Here’s all that you need to know about the pro-HB235 crowd and its strategy even if you are not willing to ascribe evil intent to their actions: Collectively, they are Walter Mondale.
In the fall of 1984.
Think about the arguments they’ve made about what HB235 will do – particularly regarding homeless shelters. I say its disinformation and lies – but if you don’t want to go there, and if you want to see the good in people (or, stated differently, presume that what you’re seeing is good), you still need to arm yourselves with the facts.
HB235 does not explicitly cover homeless shelters.
HB235 certainly does not explicitly say that trans women will have access to female-segregated homeless shelters.
There is no formal Maryland administrative law on the issue, and any that might come into existence can be overturned by courts.
Federal statutory and administrative law is similarly silent.
There is no Maryland case law on the issue.
The only rule that one can glean from the federal case law that HB235’s advocates claim will be the guidance for HB235’s interpretation is that each homeless shelter case is its own animal; whether a homeless shelter is “housing” or “public accommodations” is fact-specific.
But we’re expected to rely on all of this, while gays have their decade-old statutory specificity – and while that gets beefed up with HB285 (something that no one seems to want to talk about.)
Ten years ago, gays got statutory specificity in employment, housing and public accommodations while trans people were told to rely on…
what was left of Walter Mondale’s presidential campaign strategy by the time of the 1984 conventions: just hope that everything possible breaks his way.
He picked a woman running mate – but that didn’t turn the tide.
He gave the ‘Reagan won’t tell you that he’s going to raise your taxes but I will tell you that I’m going to raise them speech’ – but that didn’t turn the tide.
There was the hope that the 73 year-old Reagan’s age would catch up to him – but, even though there was one slip-up in one debate, that still didn’t turn the tide.
In 2001, Maryland’s gays got everything that they were asking for and told trans people what we were worthy of having – and the hope-everythng-breaks-your-way illusion that we were worthy of being able to use to attempt to get, via smoke and mirrors, all while gays got statutory specificity.
Now, here Maryland’s gays have gone again.
Even if you believe that Maryland’s gays in general (and ‘Equality’ Maryland in specific) mean well, this is what their strategy for us regarding public accommodations and homeless shelters comes down to: hope everything breaks our way…
..via administrative rulings, via court interpretations, via whatever the hell the facts of our cases might happen to be.
Hope for the best – in court.
Hope for the best in court is a good strategy, eh?
Yes, it has happened in some places (though not Maryland.) Nevertheless….
Tell that to Ramona Holloway.
Tell that to Karen Ulane.
Tell that to Peter Oiler.
Gays wanted statutory specificity in 2001 and they got it, and we have been expected to play a game ever since; under HB235, we’re still expected to play that game but it will simply involve fewer things.
You expect us to hope that no one has rigged the game.
You expect us to hope that whoever is calling the game actually knows what the game is.
You expect us to hope that whoever is calling the game not only knows what the game is and how it is supposed to be called but does not happen to have a once-in-a-lifetime foobar during our game (be it a perfect one or otherwise.)
But you have no problem with gays not having to worry about the game.
In fact, some people say that there is no ‘game’ at all.
But if you care about trans people, shouldn’t you be prepared for a rigged game, in case there actually is a game of sort sort?