ThinkProgress Logo

Stories tagged with “Transgender

LGBT

Michigan Lawmaker: Transgender Protections ‘Violate The Privacy Rights Of Women And Children’

The city of Royal Oak, Michigan was on track to become the 22nd city in the state to establish LGBT nondiscrimination protections, but that measure is now being challenged at the ballot through a citywide referendum. State House Rep. Tom McMillin (R) issued a news release explaining why he thinks the protections would “violate the privacy rights of women and children”:

MCMILLIN: Why the city would want to force places like schools, businesses and fitness centers to allow men to use a women’s restroom or locker room – and allow boys to access girl’s restrooms and locker rooms in schools, is beyond me.

It certainly violates the privacy rights of women and children. At the very least, the council should have also included a requirement for warning signs on women’s and girl’s public restroom and locker room doors saying that women and girls may be confronted there by men who think they are women.

Like Arizona state Rep. John Kavanagh (R), McMillin seems to be afraid that women and children might see a transgender woman’s penis. But transgender women are not “men who think they are women,” they are women. They are not predators, nor does anybody need to be warned that they might be in the same space. Indeed, McMillin seems to have little concern for transgender people’s same right to privacy or for their basic dignity and safety to use a gender-appropriate facility.

McMillin’s statement also claimed that requiring Christians not to discriminate against LGBT people is tantamount to “bullying”:

MCMILLIN: The discrimination and coercion this ordinance supports — that a Christian photographer or baker must, if asked, offer their services to a so-called ‘gay wedding’ or face a $500 per day fine is wrong… Bullying Christians is wrong, too.

Tom McMillin has previously said that homosexuality is a “lifestyle” and a “choice” that people have “come out of.” In 2011, he proposed a bill to ban any Michigan municipality from extending LGBT nondiscrimination protections.

LGBT

Republican Lawmaker Opposes Transgender Health Coverage Because ‘I Like Being A Boy’

Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA)

The final rules on Essential Health Benefits standards could end a long history of discrimination against transgender health coverage, as many states are already extending protections to ensure transgender people can access the benefits they deserve. But Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA) doesn’t want trans people’s health needs covered by insurance, simply because he’s not transgender himself:

BROUN: I don’t want to pay for a sex change operation. I’m not interested. I like being a boy.

As The Young Turks pointed out, Broun’s position mirrors a recent comment by fellow Georgia lawmaker Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R) that he doesn’t support marriage equality because he doesn’t want to marry a man. If the Republican Party truly wants to reach out to minorities more and tone down its rhetoric against LGBT issues, its members might need to make it less obvious when they show no empathy for people who are different from them.

LGBT

Arizona Lawmaker Is Afraid Girls Will See A Transgender Woman’s Penis In The Locker Room

Arizona state Rep. John Kavanagh (R) believes that transgender people’s bodies are traumatizing, and that’s why he’s pushing a bill to legalize discrimination based on gender identity. This is considered a “softening” from his first effort to criminalize transgender people’s use of restrooms, but not by much. Kavanagh explained why he’s trying to overturn the city of Phoenix’s nondiscrimination protections in an extended interview with Michelangelo Signorile on Wednesday:

KAVANAGH: First of all, the bathroom wasn’t the major issue. The real purpose of my bill was for showers. What Phoenix did was allow someone who is biologically male who thinks they’re female to go into a gym or a swimming pool shower or a locker room where people undress completely and this could be a woman or a girl or a young girl. I’ve had a number of parents say that they would be outraged if a man, a person who is biologically male, is in the locker room. [...]

Anybody who is concerned about a black person in a restaurant is sick, but a parent who is concerned about a young child in a locker room in this situation is a good parent in my opinion. What we have here essentially is a balancing of rights. The right not to be exposed. I think there’s psychological harm to a young girl exposed to the genitalia of the opposite sex. I think there’s some trauma there for some young girls. I don’t think it’s appropriate in that environment.

Listen to the full interview:

Amazingly, the word “penis” was avoided during the entire conversation, but its looming presence bespeaks how offensive Kavanagh’s position is. Transgender people are too often reduced to their bodies such that they cannot be seen as real people. It’s absurd to conclude that all girls would experience psychological harm by simply seeing another person’s body, and such an assertion suggests that trans people’s bodies are somehow dangerous to others. Kavanagh tried to obfuscate responsibility for his position by referring to a case at Evergreen College where a trans woman’s use of the locker room raised concern with a young girl’s family.  He neglected to mention that it’s the very anti-LGBT Alliance Defending Freedom that is responsible for raising the controversy in the first place.

Kavanagh’s description of a trans person as someone “who is biologically male who thinks they’re female” suggests his understanding of how his bill might actually impact trans people is limited. Consider the lived experience of the transgender woman, who identifies, presents, and lives as a woman in every aspect of her life. She may have undergone hormone therapy, electrolysis/laser hair removal, and other procedures to bring her body and gender into alignment, but she may have elected not to undergo surgery on her genitals — a costly, invasive procedure that would likely permanently sterilize her, depriving her of her reproductive rights. If she were to enter a men’s restroom or locker room, she would look entirely out of place, and as Signorile pointed out, would face a heightened risk for violence and harassment. The women’s room is the correct room for her to use. According to Kavanagh, however, the mere fact that she might still happen to have a penis that another girl in the locker room might just happen to see is such a safety risk to the girl that discrimination against all trans people is thus justified. It’s absurd, belittling, and just plain bigoted.

The “bathroom safety” myth is a way to make transgender people seem scary in a way that dehumanizes them such that discrimination seems like an important precaution to protect children. While there is no evidence to suggest trans people threaten children’s safety, there is ample evidence that discrimination threatens trans people’s safety. In the end, this is just a bigoted politician’s sugarcoated way of saying, “Eww.”

LGBT

Texas School Will Allow Student To Wear Dress To Prom

In February, Spring High School in Texas told student George “Tony” Zamazal that she would not be allowed to wear a dress to prom, even though she feels more comfortable dressing as a woman and identifying with female pronouns. The ACLU intervened on her behalf, and now the school has relented, explaining that Tony could wear a dress so long as she complied with the prom’s dress code as it’s enforced for all female students.

The senior is ecstatic:

TONY: All I wanted was to get to wear a dress to prom, because I wouldn’t have felt comfortable at all showing up in a tux. I’m so grateful that my school has agreed to let me be myself on such an important night.

Respecting people’s identities does not have any major consequence except allowing them to feel safe and authentic.

Alyssa

‘Veronica Mars’ Television Club: You Love Me, Don’t You

This post discusses plot points from the third and fourth episodes of the first season of Veronica Mars.

Noir is mannered, but I admit through the first several episodes of Veronica Mars, the show’s stylized nature was keeping me at a bit of a distance. That all changed with these two episodes of the show. It’s not so much that the cases got to me—I suspect that after the first two episodes, which used crimes to pull the basic cast of characters together, that Veronica’s clients will be a little more disposable. It’s that the, despite its use of private eye conventions, and in fact because of them, Veronica Mars became piercingly emotional in these two episodes, which focused substantially on the relationships between parents and children. In noir, everyone has secrets, but in Veronica Mars, the gap between public and private selves takes less time to unravel, or at least to become apparent. But that doesn’t mean that Veronica is free to send clients on her way faster than Sam Spade—instead, mysteries matter less than the consequences they open up.

In her first case, Veronica is employed by a boy named Justin to find his father—except that as far as Justin knows, his father is dead, and the gig is just an excuse for him to talk to Veronica and to give her mix CDs built around 311 releases. But instead of pulling off a successful ploy, Justin ends up discovering something that requires much more maturity from him than the quota that’s required to hit on a cool, older girl. His father’s transitioned and is living as a woman named Julia, played beautifully by Melissa Leo, who regularly patronizes the movie rental business where Justin works so she can have a chance to talk to him about film and take his recommendations. In one of the slyest, most impressive arguments for tolerance I’ve seen, she is clearly and deeply loved by the man she lived with. And Justin is in terrible pain not just because he’s discovered that his father abandoned him, but because his mother couldn’t trust him to react well to the truth.

“This is hard, I know. I wish I could have found a way to tell you,” Julia tells Justin. “This is something I had to do. This is who I am.” Justin is focused on the betrayal rather than the rare opportunity he has not just to be loved again, but to act like the kind of man Veronica would admire, until Veronica explains what it would mean to her to know that her mother wanted to visit her, even in disguise. “90 miles,” Veronica tells Justin. “That’s the distance your dad travels every week to see you for a few seconds. Look, my mom’s been missing, too, and I would give anything to feel that she cared enough about me to do that.” The case ends, and Justin’s resolution begins, with him tentatively calling his mother to tell her that the copy of Body Heat he recommended to her and special ordered for her has arrived—and giving her his regular schedule. The mystery matters far less than the emotional landscape that it opened up, noir’s secrets giving way to the complexities of contemporary life, which is difficult enough even before you introduce guns, gumshoes, and dames to die for into the mix.

As Julia’s taking the risk that Justin can love her as his mother, rather than his father, Keith Mars is confronting his daughter’s maturity, rather than his worries about her lack of it.
When he’s called into the principal’s office because she wants to tell him “We’ve noticed a dramatic change in [Veronica] over the last year. She’s late, a lot. She has attitude with certain teachers. She falls asleep in class. And socially she seems a bit isolated,” Keith downplays these changes. “I’d say Veronica is doing pretty well given the circumstances,” he tells the principal. “I can handle it, thank you.” But while he can manage Veronica’s behavior in limited ways, he can’t exactly arrest the forward march of time. When he asks Veronica about her first date with Troy, he’s rattled by her explanation that it was “Lousy conversation, but the sex was fantastic.” He gets territorial when the two keep seeing each other. “If he’s going to be kissing my daughter on my front porch for eight and a half minutes, I’m going to have to meet him,” Keith demands. “He’s taking up a lot of daddy-daughter time.” And Keith can even use his private-eye skills to put the kibosh on Veronica’s plans for homecoming. “You won’t mind, then, that I cancelled your reservation at the Four Seasons?” he tells Troy over Diet Cokes. But tracking down hotel registers one at time can only go so far—Keith’s business, in fact, depends on the idea that the world will stay richly supplied in venality. He can intimidate Troy out of sleeping with his daughter on one occasion, but he can’t predict her slipping out of her red dress and racing into the water in Lily Kane’s memory, can’t stop her from being exposed to hurt and seeking out new forms of joy.
Read more

LGBT

Arizona Lawmaker Now Wants To Enshrine Transgender Discrimination Into Law

Last week, Arizona state Rep. John Kavanagh (R) introduced a new bill that would have prosecuted transgender people with a class 1 misdemeanor for using the appropriate bathroom according to their gender. The backlash for this odious proposal was swift, and a newly formed committee has filed paperwork for a recall election to remove Kavanagh from office. Now, he has scrapped his original proposal for a new bill that enshrines anti-trans discrimination into Arizona law.

As he did the first time, Kavanagh scrapped the language from a different bill, SB 1045 — which originally addressed the professional conduct of health professionals — to serve as a shell for his discrimination bill. Though he’s no longer calling for criminal sanctions, his new bill prohibits any Arizona municipality from creating nondiscrimination protections based on gender identity:

A. The regulation of access to privacy areas in places of public accommodation based on gender identity or expression is of statewide concern and is not subject to further regulation by a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state.

B. A county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state shall not enact or enforce an ordinance or policy that requires a person or business to regulate access to privacy areas based on gender identity or expression.

C. No person or business shall be civilly or criminally liable for denying access to privacy areas based on gender identity or expression.

D. This section does not prohibit a person or business from allowing access to privacy areas based on gender identity or expression.

E. Any ordinance or policy that relates to access to privacy areas based on gender identity or expression that is inconsistent with this section is void and of no force or effect.

Kavanagh’s bill specifically targets the city of Phoenix, which passed sweeping nondiscrimination protections, ensuring all LGBT people have access to employment, housing, and public accommodations without fear of discrimination. If this were to pass into law, those protections would be voided and anybody who wishes to reject service to a transgender person would be free to do so in the state of Arizona. Kavanagh’s effort is nothing less than a proposed license to discriminate.

LGBT

Colorado Extends Insurance Nondiscrimination Protections To LGBT Community

Last week, the Colorado Division of Insurance became the second state agency in the week to issue a bulletin stating that discrimination in health coverage on the basis of sexual orientation and transgender status is impermissible under state law. The bulletin is the latest in a series of decisions by states and employers clearly stating that no person should be denied health care or coverage based on who they are.

The bulletin clarifies that existing law in Colorado prohibits discriminatory practices by insurers, including:

  • Denying coverage to a transgender person for medically necessary care that would be covered under current standards for any other individual
  • Charging more for health insurance based on a person’s sexual orientation and gender identity or expression.

One Colorado and the Colorado Consumer Health Initiative have been working closely with the Colorado Division of Insurance to seek legal clarification in response to input from Colorado’s transgender community. And the result reflects the growing movement toward equitable health insurance policies at the state and federal level.

Ending discriminatory policies that deny transgender people access to medically necessary care reflects basic values of fairness, and it also aligns with the consensus among major medical associations that transition-related health care is medically necessary for many transgender individuals and that determination of what care an individual patient needs properly rests with medical providers, not insurance companies.

Read the full bulletin and the FAQ from One Colorado and the Colorado Consumer Health Initiative.

 

LGBT

Canadian House Of Commons Advances Transgender Nondiscrimination Protections

Canada has once again taken a step forward for LGBT equality ahead of the United States. In a vote of 149-137, the Canadian House of Commons approved a bill (C-279) that would make it illegal to discriminate against people who are transgender, and it would also add hate crime protections for transgender people. The bill would not have passed without 16 votes from conservatives, despite arguments from opponents that it was a “bathroom bill” and would somehow endanger children. It’s unclear how the legislation will fare in the Senate.

LGBT

Arizona Lawmaker Introduces Bill To Prosecute Transgender People Who Use The ‘Wrong’ Bathroom

Erica Keppler, who advocated for Phoenix's nondiscrimination protections, could face arrest for using the women's restroom under this law.

Last month, the City Council of Phoenix, Arizona passed sweeping nondiscrimination protections, ensuring that people have equal access to employment, housing, and public accommodations regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity. One state lawmaker, Rep. John Kavanagh (R) is not pleased that transgender people will be protected when using the correct bathroom, and so he has introduced a new bill to ban them from doing just that.

Kavanagh gutted a Senate Bill about a Massage Therapy Board to use as a shell for his new amendment, which prohibits a person from entering a “public restroom, bathroom, shower, bath, dressing room, or locker room” if the sex designation of that facility does not match the individual’s birth certificate. He defended his “show your papers to pee” bill in an interview with 12 News Phoenix:

KAVANAGH: The city of Phoenix has crafted a bill that allows people to define their sex by what they think in their head. If you’re a male, you don’t go into a female shower or locker room, or vice versa. It also raises the specter of people who want to go into those opposite sex facilities not because they’re transgender, but because they’re weird.

Watch it:

Violating this law would constitute “disorderly conduct” and could be prosecuted as a class 1 misdemeanor. The bill describes itself as “an emergency measure that is necessary to preserve the public peace, health or safety and is operative immediately as provided by law.” Inappropriate behavior, such as the potentially harmful or invasive actions of the “weird” people Kavanagh referenced, is already illegal.

In Arizona, it is possible for transgender people to receive a new birth certificate with their proper gender, but only if they undergo gender reassignment surgery, which not all trans people choose to pursue. In addition to being quite expensive, it also results in sterilization. Were Kavanagh’s bill to pass, trans people would have to sacrifice their ability to ever have children just to legally use the proper bathroom.

LGBT

District Of Columbia Prohibits Insurance Companies From Discriminating Against Transgender People

Today, the DC Department of Insurance, Securities, and Banking (DISB) issued a bulletin clarifying key protections for transgender people in the District of Columbia. The bulletin provides a clear directive to insurers that discrimination on the basis of gender identity or expression is not an acceptable business practice in Washington.

The bulletin prohibits insurance companies from some of the most egregious practices that have been used to lock transgender people out of health care coverage, including:

  • Denying, cancelling, limiting, or refusing to renew an insurance policy.
  • Limiting insurance coverage on the basis of gender identity or expression.
  • Denying coverage for a procedure that is provided for the treatment of other conditions of illness. For example, if a plan covers hormone therapy for some diagnoses, it cannot categorically exclude coverage for hormone therapy related to gender identity disorder or other transition-related diagnosis.

DC joins a growing number of states, municipalities, and employers who recognize that equal access to health coverage is supported by medical science, improves the health of transgender people, and does not significantly increase costs. Ending arbitrary insurance discrimination against transgender people simply supports what expert medical bodies have been saying for years: transition-related health care is medically necessary for many transgender individuals whose health and well-being depends on bringing their physical body into alignment with their gender identity, and determination of what care an individual patient needs properly rests with medical providers, not insurance companies.

Read the full bulletin and the joint announcement from the Mayor’s Office of Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender (GLBT) Affairs and the Department of Insurance, Securities, and Banking.

 

Older

Newer

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up