Frequently Asked Questions
What is the “Bathroom Bill?”
The official and misleading name of the Bathroom Bill is “An Act relative to gender identity and nondiscrimination” and has been designated HB4253. This bill would add the vague category of “gender identity” to the state ban on discrimination in public accommodations. However, “gender identity” is defined in Massachusetts law as “a gender-related identity, appearance or behavior, whether or not that gender-related identity, appearance or behavior is different from that traditionally associated with the person’s physiology or assigned sex at birth.”
In other words, the bill relegates a person’s sex to their state-of-mind or a mental choice, instead of basing it in biological reality. Those advocating for this bill do not believe that men are necessarily men and women are necessarily women. Rather, they believe that biology is an inconvenient fact when it comes to matters of identifying one’s sex.
This bill would endanger the privacy and safety of women and children in public bathrooms, locker rooms, dressing rooms, and other intimate places (such as common showers), opening them to whomever wants to be there at any given time, and also to sexual predators who claim “confusion” about their gender as a cover for their evil intentions. Since the law doesn’t require a protected person to have a legitimate problem with gender confusion, there is no way to distinguish between those people that this bill is designed to help and those who will undoubtedly abuse its existence to fulfill any number of deviant desires.
No law should make whole segments of the population feel unsafe and exploit their privacy and security.
How would this bill affect bathrooms?
When the Transgender Rights Bill was passed in 2011, it specifically did not include bath rooms, locker rooms and other “lawfully sex-segregated facilities.” This bill would undue that common sense precaution and force all businesses and ‘public accommodations’ to allow men who ‘identify’ as women into the ladies’ room, and vice versa. For example, A Boston man, who was arrested for refusing to leave the bathroom in a women’s shelter, was recently awarded $20,000 of taxpayer money after he sued the city under a local ordinance that made this bathroom policy the law in Boston. If HB4253 is passed, it would allow for incidents like this to spread throughout the entire Commonwealth!
What about my membership to a women-only fitness facility?
If this bill becomes law, all fitness clubs catering to only women would have to admit men who claim to feel like women. Their belief that they are female need not be legitimate, supported by a doctor, or even something for which they’ve had surgery or hormone treatments. All one would need to do to abuse this law is decide, in their own mind, that they are the opposite sex for an hour, day, year, or whatever amount of time they deem appropriate. One does not need to make a permanent choice and is free to move back and forth between being a woman or man as much or often as they like. Men would have access not only to the fitness equipment, but the locker rooms, showers, steam rooms, and other intimate areas as well. Comfort, safety, and security (both physical and emotional) would no longer be available to women who want to workout at a fitness club without men, nor to men or women who expect privacy in their locker room or shower room in any co-ed health club or recreational facility.
What would be the affect on public schools?