You know the “Don’t Say Gay” bill, or at least I hope you do, but do you know about the “license to bully” bill and the transphobic bathroom bill?
The license to bully bill, or HB 1153 changes the definition of “harassment, intimidation, and bullying.” It keeps the important parts that include acts that “have the effect of: (1) Physically harming a student or damaging a student’s property; (2) Knowingly placing a student in reasonable fear of physical harm to the student or damage to the student’s property; or (3) Creating a hostile educational environment.”
BUT it changes what the last part means. “’Creating a hostile educational environment’ shall not be construed to include discomfort and unpleasantness that can accompany the expression of a viewpoint or belief that is unpopular, not shared by other students, or not shared by teachers or school officials.”
In other words, if a student tells another student that they are going to Hell because they are gay, this would not be construed as “creating a hostile education environment.” The utter despair that the student may feel was not caused by harassment but rather an “unpopular” belief. And to an extent, other students, teachers, and school officials are discouraged from supporting the gay student, because despite what they may say, the original statement isn’t considered intimidation or bullying.
In addition to changing the definition of “harassment, intimidation, and bullying,” the proposed bill would keep schools from defining “harassment, intimidation, and bullying” in their school policies completely. Also, another addition to the policy would be as follows: “The policy shall not be construed or interpreted to infringe upon the First Amendment rights of students and shall not prohibit their expression of religious, philosophical, or political views; provided, that such expression does not include a threat of physical harm to a student or damage to a student’s property.”
This one part could actually be turned against those with anti-LGBTQ agendas. For instance, if I wanted to tell that student with the anti-gay remark that they’re wrong, that God loves everyone, that God sees no sexual identity or gender expression, and that God wouldn’t send a gay student to Hell, I could do that. Why? Because I was expressing my religion of love, my philosophy of acceptance, and my political view of peace.
Right now there is a section of law that encourages the creation of “harassment, intimidation or bullying prevention task forces, programs, and other initiatives involving school employees, students, administrators, volunteers, parents, guardians, law enforcement, and community representatives.” HOWEVER, this bill would add the following: “Harassment, intimidation, or bullying prevention task forces, programs, and other initiatives formed by school districts, including any curriculum adopted for such purposes, shall not include materials or training that explicitly or implicitly promote a political agenda, make the characteristics of the victim the focus rather than the conduct of the person engaged in harassment, intimidation, or bullying, or teach or suggest that certain beliefs or viewpoints are discriminatory when an act or practice based on such belief or viewpoint is not a discriminatory practice as defined in 4-21-102(4).”
So the task forces cannot center on or educate others about the LGBTQIA community because that might be “promoting a political agenda” or “making the characteristics of the victim the focus.” How would they enforce this? Does that mean that a group centered around a religion is not allowed? Or centered around a race/ ethnic background? This bill is in line with the “don’t say gay” bill in that they are both trying to limit what teachers and school officials can do to support their LGBTQI students.
The transphobic bathroom bill is just as absurd. SB 2282 says: “Except as provided in § 68-15-303, where a restroom or dressing room in a public building is designated for use by members of one particular sex, only members of that particular sex shall be permitted to use that restroom or dressing room. A violation of subsection is a Class C misdemeanor punishable by a to a fine of fifty dollars ($50.00).”
Sex is to be determined by our birth certificates. Of course, this is used in Tennessee, the ONLY state that does not allow its citizens to change the sex on their birth certificate for any reason. But the real question is: how will this be beneficial? State Representative Richard Floyd believes that he is protecting his wife and children from transwomen and cross-dressers.
I have never heard of a case of a transwoman or transman or cross-dresser harming someone in a bathroom or dressing room. Just a little while ago I went into the men’s dressing rooms to help my male friend try on dresses that he had picked out. Is TJMaxx going to check my birth certificate next time I do that? Or will they just go ahead and fine me the $50.00 because I appear to be a female?
Not angered enough? Please go to LGBTQ Nation and read more about this bill and what Rep. Floyd has to say about transgender people: http://www.lgbtqnation.com/2012/01/tennessee-legislature-introduces-transphobic-bathroom-bill/?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=pulsenews
