How aboutThere has never been a case anywhere of a transgender individual using a bathroom to commit a sexual attack, or other crime.  

It is very hard…to counter fear ads. The ad uses emotion and once there is an emotional connection, it is hard to over come that emotion. All the reasons in the world will not overcome the emotion. The brain shuts out all reason.
The way to overcome the lies and fear, is to get your message out first, so that they don’t make the link. When they recognize the lie for what it is, the brain does not make the emotional link.
Nixon is credited in saying, “tell a lie often enough and it becomes truth.”

Fear repellentThe cisgendered heterosexual child-rapist is a powerful fear and hate trigger, and the director has captured it skillfully. Watching the ad, even knowing it is an ad, I’m worried about the little girl. I want to protect her.
In my fantasy second scene, as the pedophile approaches the little girl, a transwoman emerges from one of the stalls in an immaculate pink knee-length dress and a can of pepper spray. It wouldn’t work in an ad, but it helps me resolve my fear.
The logical part of my brain supplied the counter-image of the mother with the 7 year old boy who wants to take him into the ladies room with her, but under the new law has to send him into the men’s room by the creepy looking guy. Emotionally, however, it just reinforces the idea that this is about pedophiles and makes the other side stronger.
This ad scares me.  It’s damn effective.

Indeed, the ad is absurd if viewed logicallyThis ad only appeals to unfocused fear. Any rational person, watching this, would ask, “what, am I supposed to believe that a sexual predator willing to violate the various rape and molestation laws would stop short, thinking, ‘darn, I just can’t violate that bathroom gender ordinance’?”
This argument is easy to win when discussed on its merits, but of course it is difficult to do that in sound bites.
Personally, I’d like to see a move to gender-neutral restrooms generally. Then, when this sort of ad appears, it could be responded to like so:

“Opponents of measure X are using fear to manipulate voters.”
Show the creep-outside of bathroom, but freeze the film just as he walks in.
“But by opening bathrooms to everyone, this measure actually doubles the number of trusted friends and relatives who can accompany your child.”
Rewind slightly, and now show a father accompanying his daughter into the toilet and the creep slinking off.
“For real safety, vote yes on measure X.”

this ad is effective for all the reasons already mentioned, but particularly i think because they have deftly substituted a heterosexual child rapist for the unseen normal LGBT person.  this is why we have to show us.  if we’re not depicted, people will draw their own mental pictures and conclusions and see us as things, not normal people.  the maine and washington ads have been so effective because real gay people are depicted being their normal selves.  

‘Cause there are no straight female kidnappers?Watching the ad my first thought was, “Why are you letting a kid go into a public restroom alone in the first place?” It’s not like female kidnappers are unheard of. And an obvious straight male entering a women’s bathroom would be rather conspicuous unlike the female kidnapper.
It’s ironic that they couldn’t use a transwoman or even an gay man since the prejudice there is that they molest boys not girls. I know irrational fears are…well…irrational, but it’s weird conflicting fear of everyone, but not at the same time.

oddly enough, the most effective retort is to use the same inherent fear by having a woman (a transwoman, ideally) enter the men’s room followed by three big dudes.
Close with an ambulance arriving, over which you point out this is what our opponents are wanting to happen.

My suggestion from 18 months agohttp://aebrain.blogspot.com/20…
It would mean getting permission from those pictured though, which is the bit I can’t really do from Australia.
Seriously, this would work.
I know, to my shame I make use of “passing privilege” every day. It’s extremely powerful to decloak after someone has gotten to know you in semi-stealth mode.

Perhaps, one day, we’ll get listened to.There is no shame in using passing privilege — its strictly a false privilege,anyway, and represents a further stigma.
plus, as ever, this is propaganda, ultimately, so the use of normative appearing folks folks is something to be expected.
I really should just go ahead and film one myself.  I even know a great place to do it.

Scratch thatI just decided to do it.
Matt, not sure you will read this, and its probably too little too late, but I will upload this all over the damn place as soon as I can get it made.
I’ve sent out a request to my local community for assistance in doing it.

Dyssonance what did you decide to do?Film a reply? If so send it my way. It would be interesting to see want you come up with, and if we can’t use it maybe the next campaign can.
I am trying to find a decent on-line copy of the opposition’s current TV ad, to upload here……(BTW, their web site,….um….is less than user friendly.)

Some other issuesAlthough some important points about the fallacies in this ad have been made (why would bathroom laws be that important to a pedophile/child molester; more people can protect a child going into the bathroom; transgendered people are unlikely to commit these crimes), there are still a couple of issues that I think need to be addressed in order to effectively counter this type of ad.
One is that the ad makers aren’t actually expressing a concern about transgendered people using these bathrooms.  They’re concerned that “regular” men will be able to use women’s bathrooms by using the ordinance as a loophole.  Furthermore, the concern is more that other people watching this person will be legally constricted from stopping the man entering the bathroom.
These concerns stem from the fact that “gender identity” is self-identified.  In other words, if this “regular guy” claims he is a transwoman, the ad is arguing that nothing can stop him entering the bathroom, because if he self-identifies as female (the only necessary definition of gender identity), he can use the women’s bathroom.  Making gender identity a legally protected characteristic does substantially change the ways that many laws operate, simply because there has always been an assumption that sex is not only binary, but also immutable and innate.
I think the most important responses to this have already somewhat been made, including that there would already be nothing that someone could do about a female pedophile entering the women’s bathroom, or a male pedophile entering the men’s bathroom.  For those situations, the heinous acts themselves must be prosecuted.  However, I think there is a pretty powerful and popular idea that not only are these situations more uncommon, but also that they are less frightening.  Women can more effectively deal with female predators, and men with male predators, but females are more helpless against male predators (so the idea goes).  There’s also an idea of less invasive-ness inherently.  Bathrooms are traditionally treated as a sort of refuge for either sex, especially women.  
pgraydon‘s alternative ad is pretty effective, on a pragmatic level.  But there’s definitely still an aspect of culture change that people are expecting in the very least, if not in reality.  When I searched for articles related to this ordinance, most of the defenses against it legally were of a pragmatic nature; this ordinance hasn’t yet been used as a defense in cases of men entering women’s bathrooms.  However, that doesn’t change the fact that there is a perception that it very easily could be applied that way in the future.  And I think that the still greater problem is the idea that this would allow more molestations/assaults to occur, due to decreased ability of fellow citizens to take preventive action, rather than implying that the crimes would be un-prosecutable.  Either someone needs to come up with a clear and convincing explanation for why this won’t essentially make bathrooms de facto gender neutral (which would probably have to involve some external standard for gender identity), or convincingly argue to the common people that having gender neutral bathrooms would be a good thing.  Otherwise, they’re winning this argument.
Finally, just as background, I happen to be from Florida, and Gainesville is a liberal bastion among podunk religious conservative towns.  This is basically because of the large student and academic population due to the University of Florida.  The only other liberal regions are the I-4 corridor (stretches across central FL from Tampa, thru Orlando, to Melbourne (i.e. NASA)), and southeastern FL (West Palm, Fort Lauderdale, Miami).  Most of Florida is small towns, and it’s very common for kids to use public restrooms alone; I did it all the time.
This was the best local article I found covering the issue: http://www.gatorsports.com/art…

I’m working on itTrying to get together the elements to film a trans version of the commercial.
I will absolutely send it your way, Matt — and the way of anyone and everyone who might need such.
I suspect we will see a lot more of these starting in just a few days, as the battle for ENDA heats up.

Kalamazoo, Michigan, and AFA    As a Transsexual myself my opinions and views are likely skewed toward my view point so I suppose that makes them invalided in some people’s minds.  Never the less I find it amazing that the self titled American Family Association of Michigan who claims to be Christan based, can justify the tactics they do.   To me my Transsexual status aside suggests that they have an agenda we might wish to fear far more than the one to allow some small measure of job protection to a group which also includes the Transsexual or Trangender persons.  To my view, and I do read the Bible myself as well as consider myself a Christian and pray,  this group and the national organizations supporting them have the intention of really re-writing the Constitution of the United States.  They wish to leave their finger print and basically remove the First Amendment in the Bill of Rights by making what amounts to a National Religion.  One which of course only reflects their views on the Bible and any morality laws that might be based on their views.  
     I find it offensive and I hope that others do that such a group uses such gross distortion of the facts to advance their cause.  Relying on lies and falsehoods that would be unthinkable to most people.  I can say I have never peeped, masturbated, assaulted, or done anything in a public restroom other than what the place in intended for.  The suggestion that someone such as myself is predisposed to such things is an insult to me personally.  However leaving my feelings out of this, there is absolutely no DATA to support their view point.   There are no records as far as anyone can find of someone presenting as a Transsexual going into a Public Restroom for the purposes they charge as taking place.  The very suggestion would be laughable if it were not designed to in as much as turn me into a Sex Offender without any charges ever made!   What happened to Life, Liberty, Presumption of Innocence under law?   I would caution those who do not realize these people behind the AFA would likely start coming after other rights if they can advance their way of thought by taking even the basic rights from the last group they can do this to, the LGBT community.
     I do not even understand how they can prevent Same Sex Marriage under the Law.  I mean the last time I checked Marriage is a contract that is regulated by the Government.  If all people are created equal then how can they argue this point?  Granted perhaps majorities might find they would wish to take rights from a group, but as far as I know we still live or are supposed to live in a Republic where the rights of the minority are also protected, not a true Democracy which the rights of the majority of the population is advanced over all others.  My God the people of African-American decent should recognize this argument all too well because it was the same one used by those who would move about by night wearing white robes with pointed hoods, killing and terrorizing to advance their views.  These people in the so called AFA are of the same stock just more polished.  I hope, that people who vote on the ordinance in Kalamazoo recognize their game plan.  
     As for me, I do not live in Kalamazoo but I do live in Michigan in an area where my rights are not protected from job loss.  I know I was fired after I come forward as being under treatment for being Transsexual.  I however am not going to let the type of thinking of those who would deny someone such as myself or others like me who have committed no crime, be treated like second class citizens.  I certainly encourage anyone who really believes in the law this country is founded on to consider standing up as well.  ”All that is needed for evil to prevail is for good people to do nothing.”  While it may not be the exact quote, it says the same thing.  I hope that people do go to the polls and send the Gary Glenn’s, James Dobson’s and Fred Phillips of the world back to their own small twisted hate filed world.   As for me, I will still be using the Restroom my GENDER tells me to, regardless if others like it.  
Joanna Sue Morse