I understand that the fight over House Bill 2 is now far more about politics than the problems that initially caused it. I’m under no illusion that the legislature and governor will change their minds. Nevertheless, at the risk of having both sides hate on me, I have a relatively simple solution.
First, Charlotte should repeal the part of the ordinance that says transgender people can use the bathroom of their choice. They should also eliminate any language that prevents transgender people from using the bathroom of their choice. Don’t talk about it and people will go where they feel most comfortable. Most folks won’t know the difference.
In exchange, the legislature repeals House Bill 2 and all of the heavy-handed regulations that usurp the power of local government. Had the legislature stuck to bathrooms, the outcry probably would have been muted. Instead, they used the opportunity to try to prevent municipalities from including LGBT people in their nondiscrimination policies and to prevent victims of discrimination from suing to get justice. That’s clearly wrong.
They should then pass another bill that makes assault in a bathroom or locker room carry a term of 20 years to life because bathrooms and locker rooms are places out of the public eye that leave people particularly vulnerable. That should help deter sexual predators using bathrooms and locker rooms as stalking grounds and should better protect transgender people who fear being assaulted while trying to find a place to relieve themselves. Bathrooms and locker rooms should be safe places for people to take care of business.
Leave in place any indecent exposure laws. Transgender people who have not had surgery should try to be discreet. I imagine most already are. For any transgender women who have male anatomy and insist on flaunting themselves in bathrooms or locker rooms, let them be subject complaints of indecent exposure. Most won’t. They’re transgender, not transvestites.
Live and let live. Protect people from discrimination but regulate as little as possible. It’s not that hard.
Thomas Mills is the founder and publisher of PoliticsNC.com. Before beginning PoliticsNC, Thomas spent twenty years as a political and public affairs consultant. Learn more >
Thomas, 20 years to life for assault in a bathroom is far too long. Two high school girls pushing each other in the bathroom because one of them called the other a derogatory name equals two convictions for assault in a bathroom. Neither one should go to jail for a day, let alone 20 years to life. A more reasonable elevation of the assault might be to put it at the same level as an adult assaulting a child (maximum 5 months in jail if no physical harm done and maximum around 19 years if serious harm done).
Discrimination lawsuits in NC state courts are few and generally ineffective. The real important anti-discrimination lawsuits are filed in federal courts under federal laws. Be interesting if someone would cite major discrimination lawsuits that have been successfully pursued in NC state courts.
Here is an excellent tutorial on state discrimination cases versus federal, written by an attorney in Durham. http://www.newsobserver.com/opinion/op-ed/article70816607.html
Interesting, Thanks. But it doesn’t answer my questions. What remedies have state courts imposed on those found guilty of discrimination? Have major damages been awarded to plaintiffs? What NC companies, employers or local governments have been found guilty of discrimination and what have been the consequences–large monetary awards, reinstatement of an employees, cease and desist orders, etc.?
I think you see what I am driving at. How are the 1977 state anti discrimination policies enforced by the state courts? Do these policies have any real teeth? The article fails to address these questions.
D.g. Can you or anyone cite a successful anti discrimination case won in NC state courts? What was the outcome? Was there a monetary award? Who paid and how much? What penalties or sanctions were imposed on the loser? No one here so far has referenced an important anti discrimination case decided in NC state courts.
I can only assume from your non answer that you cannot name any anti discrimination lawsuits won in NC courts or what the outcome of any case was. Makes one wonder if there have been any significant anti discrimination lawsuits won in NC courts.
“No power was usurped. Local government has only the authority granted to them by the state legislature. Cities and counties can only act by permission.”
While true, that statement is disingenuous because of the application. When the General Assembly takes over some function of local government, or when it merely limits local governments’ possible courses of action, it is often an excuse to be discriminatory, as in this case.
Doesn’t the GA have enough work to do at the state-wide level on such issues and infrastructure? The GA actions limiting court remedies for discrimination turn us back 50 years. The Asheville waterworks and Charlotte airport cases are targeted actions and are not setting up governmental rules which are applied evenly across the board.
Thomas, I like your suggested compromise. I particularly like your line, “(Charlotte) should also eliminate any language that prevents transgender people from using the bathroom of their choice. Don’t talk about it and people will go where they feel most comfortable. Most folks won’t know the difference.” I sense that is exactly what has been going on since public restrooms first came into being! People have been doing their business regardless of their gender identity and no one has noticed much less cared. This whole thing is much ado about nothing.
The whole transgender bathroom is symbolic and highly political. It will have little practical impact of what bathrooms people use. But it is important symbolically to the LGBT community and their advocacy groups.
The ordinance wasn’t necessary, but the Charlotte City Council took the opportunity to patronize their liberal base by promoting the LGBT political agenda. The move was antagonistic to the conservative-dominated NCGA, which reacted to the ill-conceived provocation. The unintended consequences will fall most heavily on the City.
I agree and won a argument at work using this same argument. Some people just want to bully.
Reasonable solutions, although now Charlotte is FORBIDDEN from making any kind of such law even without mentioning bathrooms.
And, having a special “bathroom assault” law could open trans* people up to being accused of harassment in bathrooms even when they didn’t. If someone decides to say “that [transwoman] tried to molest my daughter in the women’s room”, especially in a conservative area, where they would delight in “taking down” a transgender person, it brings to mind the old “Sting” operations where gay men were routinely baited and flirted with by cops in bathrooms and then arrested for lewd acts.
Google, paypal, Breaburn pharmaceuticals, and Red Ventures (the marketing and technology company) are now turning away from North Carolina. Why did Patrick McCroney sign this bill late in the night without time for public comment?
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/north-carolina-starts-see-economic-damage-anti-bias-law-n551911
“heavy-handed regulations that usurp the power of local government.”
No power was usurped. Local government has only the authority granted to them by the state legislature. Cities and counties can only act by permission.
https://www.nclm.org/resource-center/Pages/How-Municipalities-Work.aspx
Let’s clear something up. When a state legislature passes a new law to override a local municipal law and then goes on to even further to put in place new limitations on the local municipality’s ability to regulate within it’s borders, that is exactly the definition of usurping the power of local government. When multiple aspects of the state legislature’s action will not stand up to eventual constitutional scrutiny, then the legislature is just being plain stupid. And the transgender issue along with constraining local action in minimum wage laws is not nearly the first instance of this and many other legislatures taking exactly these actions. I am not saying that all city/county government actions are any smarter than actions of state government, nor that all municipal laws are good and should be respected, but let’s not fool around with definitions of usurping.
The legislature and the governor have attempted to solve a problem (1) that is addressed by existing laws and (2) for which there is no evidence that there are law-breakers, i.e. transgendered people using bathrooms of their identified gender to expose themselves or sexually assault people. Where are the cases addressed by the legislature? Where are the transgendered females who have assaulted or exposed themselves to female children or adults? Where are the transgendered males who have assaulted or exposed themselves to male children or adults? If either situation had occurred there would be news stories, but in either case current law would have been adequate to address the instance(s) (that (s) is a lie, but I am not going to do the research, I just don’t believe there have been an instance in the first place).
One must compare other cases where “conservative” legislatures are addressing “problems” that don’t exist. Let’s take voting fraud. There are laws all over the country instituted by legislatures to prevent the under-identified from voting. Why? Because of the myth that this has been a statistically important issue in the first place. It isn’t, but they don’t let that niggling question stand in the way of disenfranchising older and younger voters, predominantly those who vote Democratic.
Then you have gun laws. Whenever a new (or previously existing) gun law comes along, we are told that there are sufficient gun laws and all that needs to be done is to enforce the existing laws. But there are sufficient laws to address sexual assault and public indecency. There are sufficient laws to punish those who are found guilty (in the single digits nationwide) of voting fraudulently. Why the double standards? Because disenfranchisement of minority populations is more important than bucking the huge money of NRA voters. There are no lobbies sufficiently large for disenfranchises voters or transgendered persons (except for the upsurge of corporations who recognize discriminatory policies for what the are), so the “no big government conservatives” do some window dressing for their base.
But you are proposing actions and a resolution that would need to be spurred and guided by common sense, thoughtful compromise, and seeking the common good. So it begs the question: Are NCGOP leaders capable of sitting down, in good faith, on one side of the negotiation table, to try to work this out?
Watching how they have handled bill presentations, floor debate, and amendment proposals during their legislative sessions, one does wonder…..
The answer is “No, they are not.” The advocates on both sides are never-say-die people. In response to the below comment that “I just don’t believe there have been an instance [of assault due to transgender permissiveness]”, see the following: https://maleviolence.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/a-sex-predators-sick-deception-_-toronto-gta-_-news-_-toronto-sun.pdf.
People who believe in civil rights and equal treatment, equal justice, and equal opportunity under the Constitution and its amendments are, indeed, “never-say-die” people. Because those fundamental rights have been fought for, struggled for, died for over the past 240 years, and those denied them, along with their allies, will continue fighting until they’re won. Those who oppose equality will, however, die off in the end.
Now, as for your claim that “transgender permissiveness” leads to sex crimes, THIS is it? Get real, Mr. Hill. The story you link to has nothing to do with transgendered people; it is about one convicted sex offender who tried to offend against new victims by PRETENDING to be transsexual and LYING about who he was.
Yanno, by that logic, I should post lots of shallow, empty comments here that prove what an idiot I am, and simultaneously claim to be a Republican activist. Then everyone would believe that my stupidity and party affiliation are one and the same, or at least related.
If you or anyone can cite a single case in the United States — one person out of 320,000,000 — of a transgendered person molesting, assaulting, or otherwise bothering someone else in a bathroom, I’d love to hear about it. I’ve searched, and come up totally empty. Maybe that’s because when actual transsexuals go into the bathroom, it’s for a very simple reason: TO GO TO THE BATHROOM.
Dear A.D. Reid, You have missed the point. No one is accusing transgender people of using their label to commit offenses. Instead, the problem is that perverts can misuse the designation to pursue predatory practices. These are unintended consequences, but consequences none the less. The writer asked for “an instance”, so I provided one. But people like yourself would not accept the truth no matter how many instances could be referenced. Do you really believe that this will be the last one? Our discussion brings up another important issue: Can sexual predators help themselves? Is this not the way they were born? What accommodation should our society create for them?
Interesting compilation of cases where men posing as women gained access to women’s bathrooms, locker rooms, etc. It happens much more frequently than LGBT advocates claim.