In today’s America, where abstract labels can obscure as much as they reveal, the Equality Act stands out as a prime example of an agenda that raises more questions than it answers.
This is particularly evident in Michigan, where an informal and formal prosecution under an Equality Act-type state law has impacted one individual in a way that could soon be replicated across the country.
The story begins with Ms.
Geiger, who had quit her lucrative corporate career due to its increasing bureaucracy and had also overcome substance abuse cold turkey.
She had always been outspoken about her beliefs, but it was on Friday, July 7, 2023, that she decided to speak up publicly.
Ms.
Geiger had read about the growing trend of “furries,” which she discovered were becoming popular among children in schools, at malls, and on the streets.
She took to her hair salon’s Facebook page to post a message with the hashtag #TakeaStand.
If a human identifies as anything other than a man/woman please seek services at a local pet groomer.
You are not welcome at this salon.
Period.
Should you request to have a particular pronoun used please note we may simply refer to you as ‘hey you.’ Regardless of MI HB 4744.
.
This is America; free speech.
This small business has the right to refuse services.
Ms.
Geiger later expressed regret over her choice of words but remained firm in her stance, which did not seem particularly contentious outside a narrow circle.
However, this narrow group had developed a strong and growing voice, sparking a wave of controversy that would eventually affect Ms.
Geiger’s personal life.
Ms.
Geiger’s Facebook post was reposted in the group “Overheard in Traverse City” under the headline “You are allowed to your opinion but you are not allowed to discriminate!” The post received 654 comments and 63 shares, with commenters ranging from Traverse City residents to a drag queen from Canada to concerned out-of-towners.
One user seemed to have joined the group solely for the purpose of making Ms.
Geiger “famous” for her perceived bigotry and hatred.
The backlash extended beyond online comments, with Ms.
Geiger’s family also feeling its impact.
Death threats were sent, including one that mentioned how cute their boys were and where they went to school, prompting Ms.
Geiger’s husband to leave his boat store job for six days and work from home.
By the end of August, their marriage had broken down.
The charges against Ms.
Geiger were filed under an amended reading of Elliot-Larsen, based on three out of 21 complaints received from individuals who “felt that they were impacted by [Ms.
Geiger’s Facebook] advertisement,” which the government argued discriminated based on gender identity.
The potential remedies for this alleged violation included monetary damages, Ms.
Geiger handing over her license, posting non-discrimination ordinances, and taking non-discrimination classes.
However, the case against Ms.
Geiger may be inaccurate in terms of the facts, as argued by her lawyer, David Delaney, who is fighting the case in court.
If the Equality Act were to pass, it could potentially shed light on the true costs and consequences of such stealth institutional moves across the entire country.
Individuals like Ms.
Geiger are warning others about the potential dangers and encouraging them to stand up before worse comes.
In standing up, these individuals may also discover something positive within themselves that they did not know existed.