LGBT

1244 readers

1 users here now

A place for LGBTQ+ people and allies to discuss interests, our lives, and relevant issues.

founded 4 years ago

MODERATORS

vis4valentine@lemmy.ml

darth_tiktaalik@lemmy.ml

Trans political candidate disqualified from House race for not using her deadname (www.thepinknews.com)

submitted 10 months ago by pingveno@lemmy.ml to c/lgbt@lemmy.ml

12 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 12 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] pingveno@lemmy.ml 16 points 10 months ago

A number of trans candidates are running for Ohio's House of Representatives, spurred on by the recent surge in anti-trans laws. Unfortunately, one has been blocked because she did not list her deadname, a requirement that is both discriminatory and not included in the Secretary of State's handbook. Yikes! Hopefully she can bring a court case and prevail.

[–] CherenkovBlue@iusearchlinux.fyi 5 points 10 months ago (2 children)

I really don't think the disqualification has anything to do with the fact that the candidate is trans. People get disqualified from ballots for all sorts of minutia that they missed. Former names are important to know if someone is attempting to cover up a criminal conviction, etc.

[–] Shhalahr@beehaw.org 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Except this supposedly important rule isn't mentioned anywhere.

According to local news outlet, Cleveland.com, Joy said that, while she would have been comfortable to abide by the law, it had not been mentioned in the 33-page candidate guide provided by the Ohio secretary of state’s office

Another article I read also said the petition form doesn't even have a space to list former names. And that the other trans candidates in Ohio likewise didn't list any deadnames, but were accepted anyway.

It has all the indications of a law only enforced when it suits the enforcer's agenda.

And also, if being able to track people by having a list of previous names is so important, why are there exceptions? Someone could just as well hide behind their married name as any other name change.

[–] pingveno@lemmy.ml -4 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Former names are important to know if someone is attempting to cover up a criminal conviction, etc.

Though probably less important in the current day where communication is so easy and ubiquitous. But yes, I think you're right.

Edit: Given the topic we're discussing, I should be crystal clear. Deadnames are none of the general public's business, on the ballot or off.

[–] uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Should have been done long ago
What if you knew her and
Found her dead on the ground?
How can you run when you know?

Tin soldiers and Nixon's comin'

[–] gibmiser@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Did she legally change her name?

Or is it a thing where it asks for all former aliases?

[–] pingveno@lemmy.ml 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I'm not sure, but from the article:

While candidates who change their name after marriage are exempt from the law, there is no exception for transgender candidates who change their name as part of their transition.

So I'm guessing she legally changed her name, but didn't fall under the marriage exception.

[–] saltesc@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I bet they haven't legally changed their name. If they had, the state having them use their birth name would be forcing them to break the law by providing a now invalid identity. If they hadn't, it would be the other way around, the state would be allowing them to run under an invalid identity. Neither of which seem legally likely.

[–] pingveno@lemmy.ml 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

As the article says, they have to keep providing any former name for five years except when changed by marriage.

[–] saltesc@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

Makes sense. That's the case for many things, though. Especially in the public where name changes are often used to "re-brand" for lack of a better term. Don't really see the issue to be honest. Not really a fan of a person being exempt from the stuff everyone else has to do.

[–] HowMany@lemmy.ml 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Is it legal in that state to change one's name? If yes - then fuck them.

And marriage? A woman taking a MAN'S name?? That makes them trans.!!!! ......O_o......? witches! witches! burn them with the books!

[–] pingveno@lemmy.ml 3 points 10 months ago

My only guess is that some time in the past, someone did something to damage their reputation, changed their name, then got elected. A lot of weird laws come from one off cases like that. Obviously the law either needs to be updated to be more inclusive or done away with entirely.