Ve Vill Ask Ze Qvestions!

the authorities are here to be progressive to you

“Doctor, I think my arm is broken.”

“I see. Do you have sex with other men? I need a detailed answer on every one of these forms so I can inform Sacramento.”

California has found another way to be wonderfully progressive, and you’ll never guess who’s leading the way.

Questions about your gender identity, your sexual orientation, and your sexual behavior should be on all health forms, so it can be reported to the authorities. In case it’s not clear what this means, Wiener is reacting to a report from the California State Auditor that identifies the absence of SOGI data — information on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity — in some state public health reporting. You can read that report for yourself here, and don’t miss the remarkable clarity of the illustration on pg. 10:

See where the arrows go after you talk to your doctor? Your personal health information rolls uphill, but Wiener is looking to get past the “certain diseases and conditions” limit: “asking the question on all health forms, not just some.” He wants you to report your SOGI up the chain during every interaction with health professionals. You tell your doctor, who tells local officials, who tell state health officials. The central authorities need to know your thoughts on hot dudes before we can deal with that ear infection. “Ve vill now show you zese photographs of a young Brad Pitt, citizen, in order to medically assess your reaction for ze authorities!”

This will seem like a curveball, but give me a minute. Twenty to thirty years ago, the transition from knock-some-heads policing to community policing was seen as a progressive reform, and it required more cops. Instead of just racing up to a reported crime in a car, kicking somebody’s ass, and throwing on some handcuffs, police officers were supposed to serve as neighborhood liaisons and “community lead officers,” getting to know the area they served and engaging in problem-solving interventions. “Broken windows” policing was progressive, looking past mere incarceration to adopt a focus on social conditions. So progressive reform = larger police departments, to change the culture of policing.

Then came the cultural switch, and progressive reform was defunding the police. Progressive reform is more cops; progressive reform is far fewer cops. Which one of those mutually exclusive reforms is the actual progressive reform? They both are. Progressive reform is changing whatever currently exists. Progressive reform is both X and Not X, depending on the currently declared conditions in the present game of Calvinball.

So: Ten years ago, what would LGBT advocacy groups have thought of a state legislator demanding that every medical form ask about sexual orientation, so that the information collected on sexual identity could be reported to officials? Would they have regarded it as a progressive reform?

Consider this story about Wiener’s effort. Sample paragraph:

Since the lackluster collection of SOGI data by health officials at all levels of government became glaringly obvious at the onset of the COVID pandemic, for which there was no accurate data tracking how the novel coronavirus was impacting the LGBTQ community, Wiener has spoken out about the need to address the issue, along with other state legislators and LGBTQ advocates.

The problem is “the lackluster collection of SOGI data by health officials at all levels of government.” Officials are not vigorously collecting information on the sexual behavior of all citizens! This failure must not be permitted!

Sexual privacy isn’t progressive, currently. You must indicate on all health forms whether or not you nail chicks, so the proper authorities can be notified. What a time to be alive.

The doctor will see you now