The idea that a transsexual-in-progress can't be a victim of sexual discrimination is bogus. If there's a group more vulnerable than women in the workplace, it's women who used to be men and men who used to be women.
I don't know about the rest of you girls, but I'm more uncomfortable with the idea of peeing next to a man who believes he's a man than peeing next to a man who believes he's a woman.
That's just me. Utah Transit Authority and the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals didn't ask my opinion.
Last week, the Denver court rejected Krystal Etsitty's lawsuit against UTA, concluding - mind-bogglingly -that Americans with complicated gender identity and biology cannot be harassed, undermined or bullied at work.
The idea that a transsexual-in-progress can't be a victim of sexual discrimination is bogus. If there's a group more vulnerable than women in the workplace, it's women who used to be men and men who used to be women.
But U.S. Supreme Court precedent doesn't allow for such conventional wisdom. Instead, this country's anti-discrimination law hinges on a dated definition of "sex" or gender in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In a 1989 ruling that will be replaced eventually, but not soon enough, the justices concluded that men and women who fail to meet the stereotype of their gender - a man with fey hand gestures, for example - can't be discriminated against.
READ THE FULL ARTICLE HERE
Mail to a friendCOMMENTS
- There Are No Comments Yet
