Hey, there! Log in / Register

Boston City Council supports transgender rights

In an 11-0 vote (councilors Flaherty and Zakim were absent), the city council said today it supports passage of Question 3 on the November ballot, which would enshrine transgender people's rights in places of public accommodation - from restrooms to hospitals.

At-large Councilor Ayanna Pressley said the issue is really simple: "Love and acceptance" vs. "Hate and discrimination." She noted that "there has been zero increase of public-safety incidents in restrooms in our state," since the passage of a law (which would be repealed with a majority "no" vote) to protect transgender people's rights in 2016.

"We are all safe when we are all treated with dignity," she added.

The City Council first passed a measure to protect those rights in 2002 - which then Mayor Tom Menino signed.

Neighborhoods: 
Topics: 

Ad:
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!

Comments

All the people getting antsty about restrooms sure got told a lot of bullshit stories by their parents. Probably also warned them about LSD in Halloween candy. Time to grow up and get over the bullshit your parents told you.

up
Voting closed 7

The obsession with restrooms is because transphobes don't want trans people to be able to participate in public life, which is dependent on bathroom access to a surprising extent.

up
Voting closed 6

You grow up seeing with your own two eyes that mankind is divided into two distinct genders. But that's not true! Suddenly here are our betters, telling us deplorables that what we see with our own two eyes (ie that men and women are biologically distinct) isn't true.

And oh how convenient, we need a whole slew of new bureaucratic organs* that need to be staffed up with highly-paid, right-thinking people to tell us what to do and how to behave, all to protect us unwashed masses from the hateful consequences of our own perceptions of reality, of course. For our own good.

*Hehe...organs...hehe

up
Voting closed 9

That's a lot of hate for something as simple as "just leave other people alone in the bathroom".

up
Voting closed 5

There. I said it.

up
Voting closed 0

...you've got balls.

up
Voting closed 3

More importantly, why do you say that"

What gonads someone has are their own business, perhaps their doctor's, or their lover's but no more than that.

People who insist on knowing if parts match clothes are busybodies at best, but probably pervs.

up
Voting closed 5

Transphobes are pervs? How so? And what exactly is a transphobe? Personally I'm not afraid of them, I don't think they should be denied any rights either. But I do think if you going to play that game you need to go all the way. Do a sex change and live your life happily ever after.

up
Voting closed 0

But I do think if you going to play that game you need to go all the way. Do a sex change and live your life happily ever after.

  1. It's not a "game"
  2. It's none of your tiny ignorant business what other people do with their lives and their bodies
  3. Transphobic is defined as a hatred or fear of trans people, which you obviously have, or you'd mind your own god damned business.
up
Voting closed 3

I have no hatred or fear, and I support Trans right. But like my grandma use to say 'shit or get off the pot.' If you were born a man but believe you are a woman, that is your right and your business. But I don't think you get to keep you peepee AND still try to use the ladies room. It's one or the other.

up
Voting closed 2

Is forcing this guy to use the ladies room really the most sensible option here?

And who's in charge of checking people's genitals to enforce this rule, anyway?

up
Voting closed 4

lol "just get a bunch of plastic surgery, which you need doctor approval for, and most doctors require you to live as your desired gender for several years and do HRT first before they'll sign off, but you can't use a public bathroom in the interim, because ur junk doesn't match"

it's not a fuckin dunkin order you can't just roll in and take care of it on your way to work, bro.

up
Voting closed 3

I'm a user here who usually has a login name but for this I need to remain anonymous. My boyfriend is transgender. No one would know it unless he was standing naked in front of you. And, as much as he'd like to, "doing a sex change" isn't a thing for trans men in any meaningful way as far as using a bathroom goes. Additionally, I think you should stop for a moment and imagine what it's like to actually BE transgender. Can you imagine feeling like your body doesn't belong to you? That the way others see you isn't consistent with how you see yourself? Hating yourself, sometimes without knowing why. No one facing this reality is playing any sort of game, as you put it. Hormone therapy, hysterectomy, "top surgeries" etc, can help right these feelings, but using the restroom is still a daily struggle. I watch daily as my boyfriend often has to seek out restrooms which are empty because there is always a fear of being discovered and outed, or worse, outed and physically harmed because he had to pee and maybe looks a little bit different from everyone else.

This is why it is important to make sure that all trans people are protected. No one should have to live in fear of violence or be forced to out himself or herself every time they need to urinate.

up
Voting closed 2

Do you think anyone honestly takes pleasure in the anguish of a person with a mental illness? This story pains me. It really does. That said...suppose your significant other suffered from a different delusion. Suppose this person were hearing voices that weren't there, or seeing people or daemons, or flying unicorns? Suppose this person thought that having two arms or two legs was one limb too many?

You wouldn't be doing a schizophrenic any favors by pretending that you believe that the voices he hears are really speaking to him. There would certainly still be a moral imperative on all of us to, as you put it, refrain from committing unprovoked physical violence on this person and from otherwise adding to this person's misery. But that imperative only goes so far. It would not be incumbent on society to humor delusions of daemons and dancing unicorns, or to allow this person to undergo amputation of a perfectly healthy limb.

If this person suffered from severe autism and was unable to handle crowds or loud noises, then it would be unfortunate, but the rest of us would not clear and or cease our conversations out every time this person enters a room or goes down the street. If this person were seeing fire-breathing dragons in the skies, it would do to have a pair of F-15s circling over Boston 24/7 just in case he's right. That would run counter to the other moral imperative we all live under: to live healthy and productive lives ourselves, to provide for our families, and to not lose sight of objective reality.

up
Voting closed 1

The only point you are making is that you are an insensitive douchebag who thinks picking certain words makes him look compassionate and covers for severely flawed logic.

Maybe you should discuss your sociopathy and your fear of people not like you with your psychiatrist first. How about that?

up
Voting closed 3

I don't have a psychiatrist. I don't need one. I have no difficulty performing daily tasks or telling up from down. Given that those basics are checked off, I see no need to pay someone to tell me that whatever failings I may have as a human being are either society's fault, my parents' fault, and either way all curable with continuing several-hundred-dollar-per-hour sessions.

If, however, you have difficulty getting in a row all the ducks you need in a row to use a public restroom...then I can see how a psychiatrist is a necessity.

up
Voting closed 3

Your irrational fears are okay. Everybody has some.

Trying to make them into feel better laws for the irrationally scared that keep people from necessary bodily functions? Not okay.

I'm afraid of monsters under the bed. Should you be required by law to have a solid, monster-proof platform for all your beds? No. That's ridiculous. I'm scared of sharks, so let's fence off all beaches and ban swimming. Because I'm scared.

Did marriage equality result in your divorce? No? That was another irrational fear that should never have been used to justify curtailing people's rights.

up
Voting closed 5

and since autistic folk have a higher incidence of non-conforming gender and sexual identity than neurotypicals, please keep us out of your bullshit "arguments"

up
Voting closed 2

We don't need "new bureaucratic organs" to stop people like you from telling someone that they're using the "wrong" restroom, demanding that a woman prove to your, or some random bureaucrat's, satisfaction that she really is a woman. (Or are you okay taking someone's word for their gender, as long as it's one of the two common ones?).

What to do and how to behave: leave other people alone. Don't act as though it's your right to chase someone out of a restaurant, park, or public bathroom for not performing gender the way you like it. Don't walk up to strangers and demand to know "what they are": you can go about your day, buy your groceries, walk your dog, etc. without knowing that, and certainly without arguing with them about the answer.

up
Voting closed 4

At a bar I was at recently there was a marked mens' room and ladies' room but on each one there was a sign that said something to the effect of "If you see someone who doesn't look like they belong in this restroom, please take the following steps: 1) Chill out, they know what they're doing better than you do"

up
Voting closed 0

"Chill out, they know what they're doing better than you do"

Couldn't have put it better myself

up
Voting closed 2

How did you reach the conclusion this was gaslighting? Why do you think a trans person doesn't actually know better than you would?

up
Voting closed 3

I see a man who looks like a man, sounds like a man, was documented to have been a man since birth, and I'd be willing to bet has the chromosomes of a man, but is telling me he believes he's a woman. I conclude he's either a troll or he's delusional. The corollary to both is that his judgment and ability to "know better" is impaired. So I don't have to take his assertions at face value. I don't have to give them the weight that they might command if the guy making them weren't so damned obviously off his nut*.

All of this is predicated, of course, on the veracity of my assertion that I can tell what it is that I'm seeing. Thus: circular reasoning. The same kind you employ when you assert that I'm wrong on the count of the other guy saying I am wrong and hateful. After all, why give the assertions of a bigot any weight?

*Hehe...nuts...hehe

up
Voting closed 4

I see a man who looks like a man, sounds like a man, was documented to have been a man since birth, and I'd be willing to bet has the chromosomes of a man, but is telling me he believes he's a woman. I conclude he's either a troll or he's delusional.

This is all based on a bad faith assumption, which isn't logical. It's also been pretty well settled that gender and biological sex, while often align, don't always. So if you're trying to come out here and just call all transgender people mentally ill, that's also in bad faith, and wrongfully labeling and, likely, stigmatizing them.

I don't find the logic concluding you to be engaging wrongfully and hatefully to be circular at all.

up
Voting closed 4

It's also been pretty well settled that gender and biological sex, while often align, don't always.

No, it isn't well-settled. It's somebody's opinion. The fact that some (but not all) people who hold that opinion are scientists does not make that opinion into a scientific fact. Especially when it's a hot-button political issue.

Social norms are arbitrary. So is the act of deconstructing them. Neither side can make an honest-to-God scientific measurement backing one set of norms over another the way you can measure a physical quantity.

up
Voting closed 3

None of this is new, ya know. Take a quick gander at the life of the Chevalier / Chevaliere d'Eon a pretty neat story about gender and biological sex in the 18th century, or the elaborately non-binary gender norms among the Buginese people in Indonesia, or etc. etc. etc.

up
Voting closed 4

Neither side can make an honest-to-God scientific measurement backing one set of norms over another the way you can measure a physical quantity.

Of course not. God isn't scientific. Much like your "logic."

up
Voting closed 2

Go read the latest evidence from scientific studies that demonstrate clear and visible MRI evidence of brain differences in trans people that align with their chosen gender.

If you can.

up
Voting closed 2

"What to do and how to behave: leave other people alone. Don't act as though it's your right to chase someone out of a restaurant..."

Does this apply to Mrs. Huckabee's inlaws?

If not for double standards you'd have none at all.

up
Voting closed 2

You grow up seeing with your own two eyes that mankind is divided into two distinct genders.

Mankind - that's a single gender, not two. And you only see "two" genders because that is what our society imposes on people - not the state of nature There are many other genders and many more gender expressions.

For instance, what gender is a person with a single X chromosome? (1 in 4000 births)

How about this person with XY genotype and Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome (1 in 10,000):
IMAGE(https://3.bp.blogspot.com/_kC5MT2r5U8s/Sp4aNq88rvI/AAAAAAAALeA/rpWgMmj-bjQ/s320/maria+patino.jpg)

While being intersex is not the same as trans, intersex people fully represent "the way things are" and "the state of nature" when it comes to biological gender. They often suffer the same social bullshit as you want to use to bully trans people. They are also far more common than many people understand.

Best to learn some science and mind your own parts if you just want things to be simple. I care far less what the person in the stall next to me is peeing with and how than I do that they mop up the #*%&n seat after.

up
Voting closed 3

Actually an informative post that cites the problems of actual people. My personal opinion is that the issue has been clouded by people on both sides of the issue.
There is no doubt as to two basic sexes. This is biology 101. Unless you reproduce by budding or something, then it's two sexes. Swirl refers to situations that occur in 1/4000 or 1/10,000 cases. These cases are people that, as citizens, deserve the same rights as anyone else. Possibly the issue is the level of privacy in public accommodations. I dunno.

The issue for most folks is the guy wearing a summer print dress that's snapping one out in the 'ladies room' while some guy's nine year old girl is in there. If you want to strongly argue for any random guy to just go in there, well, don't expect to win questions like # three.

It's not a question of hate (haters pile on me in 3,2,1...).
It is, however, a legitimate question of perverts. They're out there, for regular readers here that follow the antics of the good patrons of the MBTA that wind up busted about every ten days or so.

Oh, BTW, I lift the seat...after I pee.

up
Voting closed 3

Ladies rooms are all stalls, so unless you're putting your eye up to a crack in the wall (eww), there's nothing to see. If some self-identified woman in a summer print dress has something to snap one out, NO ONE WILL BE ABLE TO TELL, nine-year-old or otherwise, because everyone will be behind a door, minding their own P's and Q's.

Perverts come in all guises and we have laws about that. No need to keep people from using public bathrooms because you're confused about how they work and construct strawpersons to cover your inability to understand.

up
Voting closed 3

"You have no idea how the Ladies Room works"

Ya, it's complicated. Stalls, no urinals. Here I was, all these years, thinking it was just one ditch down the middle that women straddled.

"If some self-identified woman..."

I never mentioned 'self identified woman'. I said, " guy wearing a summer print dress". There's a difference.

"... something to snap one out, NO ONE WILL BE ABLE TO TELL, nine-year-old or otherwise, because everyone will be behind a door, minding their own P's and Q's."

"NO ONE WILL BE ABLE TO TELL".

RIGHT...OK, let's make her twelve..."Daddy, there's some guy in the stall next to mine and he was jerking off."

Right. A heteronormal cisgendered dad sends his unemancipated gender-unaware daughter into the ladies room and some guy walks in there, there will be a reaction.

All I'm saying is that those that are truly a bit different can decide for themselves. Perverts, on the other hand, will now have a choice...the local library, the MBTA or the local ladies room.

Freedom of expression, I'm all for it. Oh, by the way, you don't have to say, 'strawpersons'.
A straw man argument is a description of an argument, not a person. It has no sex, male, female, xir, or whatever.

up
Voting closed 6

When do you stop spewing the same lies and nonsense and fake scare tactics?

up
Voting closed 5

What is your obsession with jerking off next to twelve year olds?

None of the women here have ever encountered this scenario.

up
Voting closed 0

The issue for most folks is the guy wearing a summer print dress that's snapping one out in the 'ladies room' while some guy's nine year old girl is in there.

Correction: the issue with most folks is their own bigotry that makes them imagine that this is a thing.

There is no doubt as to two basic sexes. This is biology 101.

No it isn't.

If someone wants to have rules where people need to show you their genitalia before they can use the bathroom in their house, they are free to do so. But ignorance and your bigoted imagination are not valid excuses to restrict other people's actions in public spaces.

up
Voting closed 5

It slays all demons. Well, no. The problem is people like you. You take statements out of context and build a straw-xir argument around them. F'rinstance...
I state, "There is no doubt as to two basic sexes. This is biology 101 "
A statement taken out of context, but the current Feinstein driven shitshow in Washington shows that some people cannot understand more than one sentence at a time.
You cite an article from Teen Vogue magazine to destroy it with no effort.

Teen Vogue? Really?

I said nothing about, "...people need to show you their genitalia before they can use the bathroom in their house..."

Ideal solution? Third rest room. Labeling left blank. Or even better, three one-occupancy rest rooms. Hey, women, you like piss on your toilet seats? No?

I don't want to restrict people's actions in public spaces. But, these are supposed to be 'private spaces', if not, then just tear the walls down and pee in public.

up
Voting closed 0

That's what you are doing.

Or perversion, given your obsession with little girls and parts.

up
Voting closed 6

There's never been anything stopping some random guy from going in there, if they really wanted to. And there still wouldn't be. And you could still object to someone taking pictures of your daughter or anyone else in the bathroom regardless of what they're wearing.

Oh, and this has been the law in Massachusetts for 2 years now and nothing like this has ever happened. And it's been the law in other states for decades and nothing like this has ever happened. Perhaps what you should be worried about is if the person in the stall next to you identifies as a Republican?

up
Voting closed 6

...a tv story about a rash of female jogger attacks. One happened in a female rest room, but she got lucky (and good) and punched the guy to escape. I guess he didn't read the sign.
Signs aren't magic. They are a social construct to give people privacy when they are using a public bathroom. Most women want a bit of privacy from men. This is what used to be called 'normal'.

up
Voting closed 2

Oh that's right, it doesn't. It just demonizes an entirely unrelated group of people for the sake of defending against something that doesn't happen. Pervy straight men don't need any disguises to go into a woman's bathroom if they want to, but as we can see from your replies, apparently they need legal coverage so they can continue to be overly obsessed with the genitals of the people going into the woman's bathroom.

up
Voting closed 6

There is no doubt as to two basic sexes. This is biology 101.

Time for Biology 201

up
Voting closed 3

Mankind = Humankind. That's it.

up
Voting closed 6

Roman: Your facts are incorrect. A lower response states the reality better than I could. But the bottom line is that the human race (there is no other) does not neatly break down into male and female. Ask any obstetrician who had delivered thousands of babies.

There is a personality type that needs to rely upon an idealized past that never existed. That sort of individual relies upon spurious arguments, arguments that appeal to emotion, arguments which claim absolutes, all the while the arguments fail against simple facts.

Just as God doesn't make straight lines, God does not neatly create just boys and girls. As with most matters of life (not all grant you) there often are poles that suggest absolute examples, but there are many, many variations between those poles.

Where sexuality is concerned it is ever more complicated. For example there are heterosexuals, homosexuals, the probable majority of bisexuals but also, not fitting on the line of sexual urgency, bona fide asexuals.

Reality is confusingly complicated.

up
Voting closed 4

There are men and there are women, that's it. You have the right to identify however you choose, but I don't think men who 'identify' as women, without going through a sex change, should be allowed to use the women's room. And that doesn't seem to controversial, if you think you're a woman, then do what you need to do to become a women. Then you can use the women's room all you want. NY is going to allow people to place an X on their birth certificate if they want. I think that's ridiculous.

up
Voting closed 6

...are both wrong.

I don't think men who 'identify' as women, without going through a sex change, should be allowed to use the women's room.

Even if we were to accept your absurd terms, how is anyone to determine that they have "gone through a sex change"? Do you want to be the bathroom genitalia inspector?

up
Voting closed 0

But, if you feel like a woman, and have the ability to become a woman, why wouldn't you? We're not talking about fads but how people feel every day in their every day lives.

up
Voting closed 2

I'm a 62-year-old male who has used countless public restrooms. Not once have I seen anyone else's private parts when using the restroom. I asked my wife about her experience with women's public restrooms and she too has never seen anyone's private parts.
Since transgender people have been around for a long time, I'm assuming I've shared a restroom with one at some point. So what is the problem of assuring that they may use the restroom of their choice?

up
Voting closed 2

At least one former Boston City Councilor turned up observing the Proceedings at Boston City Council Weekly Public Meeting. Where are former Boston City Councilors? https://www.reddit.com/r/boston/comments/9h6q57/live_now_streaming_weekl...

up
Voting closed 4

I'm really shocked that Question 3 even made it to the ballot.

Who would sign a petition to do that?

up
Voting closed 5

It's a pretty low bar to get on the ballot, though I also suspect many of the signers were at least to some degree misled about what they were signing.

What I don't understand is how it was permitted to be so confusingly worded. Vote yes to leave everything the same? wtf?

up
Voting closed 0

60,000 raw signatures.

up
Voting closed 5

Massachusetts isn't very liberal. It's liberal in the sense that a LOT OF PEOPLE support "liberal" policies. Like 80-20 in favor of abortion. Settled law.

But when it comes to pushing for new progressive legislation MA is nowhere near actually liberal. MA is very Democratic, they support mostly Democrats and the policies proposed by Democrats. But the Democratic party, globally speaking, is a Center-Right/Right party.

up
Voting closed 6

Barely 50% are saying they'll vote "Yes" in the little amount of polling that's occurred so far...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Question_3_(2018,_Massachusetts)

up
Voting closed 7

See the latest results from a Suffolk/Globe poll: 73 yes, 17 no.

up
Voting closed 4

Commercialized gay culture locales NOT the same as queer venues for example around Cambridge/Somerville and in Waltham!... Queer Resource Center Brandeis https://qrcbrandeis.weebly.com/ The future Cambridge Queer Cultural Center to be modeled after http://queerculturalcenter.org/Pages/MainMenu/About.html

Mainstream gay culture addressed by the Gay Shame Movement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay_Shame

up
Voting closed 2

There are some militant hetros here who are still wrapping their pointed heads around the basic idea of gay people. Don't go confusing them with the nuances of "commercialized gay culture".

up
Voting closed 0

Sounds like a political move to me. I knew there was a reason I didn't vote for Zakim for secretary. Besides being absent for this important vote, he never asked for union endorsements when running for city council. I think he needs a challenger in the next election.

up
Voting closed 5

Assuming the vote was taken on Sept. 19, that was Yom Kippur, the holiest day on the Jewish calendar. If Hank Greenberg and Sandy Koufax can skip the World Series for YK, Josh Zakim can skip a city council meeting.

up
Voting closed 4

...or ANY vote, for that matter. Ayana Pressley showed up for work, even though she's on her way out the door.

Speaking of which, it's interesting that this particular issue came up before Pressley's replacement joins the Council. I do realize the resolution had to be addressed before November, but I wonder how the newly constituted group would have handled it.

[EDITED TO ADD: If this meeting took place on Yom Kippur, my apologies to Mr. Zakim. And shame on the City Council for convening this meeting before sundown! [Though one would think there would be some mechanism for proxy voting, no?]

up
Voting closed 0

Roll Call Votes Data of Public Meetings of Boston City Council can be online sortable by Topic, sortable by Councilor. Data listed only by Date at https://www.cityofboston.gov/cityclerk/rollcall/Default.aspx

Data and Records Management at the Office of Boston City Council President and Boston City Clerks Legislative Support Program are in great need of updating with better technology and better software, page 317 at https://budget.boston.gov/img/pdfs/13-Non-Mayoral-Departments-Cabinet.pdf New, more knowledgeable, more welcoming to civic engagement Staff are needed in the City Council Central Office and Boston City Clerks Offices rather than the corrupted current gatekeeper resistive mentality limiting civic engagement, page 324 at https://budget.boston.gov/img/pdfs/13-Non-Mayoral-Departments-Cabinet.pdf

Budget Hearings a while back weren't held or even listed for a Public Hearing on City Council Budget !

up
Voting closed 3

No roll call votes at the City Council meeting held on September 19, 2018 according to City Council Central Staff Office.

up
Voting closed 3