The Rainbow Times reports on the chilly reception Gov. Baker got at an LGBT networking event at the Copley Marriott last night when he wouldn't come right out and support a bill banning discrimination against transgender people in public places.
CommonWealth, meanwhile, assures us: Pssst: Baker won’t veto a transgender rights bill.
Neighborhoods:
Topics:
Free tagging:
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!
Ad:
Comments
I too am opposed to it
By BostonDog
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 10:20am
Much like marriage, I'd like the state to get out of the classification game. Regarding bathrooms there should be no indication of gender on any restroom owned by the Commonwealth. Why should it matter how I "identify"? Both genders use the toilet the same way so stop classifying restrooms as being gender specific entirely.
The state should not classify genders. Period.
Public Toilets? Ew.
By BlackKat
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 10:41am
I would like to see unisex restrooms, but single occupant only. If that means even with 4 or 5 such in a row [which still is less than the wall of stalls or urinals] and are getting longer lines, so be it.
Grendel's Den in Harvard
By Robert Paulson
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 11:38am
Grendel's Den in Harvard Square has multiperson unisex bathrooms. It works out just fine.
MassPort
By BostonDog
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 12:50pm
Hanscom Field in Bedford, MA has a unisex, multi-stall bathroom on the first floor which is intended for a large portion of the building. It works fine.
Hint: No one wants to see you pee irrespective of your gender (born or otherwise). And if they do, the little icon on the door isn't going to stop them.
I don't necessarily disagree
By trickycrayon
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 11:55am
But "just pretend it doesn't exist" doesn't solve for the discrimination issues we're seeing.
Baker schmaker
By Ahab
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 10:10am
Both sides are just as loony. Baker is a closeted bigot and pussyfooting. Smells like one term.
Oh Yeah
By BostonDog
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 10:32am
You are aware he has the highest approval rating of any of the 50 governors in this country, right?
You might not like it but Baker is currently a rock-star in Massachusetts. He'll easily win a second term even if he pisses off groups like this. Sadly, there aren't enough people who put LGBT rights or the MBTA as their top concern.
That Only Shows How Disliked All The Other Governors Are
By Elmer
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 10:53am
[sup] Sure, he's more popular than Rick Snyder or Paul LePage, but so is Satan.[/sup]
Yeah, But
By BostonDog
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 12:38pm
Satan isn't planning on running for office in 2018. It's going to be Baker vs. Some Democrat. Unless that dem is Elizabeth Warren or Obama, Baker will win reelection.
No, Satan's busy running for president this year
By GoSoxGo
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 12:53pm
n/t
The Choice Is Often The Devil You Know, Or The Devil You Don't
By Elmer
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 1:20pm
Don't be so sure
By lbb
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 1:47pm
The times, they are a-changin'.
Curses!
By Will LaTulippe
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 10:28am
Damn you, Baker, you've foiled my nefarious plot to get people with lady parts into a men's room stall! Foiled again! (twists handlebar mustache)
Keep your politics out of the john, you RINO (expletive).
Except....
By CCD
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 10:59am
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/wa-man-wo...
I hate it to break it to you, the left is trying to get politics into 'the john' by demanding transgender people have access to any bathroom they'd like. I mean who cares about the right to privacy.
Let's give logic a try
By Will LaTulippe
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 11:16am
Things people with dicks do: Pee standing up, poop sitting down
Things people with vaginas do: Pee sitting down, poop sitting down
Apparatuses found in men's rooms: Device for peeing standing up, device for peeing sitting down, device for pooping sitting down. The latter two are found in locked stalls with walls on all sides.
Apparatuses found in women's rooms: See latter two and explanation above.
People who pee standing up:
1) Have dicks
2) Are thus restricted to the men's room.
People who pee or poop sitting down:
1) Could have either a dick or a vagina
2) Can ostensibly use either restroom, but are limited to the apparatus that is surrounded by walls on all sides.
Riddle me as to where the breach to privacy comes in.
Here...
By CCD
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 11:30am
http://www.dailywire.com/news/330/university-toron...
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/wa-man-wo...
And as far as privacy, entering a bathroom KNOWING that there is not going to be some creep pretending to be a "woman" so he can creep on women, is privacy.
I have been following the
By Patricia
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 11:41am
I have been following the comments and while I try to stay out of this, I agree with you. Toronto already had a problem : http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2015/10/06/u-of-t-bat....
I like Gov. Baker and am tired of any objection being silenced. There has been no discussion, nor will there ever be. Even on this blog you cannot bring up a genuine concern with out being shut down.
The louder people try to drown out any type of discussion, the less they are heard.
I stopped listening a long time ago.
Did you read that article?
By KellyJMF
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 11:50am
The U of T had gender neutral bathrooms in the dorm. They had an issue with someone taking pictures over the shower door so they changed it to offer women-only, men-only, AND gender neutral bathrooms on each floor, so people could choose which they felt most comfortable in.
I work on a hotel-based convention each year and we do the same thing by designating some of the existing bathrooms as gender neutral. So each person can choose the type of facility that works best for them. Chaos has failed to ensue.
Exactly! It didn't work out
By Patricia
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 12:21pm
Exactly! It didn't work out just the way they thought it would, did it?
No one ever said anything about chaos, so I'm not sure where you got that.
Your article does not say what you think it says
By erik g
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 12:54pm
Your article does not say what you think it says.
Also, there's no "discussion" to be had. It's an exact copy of the reaction conservatives had to emerging gay rights twenty years ago, except someone has crossed out "gay" and scribbled "trans" on the playbook in red crayon. It's a transparently political ploy that the GOP trots out whenever it needs to mobilize its voters, and there's exactly as much substance to this "debate" as there was about "gay panic" or DADT. You can wrap it in whatever flowery prose you want, but make no mistake: you're advocating for the abrogation of rights for a small minority of people, and you're doing it out of bigotry. You're on the wrong side of history, and history is not going to be kind to you.
I disagree.
By Patricia
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 2:21pm
I disagree.
I don't support discrimination because of anyone's anything. I also like to look at all sides of an issue and not jump to conclusions. I also refrain from calling people bigots, etc especially when I don't know the person.
If my reasoned stance bothers you, that's your problem. I prefer my 7 yr old daughter to have the right to use a girls only bathroom, that is all. If you have a dick, stay out of that bathroom. Make all the bathrooms you want, label them whatever you want, have a blast.
Why?
By Kaz
Fri, 04/15/2016 - 1:38am
Why do people with dicks have to stay out of the same bathroom as your daughter?
Do you think they're going to use their dick on your daughter?
Do you think your daughter is going to see the dick and you're going to have to explain to her how some people are different?
Do you worry that your daughter will want one of her own?
Forget it, Kaz, it's Chinatown
By erik g
Fri, 04/15/2016 - 8:41am
We've retreated into "Won't someone think of the children?!" territory here; you're not going to talk anyone out of their own ridiculous prejudices. I'll just channel Louis CK on this.
"How am I supposed to explain this to my kids?!"
"I dunno, it's your shitty kid, you fuckin' tell 'em, why is that anyone else's problem? You want to make these guys' lives tough because you don't want to talk to your ugly child for five minutes?"
Creeps come in all stripes
By KellyJMF
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 11:44am
Newsflash--You can never enter a public bathroom KNOWING that it is creep-free no matter whether this law passes or not. But we have laws against the behavior you fear, no matter the gender or presentation of the perpetrator.
Show some class if you want
By anon
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 10:31am
Show some class if you want to be respected, Baker audience. Stop being unreasonable. You would be furious and upset if someone booed you off stage.
Baker's Lack Of Respect For His Audience Triggered The Boos
By Elmer
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 11:02am
[sup] He made the audience furious and upset.[/sup]
Actually he didn't
By Boston_Bloke
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 12:19pm
Baker only upset the first 3 rows of green clad activists who camped out in front of the stage. The rest of the audience was listening and interested in what he had to say.
And, it's unfortunate they
By Patricia
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 12:22pm
And, it's unfortunate they didn't get to hear what they came to hear.
I guess their interests don't count to the first 3 rows of people.
Were you there?
By lbb
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 1:50pm
Do tell us all about your participation.
I am going by the comments
By Patricia
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 2:22pm
I am going by the comments posted, are you?
Did you attend? Please, do tell...
I'm not claiming I know who did what at the meeting
By lbb
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 2:26pm
I'm not claiming I know who did what at the meeting. You are. You're claiming knowledge you don't have, and I called you on it.
Nope... Patricia didn't claim
By Lmo
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 3:22pm
Nope... Patricia didn't claim anything, Boston_bloke did.
I was there. I work in
By Boston_Bloke
Fri, 04/15/2016 - 6:55am
I was there. I work in procurement so I actually found the governor's speech useful. Reps from the National Gay & Lesbian Chamber of Commerce were present and introduced me to the resources they have available. This was a BUSINESS event.
Just because those in front of the camera were booing and making a scene does not mean that the rest of the 1000 people at the event had issues. Yes, most of us are liberal and/or Democrat. It's a room filled with LGBT community. That doesn't mean we don't want to hear from the man who runs the state even if his policies don't align 100% with our own concerns.
Freedom of speech is a two way street. We also have to listen to others, even those with whom we might not agree. Shouting down the governor isn't just immature, it's counterproductive. The governor was going to meet with the crowd after his speech. That was an opportunity for the transgendered community to interact with him. Instead they shouted him out of the room.
YOU show some class! Or maybe some empathy?
By Chuck
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 11:50am
You don't think the LGBT community gets "booed off the stage" by ignoramuses like you every single day of our lives?
It's this very sentiment that's enabled the southern sweep of anti-gay and anti-trans legislation. Basically they're saying, "Oh, so you bitches want and got your gay goddamn marriage? Well fags, now you're getting a whooping for getting out of line."
That's it in a nutshell.
Been there and got my whooping many times and guess what? I'm still here and ain't going no fucking where so suck it, snowflake.
wow
By CCD
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 1:22pm
I don't think anyone is suggesting that ridiculous rhetoric you are spewing.
But'cha ARE, Blanche!
By lbb
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 1:52pm
You, all by yourself, have posted enough "ridiculous rhetoric" in this thread to choke a billy goat. You need to either STFU for a while to cut down on the volume, or STFU about whether said "ridiculous rhetoric" exists.
Really?
By CCD
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 4:06pm
Please reference the derogatory terms or swear words I've used. Also, please reference any blasphemy or telling others to "STFU." I'm sure if we counted the number of posts, you've got me beat. Ain't that pot calling the kettle black...
Oh, I see
By lbb
Fri, 04/15/2016 - 9:13am
So, you get to decide what's derogatory, do you? You are a piece of work. Please stop being so hysterically fearful of nonexistent problems and using your fears to abridge the rights of others.
Never forget
By jaypee
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 10:39am
..shitbag Charlie opened his 2010 campaign making lewd jokes about the "bathroom bill", mocking transgendered people as perverts, and continued to promise a veto even after Tisei came out in support of expanding legal protection for TS people.
http://m.wickedlocal.com/article/20100429/NEWS/304...
Thrilled that my personal safety is finally being taken srsly...
By M
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 11:01am
...but apparently I'm only really at risk of being raped in a public bathroom. Never have I heard so much concern for "think of the women!!!!!"
Unlike you, I'm not thinking
By Patricia
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 12:26pm
Unlike you, I'm not thinking of myself.
I'm thinking of young girls (say, 7 for an example) who may be in a restroom alone.
And, I'm not concerned with trans people posing a threat. I am concerned of the creep posing a threat to that young girl. It doesn't have to be rape - not sure why you jump to that conclusion.
I would like to think my young 7 yr old daughter has the choice to use a girls only restroom where a male entering would be a huge red flag to anyone and certainly not allowed.
Okay, so
By trickycrayon
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 12:37pm
what's your definition of "a male"? Are you saying that a visibly transgender woman should alarm your 7-year-old? What about a cis-passing transman, who looks like a man (see: Michael Hughes) but was assigned female at birth?
We're concerned about creeps NOW. If creeps would do things like this because of a law protecting trans people, creeps would do these things NOW.
Without the protection of bills like these, though, people like Michael Hughes can be forced into using women's rooms- not because they're creeps, but because they're trans- and will potentially end up in terrible legal situations because they'll end up being PERCEIVED as creep-men-in-women's restrooms when in fact they're doing what the law mandates.
Get the problem yet?
Nope.
By Patricia
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 12:51pm
Nope.
Call me old fashioned but a male to me has a penis.
Young males have already used this to creep on unsuspecting women, see above examples. Your worried about the Michael Hughes of the world, who are the minority. I am concerned about the young girls and hope they are given a chance to use a girls only restroom.
We'll never agree on this, but to each their own.
Okay!!!
By trickycrayon
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 1:13pm
a) you're old fashioned!
b) NOT "TO EACH THEIR OWN" WHEN MY RIGHTS ARE IN QUESTION.
c) you are still misinterpreting the article you posted above to suit your own opinion so nope bye
A man can no more declare
By CCD
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 1:27pm
A man can no more declare himself to be a woman than a white man can declare himself to be black; science has taught us that both of those identities are written in our DNA. People have the right to privacy and should not be forced to share a bathroom with a person of the opposite sex.
While we can change how we act, we can’t change our biological identity; and public policy that ignores that truth can only lead to disaster.
"Science"?
By lbb
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 1:56pm
So speaks another science-ignorant person. You really don't have the least idea what you're talking about, do you? You think everyone has exactly one X chromosome and one X or Y chromosome and that's what determines gender and that's it?
Please, your ignorance is really embarrassing to watch. Please stop.
"If objectively male persons
By CCD
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 4:18pm
"If objectively male persons who are uncomfortable with their male bodies are permitted in women’s private areas, why shouldn’t all men be permitted in there? What difference does it make to women if the man in the stall next to them likes his anatomy or not?
Once objectively male persons are allowed in women’s restrooms, on what basis would any man be prohibited from entering a women’s restroom? Wouldn’t prohibiting men from accessing women’s restrooms because they’re men constitute discrimination based on sex, and wouldn’t prohibiting them from accessing women’s restrooms because they’re not gender-dysphoric constitute discrimination based on “gender identity”?"
Sigh...
By boo_urns
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 2:58pm
Here ya go: biological sex != gender
are you my dad
By trickycrayon
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 4:08pm
because you sound like my dad.
I just rolled my eyeballs so
By M
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 1:35pm
I just rolled my eyeballs so hard I sprained them. Between that and my day job, which involves responding to sexual assault of really vulnerable people (fucking irritating work, really, bc of how much it cuts into my time to spend thinking about myself), I'm going to be unable to respond to your comment. Have a great day continuing to be holier than thou (and obviously me!)!!
will do, thanks!
By Patricia
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 2:28pm
will do,
thanks!
Hey, Patricia?
By lbb
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 1:54pm
Hey, Patricia?
...there are lesbians in the bathroom.
LESBIANS IN THE BATHROOM! LESBIANS IN THE BATHROOM! Grab up the girl children, clutch your pearls and RUN!!!
You don't understand my
By Patricia
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 2:27pm
You don't understand my comments. You are obviously getting too ahead of yourself.
I have no issues with trans, gay, straight, anything YOU want to label.
I have a problem with a young girl alone in a restroom and a creep using this law as an excuse to enter the bathroom, not for the intention of going to the bathroom, but for not nice reasons.
Calm down and read what I've written.
No
By SwirlyGrrl
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 3:02pm
I understand them just fine. I also understand them to be the result of exceptionally tightly held ignorance and lack of a concept of statistical risk.
You also have a very weak grasp of genetics versus phenotypic reality when it comes to gender.
Hint: gender isn't even binary in nature.
Consider reading something about what you are talking about before offering us your ignorance as argument.
Fixed that for you
By KellyJMF
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 5:28pm
Creeps don't care about the law. So the only person being blocked from the restroom with your daughter is the law-abiding, trans-gendered M to F who would like to pee without getting harassed/assaulted in the men's room. And she is someone's daughter too. Might even be seven years old.
Oh, I don't understand?
By lbb
Fri, 04/15/2016 - 9:21am
Oh, I don't understand? Then break it down for me. You're worried about "a creep". What's "a creep"? You're only worried about men who want to rape girls, who somehow can't manage to do so anywhere other than a bathroom, and who are currently prevented from doing so by that magical sign that says "WOMEN"? Do you also worry that your daughter will be trampled to death by circus ponies on her way to school?
The solution seems to be simple. Tell your daughter to not use a public restroom. Period. If you're so worried, then your daughter is the one who should deal with the consequences of your fears. You don't get to deny a whole class of people access to a public accommodation because of your irrational fears. You go right ahead and teach your daughter to fear things that aren't real, and hope like hell that one day she won't be blindsided by a real problem (like a nice clean-cut heterosexual college boy date rapist) that she was ignoring because her optics were trained on your imaginary fears.
It's really quite laughable when an irrational person tells others to calm down.
A note to the fetishists out there
By adamg
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 12:31pm
It's amazing how detailed some anons are getting with their descriptions of what they imagine trans people do in restrooms. If you're one of them, save your time - your note is never going to be published here. Yeah, I get to see them (well, the first 128 characters, at least, and that's usually enough to convince me not to read the whole thing), but I've gotten to the point in my life where I just do not care and I find hitting a checkbox to mark your note for deletion oddly soothing.
Thanks, Adam.
By trickycrayon
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 12:38pm
.
Yes indeed
By lbb
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 1:57pm
Thanks from me too. There's enough vomit-inducing crap from non-anon bigots as it is.
You know who really can't behave themselves in restrooms?
By SwirlyGrrl
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 3:00pm
Politicians.
That's who.
Maybe we should ban all male US and state senators from men's restrooms. There's a lot more evidence that they can't behave themselves than there is evidence of problems with transgender people.
Have to disagree
By Kaz
Fri, 04/15/2016 - 12:25pm
As part of a youth leadership conference, I got to hear a speech from a member of Congress from the floor of the US House of Representatives. The week I was there, I got a stomach bug and wasn't feeling well. While we're waiting for the speech, I asked to use a restroom and they led me to a men's room that said "Members of Congress only" on the door. I was allowed to go inside. It was nice (not crazy nice). While I was in there trying to compose myself, what I can only assume was a member of Congress came in and used the stall next to me. He didn't rape me.
So, it's not all politicians anyways.
The Governor may be genuinely concerned
By bulgingbuick
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 4:25pm
about trans poop. There must be some family think tank report demonstrating that trans poop is different than non trans poop. Once he gets his poop straight or trans or whatever he'll decide.
So,
By Jo
Thu, 04/14/2016 - 8:06pm
Probably the only Republican governor in the US who would give up an evening to speak at an LGBT event - and this is the thanks he gets? Disgusting. I am ashamed of my fellow gay people. It doesn't always have to be a fight; You don't always have to be a victim.
The vitriol there last night - and in the juvenile, obscenity-laced comments even here - are troubling for those of us in the gay community who know how laws get passed and are capable of thinking like rational adults.
You have no right
By lbb
Fri, 04/15/2016 - 9:23am
It's not your place to "be ashamed" on behalf of others acting as they see fit. You're not their mother, you didn't raise them, and it's really none of your business. Don't be so arrogant., and don't presume to speak for the gay community.
You Can't Be Serious
By anon
Fri, 04/15/2016 - 11:01am
You have no right to tell someone else how he or she may or may not feel. I felt proud of Massachusetts' SJC after the Goodridge decision, even though I wasn't a judge. I imagine many people in North Carolina feel ashamed of their state legislature today, even though they aren't lawmakers. Are you going to tell them they have no right to feel that way?
Yes, in fact, I am
By lbb
Fri, 04/15/2016 - 1:48pm
Yes, in fact, I am going to tell you that you have no place feeling "ashamed" for the actions of others over whom you have no authority or control. It's not your place. If they were your elected officials, sure, you could feel ashamed at the state of your government and what you haven't done to fix it. If it was your child, you can feel ashamed at your failure to bring that child up properly. But if you don't have any part of it, then sorry, neither pride nor shame are appropriate, and saying you feel "ashamed" of the action of autonomous adults is simply paternalistic tut-tutting on your part.
Wrong
By Boston_Bloke
Sat, 04/16/2016 - 9:02am
Freedom of speech goes both ways. It also requires LISTENING. Even to those we don't agree with. Especially when it's an elected office holder who was hear to listen to us.
Noisy activists don't represent the LGBT community either. Just because they make the most noise doesn't mean everyone supported them. I was standing in the middle of the ball room that night. I saw how the activists commandeered prime real estate in front of the stage. In back of them were hundreds of other people listening to the governor. Maybe they agreed with him, maybe they didn't. They had a right to hear what he had to say and to speak to him after the event too.
I disagree Jo
By anon
Fri, 04/15/2016 - 10:04am
It doesnt matter that Charlie may be the only Republican governor to speak at an LGBT event. What does matter is what he actually said and didn't say, and what he does and does not do.
Charlie so far has won over many Massachusetts voters with his smile, but he like all Republicans does not really believe in the rights of LGBTQ people, as evidenced by his evasive stance on the bill in question. But he thinks he can continue to fool people with his winning smile. So far it's worked.
Really?So he's only as good as this bill?
By Jo
Fri, 04/15/2016 - 5:39pm
So this bill negates his stance on gay marriage and on having gays in his employ?
He didn't say he was against the bill, either.
Perhaps the typical liberal "Let's stick it to the man" mindset just doesn't apply here.
And why does the First Amendment only seem to apply to YOUR freedom of speech? It's a 2-way street.
You evidently don't comprehend the first amendment
By anon
Sat, 04/16/2016 - 9:35am
First , there is nothing about a loud protest at a politician's speech that is counter to the first amendment. Please actually read and understand the first amendment.
Baker has been against the concept of bathroom rights for transsexuals since at least 2010 when he derisively called it the "bathroom bill" and dismissed the issue as an issue that he claimed voters didn't care about. His gay running mate Tisei disagreed with him, but Baker boldly stood for discrimination against transgender people. If he was a real leader, he would be leading by telling us how he feels. Instead, he wont talk about it, like a coward. He also stated he doesn't comment on pending legislation, which is a boldfaced lie. He's commented on plenty of pending legislation.
I am not as impressed as you are that Baker supports gay marriage and employment of gays. He should, he does, great. That's not the question at hand.
Pages
Add comment