Tag Archives: Elizabeth Hungerford
A disparate impact analysis of gender’s social liability
A lot of people think gender is really cool. They might celebrate gender “diversity.” Or they might believe that legal protection for “gender identity” and “gender expression” is a fundamental human right because it is a shortcut for deconstructing sex stereotypes–it’s not. But at the very least, most people view gender as neutral. Harmless, really. […]
CHART! “Gender Identity” laws by state: definitions, citations, contexts
I made this excel spreadsheet of “gender identity” anti-discrimination legislation almost a year ago. I have hesitated to share it on the internet because there are surely errors (in the weblinks and citations if nothing else) and because IT SHOULD NOT BE RELIED UPON FOR LEGAL RESEARCH. But still, it’s pretty sweet and helps frame […]
DELAWARE joins MA and CT with “improper purpose” limitation on “gender identity” protections
Delaware joined 16 other US states this week by passing anti-discrimination protections for “gender identity.” The good news is that some reasonable limitations were added by eleventh hour amendment to the legislation. The central problem with “gender identity” legislation is still implicated by the definition itself because it directly overrides sex and is self-referential (gender is gender). Let’s take […]
Advanced topics in “gender identity:” improper purpose, male nudity, and basic fraud prevention
Popular progressive political discourse, fueled by the sloppy legal strategy of LGBT organizations, insists that adding “gender identity” to existing anti-discrimination statutes by legislative amendment is an urgent and necessary legal protection for transgendered and other gender non-conforming people. In fact, however, judicial interpretation of sex discrimination law already prohibits gender-related sex-stereotyping. More than being benignly redundant, […]
Improper purpose, an introduction to the concept.
The language of “gender identity” legislation is fraught with confusion. The complexity of issues swirling around reproductive sex and its connection (or lack thereof) to gender requires extreme attention to terminology and a delicate balancing of interests. Feminist legal critique demands that women’s need for sex-segregated boundaries be both recognized and weighed against the violent enforcement […]
“It is inaccurate to conflate sexual orientation with gender nonconformity, and such semantic sloppiness has no place in the law…”
These are the wise words of Ilona Turner, Legal Director of the Transgender Law Center, from her 2007 law review article entitled Sex Stereotyping Per Se: Transgender Employees and Title VII (95 Cal. L. Rev. 561 (2007)). I must admit, I whole-heartedly agree. Just as it is inaccurate to use “gender identity” as a replacement for sex, homosexuality […]
Sex matters. 