THINK OF THE BATHROOMS!

Will this nondiscrimination bill transition to a law?

By MAYA PHILLIPS

del.ico.us | digg it! | reddit!

print | email | 9 Comments

Last Thursday, hundreds of transgender Massachusetts residents gathered in the State House to lobby (yet again) for the right to stand under the state's hate crime and nondiscrimination umbrella. Currently, a range of person-flavors are covered—including race, religion, age, nationality, disability, sex and sexual orientation—but not transgender identity.

Ironically, transgender individuals—defined by the Massachusetts Transgender Political Coalition (MTPC) as a "people who transition from one gender to another and/or people who defy social expectations of how they should look, act, or identify based on their birth sex"—are probably the most widely discriminated against.

The bill was first introduced by Rep. Carl Sciortino, D-Medford, and Rep. Byron Rushing, D-Boston, in 2007. The Judiciary Committee sent it to study, which is usually a nice way of putting something aside and letting it collect dust until the session's end. "The gay rights bill was passed in 1989. And we were the second state to pass the gay rights bill," Sciortino said. "It's like a technical correction or playing catch-up with what should've been done in 1989. But frankly, trans rights weren't at the forefront of discussion yet."

Opponents have not-so-affectionately dubbed it the "bathroom bill," after their main concern: Groups like the Massachusetts Family Institute (MFI) worry that people will use bathrooms designated for the opposite sex. "We oppose the bill because we believe it's bad public policy regarding the modesty and the safety of women and children in public facilities," MFI President Kris Mineau said. "If a bathroom is listed as a men's facility, or a shower facility is listed as a men's facility, and likewise for women, then we do not agree with people using that facility from the opposite sex."

Gunner Scott, executive director of the MTPC (not the pro wrestler), argued transgender people are already using the restroom that they generally identify with (besides, that's not exactly illegal). "It doesn't make any sense. We're already using those bathrooms. It's not about using bathrooms. This is about people not being discriminated against," he said. "This is about telling employers, landlords that they can't say to someone, 'I'm not going to hire you because you're transgender' or 'I don't like the way you look.'"

Sciortino dismissed allegations that the bill would compromise the safety of Massholes. "The reality is there's nothing in this bill that condones, permits, encourages or legalizes illegal activity, period," he said. "If someone commits a crime, it doesn't matter whether they're a transgender, gay, straight, whatever. ... This bill is very clearly about civil rights."

The MFI also rejects the bill for "medical reasons." "The American Psychiatric Association lists gender identity as a mental disorder requiring professional treatment. This bill doesn't do that," Mineau said. "This bill tries to promote the normalcy of a gender identity disorder, which is not true."

Boston, Cambridge, Northampton and Amherst have ordinances prohibiting gender identity discrimination. If this bill passes, Massachusetts will join 13 other states (plus Washington DC) with laws protecting transgender individuals. The bill's supporters hope it's passed before the break for session in July. "We have a majority of the House and Senate already as full sponsors of the bill," Sciortino said. "So I'm confident that once we get it up for debate, it'll pass."