Los Angeles back in the 70's about Drag Performers having to wear a suit and tie under their drag costume that resulted in a $2M+ misdemeanor trial that was the second most expensive Misdemeanor case in city history of all time.  The case was found against the city, and the city council quickly repealed the law. 

[MelanieTamara]

5 hours ago, Jackie C. said:

but it's disheartening that they don't face any consequences.

I totally get what you mean. So often, these elected officials go off on their own tangents, shift funding from other areas, and go zealously after those who don't fit their social narrative; even if it means violating basic human rights. And those elected officials suffer no consequences until the voters speak every two years or so.

 

In this case, we are the beneficiary. In most cases however, we are not.