02-20-2019 06:05:04 PM -0800
02-20-2019 04:41:47 PM -0800
02-20-2019 10:44:11 AM -0800
02-19-2019 07:26:59 AM -0800
02-18-2019 09:36:51 AM -0800
It looks like you've previously blocked notifications. If you'd like to receive them, please update your browser permissions.
Desktop Notifications are  | 
Get instant alerts on your desktop.
Turn on desktop notifications?
Remind me later.
PJ Media encourages you to read our updated PRIVACY POLICY and COOKIE POLICY.

Stretch, grab a late afternoon cup of caffeine and get caught up on the most important news of the day with our Coffee Break newsletter. These are the stories that will fill you in on the world that's spinning outside of your office window - at the moment that you get a chance to take a breath.
Sign up now to save time and stay informed!

Massachusetts Transgender Discrimination Ballot Measure Reignites Bathroom Debate

men's bathroom while exiting the Statehouse in Boston

Zack Ford, the LGBTQ editor at the liberal website ThinkProgress.org, warned his progressive readers that “anti-transgender bigots” in Massachusetts had sunk to a new low with new TV ads reminding voters of the impact of laws allowing people who choose their gender identity to also decide which public restroom to use.

Massachusetts voters have a chance in November to undo what Gov. Charlie Baker (R) and the legislature did in 2016. Question 3 asks voters if a law that banned discrimination against transgender people should be overturned. That law allows people to choose the restroom they would like to use, a decision that opponents say opens a door to sexual assault or at the very least an invasion of privacy.

Ten days after the legislation was signed by Gov. Baker, a group called Keep MA Safe began a petition drive, Repeal the Bathroom Law, to place Question 3 on the November ballot. But, paradoxically, a “yes” vote on Question 3 would keep the current law in place. A “no” vote would repeal the public accommodation law.

“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,” reads the Keep Massachusetts Safe website.

“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,” the Keep MA Safe website concludes.

Amira Hasenbush, first author on a peer-reviewed paper and a fellow at UCLA Law’s Williams Institute, told the Daily Hampshire Gazette that while the study did not include the effect of the law passed in 2016, it showed that areas of Massachusetts that have lifted public restroom restrictions have not seen an increase in sex crimes.

Hasenbush said the paper showed fears of sexual attacks as the result of laws prohibiting discrimination against transgender people are "not grounded in fact.”

“We’ve done the research,” Hasenbush said. “That fear doesn’t hold.”

But the TV ads that have enraged Ford and others on his side of the debate dovetail off the fear expressed by Keep MA Safe.

In one ad, a man peers out from behind the door of a bathroom stall as a woman begins unbuttoning her blouse. The announcer warns, “Question 3 means any man who says he is a woman can enter a woman’s locker room, dressing room or bathroom at any time, even convicted sex offenders.”