Press Releases and Op-Eds

                                               NOW IN THE NEWS

 Panel Analyzes Palin’s Candidacy:
Policy experts argue over Palin’s experience but agree she needed more exposure

CRIMSON/ KANYINSOLA Z AIBANA

Buy this photo

Alex Castellanos, Vicky Steinberg, Tim McCarthy, and Tammy Mosher (left to right) discuss the credentials of Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin in Boylston Hall’s Fong Auditorium yesterday night.

Women running for office in Mass. don't have many role models

By Kyle Cheney

STATE HOUSE NEWS SERVICE

www.statehousenews.com

 

 STATE HOUSE, BOSTON, OCT. 21, 2008.....Several veteran women have left or are planning to leave the Massachusetts Legislature at the end of this session, prompting concerns among advocates for women about the impending loss of veteran leadership.

 

 With 61 women running for 58 seats in the House and Senate, women could theoretically pick up as many as nine new members in the 200-person Legislature next session, according to a News Service review of the ballot. Of the 61 women running, 47 are incumbents and 14 are challengers.

 

 But several races appear to be long-shot challenges against incumbents, and political observers on both sides of the aisle worry that with the slew of veteran women set to depart Beacon Hill, including several in leadership positions, there may be a slightly larger but greener crop of women policymakers in January.

 

The effect, some observers say, may be difficult to detect policy-wise, but in terms of mentorship, new women in the Legislature may have fewer

colleagues to turn to on gender-specific issues. In addition, veteran women lawmakers have proven to be among the most outspoken on issues of domestic violence and gender equality.

 

 Advocates for women say women lawmakers bring the experiences of mothers,daughters and females in the workplace to the Legislature's discourse, which they say are invaluable to any policy discussion.

 

Women hold 49 seats in the Legislature, just under a quarter of all districts, including four held by Republicans – all five Senate Republican are male. Among incumbents, Reps. Patricia Walrath, Mary Rogeness, and Sen. Pamela Resor, representing a combined 57 years of legislative experience, are departing. Former Rep. Rachel Kaprielian, a member of speaker SalvatoreDiMasi's leadership team, recently accepted a post as Gov. Deval Patrick's registrar of motor vehicles.

 

 Walrath played a key role in passage of the 2006 health care reform law and Resor helmed the Environment Committee this session, which environmental activists hailed as a banner one.

 

 In a separate category is Sen. Dianne Wilkerson, ousted by Democrat Sonia Chang-Diaz in the September primary, but waging an uphill sticker campaign to retain the seat she's held for 15 years.

 

 Massachusetts ranks 20th in the country for women in the State Legislature, according to NOW, and only 11 communities have elected female mayors, despite the fact that women make up 52 percent of the state's population.

 

 The wave of departures among influential women in the Legislature is the first since women broke significant electoral ground in Massachusetts, with the elevation of Sen. Therese Murray to Senate president, and the elections of Attorney General Martha Coakley and U.S. Rep. Niki Tsongas. Their elections followed Shannon O'Brien's election as state treasurer and Jane> Swift election as lieutenant governor, with Swift moving up to acting governor when Paul Cellucci departed for a federal post.

 

 The loss of such long-serving women could affect public debate, according to analysts.

 

 "Legislative bodies give significant weight to seniority," said former Massachusetts Gov. Jane Swift, in a phone interview. "You will lose those voices in leadership positions. Those are often some of the louder voices in our public discourse. The value of having women's voices in the political discourse is that they bring valuable positions to the table."

 

 Swift, a Republican and four-term state senator from 1991-1998, said Murray's rise to power speaks to the importance of retaining veteran women in the Legislature.

 

 "We need long-serving women in these positions and new women coming in so that we get more Terry Murrays," she said. "We'll have to wait and see when leadership positions are made next session how many women are still there and whether any of them move into high-profile leadership positions.

 

A spokesman for the Senate president said the 40-member body would miss Resor, co-chair of the Committee on the Environment, Natural Resources and Agriculture, but would also regret the loss of seasoned men such as Sens. Robert Antonioni, Edward Augustus and Robert Creedon.

 

 "All this experience, including Senator Resor's great work on environmentalissues, can't be replaced overnight," said the spokesman, David Falcone. "But we're confident our new members, including some very smart and talented women, along with the core and experience that remains in the Senate, will keep this body strong. Women will continue to play a major role, and we think the future for women in the Legislature is very bright."

 

 Swift said long-serving women were particularly valuable to younger, less experienced women as mentors. She said she would often turn to Democratic Sen. Pat McGovern, chair of the Ways and Means Committee when Swift took office in 1991, for advice, despite their policy differences.

 

 "I really credit her with being ... someone who would take the time to take my calls, give me advice, not on policy so much but on how to succeed in office," she said.

 

 Rep. Ruth Balser, an outspoken advocate for women's issues, described herself as someone who "looks forward to a time when there is a relatively equal representation of women, really in all fields, including politics."

 

 She credited the presidential campaign of U.S. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, of which she was an ardent supporter, for inspiring women around the country.

 

 "I think the fact that this year, more women are running, it means that women are feeling that they can enter the world of politics," she said, adding that women have made up about a quarter of the state Legislature for several sessions.

 

 Balser said women generally have the same concerns as men on policy, but that "when women have entered into politics, they have led the way on issues of women's rights and equal rights generally."

 

 "That's not to say that men don't participate at all," she said. "It's just a matter of making sure that every woman has the opportunity to fully participate in our society."

 

 Swift said the influence of this year's presidential campaign on women in politics, including the role played by Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin, will become clearer over time.

> 

 "I would hope that women would be inspired by now having a woman of both parties as major credible candidates for higher offices," she said, but cautioned that "both of these women have had fairly tough experiences and particularly have been subjected to some of the differentiations in coverage, most specifically, attention to personal life and appearance, as opposed to policy positions. My fear is that this type of over-the-top scrutiny of the personal is something women are just not going to want to embrace."

 

For her part, Swift said she was comfortable "dipping my toe in" as a surrogate for Republican presidential candidate John McCain, but had no plans to rejoin public life when the race is over in two weeks.

 

 "I don't really miss it," she said. "If I want to, I can get involved in a campaign here." With a laugh, the 43-year-old said, "I'm too old for this business."

 

 She said she plans to spend more time horseback riding and taking care of her children.

 

"My husband and I have added a bunch of new horses to the farm," she said. "I'm hoping I actually get more than one ride every three weeks."

 

 Rep. Rogeness, the Legislature's longest-serving, highest-ranking Republican, said she views the departure of several women veterans as "just an ordinary transition."

 

"I feel confident that the reins will be picked up by other women to come," he said, noting that her grandmother had served as a Missouri lawmaker.

 

 Still, those women who do come along face barriers that their male counterparts do not, she said.

 

"There's still an old boys network," she said. "It helps women join that group if we can talk football and listen to profanity, fit in with the power structure. People still apologize when they swear in my presence."

 

 Rogeness said lawmaker can learn a lot from the emergence of Gov. Palin onto the political scene.

 

 "I've been impressed with what seems to be the more prominent role of women in public life in Alaska," she said. "I think that should make us Easterners pause. It's the frontier states and really from their beginnings, it was Wyoming that sent the first woman to Congress. To have the governor of Alaska as a woman elected with no family ties to office is again something that hasn't happened here."

 

Asked about the rise of Senate President Murray and Attorney General Coakley, Rogeness conceded that they had risen to power on their own merit but said western states had still been ahead of the curve.

 

 Rogeness said it was critical for women to maintain a presence in politics because "there were some issues" – domestic violence, she said – "that weren't addressed until women were there."

 

 She said that "in the old days" police officers responding to calls of domestic violence would defer to husbands who said that the women brought it upon themselves. "I think it took women in positions of authority to bring about an absolute change in the way that was addressed," she said. "There are some issues that weren't addressed until women were part of the crowd."

 

 Advocates for women are disappointed to see several of their longest-serving supporters depart, but are hopeful that their replacements will rise to similar levels of leadership.

 

 "When women run for office, they are bringing their skills and passion to the job, as well as their experiences as mothers and daughters, women in the workplace and at home," said Victoria Steinberg, chair of the Massachusetts National Organization for Women PAC, in an email. "We should strive for diversity in the State House, as we do in all other facets of private and public life.

 

 "Although we are sorry to see some of our veteran legislators leave the Legislature this session, we stand to gain many wonderful Senators and Representatives who will be leaders on the issues most affecting women in the Commonwealth. Among the exciting new faces we hope to see in the Legislature next year are Sara Orozco, candidate for Senate in the Norfolk, Bristol, and Middlesex District, Kate Hogan in the Third Middlesex District, and Danielle Gregoire in the Fourth Middlesex."

 

 -END-10/21/2008

 * * * *

 

Slurs carry same weight as actions:

Quincy police union head displays lack of understanding

  * * * *

Jane Doe and Mass. NOW tackle the bathroom argument

Ethan Jacobs, Feb 28, 2008

http://www.baywindows.com/index.php?ch=news&sc=glbt&sc2=news&sc3=&id=70907

The main argument advanced by the Coalition for Marriage and Family against House Bill 1722 is that it would put the safety of women and children at risk by allowing access to women’s bathrooms and locker rooms by assailants claiming to be transgender. But two state organizations that are on the front lines of protecting women’s safety, the domestic violence and sexual assault coalition Jane Doe, Inc., and the Massachusetts chapter of the National Organization for Women (NOW), argue that such claims are simply fear-mongering. The two organizations released the following statement to lawmakers to try to put to rest any question that the transgender rights bill would threaten women and children:

As organizations dedicated to the rights and safety of women throughout the Commonwealth, Jane Doe, Inc. and Mass. NOW support HB 1722, "An Act Relative to Gender-Based Discrimination and Hate Crimes." That bill would amend the Commonwealth’s hate crimes and key non-discrimination statutes to be explicitly inclusive of transgender people by adding "gender identity or expression" as a protected characteristic therein. It is our understanding that many legislators recently received correspondence from the Coalition for Marriage and Family (CMF), raising concerns about the bill which are both misleading and unfounded. We are writing to correct any misunderstanding that CMF may have created.

The purpose of HB 1722 is to protect transgender people and other gender non-conforming individuals from violence and discrimination. It does not alter individuals’ privacy nor expectations of safety in restrooms. CMF’s claim that this bill will "threaten bathroom and locker room safety" for women is a deliberate scare tactic. An individual who enters a women’s bathroom to harass or attack women would emphatically not be protected by this law. Moreover, thirteen other states, the District of Columbia, as well as cities such as Boston, Cambridge, and Northampton already enjoy the protections of similar legislation and have experienced no consequential interference in privacy rights. Many transgender women and men use the bathroom that is consistent with their gender identity and gender expression, and are no more a threat to bathroom safety and privacy than are other individuals.

As you know, violence against women in our society is a very real issue, and this bill is intended to curb the violence regularly experienced by those whose gender identity or gender expression does not conform to others’ expectations, not create false assertions about women’s safety. For example, on June 2, 2007, J. Nickola, a 22-year-old transgender woman, was brutally attacked and beaten by three men on a public street in downtown Lowell, where she is a resident. The Lowell Sun newspaper reported that Nickola was:

"...repeatedly hit in the head and face, even after she was knocked to the ground. Her attackers continued to shout slurs against her and told her, "We don’t want your kind in this neighborhood." After the attack, Nickola made her way to the police substation where she was met by a Lowell police officer who observed Nickola’s injuries, which included a partially severed lip."

Incidents such as this illustrate the violence experienced by some transgender women and demonstrate the crucial need for the passage of H.B. 1722. For CMF to deliberately create an unfounded fear about women’s safety, while simultaneously ignoring the serious threats to safety experienced by many transgender and gender non-conforming people in the Commonwealth, is disgraceful. We urge you to see this claim for what it is -- a deliberate scare tactic -- and to vote in favor of HB 1722 in order to bring safety and security to all women of the Commonwealth.

---

Advocates, opponents of trans rights bill to have their say on Beacon Hill

Ethan Jacobs, Feb 28, 2008

http://www.baywindows.com/index.php?ch=news&sc=glbt&sc2=news&sc3=&id=70904

Brace yourselves. If opponents of transgender rights have their way, the discussion at a March 4 hearing on the transgender rights bill, House Bill 1722, will be derailed in favor of dredging up age-old arguments about who gets to use which bathroom. The landmark hearing will take place before the Joint Committee on the Judiciary and will mark the first time that any committee of the state legislature has heard testimony exclusively related to trans rights. The bathroom argument - essentially, that women will be harassed by men in the ladies room, an argument that was successfully employed to torpedo the Equal Rights Amendment - is an old one.

Already the anti-gay Coalition for Marriage and Family has sent an action alert to its members, warning them of the alleged dangers posed by the bill to bathroom safety. The alert called on supporters to call legislators and parrot that same argument. Meanwhile, on the fringier end of the anti-LGBT movement Amy Contrada of the group MassResistance has been slowly releasing pieces of what she purports to be a 75-page report warning against "the coming nightmare of H.B. 1722." (see"Contrada warns of trans apocalypse.")

But the advocates who drafted the bill and the lawmakers who are pushing for it say the arguments of groups like the Coalition and MassResistance are a red herring, distracting from the bill’s true purpose: to extend the state’s non-discrimination and hate crimes protections to a population that desperately needs them. In the run-up to the hearing the Massachusetts Transgender Political Coalition (MTPC) and its allies are mobilizing members of the transgender community and their supporters to testify to the discrimination the trans community faces and the impact that passing H.B. 1722 would have on addressing it.

H.B. 1722: The breakdown
Opponents of the bill have accused it of doing some outlandish things. Contrada, for instance, alleges that it would force hotels to host BDSM conferences against their will. But Laura Langley, one of the drafters of the legislation and chair of the Massachusetts Lesbian and Gay Bar Association’s committee on transgender inclusion, gave Bay Windows a breakdown on what the language of the bill actually does. H.B. 1722 will add "gender identity and expression" to the state’s hate crimes laws. It will also add protections based on gender identity and expression to state non-discrimination laws covering education, employment, housing, credit, and public accommodations. The bill requires the inclusion of "people of diverse gender identities or expressions" on the advisory boards of the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination (MCAD), the state’s lead civil rights agency. Finally, the bill expands the name and mission of the Massachusetts Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth to include transgender and bisexual youth.

The legislation defines the terms "gender identity and expression" to mean, "a gender-related identity, appearance, expression, or behavior of an individual, regardless of the individual’s assigned sex at birth."

Langley said the bill’s language intentionally casts a wide net, covering anyone who may be discriminated against because of either their gender identity or the way they express their gender.

"As with any non-discrimination statute the term that’s put in really encompasses everyone. ... By drafting it as gender identity or expression we’re including all people, whether their gender identities and expressions are stereotypically gender conforming or gender non-conforming," said Langley.

Jennifer Levi, an attorney for Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders (GLAD) and another of the drafters of the legislation, said the language was designed to ensure that the bill would protect the wide range of members of the transgender community.

"It is intended to protect transsexual people. It is intended to protect transgender individuals who don’t take medical steps to align their gender identity with their physical expression of their gender," said Levi.
She said the bill would also protect non-transgender-identified people who do not conform to society’s gender norms, including many gay and lesbian people.

"It’s not new language. It exists in a number of states that have passed trans-inclusive laws," said Levi. Currently thirteen other states and the District of Columbia have banned discrimination based on gender identity or expression, as have the cities of Boston, Cambridge and Northampton.

According to a report by the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force on transgender-inclusive non-discrimination laws, the scope of those laws varies state by state. Like H.B. 1722, the laws passed in Iowa, Maine, Minnesota, New Jersey, Oregon, Washington and the District of Columbia all include protections around employment, public accommodations, housing, and education. But some of those laws go even further than the proposed Massachusetts legislation. In an interview with Bay Windows last month, MTPC steering committee chair Holly Ryan singled out the New Jersey law as the gold standard of transgender-related legislation, noting that the law contained strong provisions that addressed bullying of transgender students in schools and outlawed the use of the so-called transgender panic defense in criminal trials. "We consider that the best law," said Ryan.

On the other end of the spectrum, many of the states that have passed transgender-inclusive non-discrimination laws have not provided all the protections proposed in H.B. 1722. In Hawaii advocates pressed in 2005 for a non-discrimination bill, but Gov. Linda Lingle vetoed it. In her veto statement Lingle described the bill’s definition of gender identity or expression as "objectionable because it contains no limiting terms or interpretational guidelines," and contended it would likely lead to "controversy and unwarranted lawsuits." That bill’s definition of gender identity and expression was similar but somewhat broader than the definition in H.B. 1722, encompassing, "a person’s actual or perceived gender, as well as a person’s gender identity, gender-related self-image, gender-related appearance, or gender-related expression, regardless of whether that gender identity, gender-related self-image, gender-related appearance, or gender-related expression is different from that traditionally associated with the person’s sex at birth."

Advocates came back in 2006 and passed a much more limited bill, focused only on public accommodations. The bill passed into law without the governor’s signature. And even without the passage of non-discrimination legislation around employment, the state’s Civil Rights Commission already interprets the state’s prohibition on sex discrimination in the workplace as providing some protection to transgender people. MCAD has issued similar rulings in Massachusetts, but advocates say legislation is needed to ensure clarity and consistency in enforcing non-discrimination protections.

Opponents conjure terror in the toilet
In its January action alert, the Coalition for Marriage and Family, which led the charge against same-sex marriage in Massachusetts in its previous incarnation as VoteOnMarriage.org, claimed that passing H.B. 1722 would threaten the safety of women and children. The alert said the bill "threatens bathroom and locker room safety" by "creating the potential for a wave of access by those claiming to be transgender into gender-specific areas like public bathrooms." The alert urged supporters to contact the legislature and make that same argument.

That same month MFI released a statement explaining its opposition to H.B. 1722 using the same rationale, saying, "Women and children have a right to feel safe in their person when they access public rest rooms, locker rooms and bath houses at parks, recreational areas and other venues. This legislation potentially compromises that safety by, among other things, blurring the distinction of who may enter a ’women’s room.’"

Gunner Scott, chair of MTPC, said the claim that H.B. 1722 would put women and children at risk for harm is unfounded.

"Clearly this law is not going to allow anyone to harass someone in a bathroom. If someone harasses someone in a bathroom they still have to face criminal charges," said Scott. He said transgender people themselves often face threats to their safety when using public bathrooms and other facilities and this law is meant to help protect them.

To neutralize the Coalition’s argument MTPC has secured support from some high-profile allies. Jane Doe, Inc., the state’s coalition of organizations working against sexual assault and domestic violence, and the Massachusetts chapter of the National Organization for Women (NOW) released a joint statement to lawmakers announcing their support for H.B. 1722 and arguing that the legislation poses no danger to women. The statement accuses the Coalition of using scare tactics to try to derail transgender rights legislation. (See "Jane Doe and Mass. NOW tackle the bathroom argument.")

"For [the Coalition] to deliberately create an unfounded fear about women’s safety, while simultaneously ignoring the serious threats to safety experienced by many transgender and gender non-conforming people in the Commonwealth, is disgraceful," reads the statement, in part.

Levi said beyond safety the objections by the Coalition also seem to be rooted in the discomfort people may feel sharing bathroom and locker room facilities with transgender people.

"Discomfort has often been the reason why people oppose non-discrimination laws. ... It’s never been a justification for not prohibiting discrimination," said Levi.

Langley said that the law would not threaten the establishment of separate bathrooms or locker room facilities for men and women, or the establishment of men-only or women-only gyms. But under H.B. 1722 those facilities would have to open their doors to anyone who identifies as and lives as the gender that they serve. A transgender person who identifies as a particular gender would be entitled to use bathroom, locker room and other single-sex facilities for that gender, regardless of whether or not they have had surgery or are taking hormones.

"It would be an incredible invasion of privacy to say we require that we check people’s hormone levels or their genitals before they enter a bathroom," said Langley.

Rep. Carl Sciortino (D-Somerville), one of the bill’s two lead sponsors, said in his conversations with other lawmakers they have not been swayed by the bathroom argument, particularly once they learn that the bill will not lessen the criminal penalties for harassment and assault in restrooms.

"Some of our opponents have put out what I would say are red herring issues, and legislators are smarter than that," said Sciortino. "The bill adds to the protection of all citizens and it doesn’t protect anyone from engaging in criminal behavior. ... Once we make that point to our colleagues, to other legislators, they understand that, and this really is a red herring issue."

---

Garrity: Thirty-five years in the women's movement

Cheryl Garrity, Jan 22, 2008

http://www.metrowestdailynews.com/opinions/x415746570

1973 was not solely the year women gained control of their bodies.

Billy Jean King publicly beat Bobby Riggs, scoring an enormous victory for female athletes and encouraging young women to pursue sports with equal funding under Title IX. The first battered women's shelters opened in the U.S. as women continued to support each other while working to change the laws that sanctioned violence against women.

Women were finally gaining entrance to medical schools, law schools, and the construction trades. Women were given opportunities that had been denied them for hundreds of years by pushing open the doors previously sealed shut. The landmark 1973 decision recognizing a woman's constitutional right to abortion, Roe v. Wade, and its progeny reflect the course of women's rights in the last 35 years and our struggle for equality.

Opportunities were not handed to women - nor can we trust they will continue to be available to women. Whether reproductive health, economic opportunities, or educational pursuits, women continually need to organize, maintain a strong grassroots effort and pursue equality by bringing lawsuits, advocating for legislative change, and educating the public.

Change takes tremendous time and effort, often requiring a monumental shift of public opinion on the role of women in society and their abilities. It often feels that we take two steps forward only to take one step back due to the backlash of those who do not want women to be equal or to have opportunities.

Almost immediately following Roe, laws were passed denying some women their reproductive rights. Funding was denied low income women and women working in the military or government, young women were denied access, and rural women were forced to wait. As if the legal restrictions were not sufficient, anti-choice zealots terrorized women entering clinics, killed abortion providers, and continued to erect obstacles for women seeking access. By 2003, the first federal ban on an abortion procedure was signed by George Bush surrounded by a group of smiling men.

Just as we have continued to fight for our reproductive freedom, we have also had to continue to fight for our economic freedoms. While progress has been made, we have had to remain vigilant to ensure that women are even considered for government appointments, that anti-discrimination laws remain effective, and that female athletes are funded equally. We have had to fight severe restrictions on public support for low income women and their families when anti-welfare reform laws swept the country.

While our work appears incrementally slow at times, when given the time to reflect, it is clear that public opinion has tremendously changed over the past 35 years.

In 2007, we have a viable woman candidate for President leading in the public opinion polls. And while Hillary Clinton deserves praise in her own right, she was given this opportunity through the work of millions of women in the last three decades and the support of thousands of more women today. Across generations, women will continue to pursue equality in all spheres of our lives. We will not go back!

Cheryl Garrity was president of the Massachusetts Chapter of the National Organization for Women (Mass NOW) from 1995 to 1999. She is a practicing attorney in Burlington, MA.

---

The Selling and Selling Out of Women

Victoria Steinberg, Jan 20, 2008

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/letters/articles/
2008/01/20/the_selling_and_selling_out_of_women/

To the Editor:

There is so much one can say about prostitution. It is a vulnerable and dangerous way of life for women, sometimes leading to physical violence and even death. It disproportionately draws in women who are downtrodden - drug-addicted, poor, or desperate. It holds a mirror up to our society, where many women cannot obtain or sustain jobs with decent wages, and instead choose to sell their bodies to the highest bidder.

According to the National Sexual Violence Resource Center, most prostitutes have been victimized at some point in their lives by sexual violence.

"Arresting activity"discuss any of this. Instead, it painted a picture of gullible women chased by police officers. The law-enforcement officials you spotlight seem utterly unapologetic about arresting the people who sell sex while letting the purchasers, who may be just as guilty of engaging in a crime, off the hook. Would Woburn detective Bob Rufo, who feels that "it's embarrassing enough" for the men buying sex, consider letting the prostitute walk in exchange for information about the men who are violating M.G.L. 272, Section 53A?

Whether one agrees with the current state of prostitution laws, surely it is beyond debate that our law enforcement is charged with equally enforcing the law.

VICTORIA STEINBERG
Copresident
Massachusetts chapter National Organization for Women
Boston

---

Offensive Transgender Article

Victoria Steinberg, Gunner Scott, Jan 19, 2008.

http://www.metrowestdailynews.com/opinion/x1605807035

To the Editor:

Your article, "'Very Feminine' Man Snared in Prostitution Ring," (Jan. 14) offended the transgender community - and all of us who support that community - from the title to the last word.

A transgender person is someone whose gender identity or expression differs from the sex he or she was assigned at birth. The facts you reported in your story suggest that the correct pronoun to use for DeMoura is "she."

If you are unsure, you should ask her. To that request for a very basic recognition of the right to self-identify, we would add our opinion that despite her alleged crime, your article needlessly and shamelessly sensationalized DeMoura's arrest.

Many newspapers and media services around the country, including the Associated Press, the New York Times and the Washington Post, have adopted guidelines to ensure respectful and accurate reporting about transgender individuals. We suggest that you do the same. Here are a few places to start: www.glaad.org/media/guide/transfocus.php or apstylebook.com.

We hope that you will publish this letter to expose your readers to another perspective on the reporting of issues related to transgender people. More importantly, we ask that you issue a correction to your article and commit to adopting guidelines for future articles in order to assure that your reporting provides inoffensive, accurate facts to your readership.

Lastly, we hope that your publication plans to cover with equal zeal the positive and encouraging steps toward equality that the trans community is taking, through its work on antidiscrimination and hate crimes legislation. We'll keep our eyes out.

GUNNER SCOTT, director, Mass. Transgender Political Coalition

VICKY STEINBERG, co-president, Mass. National Organization for Women

---

Photos

---

2005 Clothes Line Project Exhibit	2005 Clothes Line Project Exhibit
Mass. NOW Activists at a rally in Nashville, TN during the 2005 National NOW Conference	Mass. NOW Executive Board at the 2005 State Conference with Legislator of the Year Representative Elizabeth Malia.
Mass. NOW Activists at a rally in Nashville, TN during the 2005 National NOW Conference	Mass. NOW and Boston NOW gathering.