Life, Law, Gender

My issue

I know that I often sound confident about my gender transition and about my life. And, for the most part, I am.  But every once in a while I am struck by the cost of it.

Somewhere over the past couple of days I've had an opportunity to either read something, or hear something on the radio, or see something on television (I don't remember the trigger, give me a break!) that made me think about how my children might view me. 

Like any parent (I imagine), I want my children to love me -- and I've no doubt that they do (including my wayward eldest).  But, I also want them to admire me and respect my life's choices and I'm not as sure of myself on that front.  When I was growing up, the gender wars manifested themselves in us youngsters as bragging that our daddies were "better" than the next person's daddy. 

I wonder sometimes what my children say to friends and acquaintances when asked about their parents.  Do they refer to me in vague terms, do they try to avoid the conversation altogether, do they use male pronouns?  Fitting in is important to most of us and I imagine it's important to them.

It is tough to live in a two gendered world when you don't fit the model.  I can only imagine how tough it is to be the child of such a person.  How does one brag?  "My dad looks better in a mini-skirt than yours does?"

I am the best dad that I can be.  I worry that my eldest is right and that my best isn't good enough, that my gender transgressions have moved me too far from the acceptable norm to be a good dad. 

These are my private worries that torment me sometimes.  Now, they're not so private.

Transgender and running naked

A few days ago, I published the text of a speech I gave on Transgender Day of Remembrance.  It was mis-quoted by the Michigan Daily.  However, I did not object to the Daily about the mis-quote because the sentiment was accurate enough.  In today's Daily there is a letter to the editor arguing that we should not amend the bylaws because people can choose to be transgender and, akin to running naked, such a thing should not be protected.

[UPDATE] Click on the "today's Daily" link above and read the comments that people made in response to the letter, including at least two in support of the letter below.

To the Daily:

I try to take liberals seriously sometimes, and then it all just falls to pieces when I read quotes like “Does it seem to you that you are expressing your gender when you use a public restroom? For many people of the transgender community, it is an act of courage.” The article about the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender protesters that this quote was taken from (LGBT groups protest regents’ delays on bylaws outside Fleming, 11/18/2005) beautifully illustrates just how ridiculous the idea of tolerance has become on campus. Using the bathroom, an act of courage? Are you kidding me? These people voluntarily choose to change their sex, and now they want to extend the University bylaws to include this vague idea of “gender identity and expression.” What does that even mean? If I want to run around naked on campus, does that count as my way of “expressing my gender identity?” Will I get protection in the University bylaws?

The fact is, people choose to be transgender. I honestly do not care if it takes courage for them to use the bathroom. They have made a personal choice, and they need to deal personally with the consequences. Granted, people may have been murdered because they were transgender, and murder is horrible. However, the idea of tolerance has been taken to an extreme.

I would encourage the University to stand firm by not changing the bylaws to include this foggy notion of “gender identity and expression.” Do not make a mockery of such a fine institution.

Joshua Birk

LSA sophomore

The depth of this person's ignorance and bigotry startled me.  I am considering writing a responsive letter to the editor, but honestly I don't know what I could say.  I'm utterly flabbergasted.  How does one equate "running around naked" with the dilemma faced by a trans person when he or she is forced to use a public restroom that does not conform to the sex that she or he is outwardly presenting? 

"These people voluntarily choose to change their sex..."  Wow.  I guess I should be grateful that he at least acknowledges that we are people. 

I am also grateful that although he does not understand the meaning of "gender identity and expression" [sic], at least 80 jurisdictions, including 6 states (and the City of Ann Arbor), many members of the Fortune 500, and over 100 Universities and Colleges (including most of the Big 10, and the entire University of California system) understand it enough to grant just such protections. 

First Snow

My middle kiddle comes up ... it snows.  She leaves, and our high is expected to reach near 60.  This same phenomenon occurred last year.  Do you think two samples constitute a statistically valid basis for the hypothesis that Melody is to blame for our weather?

She loves the snow.  We live in a small town north of Ann Arbor.  Every year, on the Saturday following Thanksgiving, they have a parade to ring in the Christmas season (including St. Nick (not Santa) being pulled in a sleigh by real reindeer at the end).  It was a fun parade, complete with marching bands from the local high and middle schools.  Melody spent most of the time holding her jacket while the rest of us were bundled up.  She swears she's part polar bear. 

I snapped this picture (don't you just love timers on cameras?) just before we took Amanda back to the airport on Saturday.  It was taken in our front yard.  If I look happy, sitting there with The Girl and with my children, it's only because I am.  I continue to miss my eldest girl, but I feel so very blessed to have such a wonderful and loving family.  Despite not having Jennifer here, and wishing that my entire family (including parents and siblings) could have been together, it was a wonderful 5 day weekend.  We watched movies (the Lord of the Rings, again), played pool, enjoyed a fire in the fireplace, ate too much (as usual) and watched the deer in the backyard. 

It was a wonderful holiday and I count my blessings as one very lucky woman.  Even if my middle daughter is the harbinger of snow and cold. 

Also, I want to thank those of you who commented on the last post.  Obviously, I'm not going to stop blogging altogether; but my posts will continue to be sparse, I'm afraid.  Maybe that's a good thing.  Maybe the blog will then transmogrify into one where only close friends (including you, T) and family will check in to see what's up in my life.

Happy Thanksgiving

I am thinking that my blog life has run its course.  I don't post often enough to post all the new stuff that's happening and when I do post it seems to me that it's often a re-hash of old things.  I say the same things over and again.  I've started off three or four posts recently with "Last year ..." and then linked to the post of the previous year.  I started this blog because I wanted to inform people -- if they went to school with me, about me, and if they didn't about transgenderism in general.  I think I've done a fair job of that and I suspect that only a very few hard core loyalists are even still here with me (and for good reason -- who wants to keep reading the same things over again?).

So, I'm not saying goodbye.  But, I am giving warning that the scarcity of posts will likely continue and even get worse and it's entirely possible that they will stop sometime soon.

Having said all that, today is Thanksgiving.  Last year <grin>, I posted about what this holiday means to me, and I listed the top things about which I was grateful.  This year, the list is identical, except that instead of "CivPro" my concern is bankruptcy and, most importantly, I've added The Girl to my list of things to be grateful for in my life.

She appeared when she was supposed to (and I for her).  We are incredibly good for each other and support each other in amazing ways.  The fact that she loves me enough to want to go through the enormous hassle of planning a wedding and then actually marrying me is a tremendous gift in my life.

I'm grateful for my children and my parents and my siblings.  I'm grateful for all the new friends I've made this year and all the old ones who are still here, even if I don't talk to them everyday (or week, or month, or maybe even year).

I'm grateful for having found an area of the law (Family Law) that truly turns me on.  It is an area where I can combine the two main interests of my life (equal rights for LGBT folk and family) and see how I can make a real difference in people's lives.  That has always been so important to me.

So, on this day of reflection and appreciation, I offer my wish for a day spent with your loved ones and the opportunity to give thanks for whatever bounty exists in your life.

Happy Thanksgiving.

My girls come today

Just as last year, my two youngest daughters, Amanda and Melody are coming to visit for the Thanksgiving holiday today. They are just good kids.  I pick them up at 3 PM.  This makes me happy. :)

Tough Night

Today is an especially difficult day for me.  It is, of course, the official date of Transgender Day of Remembrance.  Although I had very little (nothing) to do with the planning of the events, they still want me to again MC the event and give the opening remarks.  At one level, I guess I'm glad they think enough of me and my speechifying that they want me there and want me to talk.  On another level, I don't think I'm that all that wonderful as a speaker; moreover, I've been in people's faces a fair amount in the past couple of weeks -- first with the evening of Recognition and Remembrance and the with the TDOR rally on Thursday. (As a side note to that rally, the Michigan Daily covered the event and reported upon it here (photo by Ryan Weiner; this was part of the crowd as I was speaking).  Note that they a) misquoted me and b) spelled my name wrong, twice (this, after asking me to spell it for them; go figure). Then, again, I've been quoted in the Daily 3 times in the past year (one in an article based upon a full interview) and there have been material errors each time). So, speaking today is difficult for me for the two very simple reasons that the subject matter is extremely difficult (I cried during one of the speeches, a poem, given by a young man at the rally on Thursday; if I can get his permission, I will post it here.  It was incredibly beautiful and moving). And, I'm kind of talked-out.

However, what makes this day particularly difficult for me is the fact that The Girl and I won't be together this evening.  Even that would be tolerable (after all, she travels quite a bit on business and it's lonely but not really difficult). What makes tonight different is that she will be with a very dear, very close group of friends -- through whom she met her last partner (Carolyn), 20 years ago this month.  Since it is the group's 20th anniversary and since Carolyn just died this past year (breast cancer) I know that tonight is going to involve some reflection on the changes of the past 20 years and I know that it will center a lot around Carolyn.  I know this will be very, very difficult for The Girl and I want desperately to be there with her, to help give her strength.  But, I cannot.  They set this date up after I was already commited to speak and I can't get out of that commitment (not that I would really want to, of course. TDOR is one night a year to pause and reflect on the violence that still exists against our community; it deserves my attention and respect). 

It's going to be a tough night.  However, on a good note, my friend from Germany did read my last blog post and write to me, so now I have a working address for her, yay!

My German Friend

My best friend from law school last year graduated and went back home to Germany.  She got married recently and sent me a postcard from her honeymoon (thank you!!!) but her UM email address no longer works and I have no way to contact her.  I'm very sad; I miss her.  If you are this woman -- EMAIL me already!!!! :)

TDOR Rally

Despite my best efforts to be less (or even not) involved with the Transgender Day of Remembrance this year, I was asked to speak at a rally held on campus today in commemoration of TDOR.  The rally ends just as this month's Regents' meeting gets ready for public comments.  There will be four of us speaking this afternoon, they've asked me to speak first (for which I was grateful, I was worried that I would just be repetitive if I went last).  As we have four of us, we are each limited to five minutes.  Again, I was grateful as I don't want to stand out in the freezing temperatures and snow any longer than necessary.  Last year, it rained.

My speech is below the fold.

I want to speak to you today of courage.  On a day when we pause – for the 7^th year in a row – to acknowledge the tragic deaths, in the past twelve months, of another 27 trans people, it seems appropriate to start with a discussion of their courage.

I am not talking about the courage it took them to die, though it may have taken courage. I’m talking about the courage it took them to live.  I think it is fair to say that these men and women lived courageous lives.  They displayed courage in their defiance of the societal norms of gender expression, if in no other area.  Does it seem to you that expressing your gender is an act of courage?  How many of you feel as if you’re being courageous in the morning when you choose your clothes, your jewelry, or the style of your hair?  And yet, I submit to you that for many people, especially transgender people, it is an act of courage. 

For years, people told me that I was brave for living my life openly and honestly.  I dismissed them.  But, as I think about these 27 lives, violently taken, I realize that to not own my own courage is a disservice to them. So, today I own the courage it has taken me to live my life, to survive job terminations, family breakups, ridicule and outright hostility. It took courage to use the restroom, to go to the grocery store, to seek a life partner.

It has often been said that courage is not the lack of fear but acting in the face of that fear.  It will take tremendous courage – from all sorts of unlikely places – to put an end to this violence.  It takes courage to go against any established norm or to live outside the confines of what society deems to be “normal.”

Yet, such acts of courage exist everywhere.  Some are more noticeable than others. In a year when we lost a national treasure in Rosa Parks it seems fitting to acknowledge the courage it took her to not give up that seat on the bus.  Even yet today, 40 years after that famous act and nearly 40 years after the Supreme Court outlawed miscegenation laws – laws forbidding inter-racial marriage – it still requires courage for my sister to marry a black man and raise her family. 

Often, like me, people don’t see their own acts as acts of courage.  They are simply doing what they need to do in the moment to live their lives in an honest way.  I would wager that most of these 27 people that we are remembering today viewed their gender transgressions in such a way.  But, sometimes, living honestly takes a conscious effort, a conscious act in the face of fear. 

Last year at this time I spoke of the hate speech that underlies and gives support to violence.  I urged each person listening to me to refuse to tolerate such speech.  Such an action requires courage.  It requires the courage to stand against one’s peers, to be willing to put oneself out there in support of what one knows is right.  But, I suggest that it is not merely the overt hate speech that is the enemy here.  I suggest to you that it is also the casual speech that dehumanizes people that we need to target.  Some might call this political correctness, and maybe it is.  But, when people use words and phrases like “that’s so gay” in a derogatory and pejorative fashion it adds another building block into the wall that separates US from THEM.  It’s all about education and language.  We must educate people.  We must not tolerate negative language, or language that puts another down, makes them something less than human.  Because when they reach that status, it becomes OK to react to them with violence, even kill them – or overkill them as is most often the case with murders of transgender people.

We must not tolerate invidious discrimination on any level. And, until our education efforts can make the world is a safer place for us – and for all – we must seek the shelter of laws and regulations to prohibit such discrimination, which I suggest implicitly sanctions violence.

Last year, in my TDOR speech, I called upon the University to amend its bylaws to prohibit discrimination on the basis of gender identity or expression. At that point it had already been 7 months since the TBLG Task Force report came out with that recommendation and yet the regents took no action. Back then, it took courage to do the right thing; we would have been in the vanguard of universities and corporations offering such protection.  Our university’s leaders did not have that courage and we are still today without that language.  Please join with us in encouraging the regents to amend the bylaws.  Let’s remember the lives of courage that these 27 people lived and draw from them the strength to make our little corner of the world safer and more welcoming of difference and diversity.

Thank you.

Jenny Runkles - round 2

Last year, I posted about the great time I had at the Jenny Runkles banquet and how my friend and OutLaws co-chair won the award.  This year, I was unable to make it to the dinner, but once again, a friend (known to readers of this blog as BoSox), and this year's OutLaws co-chair won.  Congratulations, Kyle.  And, thank you for all that you do.  You are awesome and completely deserving.  The pictures and story are available on OutLaws web-page.

Res Gestae - 2

Not surprisingly, the editors at Res Gestae asked me to rewrite my article submission (too little school specific content).  So, I did.  I still think it is not worthy of publishing anywhere, let alone in a law school newspaper, but what do I know.

Anyway, the new version is below the fold.

My Opinion

by Denise Brogan

I hope you don’t really want my opinion on the things in this article; that would give me cause to worry about you and I have too many other things to worry about right now.  Still, people seem to ask my opinion on things a lot and I’ve also been asked (more than once) to write an article for this publication (be grateful that in nearly 2 years here, I’ve resisted to this point).  Maybe it’s my age. I’m about twice the average age of a Michigan Law student, and I’ve had some interesting life experiences (hey, how many of you have lived aboard a submarine for four years, raised three kids to happy adulthood, made and lost a million dollars, and what else was it….oh yeah, changed sex?).  That combination of age and experiences has probably given me a unique perspective on things, but maybe not.  So, I’m going to write about a few things that people seem to always ask me.  Feel free to skip this article, disagree with anything said, or give me a hug in the hallways.

Why are you in law school?

I came to law school after a successful business career because I reached a point in my life where I really needed to make a difference in the world.  It’s my version of a mid-life crisis. It is often said that young people are idealists but get pragmatic as they age (said another way, young people are often liberals until they amass enough wealth to conserve).  I live backwards.  I am a reformed Republican.  Now, I am an idealist who believes that we need to give back to our communities and stand up for those whose voices are drowned out by the majority.  There are a great many social causes worthy of time, money and attention.  But, since I’m just one person, I picked the one that is important to me (hopefully, I don’t ignore the others – I really do believe in Martin Luther King’s sentiment that “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.”).  I am here to learn better how to help the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and, of course, Transgender communities achieve social equality.

Is the new wireless access policy good or evil?

EVIL.  It is the thing that annoys me the most about our Law School.  It is paternalistic in the extreme, and ineffective in achieving its stated goals, in my opinion. Moreover, it has kept me from being able to do things that I think are important.  For example, it annoys me that I can’t access Lexis/Westlaw during class.  But, all of that may just be due to the perspective of having had it and then lost it.  Two years from now, when no student here has had the experience of being able to surf while in class it may no longer be an issue.  For now, there’s always FreeCell whenever an instructor fails to keep my attention (I understand that before computers, students had to resort to more arcane distractions like crossword puzzles during class).

What did you think of the guys in drag in last month’s Res Gestae?

I loved it.  In the transgender community we always talked about Halloween as the “high holy day for crossdressers”.   It is the one day a year when people can get away with playing with gender (we use a stronger word than “playing”, but I’ll leave that to your imagination) without the normative social sanctions that otherwise win the day. It was great for me to see other transgenders in last month’s Res Gestae.  You girls totally rock. Now, if only we can get someone to nominate a lesbian for Mr. Wolverine we’ll really be onto something!

Do you worry about grades?

Yes, but I really try not to.  I recognize that young people in law school, preparing for their first career, are under a different sort of pressure to achieve.  So much seems to ride on your grades.  The same thing that motivated us to seek a top 10 law school motivates us to compete and our success in that is measured by grades.  But, I am not seeking a firm job after graduation and having high grades means really little to the employers I will seek.  So, I honestly try to look at my classes as an opportunity to learn what I can about the workings of our legal system and the law, with special emphasis on the areas I care about, such as civil rights, family law, etc.  I am confident that if I learn something in each of my classes I will pass – and thus far, my thesis has proved true – however, near the end of each semester I again contemplate what life might look like if I fail and I do actually panic a wee bit. What do you suppose a middle age, transsexual, law school drop-out earns anyway?

What is your favorite thing about law school?

The opportunity it’s given me to meet smart, interested people and to get involved in things I care about.  I started a student group last year (not exclusive to the Law School) called TransForUM, which is a group for transgender identified students, faculty, administrators and alumni (we have members in each category).  I’ve also been on the Outlaws board and on the Advisory Board for the LGBTA office on campus.  I really do enjoy most of my classes and all of my instructors.

50 Years of Service

I was privileged on Friday night to share the stage with Representative John D. Dingell.  He was being honored for his 50 years of service in the U.S. Congress. The event, An Evening of Recognition and Remembrance, was hosted by the Washtenaw Rainbow Action Project (WRAP) and was held on Veteran's Day.  Several of the speakers, including a Colonel in the Civil Air Patrol who is the local chapter president of the Servicemember's Legal Defense Network spoke about House Resolution 1059, calling for the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell.  I was asked to speak both as a veteran and as a reminder of the existence of transgender people and our unique issues related to serving in the military.

The event was nicely done.  In addition to the Congressman, outgoing Chief of Police Dan Oates was there and recognized, and several members of Ann Arbor's city council were present as well as a couple of state legislators.  My Girl came from work and joined me.  It was such a thrill for me to have her there.

I was given 2 minutes to speak, so I said nothing profound; my objective was simply to raise awareness in the Congressman and the other guests about transgender people. The text of my brief talk is below the fold.

[Update] I had a nice talk with one of the other speakers prior to the event. Her daughter came out as a lesbian after completing her education at one of the service academies.  Now, after discharging her from the service (under Don't Ask, Don't Tell) the government is demanding repayment of the education cost. It sure seems to me like we've got our priorities all mixed up. 

I told her about my service in the Navy during that conversation, but she came up to me after the event to apologize that she had just assumed that women were allowed on submarines until she heard my talk.  She hoped I wasn't offended that she did not initially realize that I was transsexual.  I wasn't.

Thank you, Colonel.

I promise to be brief in my remarks – I think we can all agree that we’d rather listen to the Congressman than some middle aged transsexual law student! J

I really only have a couple of things that I’d like to say tonight.

First I think it’s entirely appropriate that we acknowledge a public servant who has served his constituency faithfully for half a century.  Gee, Congressman, that means you were first elected the year I was born.  After having spent the last two years with a group of 20 something law students, it’s a real pleasure to not be the oldest person in the room!

But, I am here because I represent a slice of America that many people either never hear about, or if they do, choose to ignore.  I represent transgendered Americans.  Often the only time people hear about us is when we’ve been brutally murdered.  One week from Sunday marks the 7^th annual Transgender Day of Remembrance – a day that we ourselves set aside to pay our respects to the men and women who were attacked and killed in the preceding 12 months based almost exclusively on the way they represent their gender.

And, more to the point on this Veteran’s Day, I represent the thousands of transgendered individuals who served their country in the armed forces despite the constant fear of discovery and swift reprisal. I, myself served – deep in the closet – aboard a United States Submarine during the Vietnam Conflict.  I carried a top secret clearance.  And, I represent the tens of thousands of transgendered individuals who were either denied their chance to serve or were summarily discharged on mental health grounds because of their transgender status.

I know, personally, more than a handful of transgender veterans.  One was a tail gunner in a helicopter in Vietnam.  Another served aboard nuclear submarines (unlike me, who served on the last WWII class diesel in the fleet), and yet another who was paratrooper in the 101^st Airborne.  And, I could rattle off many more.  Mildred Brown a clinical psychologist says in her book, True Selves, that "Over half of my male patients served in one of the branches of the military."

And, I represent those service members, such as Angel, who are in uniform now.  She is a major in the Air Force and is currently in Iraq. 

I know, Congressman Dingell, that wherever you go people are asking you to listen to them and to represent them and do something for them.  Tonight, I am no different.  I ask you first to acknowledge the existence and plight of people like me – transgender Americans – first by joining the ranks of congressmen that have signed a non-discrimination policy that incorporates gender identity or expression and then I ask that you consider an amendment to HR 1059 that also protects us.

Again, my heartfelt thanks for and congratulations on your extraordinary service.

Happy 23

Happy Birthday, Jennifer!  I love you.

Res Gestae

I was asked to write an article for the Res Gestae, our law school's student newspaper. I don't have time to do all my homework and write blog entries so don't ask me why I agreed to write the damn thing.  My Girl says it's because I don't have the word "NO" in my vocabulary.  The article is, in my opinion, boring, irrelevant, and sans verve. But, at least I feel like I fulfilled my [perceived] obligation to write something. Because I've not had time to write anything here in the past few days, I include it here.  Readers of this blog will find nothing new in it. I offer it only as a filler of time and space.

Reflections on November

by Denise Brogan

November is an important month in my life.  I know you don’t (and shouldn’t) give two cents for what’s important to me, but then you shouldn’t be reading this anyway – finals are just three short weeks away.  And I apologize, but there are no hidden gems of insight or advice or titillation in this piece; it’s all just about me – after all, isn’t everything?  So, why are you still reading?

Don’t get me wrong I love October.  I love the turning of the leaves and the mild temperatures before the cold sets in.  The madness of September and restarting school are behind, the pressure of finals are in the hazy future. The main topic on LawOpen is football tickets (and how much scalping one can get away with). And, I love the fun of Halloween.  In the transgender community we always talked about Halloween as the “high holy day for crossdressers”.   It is the one day a year when people can get away with playing with gender (we use a stronger word than “playing”, but I’ll leave that to your imagination) without the normative social sanctions that otherwise win the day. It was great for me to see other transgenders in last month’s Res Gestae. You girls totally rock. Now, if only we can get someone to nominate a lesbian for Mr. Wolverine we’ll really be onto something!

But, when November rolls around I find myself taking stock of the priorities in my life. In the first half of the month are family birthdays. My mother was born in November and she is both elderly and in poor health.  My eldest daughter was born in November (she’s 23 – nearly as old as the average age in this school; damn, but that makes me feel ancient). She was born prematurely and had to fight for her life for the first months of it. The importance I place on those two events speak to the value that I place on family in my life and, arguably, to central elements of my identity as a person and as a parent.

In the second half of the month another event occurs that is important to my identity and helps me to remember why I’m in law school at my advanced age.  Every year, for the past seven, members of the transgender community and its allies have commemorated Transgender Day of Remembrance (TDOR).  TDOR began as a local (San Francisco) phenomenon in 1999, but has grown to include national and even international recognition.  It serves as a means to memorialize the victims of deadly violence, violence inflicted upon its victims for the fact of their transgressions against gender norms, and to raise awareness of transgender lives – to lift us above, if only for a moment, the obscurity and indifference that typify our existence in the broader culture.

As this month progresses, I become more aware that final exams are looming.  I am fortunate in that I am somewhat freer of the need to obsess over grades, and consequently over finals, but I’m also not oblivious to them. I came to law school after a successful business career with a vision of making a difference in the lives of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and, of course, Transgender (LGBT) people.  To do that, I need to actually learn something.  I am confident that if I learn something in each of my classes I will pass – and thus far, my thesis has proved true – however, near the end of each semester I again contemplate what life might look like if I fail and I do actually panic a wee bit. What do you suppose a middle age, transsexual, law school drop-out earns anyway?

And, finally, comes Thanksgiving.  Thanksgiving is my favorite holiday of the year, bar none.  I’m a big believer in showing appreciation for what you’ve got.  And, I’ve much to be appreciative for this year:

·        I am only 4 weeks away from having completed two-thirds of my law school career.

·        I am old enough to join AARP, but I can still climb the stairs of Hutchins with a backpack full of law books.

·        My children are happy and healthy (a corollary to that is that I’m also appreciative of their intelligence and hard work in that they got scholarships and Dad didn’t have to pay their tuition (yes, my kids call me Dad)).

·        I live close enough to Canada to be able to legally (at least there!) marry my partner when this term ends.

·        My mom is still with me and still mentally as sharp as ever.

·        I drive a hybrid that gets 50+ miles per gallon.

·        I’m the first openly out transsexual ever accepted into this fine Law School, and I’m appreciative that I’m here.

·        I’m appreciative of the hard work that so many people have put forth to see that the University’s bylaws are amended to prohibit discrimination on the basis of gender identity or expression.

·        I’m appreciative of the truly fabulous people that I’ve met at the University of Michigan Law School, and am honored to call many of them friends.

OK, that’s my article.  I told you that it was all about me and that you shouldn’t waste your time reading it.  But, here you are.  Well, be appreciative of the fact that I will probably never write another one.  Happy Thanksgiving!

Supreme Court and Different types of men and women

One side says the case is about sex discrimination. The other says it's simple stereotyping. Now the Supreme Court is being asked to step in.

In 1999, Philip Barnes was a Cincinnati police officer training for a promotion to sergeant. Barnes was also intent on changing gender and spent his off hours living as a woman. Barnes, who had worked in the department since 1981, ranked 18th out of the 105 officers who took the sergeant's exam. But the police department, citing a litany of professional errors and shortcomings, refused to promote Barnes.

"The law tries to keep women and men from being treated differently," says Ganulin. "But different kinds of men and women is the gray area, and the Court needs to step in."

According to Legal Times, the Supreme Court of the US (SCOTUS) may take up the case of Barnes v. Cincinnati (text of article below the fold).  You can't control what SCOTUS will hear and what it won't.  All other things being equal, I would rather have had them hear either the Littleton case or the Gardiner case, or even Ulane (all of which they refused).  And, of course, they may choose to not hear this one. 

The issue is an interesting one from serveral perspectives.  First, because of Ulane, the law of the land since 1984 has been that it is legal to discriminate on the grounds of transsexuality without running afoul of Title VII's prohibition against discrimination on the grounds of sex.  According to the Ulane court:

The phrase in Title VII prohibiting discrimination based on sex, in its plain meaning, implies that it is unlawful to discriminate against women because they are women and against men because they are men. The words of Title VII do not outlaw discrimination against a person who has a sexual identity disorder...

Since Ulane was not discriminated against as a female, and since Title VII is not so expansive in scope as to prohibit discrimination against transsexuals, we reverse the order of the trial court and remand for entry of judgment in favor of Eastern ...

Then came Price Waterhouse.  In that case, a woman was denied promotion because she was not feminine enough for her supervisors and the partners in the accounting firm. There, SCOTUS did hear the case and ruled that the discrimination was unlawful because of sex stereotyping:

As for the legal relevance of sex stereotyping, we are beyond the day when an employer could evaluate employees by assuming or insisting that they matched the stereotype associated with their group, for "'[i]n forbidding employers to discriminate against individuals because of their sex, Congress intended to strike at the entire spectrum of disparate treatment of men and women resulting from sex stereotypes.'"

Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, 490 U.S. 228, 251 (U.S. 1989).

Following Price, people began to speculate that coverage for transsexuals may then exist under Title VII, using such an argument.  Smith was the first case that was really successful in that argument (reported upon here, and here). Barnes was decided by the same 6th Circuit.  Part of me really hopes SCOTUS declines to hear it; I like the law as it is now established and I fear this conservative court will take away this protection from us. On the other hand, of course, they could do the right thing.

[UPDATE] 11/7: The Washington Post reports that the supremes have decided to not hear the case.  Text of article below the fold.

The Supreme Court refused Monday to consider shielding employers from discrimination lawsuits by transsexuals, dodging a workplace rights fight.

The court's refusal to intervene leaves in place a victory for Cincinnati Officer Philecia Barnes, who was born Phillip Barnes.

---
Supreme Court May Take Up Transsexual Case

Nathan Carlile
Legal Times
11-03-2005


One side says the case is about sex discrimination. The other says it's simple stereotyping. Now the Supreme Court is being asked to step in.

In 1999, Philip Barnes was a Cincinnati police officer training for a promotion to sergeant. Barnes was also intent on changing gender and spent his off hours living as a woman. Barnes, who had worked in the department since 1981, ranked 18th out of the 105 officers who took the sergeant's exam. But the police department, citing a litany of professional errors and shortcomings, refused to promote Barnes.

Barnes, now known as Philecia Barnes, filed suit in 2003 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, claiming sexual discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. A jury ultimately agreed with Barnes, awarding $320,000 in damages. The verdict was later upheld by the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. On appeal, the city argued, to no avail, that the sexual discrimination Barnes claims is instead sexual stereotyping, based on his act of switching sexes, which does not enjoy special protection under the law and would leave Barnes without a cause of action.

The Supreme Court will consider Barnes v. City of Cincinnati during its private conference Friday. It is among several cases the Court will review to determine if they should be added to the Court's docket for argument next year.

In its brief the city cites Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, a landmark sex discrimination case decided in 1989 with a 6-3 vote. In a dissenting opinion in that case, Justices Anthony Kennedy, Antonin Scalia, and then-Chief Justice William Rehnquist wrote that "Title VII creates no independent cause of action for sex stereotyping." The dissent went further, emphasizing, "The plaintiff must show that the employer relied on her gender in making its decision."

The city sees this as an opening. It has asked the Court to view Barnes as a transsexual and in the same light as homosexuality, which does not have protection under Title VII. The brief also cites confusion between the circuits and says the 2nd and 7th circuits have recognized that Title VII does not protect transsexuals from discrimination.

In the respondent brief, Barnes says the circuits are in agreement because his claim was not based on his transsexuality but on how the department viewed his gender. Barnes claims the Court established clear precedent with Price Waterhouse, saying sex stereotyping is a form of discrimination and the law was properly applied in this case.

"Just as the woman in Price Waterhouse was denied a partnership because she was not sufficiently feminine for her employer, Philip Barnes, a male at the time of his probation, was denied his promotion because he was not sufficiently masculine enough for his supervisors," the brief states.

What is most important, says Richard Ganulin, Cincinnati's assistant city solicitor, is whether the Court desires to redefine the difference between sex discrimination and sexual stereotyping.

"The law tries to keep women and men from being treated differently," says Ganulin. "But different kinds of men and women is the gray area, and the Court needs to step in."

UPDATE:

Court Passes on Transsexual Discrimination

By GINA HOLLAND

The Associated Press
Monday, November 7, 2005; 10:49 AM

WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court refused Monday to consider shielding employers from discrimination lawsuits by transsexuals, dodging a workplace rights fight.

The court's refusal to intervene leaves in place a victory for Cincinnati Officer Philecia Barnes, who was born Phillip Barnes.

A federal appeals court upheld a jury's finding that Barnes was a victim of discrimination, under a federal civil rights law. The city had been ordered to pay the officer $320,000, and pay another $550,000 in attorney fees.

Barnes, a 24-year veteran of the Cincinnati police force, dressed as a man at work but a woman during off-hours in 1999 when the officer was demoted. Barnes sometimes wore makeup to work and had manicured nails.

Richard Ganulin, one of the city attorneys, told justices that employers should be protected from discrimination lawsuits based on "transsexual and homosexual characteristics." The city maintains the demotion was for professional reasons.

Had the court agreed to hear the case, arguments would have been scheduled in the spring, in time for two justices named by President Bush to weigh in. At issue was the scope of the 1964 Civil Rights Acts, which protects people from sex or race discrimination.

Sexual orientation is not covered in the law, but justices were asked to deal with a related issue: sex stereotyping of transsexual workers.

A transsexual is a person who has undergone a sex change operation or whose sexual identification is with the opposite sex.

The case would have been a follow-up to a 1989 Supreme Court decision which made it more difficult for employers to win lawsuits accusing them of sexual stereotyping and other bias. That case involved a woman who argued she was denied promotion because her supervisors thought she did not act feminine enough.

Justice Sandra Day O'Connor played a key role in that case. She sided with the woman and wrote a separate opinion that gave guidelines for lower courts to follow. Victims, she wrote, must show that "an illegitimate criterion (such as sexual stereotyping) was a substantial factor" in the employer's personnel decision.

Bush has named appeals court Judge Samuel Alito to replace the retiring O'Connor, and some civil rights groups oppose the nomination. Another Bush nominee, Chief Justice John Roberts, was confirmed in time for the start of the Supreme Court's term last month. Roberts replaced Rehnquist, who had voted against the female worker in the 1989 case.

There are no good estimates about the number of transgender workers in the United States because of their fears of going public, said Lamda Legal attorney Cole Thaler.

"Trans employees are particularly vulnerable to harassment and discrimination because they deviate from employers' ideas of what men and women are supposed to look and act like," said Thaler, a lawyer with the gay-rights group that is not involved in the Barnes case.

The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati said that Barnes was subjected to an unusual daily evaluation by other sergeants and required to wear a microphone at all times

The case is Cincinnati v. Barnes, 5-292

Transgender violence/ Day of Remembrance

Last year at this time, I was heavily involved with preparing for the annual Transgender Day of Remembrance.  I was on the committee that planned the event, I was the keynote speaker at the rally the day before, I led the parade, and I acted as the "Master of Ceremonies" at the evening's event itself, and of course, I blogged about it.  All in all, we had a very nice turnout and quite a bit of participation.  I also tried to raise awareness in the Law School -- I provided black arm-bands for people to wear, I put up flyers around the school, and I sent out a school-wide email discussing the event.  I got very little response from the law school community; only a handful asked for and wore arm-bands, only 1 or 2 showed up for the rally, and none came the night of the event.

But, I did raise consciousness at some level.  I got, in response to the email I sent, a reply from a law student that suggested that I was overstating the case of violence toward transgenders, that the reasons for their deaths might not have been their transgenderism, but some other reason -- such as their perceived status as prostitutes. In the end, helpful commenters, supporters (including Michigan blogger, Heidi) and I either convinced the other side that they were attacking unfairly and unnecessarily, or they simply gave up. 

But, this year, I've done nothing to plan for or facilitate this event.  Not because I no longer attach importance to it, but simply because I've been swamped with a too heavy law school class schedule (not to mention a new romance).  On the contrary, I have recently had cause to reflect on the fact that very little attention, in the scheme of things, ever gets paid to transgender people.  What attention does come our way is either because we yell and scream and demand respect (but rarely get it), or we get physically assaulted.

In today's Between the Lines, there is an article (under the byline of a friend and supporter) about a recent assault on two transgender women in Pontiac, MI.

According to a statement police spokesman Sgt. William Ware gave the Oakland Press Oct. 25, bigotry may have been a motive in the attack on the two trans women.

"The person (who attacked them) was calling them names and taunting them," while following the women home from the Liberty Bar according to Sgt. Ware.

Police did not have a good description of the suspects in the assault at press time.

"The description of the perpetrators varies between the two victims," said Detective Jaclyn Wilton, who is working on the case. "I think there were some very serious injuries to the two victims, and perhaps some memory loss and confusion. We're looking for anyone who has any information to share that with us."

If that wasn't enough, one newspaper who reported the incident assaulted them yet again, by referring to them both with masculine pronouns.

The Tuesday, Oct. 25 edition of the Oakland Press identified the two transgender victims of the Oct. 19 assault as "two gays."

The report repeated the mistake in the second paragraph, saying, "The two men, one of whom cross-dresses and the other is transgendered..."

In the year since the last commeration of TDOR, there have been 12 more murders in this country alone and that does not count the assaults that did not result in death.  It's still not safe for us out there, people.  The education must continue.  I am sorry that I did not do more this year.  If you can, please attend the TDOR event (scheduled for November 20) in your area. [UPDATE] - Original flyer had a typo in it. The local rally is scheduled for Thursday 11/17 (not to be confused with the events on the actual day).

Quoting again from today's article:

Stay Safe

According to Triangle Foundation Director of Policy Sean Kosofsky, "Everyone in the GLBT community must be very careful, very alert when they're leaving bars and bookstores and other venues like them. This might signal the rise of more incidents in Pontiac, or it may not, but folks need to take very careful precautions." Kosofsky made the following recommendations:

1. Be incredibly aware of your surroundings. Are there individuals present who don't look like they belong there?

2. Park and walk in well-lit areas. If private parking is available, that is the safest option.

3. Travel in groups. Have folks walk you to your car or other places. Not only is there safety in numbers, you'll also have witnesses if anything does happen.