Michigan passes misgendering law. Use wrong pronouns, pay a $10,000 fine

And what will happen to people who can’t afford that? What about vulnerable people with learning difficulties who are going to be more confused and upset about this if they’re not informed about this at all. Especially if their parents or carers don’t mention stuff like this to them because of it indoctorating them.

@Vknid

Personally I think these people should be in a mental hospital. They need serious help, not praise.

Misinformation spread rapidly on social media last week claiming that legislation expanding Michigan’s hate crime law to include protections for gay and transgender individuals would make it a felony for using a person’s wrong pronoun.

However, House Bill 4474 doesn’t even contain the word “pronouns,” much less set out any sort of legal framework to criminalize misidentifying of gender or disagreeing with an individual’s preference to be referred to as he, she or they.

Some conservative critics have taken a couple of words in the bill’s text that says any action that “threatens by word or act” and interpreted it to mean that addressing someone as a “he” when the individual identifies as “she” would be a threat punishable by up to five years in prison and a $10,000 fine.

 

Michigan’s hate crime law dating to 1988 already makes it illegal to intimidate someone based on an actual or perceived characteristic, such as race or color, religion, sex or national origin. The bill would add protections for sexual orientation, gender identity, age and physical or mental disability.

Under the legislation, intimidation is defined as a “willful course of conduct involving repeated or continuing harassment of another individual that would cause a reasonable individual to feel terrorized, frightened, or threatened, and that actually causes the victim to feel terrorized, frightened, or threatened.”

Maybe read up a bit before jumping into biased conclusions. ”Oh no, harrassing trans people is gonna be a no-no? Damn I guess I need to find a new hobby”.

Examples are provided, take a close look:

“If somebody says, ‘I do not believe you are a man, I believe you are a woman’ and misgenders someone, even intentionally, that is not a crime,” Savit said. “That is First Amendment protected speech. … I don’t believe it’s a kind thing to say. But it’s not a crime.”

It only becomes a hate crime when a “reasonable” person feels repeatedly frightened and threatened by an individual’s words or acts.

“People can say whatever they want, that ‘I feel frightened because somebody misgendered me,'” Savit said. “But that’s not going to cut it for purposes of this bill.”

“The notion that somebody can just be misgendered one time, misgendered accidently, or even intentionally, and that’s going to lead to criminal charges is simply wrong,” Savit said. “It’s not supported by the text of the bill.”

The criminality line for a hate crime, Savit said, would be crossed if someone tells a transgender woman “I don’t believe you’re a woman, I know where you live and my gun is lock and loaded.”

“That absolutely could be a hate crime,” Savit said. “That’s legitimate intimidation. But just simply saying I’m not calling you by the pronoun that you identify as, that in no way can be criminalized consistent with the First Amendment.”

So basically it already protects people getting harrassed by religion, race and so on. Now they simply add trans people to cut down on psychos harrassing them. Where exactly is the problem?

https://eu.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/michigan/2023/07/04/michigan-legislature-not-criminalize-pronoun-use-lgbtq-transgender-misgendering-fox-news-daily-mail/70379518007/

“So basically it already protects people getting harrassed by religion, race and so on. Now they simply add trans people to cut down on psychos harrassing them. Where exactly is the problem?”

Actually, you might want to read the bill.  It does not technically say trans anything.  But it more or less describes the condition.  However, the real take away here is not that it mentions “gender expression” but all the other things it adds and latches on.  In short, it makes things that are already illegal, illegal.  Like many “hate crime” bills it is very redundant and wholly unnecessary.  The threat here is it basically gives the goverment digression to charge someone with a hate crime for dirty looks if they wish which is intentional because it will be used selectively.

Now if you want to champion that because it has the words “gender expression” in it, then I have a contract for you to sign.  Don’t read any of it, but I can promise you it contains the phrase “gender expression” so you should be ok with blindly signing it.

The very interesting thing here is that after reading the bill I found something that I have not heard anyone mention.  Now maybe I am reading this incorrectly but this seems like legalese for if you want to avoid jail time you can “volunteer” for reeducation.  I will make a separate post on that.

“Not surprised tho that the basement pissing Quarterpounder would misrepresent it and run with a fake and biased narrative“

It’s like you cannot stop yourself from being hateful.

Maybe read up a bit before jumping into biased conclusions. ”Oh no, harrassing trans people is gonna be a no-no? Damn I guess I need to find a new hobby”

I guess we fell for the same panic libs did with the “don’t say gay bill” 😅 And no, no one was thinking “oh no i can’t harrass trans people anymore”

That said…

I’m sure like bills that protect women from domestic abuse get at times taken advantage of by not so nice women who just want revenge on their partner for some reason, chances are this bill will be taken advantage of by some not so nice trans and non-binary people

I’m not saying this out of the blue, there’s a track record that makes this beliveble, like what is the % of women who win such cases like i mentioned vs the % of men who’ll win them? And why does Ezra Miller get a shit-ton of protection for terrible accusations but Johnny Depp gets burnt at the stake without even a chance to defend himself?

There is unfortunately a bias when it comes to these cases, particularly towards straight white men

The same way 50-100 years ago (heck maybe even less) if you had a court case of a white man vs a black man, who had a higher chance of winning? Not to hard to figure out since back then the bias was towards black people

These biases unfortunately don’t only hurt innocent people who might get charged for something they didn’t do, but they also hurt people who’ve really been victims of such crimes, because the more people take advantage of these biases to bulshit, the less credibility real victims have

And this is what I would do

I’d just keep saying it. If calling someone an asshole or motherfucker is ok, but not their “improper pronouns”, then we live in a upside down world I want no part of and will NOT follow “rules” like this.