Comments on: Trans Americans enjoy robust bias protections

By: LGBTTIQQ? — IGF Culture Watch

LGBTTIQQ? — IGF Culture Watch — Sun, 01 Jul 2012 03:40:23 +0000

[...] as another commentary in the same Blade issue, by Dana Beyer, points out, two months ago a landmark EEOC decision [...]

By: Abby Jensen

Abby Jensen — Sat, 30 Jun 2012 14:33:58 +0000

Thanks for this well-written article, Dana. There is, however, one error that needs correction. Contrary to your statement near the end, LGB, as well as straight, people *are* protected under the EEOC’s decision in Mia Macy’s case, and the principles and case law, including Vandy Beth Glenn’s case from the 11th Circuit, that underlie it. All that is required, for them, as well as for trans people, is proof that the cause of the discrimination against them was their gender non-conformity, not their sexual orientation or some other non-protected factor. That this is true is best demonstrated by the fact that the basis for this entire line of case law, of which the EEOC’s decision is the most recent culmination, is a Supreme Court case (Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins) in which the Court held that the denial of a promotion to a straight woman because she wasn’t feminine enough was illegal sex discrimination under Title VII.

Another thing to keep in mind is that this same expansion of bans on sex discrimination under federal law can, and should, be applied to state law bans on sex discrimination in public accommodations and other areas besides employment. I believe it is only a matter of time before this interpretation applies throughout the U.S.

(Editor: Pardon the double posting. I’m doing this from my phone, which isn’t easy. Please approve and post this corrected comment in place of the first one. Thank you.)

By: Abby Jensen

Abby Jensen — Sat, 30 Jun 2012 14:23:59 +0000

Thanks for this well-written article, Dana. There is, however, one error that needs correction. Contrary to your statement near the end, LGB, as well as straight, people *are* protected under the EEOC’s decision in Mia Macy’s case, and the principles and case law, included Vandy Beth Glenn’s case from the 11th Circuit, that underlie it. All that is required, for them, as well as for trans people,
is proof that the cause of the discrimination against them was their gender non-conformity, not their sexual orientation or some other non-protected factor. That this is true is best demonstrated by the fact that the basis for this entire line of case law, which the EEOC’sof decision is the most recent culmination, is a Supreme Court case (Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins) in which the Court held that the denial of a promotion to a straight woman because she wasn’t feminine enough was illegal sex discrimination under Title VII.

Another thing to keep in mind is that this same expansion of bans on sex discrimination under federal law can, and should, be appplied to state law bans on sex discrimination in public accommodations and other areas besides employment. I believe it only a matter of time before this interpretation applies throughout the U.S.

By: Dana Beyer

Dana Beyer — Sat, 30 Jun 2012 14:14:44 +0000

Good points, Mike. First, the bureaucracy is setting up to train the 53 EEO offices and will be rewriting its manuals. Implementation in any bureaucracy takes time.
Second, I never said it was HRC. One shouldn’t jump to conclusions.
Third, the question that trans people ask is simple: “What are my rights?” We have an obligation to answer that clearly and correctly.
Finally, as for how we message going forward (and messaging is different from providing answers to the current situation), I will say what I testified in a Senate briefing on ENDA last month: We want ENDA to solidify protections for the trans and gender non-conforming communities, and it should be inclusive of sexual orientation. Until gender-conforming gay folks are covered under Title VII, and I foresee that happening in the not-too-distant future, the trans community’s motto should be “No Gays Left Behind.” We needed the gay community to stand with us; now we need to stand with the gay community (and, of course, many of us are gay, too.) Those who argue against inclusive civil rights have missed the train, the train which includes all of us gender variant persons, be we radical separatist butch lesbians or radical separatist post-op transsexual women. Curtis Mayfield sang it best back in 1965: “People get ready, there’s a train a-comin, you don’t need no baggage, you just get on board.”

By: Mike in Houston

Mike in Houston — Fri, 29 Jun 2012 15:06:50 +0000

While the EEOC decision was historic, it’s not clear that the rest of the bureaucracy has gotten the message – one case starts the ball rolling, but it will take several more to make it stick… It’s also not apparent to anyone who looks at an EEO poster at work that gender identity / expression is part of the equality mix…

And before berating HRC or other national orgs for continuing to state that you can be fired for being transgender in 34 states – think about this: can you imagine the sh*t storm from the trans community if their messaging was changed to just talking about the need for employment protections for the LGB community? That may be the right legal strategy, but I can already hear the “threw us under the bus” crowd (see the companion piece from Ashley Love) ginning up their outrage machine.