Massachusetts Rep. Colleen Garry (D) believes she knows trans kids' identities better than they do.

Several Massachusetts lawmakers are not happy with new guidance from the state’s Department of Education advising on how to respect transgender students in school, based on nondiscrimination law passed in 2011. Notably, they believe that allowing them to use the appropriate restroom is somehow going to infringe on other students’ privacy. To correct that, they are taking the brash step of proposing a bill that define students’ gender by their anatomy instead of by their actual identities. Here are some of the unfortunate anti-trans comments they shared with the Lowell Sun:

REP. COLLEEN GARRY (D): An anatomical male in a locker room could make girls feel uncomfortable and vice versa. The (2011) bill was not to accommodate locker rooms and bathrooms, but the commissioner took it upon himself to provide guidance to schools… This is guidance; it’s not regulation. It’s their interpretation of how schools should handle things.

REP. SHEILA HARRINGTON (R): Obviously we’re very sensitive to people with transgender issues, and we’re trying to be compassionate, but we want to be respectful of the privacy of all people.

REP. MARC LOMBARDO (R): It’s time we say enough to this radical social agenda promoted by the administration and use common sense to protect our children.

Transgender young people do not have “issues,” nor are they in any way a threat to any student. What these lawmakers are trying to do is to force an identity upon a trans students that they don’t have, thereby negating the entire purpose of a nondiscrimination law protecting them.

What needs to happen in both schools and apparently the legislature is some basic education about what it means to be transgender. Women have a legitimate reason to be concerned if there is, in fact, a man in their locker room, but that has absolutely nothing to do with a trans woman. Society may attempt to assign a gender based on a person’s anatomy, but the entire point trans people are trying to teach the world around them is that sometimes society gets it wrong. Forcing someone who is trans into the wrong facility or a separate facility they don’t require for their own sense of safety is a rejection of that person’s identity, and it’s government endorsement of that rejection that fuels anti-trans stigma.

GLSEN reported that in 2011, 63.9 percent of LGBT students reported being verbally harassed because of their gender expression. Thanks to these lawmakers, that number just jumped to 100 in Massachusetts.

Students protested their trans classmate by wearing sweatpants and gym shorts.

In her senior year at South Panola High School in Batesville, Mississippi, one transgender student decided it was time for her to fully realize her gender identity and began dressing as a girl. The ACLU applauded the school’s interim superintendent, Mike Foster, for supporting the student and recognizing her as the gender with which she identifies. But one group of students, clearly uninformed about what it means to be transgender, decided that she was getting “special treatment” — permission to violate the dress code — and held a protest in which they actually violated the dress code themselves by simply wearing athletic clothing:

One of the students involved in the protest says it all boils down to rules.

“Told us, ‘Everybody that has on jogging pants, follow us.’ So we went to the band hall,” said senior Logan Roberson. He says all of the students who violated the dress code were forced to change their clothes.

Roberson and parents say if Leah can dress in female clothing when she is still technically a man, they should be able to wear sweat pants and gym shorts.

“That to me is a double standard. What one rule goes for one, one rule goes for all,” said parent Allen Jones. [...]

“How distracting is it for you walk down the hallway and see a boy you’ve known since kindergarten, now a girl, wearing high heels walking, that’s distracting to you,” continued Roberson.

Roberson did not clarify why exactly the friend had become a distraction, but it’s clear that these parents and students do not understand the basics of gender identity. The student is not “still technically a man,” nor is she violating the dress code at all.

A Facebook group called “Mississippians Support Leah” has formed to support the student, who wishes to remain anonymous. Another Facebook group known as “Prayers for South Panola School District,” now hidden, had the opposite intent, though a parody page now mocks that group for hiding their intolerance.

There is still incredible work to be done to support transgender people, and it increasingly seems that schools are where that struggle is playing out.

The Massachusetts Department of Education recently issued a comprehensive set of guidelines for respecting transgender youth in schools, including using the names and pronouns they’ve chosen for themselves and allowing them to use the appropriate restrooms. Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly is not happy about it, and in an epic rant captured by Equality Matters, complained to Monica Crowley and Alan Colmes that the policy violates parents’ rights. His bloviating was rife with ignorant stereotypes about what it even means to be trans — including jokes about name changes — and he offered no compassion whatsoever for the actual experience of trans youth:

COLMES: There has to be some confidentiality. Some students don’t feel comfortable talking to their parents about issues like this. This isn’t as if you wake up some day and Jane says, “Call me John,” or vice versa. [...]

O’REILLY: The parents should be shut out of this whole process? They shouldn’t know anything that’s going on?… Here’s how insane you are and this whole thing is, and this is truly madness, ladies and gentlemen. You’re telling me that a kid can go to a public school in Massachusetts, immediately upon entering the school take off the kid’s shirt and put on a dress, alright, go to the girls’ room when he’s a boy, and then change his name from John to Tiffany, and then after school, put the shirt back on, go home, and he’s still John. [...]

COLMES: Sometimes a child needs the ability to have a confidential conversation with someone not in the family.

O’REILLY: There’s a difference between a conversation and a lifestyle. That’s such a violation of parental rights by the state of Massachusetts. It’s off the chart violation.

Watch it:

It’s unfortunate O’Reilly wasn’t interested in Colmes’ voice of reason about “protecting the dignity” of trans young people, because his goal seems to be quite the opposite. As Carlos Maza thoughtfully explains, gender identity is largely inflexible, and students aren’t allowed to casually change their gender or claim to be transgender for inappropriate reasons. What is important is making sure that trans students feel safe and included, because it’ll have a profound impact on their ability to excel in the learning environment. Similarly, if they don’t feel safe identifying to their parents, outing them only risks opening them to rejection, one of the primary reasons LGBT youth are disproportionately homeless.

The basic goal of these guidelines is to protect trans students, but O’Reilly makes it clear he doesn’t know the first thing about them.

Coy Mathis

Six-year-old Coy Mathis is transgender, and until December 2012, she was allowed to use the girls’ bathrooms at her elementary school in Fountain, Colorado. But then, administrators informed her parents that she would be required to use the boys’ bathroom, a staff bathroom, or the nurse’s bathroom. The Transgender Legal Defense & Education Fund (TLDEF) urged the school to reconsider, but the school refused, so now the group has filed a complaint on Coy’s behalf with the Colorado Civil Rights Division.

This complaint will be the first test of the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act, which includes protections based on gender identity. Other Colorado school districts, like Boulder Valley Schools, have already crafted policies guaranteeing “students shall have access to the restroom that corresponds to their gender identity consistently asserted at school.” Here, though, is how district officials at Fountain-Fort Carson School District 8 justified discriminating against Coy’s gender identity:

The District’s decision took into account not only Coy but other students in the building, their parents, and the future impact a boy with male genitals using a girls’ bathroom would have as Coy grew older. The reason it has not apparently been an “issue” to date is that fellow students and even the other teachers in the building are not aware that Coy is a male and at his young age, he may appear to be a female. In addition, when he was in kindergarten last year, the restroom facilities were gender-neutral, as opposed to the restrooms used by elementary school students.

I’m certain you can appreciate that as Coy grows older and his* male genitals develop along with the rest of his body, at least some parents and students are likely to become uncomfortable with his continued use of the girls’ restroom, and that it would be far more psychologically damaging and disruptive for the issue at an age when students deal with lots of social issues.

The lawyer who penned the letter clarified in a footnote that male pronouns were used “not in an attempt to be disrespectful, but because I am referring to male genitals.” Of course, it is disrespectful, because Coy’s gender is not determined by her genitals — she is not a “boy with male genitals,” but a girl whose genitals are irrelevant — which is exactly the point of this entire issue. The state’s protections are determined by gender identity, not genitalia. Focusing solely on an individual’s anatomy is one of the biggest obstacles to respecting trans people as whole individuals, and it’s clearly the obstacle in this case.

Coy’s parents are currently homeschooling her until this situation is resolved.

Last April, high school student Amber Hatcher announced she would be participating in the National Day of Silence, a nationwide protest to raise awareness about anti-LGBT bullying, and sought permission in advance from her school administrators in Desoto County, Florida. Her principal threatened “ramifications” if she participated and even called her parents suggesting they keep her home because there “would be consequences.” Lambda Legal reached out to the school informing administrators of students’ rights, but they chose not to respond, instead emailing teachers to notify the principal if anybody was participating. Amber followed through, and was subsequently suspended for the day.

Lambda Legal has now filed suit against the school on Amber’s behalf. The complaint includes the full text of the email Principal Shannon Fusco sent to teachers advising about the protest:

Teachers:
Please note that we have a group of students today who have an intention of protesting. The district has an absolute policy against protesting on school campuses.

If you have students who are wearing placard [sic] in protest of an issue or disrupting the hallways or classrooms, please notify the dean or administration, and we will handle it.

If a student refuses to participate in class by taking part in a silent protest, that is considered a disruption. Again, please notify the administration, and we will handle it.

Thanks you,
sdf

It’s been over 40 years since the Supreme Court ruled that students have a right to participate in protests in schools. In the 1969 case Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, the Court ruled that it was a violation of students’s First Amendment rights to suspend them for wearing black armbands to protest the U.S.’s involvement in Vietnam. Like the students in that case, Amber was participating in class and simply remaining silent to indicate her position. The school was completely in the wrong for blocking her free expression, and it’s unfortunate a lawsuit is required for the administrators to learn that lesson.

Whether or not to have a straights-only prom has embroiled Indiana’ Northeast School corporation in a national controversy, particularly because of the comments made by special education teacher Diana Medley. Not only does she believe being gay is a choice influenced by “life circumstances,” but she doesn’t even believe gay people have any sort of purpose in life. Last week, Northeast Superintendent Mark A. Baker defended Medley’s right to free speech, apparently offering no concern about the potential harm to students by such comments. Given the controversy has not died down, it seems Medley has now been placed on administrative leave and the school has also increased security measures, according to a new statement from Baker:

As many of you know and appreciate, our school corporation is continuing to manage as responsibly and respectfully as possible the fallout from comments made by an employee as she attended a meeting outside of school or a school activity.

We have conveyed our disappointment and our disagreement with these statements and have emphasized her comments do not reflect our schools’ views or opinions.

The administration and one school employee in particular at North Central Jr/Sr High School have received aggressive email messages. We are turning over to law enforcement all such communications. Further, and as a precaution, the Indiana State Police and the Sullivan County Sheriff’s Department have deemed it necessary to station an officer at our high school. Additionally, these law enforcement agencies, while they are here, are familiarizing themselves with our buildings, as is part of their regular training.

For that, we are grateful for their support of our school and our students. This matter has created some heartbreaking differences in opinion. Please know we are always going to put the safety of our students and faculty first and any disruption of our educational process will be managed quickly.

In response to our concerns for the safety and security of everyone in our buildings, we have placed the employee at the center of this concern on administrative leave.

It’s unfortunate that safety has become a concern at the school, but it’s also disappointing that the school has not taken any responsibility for the impact of Medley’s comments on students. From this statement, it seems Medley’s suspension is only for her own safety and not to protect students from her very negative message of rejection. Though the district is to be commended for distancing itself from her remarks, it’s not clear that administrators have taken any steps to improve (or even assess) the climate for LGBT students.

The Massachusetts Transgender Political Coalition marching for equality.

The Massachusetts Department of Education issued new guidance on Friday for how to respect transgender students and ensure their full safe inclusion in schools. The new directives reflect a 2011 law prohibiting discrimination based on gender identity and take a comprehensive look at the experience of trans people in the education system. Here are some of the recommendations:

• Respect students when they determine their own gender identity.
• Use the names and pronouns students have chosen for themselves.
• Protect the confidentiality of students’ identities in their records, making sure only to disclose a student’s identity when it will benefit the student.
• Adjust gender markers on student records to reflect students’ gender identities.
• Ensure students can access the restrooms, locker rooms, and changing facilities that correspond with their gender identity.
• Provide a safe alternative to sex-segregated restrooms, such as a single “unisex” restroom or nurse’s restroom.
• Work with students who feel uncomfortable having a trans student in their restroom or locker room to help foster their understanding of gender identity and a culture of respect and values.
• Allow students to participate in physical education and athletic activities in a manner consistent with their gender identity.
• Adjust dress codes, including for events like prom and graduation, to be gender-neutral.
• Incorporate education and training about trans and gender non-conforming into anti-bullying curriculum, students leadership trainings, and staff professional development.
• Help families and the community understand what it means to have a school with policies that are inclusive of gender identity.

Conservatives are already complaining that bathrooms need to remain segregated by genetic sex, but education department spokesman JC Considine explained that school restrooms are not public accommodations:

CONSIDINE: We’re talking about the use of school facilities by students who have no choice but to be in a school building. Kids have to have restroom access.

Indeed, kids need to have an environment where they can be respected for who they are, and these guidelines provide for just that.

This spring, a gay Missouri teen who challenged his school’s policy barring same-sex dates will get to bring his boyfriend to the prom.

Stacy Dawson found out he could not bring his boyfriend because of a single line in the school handbook stating, “high school students will be permitted to invite one guest, girls invite boys and boys invite girls.”

“I’m doing this for anyone to bring anyone they want to prom,” Dawson told LGBTQ Nation before the ban was reversed. “I hope that my school and the school board members understand it’s a wrong policy. [...] It isn’t fair that a school can randomly disregard students’ rights because it doesn’t agree with who you want to take to prom.”

Just one day after the Southern Poverty Law Center threatened a lawsuit on Dawson’s behalf, the school quickly removed its ban.

SPLC’s letter to Scott County Central High makes the strong case for the ban was unconstitutional. The letter cites Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, where the Supreme Court determined students do not “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gates.” And a second federal case in Mississippi, McMillen v. Itawamba County School District, decided a student expressing “her identity through attending prom with a same-sex date” was “the type of speech that falls squarely within the purview of the First Amendment.”

However, the fight against same-sex discrimination at proms carries on elsewhere, as an anti-gay Indiana group faces major backlash for proposing a gay-free prom.

When news broke that a group was trying to create a gays-free prom at Sullivan High School in Indiana, special education teacher Diana Medley’s anti-gay comments quickly became viral on the Internet. In addition to saying that homosexuality is a choice, she went so far as to say that gay people have no purpose in life. A Change.org petition with over 15,000 signatures is calling for disciplinary action, Dan Savage has called for her to be outright fired, other Indiana teachers are countering her message, and thanks to reddit, even the principal from Billy Madison has chimed in. It seems, though, that the school is not taking any action.

Superintendent Mark A. Baker released a statement Tuesday distancing the Northeast School Corporation from her position but defending her free speech:

I would like to clearly state the Northeast School Corporation has never denied any student the right to attend prom or any other Northeast School Corporation sponsored event due to their race, gender, or sexual orientation. Furthermore, the Northeast School Corporation has never denied any student access to any events sponsored by Northeast School Corporation. This includes sports, plays, musicals and any other extra-curricular activities.

In regards to the story that WTWO aired on February 10, 2013, the Northeast School Corporation employee that was interviewed was expressing her First Amendment rights. The views expressed are not the views of the Northeast School Corporation and/or the Board of Education.

These comments were expressed during a Sunday community meeting at a local church and at no time was she representing the Northeast School Corporation. The teacher was participating in a meeting with her local church congregation.

Of course Medley has the right to her fraudulent, offensive beliefs, but she also has an obligation to the safety and well-being of students that she supervises. As a special ed teacher, she is likely working with students who are already vulnerable to bullying because of their physical, mental, or learning disabilities. By publicly stating that an entire group of students don’t have a purpose in life, she compromises her trust as an educator. At the very least, remediation to help her understand the obvious harm inherent in her position should be required, if not further disciplinary action.