Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-11-17 Public Comment - M. Maier - I-183 Bathroom BillFrom:Megan Maier To:Agenda Subject:Initiative 183 (Montana Locker Room Privacy Act) Date:Wednesday, October 11, 2017 10:32:20 AM Dear Bozeman City Commissioners, As a Bozemanite, I am writing to you about Initiative 183, the "Montana Locker Room Privacy Act," which I hope you will decide to fight. As you know, this initiative is a version ofHB 609, which purported to protect privacy, but in fact would harm children and adults of all genders and gender identities — particularly those of an already marginalized population —by creating the exact problem it intends to solve. I 183 requires a person using a protected facility to use the facility that is designated for that person’s “sex", which is defined as "a person’s immutable biological sex as objectivelydetermined by anatomy and genetics existing at the time of birth.” However, anatomy and genetics at the time of birth can be misleading. Each year, about one in every 2,000 babies isborn “intersex,” which means they have characteristics that cannot easily be classified as “male” or “female.” Further, I 183 suggests that “a person’s original birth certificate may berelied upon as definitive evidence of the person’s sex.” First, nobody should be carrying around — or be forced to produce — an original birth certificate. Second, many states —including Montana — allow transgender individuals to change their birth certificates after appropriate treatment or a surgical procedure. Thus, a transgender individual is likely to bein possession of an official birth certificate matching the gender with which he or she identifies, not a certificate that indicates the sex assigned to him or her at birth. By requiring all Montanans to use the restrooms, changing rooms or locker rooms ingovernmental facilities or public schools that are designated for the sex they were assigned at birth, I 183 creates the precise problem it purports to resolve. Recent studies indicate 64% oftransgender individuals have experienced sexual assault. Conversely, there are no statistics supporting the concept that transgender individuals are more likely to commit sexualassault and, in fact, sex offenders are disproportionately likely to be heterosexual cisgender men. Thus, in anything, I 183 could increase sexual assault against transgender women. Imagine a young transgender woman who has lived as a female as long as she can rememberbeing required to use the men’s restroom at the county courthouse. She might look like Jazz Jennings, a young spokesmodel and activist who never went through male puberty and lookslike any other 16 year old girl. While any man who encountered her would likely tell her she is in the wrong restroom, this young woman is at real risk of being assaulted. Imagine also atransgender male university student being required to use the women’s locker room. This individual might look like Aydian Dowling, a bodybuilder and runner up to the cover ofMen’s Health magazine — a muscular, bearded young man who does not want to be in the women’s changing room any more than the women around him feel comfortable with himthere. The examples above are indicative of the injustice that would occur under I 183 — transgender individuals who have lived their authentic selves for many years being required touse facilities that make them and others uncomfortable and unsafe. Further, imagine the difficulties and embarrassment that would be felt by all when Montanans are forced to policethe restrooms. Public school teachers could feel forced to out their transgender students for fear that their schools would face civil action for failing “to take reasonable steps to prohibitthe member of the opposite sex from using the protected facility.” Empowered transphobic individuals might even stand post at the library restrooms, questioning anyone whodoesn’t present themselves in stereotypical gendered clothing or makeup. Instead of allowing an initiative onto the ballot that would further discriminate against this already marginalized population, we must send the message that Montana is a welcoming,unprejudiced state. Transgender people are among the most targeted populations in the U.S., facing discrimination in nearly every aspect of life, including in gaining and keepingemployment, housing, in public accommodations, and from law enforcement. Further, about 41% of transgender and gender nonconforming people in the U.S. attempt suicide,compared to 1.6% of the general population. A ballot initiative — even its campaign — specifically targeting this population only hurts them more. If you need financial statistics to be convinced that bills like this are bad for Montana,consider that I 183 could cost the state millions in civil actions, lost jobs and investments. In response to HB 2 of North Carolina, 80 corporate CEOs wrote an opposition letter toGovernor McCrory, more than 1750 North Carolinians lost their jobs and more than $77 million-worth of investments and visitor spending was forfeited. When Bruce Springsteencancelled his concert in North Carolina to protest HB 2, he caused a chain reaction of cancellations the state, reaching far beyond music. Recently, in response to SB 6 and HB 1362of Texas, more than 140 leading entertainers wrote an open letter stating that bills like this send a message to children — the message of “that child is unwelcome, that child isdangerous.” Montana is a destination state for many visitors hoping to see our national parks and wonderful public lands. There is a growing tech industry in Bozeman and two big stateuniversities that hope to grow enrollment. Allowing an initiative like this on the ballot — even allowing its campaign — could cause great losses to the state. In summation, I 183 unduly burdens transgender and gender nonconforming people byrequiring them to use restrooms designated for genders with which they don’t identify, forces state employees to police restrooms to save the state from a lawsuit, and empowerstransphobic individuals to question anyone they think doesn’t look stereotypically male or female enough. Transgender individuals are not dangerous and to anyone claiming that ifwe don’t have a law like I 183 on the books, a man could dress up as a woman to enter a woman’s restroom to assault women I would respond, first, that this action is already illegal.Second, I would challenge him to provide statistical evidence to support this claim. Thank you for considering my comments, Megan Maier Further Resources: http://www.transequality.org/issues/resources/transgender-people-and-bathroom-access https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Herman-Gendered-Restrooms-and-Minority-Stress-June-2013.pdf http://www.thetaskforce.org/static_html/downloads/reports/reports/ntds_full.pdf