Tag Archive | Legal

It wasn’t supposed to happen this way

On Monday, we completed our usual planning session for the next two weeks of work and afterwards I stopped in to talk to my boss. Along the way, he informed me that the person I know best and trusted in HR just retired. Uh-oh. That threw a spanner into my coming out plans with HR. I had planned to talk to that exact person in early April since I’ve had contact with her before but not openly about this specific issue. My boss saw this bothered me so asked why. Given that I do trust him and have no reason not to talk to him, I said, “Let me close the door. We probably need to chat.”

So out it came. He now knows. And his reaction? “I don’t see this impacting your place in this organization in the least. In fact, if it does, I will be very disappointed in whomever tries to make it an issue.” He also said with my HR contact having left the company last week, he will find out who is best for me to talk to in HR so I’ll either have an HR appointment later this week or probably the first week or second week after I get back from vacation. I did explain that I am aiming to complete the legal aspects of transition in the second half of this year with a soft target date of September. Once that is done, I can really be full time and start the clock towards GCS.

That also means it’s all in play and live. And my boss? He congratulated me on tackling something that must be very difficult to face. He also said that I probably have enough stress from this outside the office (which is true) but he wanted to make sure the office was zero stress on this specific issue.

I work with great people, for a great company. I hope I can continue to say that going forward.

Addendum: Today I received an email from our new contact in HR. She wants to see me the first day I am back from vacation, which is Monday, the 23rd.

My boss also reiterated that if I need to speak to him at any time, his door is always open.

Medical Information about Transwomen in Sports

Mar9

The following was put together by Transadvocate, a trans advocacy website, on their Facebook page. In order to not lose track of it, I am putting it here. This is not my work! I am copying it for ease of reference! Thank you Transadvocate and Rehan! If I find another link to this, I will add it here for completeness as well.

In regards to the Crossift HQ refusal of Chloie Jonnson’s participation at the games here are some facts that should be considered before any sensationalistic claims are made without proper knowledge.

First of all the XY vs XX argument is invalid and not sufficient. There are well documented cases of XX males and XY females. The SRY gene region is normally found on the Y chromosome but is not a reliable method of testing since not only is not always found on the Y chromosome it also triggers a gene cascade not well understood by scientists yet that in turn affect other tissues during development which may lead to altered sexually dimoprhic traits in individuals, such as brain structure.

This is evidenced by scientific literature cited

Male-to-Female Transsexuals Have Female Neuron Numbers in a Limbic Nucleus
http://press.endocrine.org/doi/abs/10.1210/jcem.85.5.6564

and

Sexual differentiation of the human brain: relevance for gender identity, transsexualism and sexual orientation

and

Sexual Differentiation of the Bed Nucleus of the Stria Terminalis in Humans May Extend into Adulthood
http://www.jneurosci.org/content/22/3/1027.short

and

A sex difference in the human brain and it’s relation to transsexuality.
http://depot.knaw.nl/821/1/15106_285_swaab.pdf

with subsequent study by Dr.Swaab et al. And Kruijver et al. showing differences in the Bed Nucleus of the Stria Terminalis, SDN, Hypothalamus and gray matter volume underlining the importance of brain physiology.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0165380688902313

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053811909003176

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1300/J082v28n03_07#.UxoCwRbPPFI

http://books.google.ca/books?hl=en&lr&id=JFpq6hYQRhQC&oi=fnd&pg=PA41&dq=brain+dissection+transgender+Dr.+Swaab&ots=FjtewJ28wz&sig=8F-QOG1Q5QCEIMe1oQwqlWNb9ko#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://www.hawaii.edu/PCSS/biblio/articles/2005to2009/2006-atypical-gender-development.html

Also studies showing it to be irreversible

http://aace.metapress.com/content/nm510264636815vk/

There is also an article linking hormone related genes to the atypical sexual dimoprhism. Genes CYP19 (Aromatase responsible for testosterone to estrogen conversion), AR (androgen receptor, the “key” hole for the cell that the testosterone “key” acts on to elicit it’s effects) and ESRB (Estrogen Receptor Beta which is responsible for the initiation of differentiating gene cascades in the fetal brain during fetal hormonal “washes”)

here

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306453005000454

Continuing on the topic of performance and gender testing the IOC released a statement before the 2012 summer Olympics.

“The new rules state that a panel of independent medical experts will examine through a blood test the testosterone levels in a woman and will then make a recommendation about whether she could be eligible to compete.”

The IOC and NCAA have decided after extensive research (independently) that Hormone profile is the primary determining factor for gender qualification in sport.

The Olympics requires 2 years post surgery before being allowed to compete at an INTERNATIONAL event.

The NCAA requires only one year of HRT.

This was determined the minimum to not have any unfair advantage as evidenced by the quotes from respective authorities below.
“Requiring sex reassignment surgery before allowing participation for the high school or collegiate student athlete is medically unnecessary and not linked to competitive equity IOC regulations requiring surgery for Olympic transgender athletes have been controversial and it would be unreasonable to”make this requirement for high school and college students”
ERIC VILAIN M.D., PH.D., PROFESSOR, DIRECTOR OF THE CENTER FOR GENDER-BASED BIOLOGY AND CHIEF MEDICAL GENETICS DEPARTMENT OF PEDIATRICS, UCLA
“Research suggests that androgen deprivation and cross sex hormone treatment in male-to-female transsexuals reduces muscle mass; accordingly, one year of hormone therapy is an appropriate transitional time before a male-to- female student athlete competes on a women’s team
ERIC VILAIN: M.D., PH.D., PROFESSOR, DIRECTOR OF THE CENTER FOR GENDER-BASED BIOLOGY AND CHIEF MEDICAL GENETICS DEPARTMENT OF PEDIATRICS, UCLA
“Transgender student athletes fall within the spectrum of physical traits found in athletes of their transitioned gender, allowing them to compete fairly and equitably”
DR. NICK GORTON
AMERICAN BOARD OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, MEDICAL LEGAL CONSULTANT, TRANS HEALTH CARE

Further more, the difference need to be put into perspective when transgender women are compared with cisgender women they fall within a female range after the required time period (1 year NCAA, 2 years post-op IOC).
“Differences within the sexes are considerable and often times larger than differences between the sexes ”
DR. WALTER BOCKTING, PH.D.
PRESIDENT OF WPATH, ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR, UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA MEDICAL SCHOOL

These facts are presented based on scientific literature as cited
here
Elbers JM, Asscheman H, Seidell JC, et al. Effects of sex steroid hormones on regional fat depots as assessed.
here
Australian Sports Commission. Transgender in sport.www.ausport.gov.au/fulltext/2001/ascpub/women_transgender.asp (accessed 22 Mar 2005).

here
as contrasted between these two
↵ Stamm R, Veldre G, Stamm M, et al. Dependence of young female volleyballers’ performance on their body build, physical abilities, and psycho-physiological properties. J Sports Med Phys Fitness 2003;43:291–9. [Medline][Web of Science]
↵ Viitasalo JT. Anthropometric and physical performance characteristics of male volleyball players. Can J Appl Sport Sci1982;7:182–8. [Medline]
and here
Pilgrim J, Martin D, Binder W. Far from the finish line: transsexualism and athletic competition. Fordham Intellectual Property Media & Entertainment Law Journal2003;13:495–549.
And the rest of these studies

↵ Federation Internationale de Volleyball. Medical regulations, ed. 2004. http://www.cev.lu/mmp/online/website/main_menu/downloads/file_28430/fivb_med_regulations_-_revised_7.pdf (accessed 23 Mar 2005).
↵ Lausanne Declaration on Doping in Sport (adopted by the World Conference on Doping in Sport). 1999.www.sportunterricht.de/lksport/Declaration_e.html (accessed 23 Mar 2005).
↵ Ritchie I. Sex tested, gender verified: controlling female sexuality in the age of containment. Sport History Review2003;34:80–98.
↵ Batterham AM, Birch KM. Allometry of anaerobic performance: a gender comparison. Can J Appl Physiol1996;21:48–62. [Medline]
Thomas JR, French KE. Gender differences across age in motor performance: a meta-analysis. Psychol Bull1985;98:260–82. [CrossRef][Medline][Web of Science]
↵ Shepard RJ. Exercise and training in women. Part I. Influence of gender on exercise and training responses. Can J Appl Physiol2000;25:19–34. [Medline][Web of Science]
↵ Dickinson BD, Genel M, Robinowitz CB, et al. Gender verification of female Olympic athletes. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2002;34:1539–42. [CrossRef][Medline][Web of Science]
↵ Simpson JL, Ljungqvist A, de la Chapelle A, et al. Gender verification in competitive sports. Sports Med 1993;16:305–15. [Medline][Web of Science]
↵ Introducing the, uh, ladies. JAMA1966;198:1117–18.
↵ Doig P, Lloyd-Smith R, Prior JC, et al. Position statement. Sex testing (gender verification) in Sport. Canadian Academy of Sports Medicine. 1997. http://www.casm-acms.org/PositionStatements/GendereVerifEng.pdf (accessed 23 Mar 2005).

There is no “residual” advantage and often times transgender athletes are at a disadvantage due to severely lowered testosterone levels in comparison to native females. Cisgender women have a higher testosterone than transgender women who have had reassignment surgery and the related information.
http://transathletes.org/hormones.php

Other issues that arise in the form of practicality

1) Her numbers pale in comparison to other female athletes

Crossfit profile comparison between her and CLB:http://games.crossfit.com/compare/161983/8404

Back Squat: 225 lb Clean & Jerk: 165 lb Snatch: 125 lb Deadlift: 275 lb

These numbers pale in comparison to the top competitors as well as compared to many other regional athletes.

2) Let her compete, if she has an unfair advantage it will be very apparent and provide evidence for these as of yet unfounded claims of unfair advantage. There are yet to be any instances of a transgender athlete dominating competitions if this were to be so likely.

3) Saying this will open the door for other males to “become” transgender and dominate is very short sighted. Firstly they would have to adhere to the strict protocol involving Hormone Replacement Therapy which would remove that advantage. Secondly transgender people face a MASSIVE amount of discrimination not to mention the amount of money and physical pain of procedures that need to be endured to complete the requirements. The transgender suicide rate is 41%, forcing someone to live as the opposite identity is devastating psychologically and would also be true of someone trying to “fake” it. (Remember once the surgery is done it is a PERMANENT change, is winning crossfit that important?)

4) Having larger bone structure and lowered muscle mass constitutes a disadvantage.

5) Furthermore there is no consistent testing policy in crossfit for PED’s. A cis-female using AA has a much larger and much more distinct advantage which could be considered universally as an “unfair advantage”.

The most shocking thing is the completely deplorable and inappropriate reply from Crossfit HQ, who seem to be the ones lacking in understanding of the human genome and biology.

Transgender Rights

Feb15

Recently some questions were asked. Some of these questions were:

A common theme is that if everyone were stealth, then Trans rights would never progress.

Do you agree?

What are examples of Trans rights? Are they special rights for people born Trans?

What does stealth look like to you?

Is stealth possible in 2014 for an adult transitioner?

I did not attempt to answer all of those, just the ones that most interested me. My answer is below.

Trans rights are confirmation of rights that should be accorded to trans people but often are not. As I have explained elsewhere, as explained to me by a lawyer, in the United States, unless a law explicitly covers a group, then that group is not protected.

Case in point – ENDA. Over 80% of Americans believe that discriminating on the basis of gender identity is already illegal because discriminating based on sex is illegal. But it’s not illegal because it doesn’t work that way. So firing you because you are trans is completely legal today in most states because we are not explicitly protected.

Another case in point – Rick Perry, when he found out that a transwoman could remain in her existing marriage, that a transwoman could also with identifying documents marry a man, got a bit upset. He said he thought a transwoman shouldn’t be allowed to marry anyone. And he and Greg Abbott, the Texas state attorney general, have been hoping for a legal ruling in the Nikki Arraguz Lloyd case that would support them doing exactly that. Unfortunately for them, the appeals court just ruled completely in Nikki’s favor. I expect the Texas Supreme Court to overturn that ruling, thus forcing the question to the SCOTUS since, at its core, it is a 14th amendment issue.

Likewise, trans people can be denied housing because the existing laws do not explicitly rule out such discrimination. Same for medical services. Because they are trans. And because of these completely unfair forms of discrimination, trans people fall into poverty four times as often as the general population. Trans people have suicide attempt rates of 41% versus 1.5% for the general population. And study after study shows this is not because trans people are trans but because of the social distress caused by this sort of discrimination and poor treatment.

There is a reason the AMA considers this a medical condition. There is a reason the AMA supports insurance coverage for trans health care. And no, it’s not due to any sort of political correctness. It’s due to the science. It’s due to science that confirms that transition, as a treatment for those with severe GID is the most effective treatment available. Trans haters like to point to post transition suicide attempt rates of 4.5% – 200% higher than the general population. But they don’t want to mention pre-transition 41% suicide attempt rates. As one psychiatrist said, when you can reduce suicide attempts by 90%, that’s a good treatment.

Let’s circle back to trans rights. Trans rights are human rights. They are explicit laws that formally codify that trans people should not be discriminated against just because of an accident of birth, just like discrimination based on sex,

Then you have the “religious freedom” nonsense. Those people want to codify their “right” to discriminate against you as trans using the excuse of their religious beliefs.

So there are legitimate issues and reasons to fight for what we call trans rights. How do we do that?

Let’s look at other civil rights movements. Blacks began to make progress when they stopped waiting for whites to eventually “come around” and instead became active and visible. Part of that visibility came via major media. For example, as Martin Luther King noted, Nichelle Nichols, in Star Trek, was one of the first positive black role models on television. He even convinced her to stick with the show and the role, both because he liked her work as an actress and because he wanted to convey to her the importance of being visible to other black youth. Black visibility led to changes.

Likewise, we began to finally see significant changes in public attitudes towards GLB people when those people began to be more visible, especially in entertainment media, and not cast as sociopaths, criminals, addicts, etc. Gay celebrities, athletes, newscasters… all these things began to shift the public opinion to where today, those supporting gay rights now are in the majority. And the younger generations are overwhelmingly in favor of gay rights, again, at least in part, because of positive visibility and role models.

That brings us to the visibility question about trans folk. Some people argue everyone should be visible. I disagree. It’s a highly personal decision that must be weighed by each individual, their own mental health taken into consideration, as well as an honest evaluation of the likely pressures associated with trying to be a positive public role model. So no, not everyone should be “out and proud”. It’s stressful because trans rights are still widely ignored, because the haters are very real, because violence and discrimination against trans people can happen quite often, particularly if you are a public trans figure. An acquaintance recently made the choice to retreat from public visibility to some degree. That’s exactly why this needs to be a personal choice and why I disagree with the “everyone out and proud” assumptions.

Yet at the same time it is important to note that somebody needs to step up and become that public face. Sometimes it happens accidentally. Sometimes deliberately. But we need those positive trans role models so society can get past its hangups about trans people. No, not everyone needs to do this but we do need visibility. And everyone can help, even if they are stealth, by donating to trans organizations. No, it doesn’t have to be a lobbying organization or a politically active organization. You can donate to shelters for trans folk, particularly for trans youth. Donating doesn’t out you. It just says you’re a supporter and you can donate anonymously too. Often your local trans support group can accept donations. That’s one way to help right there.

In the end, progress has to be pushed. I do not believe progress just happens, all by itself. Neither did Martin Luther King.

Faux Moral Outrage Among Shrill Transgender Harpies

Jan19

A federal judge upheld the right of a transgender inmate to receive gender confirmation surgery at the expense of the state. As usual, a particular crowd of transgender voices arise at this “outrage”, about how the “community” brings “shame” upon ourselves because some of us supported this decision. Since I cannot post my unfettered thoughts elsewhere, where these harpies gather like shrill ravens shouting down anyone who disagrees with them, I’ll post my thoughts here. What follows is what I would have addressed to these irrational, illogical, constitutional defying shrill voices of faux moral outrage had I been allowed to say it where it should have been said.

Some of you seem to hold the notion that prison should be cruel and unusual punishment, despite a clear constitutional prohibition against the same.

Some of you seem to want to pick and choose what the government is allowed to call “medically necessary”.

Some of you seem to want to deny that the AMA and APA have stated that GCS can be “medically necessary” in specific cases.

Some of you seem to want to deny the long standing legal finding that anyone in prison is thus a ward of the state and the state is therefore mandatorily obligated to provide “medically necessary” health care, because the state has removed the opportunity for the individual to do so themselves.

Given the above, the decision of the judge follows in clear black and white logic.

Some of you seem to not give a damn about the US constitution, two hundred years of legal precedents, the advancement of modern medicine, and the formal recognition by the scientific community that being transgender is a medical condition.

Here’s a hint – if GCS is medically optional for this prisoner, it is medically optional for every single one of you too. If it is medically optional for this prisoner, and not covered, then it should legally not be covered for you either.

I don’t care of you like or dislike this human being. I certainly don’t. I think what she did was reprehensible. But you cannot play the selective game with medically necessary treatment without also establishing legal precedent that it is therefore selective for everyone else, including you.

There is a word for the short-sighted thinking you present and that word is hypocrisy. I would suggest you reconsider the legal and logical ramifications of your short sighted position, but I know better than that. That’s simply impossible for those motivated by such hypocrisy. Your quasi-moral outrage appears to be more important to you than consistency of legal application of the law in light of the AMA’s position on transsexual surgical health care. Your faux moral outrage defies facts and logic before the law but you’d rather “feel good” about your faux moral outrage than have consistent and fair legal precedents.

And yet some of you wonder why we have so much trouble getting insurance coverage for GCS for the rest of us? Go look in the mirror. You are why so many of us have such trouble. YOU are the problem! You! Because as soon as you argue that this procedure is not medically necessary for Michelle Kosilek, you have argued that it is not medically necessary for you either. If you, as a layman, call into question the diagnosis of medical professionals in one case, you have created the legal basis for a layman to question that diagnosis in every other case.

So the next time a trans brother or sister wonders aloud why getting coverage for GCS is such a legal mess, please have the courage to stand up and say, “Me! Me! I’m the one who screwed you over, for my faux moral outrage! You’re welcome!” But I’ll bet not one of you has the guts to stand up and take responsibility for what you represent. Not one.

Liz – Day By Day

A long journey to find myself