Off the Kuff Rotating Header Image

On bathrooms and menaces

Nonsequiteuse has something to say.

Steven Hotze, M.D., recently published these outright lies about the Houston Equal Rights Ordinance:

Mayor Parker’s ordinance would include minority status for the so called “transgendered,” allowing a biological male to legally enter women’s public bathrooms, locker rooms and shower areas and expose himself to women and girls or just ogle them like a peeping Tom. All he has to claim is that he “thinks of himself as a woman.”

I want to protect my wife, daughters and granddaughters from being exposed to the dangers of male sexual predators masquerading as women in women’s public bathrooms, locker rooms and shower facilities. Don’t you want the same for your wife, daughters and granddaughters? Shame on Mayor Parker and city council for passing an ordinance that would put women and children at risk from sexual predators. That is why it is referred to as the Sexual Predators Protection Ordinance.

Shame on Steven Hotze for deliberately and willfully lying about the ordinance.

Let me break this down for you.

  • The ordinance does allow transgender people to enter public bathrooms.
  • Someone who is biologically male, but who lives life presenting herself as a woman, is considered to be a transgender woman, or transwoman. This person would use the same bathroom as a cisgender woman, or ciswoman, which is a woman who was both born biologically a woman and who presents herself to the world as a woman.
  • Transgender people have to use the bathroom for the very same reasons cisgender people do, and they have to do so when out in public for the exact same reasons, too.
  • A transman or transwoman using a bathroom is NOT committing a crime by being in a bathroom and utilizing the plumbing fixtures therein.
  • A transwoman or transman is NOT committing a crime by being a transgender person.
  • A person who enters a bathroom to commit a crime IS a criminal.
  • A person’s gender identity is irrelevant to any criminal intent or action. In other words, you are a criminal for committing a crime regardless of your gender.
  • A man who puts on a dress in order to commit a crime is not transgender. Such a person is a criminal using a disguise that he hopes will allow him to evade detection and apprehension.
  • “Thinking of himself as a woman” is not now, nor has it ever been, nor will it ever be, an affirmative defense to charges that a crime has been committed. The ordinance does not create such an affirmative defense, and never tried to do so.

Calling this equal rights ordinance a “sexual predator protection ordinance” is a deliberate attempt to scare and mislead people. This ordinance does not exempt any person or class of people from criminal penalties for committing criminal acts.

She has more, so go read the rest. If Steven Hotze is genuinely concerned about sexual predators in his midst, he’s not looking in the right places for them. Or maybe he should look closer to home.

We now know why Houston’s 311 director lost his job.

Kendall Baker was the subject of a sexual harassment investigation. Afterwards, Baker, who is also a minister, spoke out against Houston’s equal rights ordinance saying it would allow predators into women’s restrooms.

Baker is a member of the Houston Area Pastors Council. Just a few weeks ago, Pastor Baker addressed Mayor Annise Parker as he spoke against Houston’s equal rights ordinance during public comment.

“I say to you, what if I came into the bathroom while you were sitting on the toilet? Wouldn’t you feel uncomfortable?” Baker asked.

But city records show Baker was placed on indefinite suspension from the city, after the Office of the Inspector General reportedly found Baker had sexually harassed subordinate female employees.

Baker was among the multitude of candidates that ran for At Large #3 in the 2007 special election. Just as well he didn’t get elected, I’d say.

One last thing. I don’t know how well the petition effort to repeal the Houston Equal Rights Ordinance is going. It’s not that high a bar to clear, and there are sadly plenty of people out there who think like Steven Hotze and Kendall Baker, so I won’t be surprised if they succeed. It should be noted that the petitions, if they do get filed with the City Secretary, become public documents. If there are any closet supporters of repeal out there, the only way they can stay in that closet is to not sign one of those petitions. Just FYI.

Related Posts:

2 Comments

  1. Jason says:

    I don’t care if a “transwomen” uses the men’s bathroom while I am in there, but there is something to be said about this opening the door to Men who seek to enter the women’s restroom for peverse reasons. I would concede this would be extremely rare, but it is still a real threat and would almost certainly occur. Frankly, it probobly occurs already, but under the current norms if a person looks out of place, people would alert someone. Under this ordinance, people won’t because either they think it is the new norm, or they fear being called a bigot. In law school I remember researching the whole XXY situation before writing a paper on the subject because frankly, gender is not so black and white; but this aspect of the ordinance cartainly has the potential to create some uncomfortable situations for people who otherwise support gender equality.

  2. matx says:

    We’re talking about public restrooms–if an individual in a restroom makes you feel uncomfortable, you can leave and wait until they exit.

    Frankly, if a person wants to harm someone, there are many more covert ways and places to do it than a public restroom. Sexual predators usually have access to their victims because they are known to them, often in a position of authority. Family members, significant others, teachers and coaches, even police officers, are more likely to assault a woman or child than some stranger in a bathroom if you really pay attention to the news.

Bookmark and Share