BOOK REVIEW: The Power by Naomi Alderman

The Power is  very thought-provoking work of speculative fiction which attempts to portray an alternative world where women develop a power to inflict pain and grievous bodily harm (primarily through self-generated electric shock), that results in a world where gender roles are upended and women become the dominant sex.

The key strengths of the book are its setting and the ways in which the author riffs off aspects of our culture and societal norms in depicting how the world in the book is impacted by the sudden change in the power dynamics between the sexes. Would women really abuse and sexually dominate men if the roles were reversed and women now have the power to physically harm men whenever they want? In the world depicted in Naomi Alderman’s The Power, the answer is a full-throated yes.

A key weakness of the book in my opinion is the depiction of the characters around which the story is centered. For the most part, there was no character that I identified with strongly enough to become emotionally invested in their future. The one exception is the primary male character, Tunde Edo, a Nigerian boy who turns into scampi’s journalist and chronicler of the extraordinary events resulting from the discovery of The Power by women. Tunde was interesting and I definitely cared about what happened to him but as for the other characters, Ricky, Darrel, Allie, Roxy, Jocelyn and Margot, not so much. I don't think this is because of my own gender identity as a cisgender man; Tunde is continually depicted sympathetically, something which really can't be said about any of the other characters in the book (with the possible exception of Jocelyn and Margot).

It wasn’t until I reached the end of the book that I noticed another interesting feature. The entire work is characterized as a work of fiction by a guy called Neil Adam Armon who is exchanging letters about a book (which we have just read) with someone named Naomi, who are discussing different points about the ideas depicted in the story. it's clear from their interaction  that women being the dominant sex is perfectly natural in their world and the idea that men could be soldiers and commit atrocities on women is entirely fanciful and somewhat titillating. One of the last communications from Naomi is the suggestion that the book might do better if it is published under her name instead of a man's.... Also, between chapters there are illustrations of "historical artifacts" which purport to depict ancient examples of women in the past who had the power, demonstrating that the power has been a reality for a very long time. It’s the inclusion of similar clever subversions of gender like this which makes The Power a compelling (and quick), if flawed, read.

Title: The Power
Author: Naomi Alderman.
Paperback: 341 pages.
Publisher: Viking.
Date Published: October 27, 2017.
Date Read: July 21, 2018.

GOODREADS RATING: ★★★★☆  (4.0/5.0).

OVERALL GRADE: A/A- (3.83/4.0).

PLOT: B+.
IMAGERY: A-.
IMPACT: A+.
WRITING: A.

QUEER QUOTE: California Enacts Law To Provide Nonbinary Gender Option In Official Documents

Wow! The state of California completed its 2017 legislative session recently and there are some fascinating new laws on the books thanks to Democratic supermajorities in both Houses and a Democratic governor in Jerry Brown.

One of the important bills Governor Brown signed into law was SB179, the Gender Recognition Act, which provides the option of "nonbinary" on official identity documents issued by the state of California which ask about the gender or sex of an individual.

USA Today reports:

The state of California will now legally recognize non-binary as a third gender on official state identification documents.  

Gov. Jerry Brown signed SB179 on Sunday night. The bill, dubbed the Gender Recognition Act, will allow a third gender choice on driver's licenses, state identification cards, and make it easier for people to change their gender and name on state identification papers.  

Non-binary, is a catch-all term for people who do not identify as exclusively male or female, and has been slowly acknowledged by some states as a gender option. 

In June, the District of Columbia followed Oregon's lead and began offering the gender-neutral choice of "X" on driver licenses and identification cards, and similar legislation is currently pending in New York.

The bill was authored by Senators Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) and Toni Atkins (D-San Diego),  who are two of the many openly LGBT members of the Legislature. Equality California (an organization MadProfessah used to be a Board Member of) issued a statement on the occasion of the enactment of the bill into law.

Today's Queer Quote is an excerpt from this press release:

SB 179 makes it easier for transgender, intersex and non-binary people to get official identification documents that accurately reflect their gender identity. In addition to recognizing a nonbinary gender, this bill streamlines the process to change the gender marker or name on state-issued identification documents. Previously, individuals faced difficult and burdensome obstacles to change their identification documents, such as requirements that a person obtain a physician’s verification or that they appear in court, which ultimately made the process intimidating and added expenses that an individual might not have. 

“Gov. Brown’s signature today has put California at the forefront of ensuring the dignity and safety of its transgender, non-binary and gender-non-conforming residents,” said Rick Zbur, executive director of Equality California. “When your ID doesn’t match your gender identity or expression, it can expose you to potentially dangerous situations. SB 179 eliminates unnecessary obstacles from the process of getting state-issued identification documents for thousands of Californians.” 

“With this simple change, California has made daily life infinitely safer and easier for many gender nonbinary and transgender people,” said Kris Hayashi, executive director of Transgender Law Center. “We’re asked for identification everywhere from banks to bars to airports, and it can be devastating and even dangerous for nonbinary and transgender people to navigate life with an I.D. that doesn’t reflect who they truly are.” 

According to a 2015 national survey of 25,000 transgender people, only 11 percent reported that all their identification documents had their name and gender that is consistent with their gender identity, and one-third of respondents who showed an ID with a gender marker that did not match their appearance reported being verbally harassed, denied services or assaulted.

 Congratulations to California!

Fusion Adds Data To #GayMediaSoWhite Discussion

John Walker at the Fusion website analyzed the covers of the magazines of The Advocate, Out and Attitude and produced this useful infographic (seen above) to determine the (lack of) diversity represented therein.

The summary of the data is:

Representation on the cover of Out, June 2011 – May 2016In the past five years, Out has featured 78 people on the cover of its magazine. That figure includes repeat appearances by Dustin Lance Black, Ellen Page, Neil Patrick Harris, and Zachary Quinto. The mag’s upcoming May 2016 issue will feature Troye Sivan, a gay white singer-songwriter from Australia who rose to fame on YouTube.
Sixty-six of those 78 people have been white (85%), and 31 of those white people have been queer and/or trans (40%). Twelve of the 74 individuals featured on Out‘s covers have been people of color (15%), and eight of them have been queer people of color (10%).Representation on the cover of The Advocate, June 2011 – May 2016I was unable to locate cover imagery for the following six issues of The Advocate: September 2011, December 2011, January 2012, May 2012, June 2012, and July 2012. But of the covers I was able to find—excluding the publication’s more abstract, evocative cover art—at least 35 people have been featured on the cover of The Advocate over the past five years.At least 10 of those 35 individuals have been people of color (29%). At least eight of those 35 were queer and/or transgender people of color (23%). That includes the mag’s April/May 2016 cover star DeRay Mckesson, a prominent figure in the Black Lives Matter movement who is currently running for mayor of Baltimore.Representation on the cover of Attitude, June 2011 – May 2016Attitude has featured 111 people on its covers in the past five years. That tally includes repeat appearances by Adam Lambert, Dan Osborne, Gareth Thomas, Greg Rutherford, Harry Judd, James Hill, Thom Evans, and Tom Daley.
One-hundred and six of those 111 have been men (95%). The remaining five were women (5%), all of whom were white. (This gender disparity isn’t as troubling as it could be, given that—unlike The Advocate and Out—Attitude is specifically marketed to gay men.) No trans or nonbinary people of any race or ethnicity have been featured on the cover of Attitude in that timeframe.

The overall data can be summarized with this final quote of the data analysis is:

By the way, of the 21 people who appeared on more than one of these magazine covers, we found that seven (33%) are straight white cisgender men. Two of the repeat cover stars are queer women (10%), Lady Gaga and Ellen Page. Just one (5%), Michael Sam—who has been seen on both Out and Attitude—is a person of color.

Discuss!

QUEER QUOTE: SD Gov Vetoes Anti-Trans Students Bill

Wow! This is a big surprise. The Republican Governor of South Dakota has vetoed a bill that explicitly targeted the transgender community for discrimination. House bill 1008 would have stated that students in South Dakota must use bathrooms and changing facilities that correspond to their "biological gender" and not their gender identity.

Governor Dennis Daugaard's veto message is today's queer quote:

March 1, 2016

The Honorable Dean Wink

Speaker of the House of Representatives

500 East Capitol Avenue

Pierre, SD 57501

Dear Mr. Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives,

I respectfully return to you House Bill 1008, with my VETO.

House Bill 1008 does not address any pressing issue concerning the school districts of South Dakota.  As policymakers in South Dakota, we often recite that the best government is the government closest to the people.  Local school districts can, and have, made necessary restroom and locker room accommodations that serve the best interests of all students, regardless of biological sex or gender identity. 

This bill seeks to impose statewide standards on “every restroom, locker room, and shower room located in a public elementary or secondary school.”  It removes the ability of local school districts to determine the most appropriate accommodations for their individual students and replaces that flexibility with a state mandate.

If and when these rare situations arise, I believe local school officials are best positioned to address them.  Instead of encouraging local solutions, this bill broadly regulates in a manner that invites conflict and litigation, diverting energy and resources from the education of the children of this state.

Preserving local control is particularly important because this bill would place every school district in the difficult position of following state law while knowing it openly invites federal litigation.  Although there have been promises by an outside entity to provide legal defense to a school district, this provision is not memorialized in the bill.  Nor would such defense eliminate the need for school or state legal counsel, nor avoid expenses relating to expert witnesses, depositions and travel, or other defense costs.  Nor does the commitment extend to coverage over settlement or damage expenses.  This law will create a certain liability for school districts and the state in an area where no such liability exists today.

For these reasons, I oppose this bill and ask that you sustain my veto.

Respectfully submitted,

Dennis Daugaard

Hat/tip to Joe.My.God

QUEER QUOTE: Anti-Trans Initiative Fails To Quality For CA 2016 Ballot

Good news! Previously we had reported that some haters had been circulating petitions in California to try to literally regulate the access to urination facilities of transgender people with their so-called "Privacy for All" act.

Today comes news that this ballot measure has failed to qualify for the 2016 ballot! The Washngton Blade reports

A social conservative group seeking to place an anti-transgender initiative on the 2016 California ballot announced Monday it failed to collect enough signatures by the deadline to make it happen. 

The initiative, dubbed the “Personal Privacy Protection Act,” sought to prohibit transgender people from using restrooms in government buildings consistent with their gender identity and would have allowed businesses to do the same. 

The anti-trans coalition, known as Privacy for All, needed to submit 365,880 signatures by Monday to qualify the measure for the ballot. Nowhere in the organization’s statement does it say how many signatures it did collect. 

The coalition is supported by the Sacramento-based Pacific Justice Institute and other groups in California that passed Proposition 8 to ban same-sex marriage in the state.

Today's Queer Quote is from Kris Hayashi, the executive director of the Transgender Law Center:

"This initiative was a poorly veiled attack on transgender people that sought to undermine that freedom and single out for harassment anyone who doesn’t meet stereotypes of what it looks like to be male or female. Today Californians have made clear these types of discriminatory attacks on transgender people and our families, communities, and neighborhoods have no place in our state."

This is the same group that was behind Proposition 8 and also tried to repeal the Student Success and Opportunity Act (AB 1266) which makes it clear that students can participate in all student activities regardless of their gender identity or gender expression. Because they have lost so dramatically on the question of marriage equality, these heterosexual supremacists have taken to targeting the most vulnerable group in the LGBT coalition: the transgender community.

Hat/tip to Joe My God

CA Anti-Transgender Bathroom Initiative Is Collecting Signatures Now

There is a new threat to LGBT people on the horizon in California. The same people who opposed marriage equality and got their butts kicked so thoroughly by the forces of equality and progress have switched their focus to trying to regulate where gender non-conforming people can pee!

They have filed a ballot measure and are currently have until November 20, 2015 to collect roughly 500,000 signatures. Here is the attorney's general's summary of the proposed initiative:

Initiative 15-0019
LIMITS ON USE OF FACILITIES IN GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS AND BUSINESSES. INITIATIVE STATUTE.  
Prohibits individuals from using facilities in government buildings except in accordance with their sex as determined at birth, through medical examination, or court judgment recognizing a change of gender. Creates legal damages claim of at least $4,000 against a government entity or person that violates the provision. Allows businesses to prohibit employees or patrons, including transgender people, from using facilities except in accordance with their sex as determined at birth, through medical examination, or court judgment. Exempts businesses from criminal and civil liability for implementing such a prohibition. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local government: Increase in state court costs related to civil claims, not likely to exceed a few tens of millions of dollars annually. Unknown increase in state and local government costs related to actions taken to avoid, litigate, or remedy civil claims filed for violating the measure. Potential significant loss of federal funds. (15-0019.)

If you see anyone asking you to sign such a measure, just say no!

QUEER QUOTE: Justice Department Now Agrees 1964 Civil Rights Act Protects Transgender People

There has been an interesting (and important) development late in the year in LGBT equality! The question of whether discrimination on the basis of gender identity or expression is covered under prohibitions against "sex discrimination" has been hotly debated for years. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) issued a ruling in Macy v. Holder in 2012 which said that they believe that discrimination against transgender individuals is illegal sex discrimination under federal law. The U.S. Department of Labor used that ruling to issue an announcement in 2014 that the agency also believes employment discrimination against transgender individuals is illegal under federal law.

Chris Geidner of Buzzfeed reports that on December 15, 2014 the Attorney General of the United States sent out a memorandum basically agreeing with the EEOC and Labor Department's interpretation of Title VII of the 1964 Civil Right Act that prohibition of sex discrimination in employment includes transgender employees.

This is a huge deal because there is no federal law enacted by Congress prohibiting discrimination against LGBT employees and only a dozen states have enacted state laws protecting civil rights based on gender identity or gender expression (in contrast to over 20 states that have law protecting civil rights based on sexual orientation). Thus the Justice Department reversing its previously held position and now endorsing the concept that "sex" includes "gender identity or expression" is very significant.

Here's a key excerpt from the Attorney General's memorandum (Treatment ofTransgender Employment Discrimination Claims Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ) which is today's Queer Quote:

After considering the text of Title VII, the relevant Supreme Court case law interpreting the statute, and the developing jurisprudence in this area, I have determined that the best reading of Title VII' s prohibition of sex discrimination is that it encompasses discrimination based on gender identity, including transgender status. The most straightforward reading of Title VII is that discrimination "because of ... sex" includes discrimination because an employee's genderidentification is as a member of a particular sex, or because the employee is transitioning, or has transitioned, to another sex. As the Court explained in Price Waterhouse, by using "the simple words 'because of,' ... Congress meant to obligate" a Title VII plaintiff to prove only "that the employer relied upon sex-based considerations in coming to its decision." 490 U.S. at 241-242.It follows that, as a matter of plain meaning, Title VII' s prohibition against discrimination "because of ... sex" encompasses discrimination founded on sex-based considerations, including discrimination based on an employee's transitioning to, or identifying as, a different sex altogether. Although Congress may not have had such claims in mind when it enacted Title VII, the Supreme Court has made clear that Title VII must be interpreted according to its plain text, noting that "statutory prohibitions often go beyond the principal evil to cover reasonablycomparable evils, and it is ultimately the provisions of our laws rather than the principal concerns of our legislators by which we are governed." Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Servs., 523 U.S. 75, 79 (1998). 

It basically says what I said, but in a lot more words, and using Supreme Court precedent. This is a very important result and it will be interesting to see if this signals the next evolution of civil rights jurisprudence which is that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation (i.e. against LGB people) is also sex discrimination. I have believed that it is, and the best explanation for why this is I have ever read is in Andrew Koppelman's  now seminal 1994 law review article "Why Discrimination Against Lesbians and Gay Men is Sex Discrimination."

The interesting situation now is that currently the T in LGBT have federal employment protections while the LGB do not, while the LGB have many more states where they are protected under state law and the T are not. Surely this untenable status quo can not be maintained for long.

 Hat/tip to Chris Geidner

Pro Strongman Champ Rob Kearney Comes Out As Gay

So, this is pretty cool. Rob Kearney is a 25-year-old professional strongman currently ranked as the #2 middleweight champion in the world. Last week he decided to come out to the world as a proud gay man by posting this to Facebook:

The social media post included some of the pictures at the top of this blog post with his boyfriend Joey.

The reaction to Kearney's coming out has been apparently overwhelmingly (but not entirely, of course) positive.

"I thought it was important to be honest," he told me.  "People need to know that one of the top strength athletes on the planet is also gay.  But I didn't want it to affect my ability to compete.  And that possibility definitely crossed my mind before I made that post." 

But once made, the first reactions were overwhelming.  "I can't remember this many people being this supportive and encouraging in my life!" he raved to me.  "I mean, I have always had people back me for events, but that was nothing compared to the sheer numbers of positive messages that came to me.  It was really humbling!" 

Rob is aware that the real impact of his revelation would be felt more gradually over time.  "I am not only the first actively competitive professional world strongman," he explained to me.  "I am also a gay strength coach."

Just as I did when I blogged about Apple CEO Tim Cook's official coming out this week, I congratulate Rob on his openness. It is precisely because of the examples provided by people like Kearney and Cook  (that people of all sexual orientations are in every walk of life) is why those of us who fight for and believe in full LGT equality are confident that eventually (some days soon!)we will live in a world where everyone will be judged by the content of their character and not have their hopes and aspirations impeded by their sexual orientation.

Gender Neutral Pronouns: "Xe Didn't Like Xyr Look And Told Xem"

Can you understand the meaning of the title of this blog post? "Xe," "Xyr" and "Xem" are all proposed gender-neutral pronouns that can be used in place of "she/he," "hers/his" and "her/him." The school board in Vancouver, Canada has recently approved  a policy for the use of these pronouns in schools:

VANCOUVER -- Grammar teachers may need to amend their lesson plans after the Vancouver school board approved Monday a policy change that welcomes a brand-new string of pronouns into Vancouver public schools: “xe, xem, and xyr.”
The pronouns are touted as alternatives to he/she, him/her, and his/hers, and come as last-minute amendments to the board’s new policy aimed at better accommodating transgender students in schools.
The vote came after a brief debate that sparked unrest among opponents of the policy who shouted “dictator” and “liar” at trustees, as security guards and police officers watched from their posts at council doors. But supporters waved pink and blue-coloured flags and drowned out the detractors with their cheers once the policy passed. Three previous public meetings were similarly rowdy.
The vote may be the knockout blow in a bitter and protracted fight over the controversial plan to put gender-neutral washrooms in schools and support students in expressing their preferred gender identities.

What I find so interesting about this is that this pronoun scheme was invented in the early 1970s but is only now getting traction, according to the Business Insider: 

In 1789, William H. Marshall recorded the existence of the gender-neutral pronoun “ou.” “Ou will” meant “he will,” “she will,” or “it will,” according to Dennis Baron’s “Grammar and Gender.” “Ou” stems from the Middle English epicene “a,” used in the 14th century by writers for “he,” “she,” “it,” they,” and even “I.”
From there, Don Rickter is the most widely accepted inventor of “xe,” xem,” and “xyr” in 1973.
Another modern version of gender-neutral language are the Spivak pronouns. By dropping the “th” from “they,” “them, and “their,” mathematician Michael Spivak created “ey,” “em,” “eir,” widely used by LGBTQ advocates.

Would you be able to use these pronouns appropriately if the need arose? I think I could.

High Court of Australia Recognizes 3rd Sex Category (Neither Male Nor Female)

Interesting and important news out of Australia relating to LGBT people. Apparently the High Court of Australia ruled just over a month ago that a person does NOT have to be registered by the state as either male or female, but can be listed as a 3rd "non-specific" sex by the Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages.

Australia Broadcasting Corporation reported the news:

A Sydney resident who fought to be legally recognised as being of non-specific sex has hailed a High Court ruling that New South Wales laws do permit the registration of a category of sex other than male or female. 

Norrie was born male but had a sex change and now does not identify as specifically male or female. 

After a four-year legal battle, Norrie has won the right to be legally recognised as being of non-specific sex. 

Norrie, who had been quietly confident of winning the case, says the historic verdict is a big win for the wider transgender community. 

"I screamed a squeal of delight. Very loudly. It's very thrilling, very exciting," Norrie said. 

"I'm overjoyed that it has happened. It's important for people to have equal rights in society and if some people are granted the right to have their sex and certain benefits that go along with that, then why shouldn't everyone have that right? 

"Why should people be left out because they're not seen as male or female? They should be recognised as whatever they are and allowed to participate in society at an equal level."

This is a great development, and following a similar ruling by the India High Court in the last month is an indication that the idea that sex and gender are not binary phenomena is starting to gain traction among the international judiciary.

One reason why this is important for LGBT people is because the primary mechanism by which gender and sex roles are maintained and regulated is through the imputation of homosexuality. One primary example of where gender registrations are directly related to the rights and responsibilities of citizens is in the context of marriage. Thus the fact that more and more countries are recognizing

the true nature of gender and sex is exciting. 

Facebook Broadens Gender Options For 150 Million Users

Interesting news! Facebook announced a new option for users based in the United States to customize their gender on their Facebook profiles "About" section. I was able to change my facebook profile so that it says "cisgender male."

The Williams Institute, a think tank based at the University of California, Los Angeles, estimates there are at least 700,000 individuals in the U.S. who identify as transgender, an umbrella term that includes people who live as a gender different from the one assigned to them at birth.

The change at Facebook drew dozens of appreciative postings on the company's diversity website, although there were some pointing out the need to change relationships beyond son and daughter, and asking for sexual preference options.

The move by Facebook represents a basic and a yet significant form of recognition of the nation's growing transgender rights movement, which has been spurred by veteran activists and young people who identify as transgender at younger ages. The Human Rights Campaign last year found that 10 percent of the 10,000 lesbian, gay, bisexual transgender youths it surveyed used "other" or wrote in their own gender terms.

Will you change your gender identity on Facebook?

Hat/tip to Wonder Man