Tuesday, May 10, 2016

The State of North Carolina "Bathroom Law": To be or Not to be For Transgender Rights

The Bathroom conundrum
the bathroom question?
Hamlet’s “To be or not to be” better explains the predicament of the State of North Carolina’s administration with respect to the “Bathroom Law”. By way of context building, the Bathroom Law is enacted in March 23, 2016 as “the Public Facilities Privacy and Security Act” or as the long title suggests, “An Act to Provide for Single-sex Multiple Occupancy Bathroom and Changing Facilities in Schools and Public Agencies and to Create Statewide Consistency in Regulation of Employment and Public Accommodations”. The long title provides a clue as to the content of the law: it regulates the use of public bathrooms, to say the least.
However, the most controversial aspect of the law, which is the gist of this post, is that it mandates one to use the bathroom section that relates to the gender on his/her birth certificate. In other words, notwithstanding the gender one identifies himself/herself with, you are mandated to identify with the gender on your birth certificate for the purposes of having some “convenience” in public when an occasion calls for it. As a result of this particular provision, the uproar against the law has cited it, in the most undignified manner, as “anti-LGBT”.





Advertisement

The critical thing about the State of North Carolina is that no one is permitted to change the gender on his birth certificate unless such person had undergone s^x reassignment surgery. Therefore, unless and until one has changed the gender on his/her birth certificate, which is only possible after a s^x reassignment surgery, can there be a legal permission to use the bathroom of the gender he/she identifies with where the gender differs from the one originally in his/her birth certificate.
the gender question
The Bathroom Law: The Gender Question!
With the context in summarised perspective, we will now turn to the criticisms for and against the law. It is pertinent to point out here that the backlash had been more intense than any favourable disposition towards the Act. At the height, the FEDs have threatened to withdraw N.C’s education funding if the State fails to repeal the law, citing that the Bathroom Law violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act “which bars discrimination on the basis of s^x in workplace, and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 which on the other hand bars discrimination in education on the basis of s^x.[1] In consequence, there have been a couple of lawsuits between the State of North Carolina and the Department of Justice. They have each filed a suit against each other, arguing on the legality or otherwise of the “infamous” Bathroom Law.
Since the matter is before a court of competent jurisdiction, it will be subjudice to make further comment in substance on the matter. However, we may need to point out the contradicting opinions. One twitter user, Bakari, referred to as being “much more bigotry than [bathroom bill]”. He concluded by adding “All that discrimination packed in 5 pgs”. On the other hand, Megan seems to be in support of the Act, citing that “we can’t let transgender use women’s bathroom, [as this will] def.[initely] open doors up to predators.”
Closet
For whose safety?
Each side has a valid argument from the summarised context above: protecting the “vulnerable” from possible assault and protecting the rights of the transgender community. What do you think of the Bathroom Law? Is the problem with the law or the entire gamut of North Carolina’s law regarding transgender? Or are the critiques not objective enough to appreciate the potential risk of letting into a delicate place like bathroom, those who have not really undergone the necessary surgery to reassign their hormonal makeup to reflect their identified gender?






[1] The Washington Times, Feds Threaten to Pull Education Funding from N.C over Transgender Bathroom Bill, online: May 4, 2016 <washingtontimes.com> 

No comments: