Frequently
Asked Questions
What
is the "Bathroom Bill?"
The official and misleading name of the Bathroom Bill is "An
Act Relative to Gender-Based Discrimination and Hate Crimes"
and has been designated HB 1728. This bill would add the vague category
of "gender identity or expression" to the state ban on
sex discrimination, defining it as "a gender-related identity,
appearance, expression, or behavior of an individual, regardless
of the individual's assigned sex at birth." In other words,
the bill relegates a person's sex to their state-of-mind or a mental
choice, instead of basing it in biological reality. Those advocating
for this bill do not believe that men are necessarily men and women
are necessarily women. Rather, they believe that biology is an inconvenient
fact when it comes to matters of identifying one's sex.
This
bill would endanger the privacy and safety of women and children
in public bathrooms, locker rooms, dressing rooms, and other intimate
places (such as common showers), opening them to whomever wants
to be there at any given time, and also to sexual predators who
claim "confusion" about their gender as a cover for their
evil intentions. Since the law doesn't require a protected person
to have a legitimate problem with gender confusion, there is no
way to distinguish between those people that this bill is designed
to help and those who will undoubtedly abuse its existence to fulfill
any number of deviant desires.
No
law should make whole segments of the population feel unsafe and
exploit their privacy and security.
Advocates
claim that the bill would not affect bathrooms. It that true?
False. The author of the bill has admitted that bathrooms will be
affected. Attorney Laura Langley, of the Gay & Lesbian Advocates
and Defenders (GLAD), said in a Bay Windows article last year that
under the bill "those [single sex] facilities would have to
open their doors to anyone who identifies as and lives as the gender
that they serve. A transgender person who identifies as a particular
gender would be entitled to use bathroom, locker room and other
single-sex facilities for that gender, regardless of whether or
not they have had surgery or are taking hormones." Furthermore,
a similar bill was recently passed in Colorado where advocates of
the measure stated it would not impact bathrooms, but as soon as
it passed the state issued a pamphlet saying that it does. (Click
Here to see the CO-DORA brochure). A similar bill in New Hampshire,
soundly defeated in March, clearly stated its impact on bathrooms.
What
about my membership to a women-only fitness facility?
If this bill becomes law, all fitness clubs catering to only women
would have to admit men who claim to feel like women. Their belief
that they are female need not be legitimate, supported by a doctor,
or even something for which they've had surgery or hormone treatments.
All one would need to do to abuse this law is decide, in their own
mind, that they are the opposite sex for an hour, day, year, or
whatever amount of time they deem appropriate. One does not need
to make a permanent choice and is free to move back and forth between
being a woman or man as much or often as they like. Men would have
access not only to the fitness equipment, but the locker rooms,
showers, steam rooms, and other intimate areas as well. Comfort,
safety, and security (both physical and emotional) would no longer
be available to women who want to workout at a fitness club without
men, nor to men or women who expect privacy in their locker room
or shower room in any co-ed health club or recreational facility.
Isn't
this bill just about giving transgender people basic rights and
protections?
"Gender identity disorder" is medically classified by
the American Psychiatric Association as a mental illness in the
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th Edition.
In other words, Gender Identity Disorder is classified just like
bi-polar disorder, schizophrenia, and other serious mental diseases
or disorders. We believe that transgender persons should enjoy the
same legal protections as other citizens and be free of harm or
harassment. MFI does not condone harm or harassment against any
person, but invading everyone else's privacy and safety is going
too far.
Aren't
you trying to draw a direct comparison between the sexually confused
and pedophiles?
Absolutely not! Our opposition to this bill is grounded in love
and respect for both the mentally ill and the public at large. There
are two sets of concerns at issue here and this bill addresses neither!
A bill
addressing Gender Identity Disorder should both protect and care
for those suffering from the disease as well as protect other vulnerable
members of our society. HB 1728 does neither.
The
portrayal of a sexual predator following a young girl into a public
bathroom is meant to bring attention to the very real dangers that
this bill would bring if enacted. As written, this bill would allow
anyone, whether or not they suffer from "gender identity disorder,"
to enter any bathroom, dressing room, etc. that they choose to enter.
Such a law would grant sexual predators a "free pass"
into intimate places where they can "scout" victims. Law
enforcement would be powerless to stop a crime before it started,
even with known sex offenders, because HB 1728 would give the offender
the absolute legal right to be within whatever intimate place they
chose be. This fact should disturb everyone.
What
would be the affect on public schools?
Public schools would be forced to follow the law and allow boys
and girls to enter opposite gender restrooms and locker rooms. School
sports would also be adversely affected. Legal experts believe that
the policy of having separate boy's and girl's sports teams will
be challenged under this law. Any male student could claim "gender
identity" issues and join a team designated for the opposite
sex, gaining a competitive edge and putting female shower safety
and modesty in great peril. If one school chooses to start putting
boys on its girl's basketball team, would other schools be forced
to accept this change and subject its girls to a dangerous on-court
situation? Do you want boys blocking, picking, and rebounding on
the court with your daughters?
Additionally,
teachers would be required to teach young children that their gender
is a state-of-mind, not a biological fact. This means that they
would be taught that they can somehow mentally change their sex
and that just because they were born a boy or a girl doesn't mean
that they must remain such, possessing the right to act, dress,
and use whatever bathroom they prefer on any given day. For example,
a teacher in Newton told her third grade class that people can have
an operation to change their sex. These little children were sent
home traumatized, leaving their parents to deal with the aftermath.
Does
my legislator support this bill?
Over 100 legislators have signed on to support this measure. It's
likely that your state representative is one of them. Advocates
adopt extremely misleading language to gain support for their bill,
so it is no surprise that some legislators may be unsure about the
true effects of this bill, not to mention ordinary citizens. Click
Here to see if your state representative and/or senator has
signed on as a co-sponsor of H.B. 1728. Remember, just because a
legislator is not sponsoring the bill DOES NOT mean he or she is
not planning to vote for the bill. All legislators need to be notified
about how you feel about this bill and alerted to its dangerous
affects. Visit our Take Action page
to send a communication to your legislator.
Why
should I care if a man wants to call himself a woman or vice versa?
That doesn't really affect me, does it?
Yes, it does. Aside from the ability of individuals to abuse these
laws and invade intimate public spaces like bathrooms, locker rooms,
dressing rooms, etc., this law would create an enormous public health
risk by enabling sexual predators. If men can enter women's restrooms,
what prevents a child predator from legally awaiting his prey in
places where little girls or boys are most vulnerable, such as museum
restrooms? Those who support this legislation are not fully recognizing
the ramifications of such poor public policy.
What
kind of public policy would this bill create?
The public policy created by this bill would be socially destructive.
If we relegate sex to a mental choice for one legal purpose, then
it becomes a legal choice for all purposes. Some laws are sex-specific
for very good reasons, but if sex is a choice, why can a man not
call himself a woman and then abuse those sex-specific policies?
Abuse of any and all sex-specific laws and policies such as public
nudity becomes possible if we allow this law to be enacted.