Tag Archives: gender identity

Anti-Discrimination Law Passed in Missouri County

by D Gregory Smith

From The St Louis Post-Dispatch:

In one of the longest and most emotional meetings in the St. Louis County Council’s history, an ordinance was narrowly passed Tuesday night that adds gender identity and sexual orientation to the county’s anti-discrimination regulations and hate crimes law.

An overflow crowd of more than 250 people spilled out of the council chambers in Clayton; 92 of them signed up to address the council, and most took advantage of that opportunity in a public comments segment that lasted more than two hours.

And as could be expected on an issue that involved religion and civil rights, most of them spoke fervently.

The ordinance adds protections for people in employment, housing and public accommodations in unincorporated areas, regardless of their sexual orientation. It also expands protections on the basis of gender and disability.

Are you watching Helena? It can be done.

Full story here.

Related articles

Alaska Lt. Governor Files To Change Driver’s Licenses To Include Gender Identity

by D Gregory Smith

Some good news out of Alaska:

Alaska Lt. Governor Mead Treadwell has filed a new regulation that governs changes to driver’s licenses and will allow transgender individuals to correct the gender marker on their licenses without undergoing major surgery. The regulation takes effect August 11. The American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of Alaska had challenged the surgery requirement as a violation of an individual’s right to privacy.

“We appreciate the work of the Department of Motor Vehicles and the Lt. Governor’s office in crafting a regulation that recognizes the important and legitimate needs of transgender Alaskans,” said Jeffrey Mittman, executive director of the ACLU of Alaska. “All Alaskans must be able to obtain a driver’s license that accurately reflects their gender and avoids disclosure of sensitive personal information unrelated to their ability to safely drive a motor vehicle. The government should never needlessly intrude into mandating specific medical procedures.”

The ACLU filed its challenge on behalf of a transgender woman, K.L., whose United States passport and work documents all identify her as female. After initially securing a change to the gender on her driver’s license, she was told that her new license would be revoked unless she submitted proof of having surgery.

“I am humbled and grateful for this decision,” said K.L. “It is my prayer that this victory will make a difference in the lives of transgender people.”

Many transgender persons are treated for a condition called gender dysphoria. Although the American Psychiatric Association agrees that surgery is medically necessary treatment for some, it is not required for everyone with the condition. Treatment for gender dysphoria varies from individual to individual, and many can be effectively treated without surgery.

Additionally, such surgery is beyond the means of many people and is potentially dangerous for some individuals. The State Department no longer requires transgender people to have surgery before it will correct the gender marker on passports, and a growing number of states have stopped requiring surgery for changing the gender marker on a driver’s license.

“The previous requirement had nothing to do with accepted medical standards and demonstrated a callous lack of understanding of what it means to be transgender,” said John Knight, staff attorney with the ACLU Lesbian Gay Bisexual and Transgender Project. “The government should not be in the business of dictating anyone’s medical care, especially when it comes to requiring surgery that may not be available, desired, or medically necessary.”

More information on this case can be found at: www.aclu.org/lgbt-rights/kl-v-state-alaska-department-administration-division-motor-vehicles

Related articles

Author Bobbie Zenker talks about “TransMontana” on KBZK

by D Gregory Smith

Very proud. You can see it here.

Transgender Breakthrough

by D Gregory Smith

From Kris Hermanns, Executive Director, Pride Foundation:

I wasn’t sure if you heard word (Monday), but history was made once again.

For the first time ever, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has ruled that discrimination against an employee or applicant on the basis of the person’s gender identity violates the prohibition on sex discrimination contained in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

The EEOC’s decision means that transgender employees across the country who experience workplace discrimination can now file a claim with the EEOC at any of its offices across the country.

Below is a link to a full article about the EEOC decision, the implications, and comments from some of the leading legal minds who have been working to advance transgender legal protections for decades. I encourage you to read it.

This is an incredible decision. We continue to make steady progress and are moving closer to the day when LGBTQ people and their families are fully recognized, protected, and supported.

It’s exciting to know Pride Foundation is a part of making this all happen.

Thank you.

Kris

# # #

Transgender Breakthrough

EEOC ruling that gender-identity discrimination is covered by Title VII is a ”sea change” that opens the doors to employment protection for transgender Americans

By Chris Geidner
Published on April 23, 2012, 10:38pm | Comments

An employer who discriminates against an employee or applicant on the basis of the person’s gender identity is violating the prohibition on sex discrimination contained in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, according to an opinion issued on April 20 by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). The opinion, experts say, could dramatically alter the legal landscape for transgender workers across the nation.

More at http://www.metroweekly.com/news/?ak=7288

Related articles

Two Spirits: Coming To Montana PBS

by D Gregory Smith

Two Spirits, a film by Lydia Nibley, is coming to PBS this Sunday, June 12th at 10:30 pm through the program Independent Lens– and I want to encourage you to watch it.

It is an amazing film which “interweaves the tragic story of a mother’s loss of her son with a revealing look at a time when the world wasn’t simply divided into male and female- and many Native American cultures held places of honor for people of integrated genders.”

I’ve talked about this remarkable film before. My friend and collaborator Gregory Hinton gave an excellent introduction to the film when it was screened at the Autry as part of our Out West series last summer. Part of his memorable remarks were these:

The city and the country have a lot to catch up on.  We have much to teach each other. To protect our rural kids, and our rural elders, our community must be visible, like a porch light streaming into the western night sky.

And now, to Lydia and Russell, the filmmakers of Two Spirits, thank you for your advocacy by flipping on the switch.

Two Spirits is the story of Fred Martinez, a Navajo boy who was also a girl. It is also the story of Pauline Mitchell, the mother who loved him, who prayed every night for his safe return.

It speaks to the prescience of the Navajo culture.  Imagine a time where Two Spirit children were adored, their talents cultivated, their spirits revered.

The World Premiere of Two Spirits was sponsored by the Matthew Shepard Foundation in Denver.  I recently told Judy Shepard that in addition to experiencing bias as a gay man, I have also experienced bias as a rural westerner. I asked her if Matt loved Wyoming. Judy told me he stayed in Laramie because it was home and he loved the out of doors.

The love of mothers and courage of sons astonishes.

Stay home if you want. Be who you are. This is the mission of Out West.

Check your local listings here, and watch the trailer below:

My Statements Re: HB 516, HB 514

by D Gregory Smith

February 18, 2011

Montana Legislators,

RE MT HB 516:

  1. Every community should have the right to decide its own ordinances of inclusion. Ordinances of exclusion, usually reserved for dictatorships, theocratic states and societies of intolerance are another matter.
  2. Creating a law that disallows protection is counterintuitive to the purpose of government as set forth in both the Federal and State Constitutions, in which are stated explicitly the government’s purpose to protect the citizenry from discrimination, violence and other harms.
  3. This is an attempt to write prejudice and bigotry into the law. It is an attempt to tie local ordinances to State law in a way which keeps government from evolving as understanding, both scientific and social, creating a top-down model, instead of a cooperative, interdynamic process.
  4. It is a blatant and ignorant effort to push a personal agenda of intolerance toward LGBT persons in obvious defiance of biological, social and psychological science.
  5. This bill is discrimination and rejection of the right of communities to protect the citizens as they believe necessary. It enshrines bigotry, ignorance and personal belief in defiance of science, human experience and freedom.

RE HB 514:

1.  The reality of difference in sexual orientation and gender identity is acknowledged by this bill.

2.  The scientific evidence and positions of the scientific community regarding the reality of different sexual identities/orientations and the fluidity of gender identities are clear. The American Psychological Association recognizes the reality of heterosexuality, bisexuality and homosexuality. The APA also advocates against discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. Regarding sexual orientation:

Research has found that the people who have the most positive attitudes toward gay men, lesbians, and bisexuals are those who say they know one or more gay, lesbian or bisexual person well, often as a friend or co-worker. For this reason, psychologists believe that negative attitudes toward gay people as a group are prejudices that are not grounded in actual experience but are based on stereotypes and mis-information. Furthermore, protection against violence and discrimination are very important, just as they are for any other minority groups. Some states include violence against an individual on the basis of his or her sexual orientation as a “hate crime,” and ten U.S. states have laws against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

Regarding gender identity:

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT APA opposes all public and private discrimination on the basis of actual or perceived gender identity and expression and urges the repeal of discriminatory laws and policies;

THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT APA supports the passage of laws and policies protecting the rights, legal benefits, and privileges of people of all gender identities and expressions;

THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT APA supports full access to employment, housing, and education regardless of gender identity and expression;

The American Medical Association says the following:

AMA Policy Regarding Sexual Orientation
General Policies:

H-65.992 Continued Support of Human Rights and Freedom. Our AMA continues (1) to support the dignity of the individual, human rights and the sanctity of human life, and (2) to oppose any discrimination based on an individual’s sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, race, religion, disability, ethnic origin, national origin or age and any other such reprehensible policies. (Sub. Res. 107, A-85; Modified by CLRPD Rep. 2, I-95; Reaffirmation A-00; Reaffirmation A-05; Modified: BOT Rep. 11, A-07)

H-65.983 Nondiscrimination Policy. The AMA affirms that it has not been its policy now or in the past to discriminate with regard to sexual orientation or gender identity. (Res. 1, A-93; Reaffirmed: CCB Rep. 6, A-03; Modified: BOT Rep. 11, A-07)

H-65.990 Civil Rights Restoration. The AMA reaffirms its long-standing policy that there is no basis for the denial to any human being of equal rights, privileges, and responsibilities commensurate with his or her individual capabilities and ethical character because of an individual’s sex, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, or transgender status, race, religion, disability, ethnic origin, national origin, or age. (BOT Rep. LL, I-86; Amended by Sunset Report, I-96; Modified: Res. 410, A-03)

Does Montana want to ignorantly proceed against the example of these two esteemed organizations?

3. Protection is not a special right, it is an equal right. We all have the right to live in peace and without the threat of violence, discrimination or subjugation. Studies and experience show that LGBT persons are constantly subject to bigotry, violence, and harassment. Indeed, LGBT teens are the highest risk group for suicide attempt and completion. Much of that is due to oppressive or negligent laws that fail to promote a sense of self-worth for every law-abiding citizen.

4. Montana has a history of live and let live. Without this bill, the lives of a significant number of Montanans are prevented from being full lives of integrity and equality. Without this bill, you continue to promote a second and third class of Montanans.

Sincerely,

D. Gregory Smith, MA, LMHCA

Butte