Welcome! To read each post in full, click on the post title.



This is not legal advice, which can only be given by an attorney admitted to practice law in your jurisdiction after hearing all of the facts and circumstances in a particular case.

Thursday, March 10, 2011

Md. House debates trans rights bill : Washington Blade – Gay News

Md. House debates trans rights bill : Washington Blade – Gay News

About 30 witnesses spoke in favor of the Gender Identity Anti-Discrimination Act, compared to about 10 opponents, including one transgender activist who testified against the bill on grounds that it lacks language barring discrimination in public accommodations.

It's interesting to see that a trans rights activist argued against the bill. There is some division in the community about whether there should be public accommodations provisions in a workplace rights bill. To say that the trans community is not monolithic is an understatement.

5 comments:

Zoe Brain said...

I once headed a mixed development team - Germans, Israelis, and Australians.

That I could manage.

Trying to get Trans people to agree on such issues - whether to accept permanently legislated 2nd-class citizenship status in return for at least some protection, or to agitate for equal rights at the expense of people actually dying until that's achieved - is a little harder.

HRC Watch said...

So, what do you think?

Dr. Jillian T. Weiss said...

I'm not sure what I think, Ethan. On the one hand, I want the full panoply of rights for trans people. On the other, I want what I can get now, and in my opinion, employment rights are key to trans people being successful. When they can be fired summarily simply for being themselves, I oppose that and want to do everything I can to protect us. I get calls every day from people whose lives are crumbling because they are denied the right to work. But I fully sympathize with those who say in for a penny, in for a pound, that we'll be opposed no matter what the bill says, so might as well go for the whole nine yards. So I'm in kind of a quandary. What do you think?

Bekka Jai said...

Personally, I think having no public accommodations protections is a back door to continuing discrimination. What good is being hired in a place where you are forbidden from using the bathroom or appearing in public spaces? Is it really civil rights when you can still be thrown out of a club, restaurant, or other public place just for being trans?

HB235 gains transpeople little if anything in the way of real protections, it just provides cover for politicians who can then claim that we're already protected under the law even though that law doesn't actually protect us in the ways that really matter.

beckygrrl said...

Personally, I think having no public accommodations protections is a back door to continuing discrimination. What good is being hired in a place where you are forbidden from using the bathroom or appearing in public spaces? Is it really civil rights when you can still be thrown out of a club, restaurant, or other public place just for being trans?

HB235 gains transpeople little if anything in the way of real protections, it just provides cover for politicians who can then claim that we're already protected under the law even though that law doesn't actually protect us in the ways that really matter.