Visible Man: Tipping the scales of justice

Jamison Green offers a man's POV on life in the trans lane. Opinion, advice and information from an internationally respected leader of the FTM community.

More Columns By the book TV tells our stories, part 2 TV tells our stories, part 1 Archive Interact FTM message board MTF message board Trans Tips & Tricks message board ToOp or not ToOp message board Transland Transitions message board Gender message board

There has been so much news lately -- both good and bad -- that it's difficult to know where to start. I'll flip a coin ...

OK, some good news first: California became the fourth state, after Minnesota, Rhode Island and New Mexico, to codify nondiscrimination against trans and gender-variant people in employment and housing when Governor Davis signed Assembly member Mark Leno's bill, AB 196, into law on August 2, 2003.

This may be old news to some readers, as it's had a fair amount of publicity, but I could not let it pass without comment, since the provisions of this bill are ones that I have been closely involved in working to achieve for many years.

The first attempt to add the term "gender identity" to the California Government Code was in 1996, when Senator Marks introduced a bill relating to fair employment and housing; that bill died in committee, November 30, 1996. Assembly member Keeley introduced a bill similar to AB 196 in February 2000, and it also died in the Senate six months later. We came very close to getting yet another bill (AB 1649) through the 2001-2002 legislature, under the sponsorship of Assembly member Jackie Goldberg. Leno's bill finally ran the gauntlet, thanks in no small part to the refinement of the arguments in favor of such legislation over the past decade.

Leno's experience in championing trans-positive legislation as a San Francisco supervisor was, no doubt, also helpful. Thanks, Mark, and thanks to all the other supportive and dedicated legislators who also helped win this victory. Thanks to Governor Davis, too, for taking the positive step of signing AB 196 rather than letting it become law without his signature -- or, worse, vetoing it!

Now some of the bad news. Just as I thought might happen, some gung-ho conservative attorney has agreed to take on Linda Kantaras's appeal in the decision that affirmed Michael Kantaras' status as a man last February. The case will be argued at the Second District Court of Appeals in Lakeland, Florida, sometime late this year or early in 2004.

"By allowing someone to subjectively define their sex, the court sets a precedent for similar rulings on race; for example, a Caucasian who thinks he or she is African American, or vice versa," said Mathew Staver, president and general counsel of Liberty Counsel, the "conservative legal watchdog group" that has risen to the challenge.

"This case could really undermine all objectivity within the legal system, and we believe that it has great importance to not only the legal system, but also to marriage and to many other classifications that we recognize as protected statuses, such as national origin or race and many others," said Staver, who is representing Linda Kantaras, according to the Christian News Service (in an article by Lawrence Morahan, published July 24, 2003).

Note the appeal to shore up perceived protections for accepted categories like national origin and race, categories for which conservatives have also, historically, opposed "special rights." Now their tactics have changed to reinforce those protections and those special rights they hold dear.

I expect Liberty Counsel and Staver will focus their effort on establishing a mechanism for determining sex that will affirm their worldview; this will not bode well for gender-variant people who find that changing their sex is the best way for them to manage their lives.

I wonder whether Court TV will continue to monitor this case. I predict it will be highly charged with religious indignation and attempts to invoke moral judgment, and it could even rival the Scopes "monkey trial" of 1925. We are treading on dangerous ground, and the attorneys for Michael Kantaras will be called upon once again to establish evidence and lines of reason that are so clear and immutable that a reasonable court will be able to affirm the validity of Michael's gender identity and the reality of his life and his children's lives.

In a related development, the issue of gay marriage, the Vatican's forceful statement against it and the Bush Administration's stated intention to codify marriage as a special right reserved for heterosexual couples -- possibly even by an amendment to the U.S. Constitution -- means that a showdown is coming on that front as well.

Cases like Kantaras, and other trans-related issues, will have a part to play in these arguments, too, since the conservative Religious Right conflates all these states of "moral depravity." They are terrified since the Texas sodomy laws were struck down and since Canada has legalized gay marriage. Now, they're almost holding their breath waiting for the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court to rule that gay marriage is legal in that state (a ruling could come any day, and go either way). And if the court says marriage is not for straights only, Messrs. Bush and Ashcroft will probably equate this new evil to the threat of terrorism itself.

Blind Justice holds her scales with our trans and queer lives in the balance. We've seen some major victories lately, and I am convinced we will prevail in the long run -- but we may have some serious battles in the months and years ahead. We need to shore up our relations with our allies and repair any rifts within our community, so that we can present a clear, united front as we weigh in to fight for a future that is filled with integrity and freedom for all.