The Board of Trustees of Michigan State University at their meeting on December 5, 2003 added the term 'gender identity' to the harassment clause of the university's anti-discrimination policy (ADP). The policy now reads:
Some history
I may have started the ball rolling on this when I asked in a letter to Human Relations on April 4, 1995: "Is the language of the MSU anti-discrimination policy and sexual harassment policy considered to include transgender people?"
I wanted to know because I was in the processing of coming out as transgender myself, i.e., transitioning from one public gender role to another. (What is often incorrectly and sensationally called a sex-change.)
Eventually a lot of other folks became interested in the question, as the Gay/Lesbian community broadened to GLB and eventually GLBT. It took until 1998 simply to get a written response from MSU that, although it refused to answer the question, at least acknowledged that the question existed.
After a while some serious efforts began in an attempt to broaden the ADP to include gender identity. The process was slow, no doubt in part because the issue and the language involved is confusing to many people. I was no longer working on campus by then, and had little to do with that effort, other than to speak to a committee about my experiences as an employee who transitioned while working at MSU.
In November 2002 the proposed change was finally presented, then tabled for a year, supposedly to further refine the language.
What MSU has done
MSU has now added gender identity to the harassment clause of their anti-discrimination policy, but did not include gender identity in the discrimination clause.
President McPherson's stated reason for doing so (as reported in the Lansing State Journal, December 6, 2003, "MSU approves policy banning gender identity harassment") is that harassment is easier to define than discrimination. This may be true, but how is that justification for not also including gender identity in the discrimination clause? Every other term mentioned in the harassment clause is included in the discrimination clause; only gender identity is left out. What kind of message does that send to people?
Could this not be seen as implying that it is okay to discriminate against people on the basis of gender identity in situations that would cause, "limitation of employment opportunity, access to university residential facilities, or participation in educational, athletic, social, cultural, or other university activities?" (Gee, I don't have any trouble understanding what that means.)
President McPherson goes on to say that gender identity does not have a clear legal definition. Oh? Does race actually have a clear definition? Or gender? Or sexual orientation?
Is this change better than nothing?
Let's see. A transsexual person like me now cannot be harassed at MSU, but we can still be fired, denied employment, denied advancement, denied access to university residential facilities, or participation in educational, athletic, social, cultural, or other university activities and generally denied equal treatment. This strikes me as being on the same level as saying, "treat your slaves kindly." It doesn't address the basic problem, it just gives the masters better press.
Okay, that's really harsh. 99% of the folks who work at MSU are super, wonderful people and I miss them dearly. But at MSU, as everywhere, there are a few people who let their learned or taught prejudices get in the way of liberty, equality and justice for all. When those people end up in positions of power, other people need to be protected.
During the hiring process, or an evaluation for a raise or promotion, one is not supposed to ask about or consider personal information that is irrelevant to the performance of the job. Even if one suspects that a decision was influenced by a factor such as gender, sexual orientation or gender identity, proving so is almost impossible. The real value of the ADP is prescriptive, in the message it sends to people about how they should behave and expect other people to behave.
I was never harassed because I am transsexual, but that may have been because I was an outspoken activist for queer liberation; I could call for backup. Not everyone is so lucky, or is able to follow such a path. And I still had to be careful.
While I worked at MSU I once decided to not pursue a particular new position because changing jobs would have meant loosing the security afforded by the seniority I had built up in my current union-protected position. Would I have felt any safer about trying for that other job if this change to the ADP had been made then? No, it would have made no practical difference to me.
If this change is a step on the way to full equality, then it's a good thing. But everyone needs to understand that this is but a first, small step, not a solution.
This is important to lots of people
Gender identity isn't only about the few people who 'change sex.' This is also about the large number of intersexed people, gay men, lesbian women, bisexual men and women, transgender people and everyone whose body or behavior doesn't match the current social stereotype for men or women.
That's why this is going so slowly. If this were only about the handful of transsexual people at MSU, it would not be such a big deal. (I never knew of more than 10 total among the 50,000 students, staff and faculty, though I'm sure there were a few more.)
When freedom of gender expression is finally protected, I don't think it's likely that most men on campus will heave a sigh of relief and wear a dress to work the next day. But one or two might. And a few brave women on staff might point out that the ultra-femme dress code in their office is at odds with their gender identity and show up wearing comfortable clothes.
The students, of course, will be the ones to show everyone else what this really means. When I look back at how far we've come in fifty years, in spite of all the conservative resistance, I am astounded, and hopeful for the future.
So come on, MSU, do the right thing. Hey, I might look for a job on campus again, or send my kids to school there!
That's what I think here, East of Lansing, in December 2003.
2014 update: In 2007 the MSU Board of Trustees finally approved adding gender identity to the antidiscrimination policy. The Faculty Handbook now has this footnote:
"For the purposes of this Policy, the reference to 'gender identity' shall be interpreted to include protection against gender stereotyping based on a person's gender expression. In other words, gender stereotyping is impermissible discrimination or harassment based on a failure to conform to stereotypical gender norms."