jump to navigation

Barney Frank warns of “suspicious packages” May 18, 2010

Posted by Paige of Quarrel in two rights make a wrong.
Tags: , , , ,
add a comment

While US Representative Barney Frank (D, Massachusetts 4th) isn’t known as a security hawk, he’s currently warning employers to be on the lookout for “suspicious packages” in our nation’s bathrooms.  Specifically, packages on women.

Frank doesn’t offer any proof that these packages are dangerous.  He doesn’t offer any advice on how they should be found.  He just thinks they’re icky.

Frank’s version of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, as the Christian right has been claiming for years, is fully expected to force men with beards to use the ladies room.  But only if those men have vaginas.  (Vaginae?)  Because we’re sure that won’t cause any problems at all if the guys just explain it.  Every time they use the restroom.  For the rest of their lives.

New men's room signs

Get used to the new men's room signs

More importantly, it will prevent transgender women who have penises from using the women’s restroom or locker room.   No word yet on how it will prevent this, but we expect the bill will include emergency funding to the States to train penis-sniffing dogs.

Instead of using dogs to spot Terminator cyborgs, bathroom owners can finally use them to prevent innocent people from urinating safely.  “Urinating safely” here is obviously code for something sinister, because numerous studies have proven that transgender people are far more dangerous and more likely to rape and molest and generally creep people out than cisgender gays and lesbians, who will be protected by the bill.  The bill is not expected to solve the problem of straight couples doing it in bathroom stalls in every bar in New York on a Saturday night while lines form outside.

Rep.  Frank also wants to make sure employees have a “consistent gender presentation” in order to be able to sue for discrimination.  No one from Frank’s office has responded to our inquiry about whether this clause would ban lawsuits by effeminate gay men, butch lesbians, that guy from Phish, that guy from Smashing Pumpkins, Sir Elton John, the coach from Glee, guys with long hair, women wearing pants, or any one who’s ever been to a pride parade.

At the time of publication, his office also had not replied to questions about why he’s in charge of where people can pee, where he suggests his own constituents who currently have the freedom to pee should pee in the future, why he thinks women need to be protected from penises or, our personal favorite, who died and made him queen.  We will keep you updated on this developing story.


To Barney Frank, RE: ENDA April 21, 2010

Posted by Paige of Quarrel in two rights make a wrong.
Tags: , , ,

If he sells us out on ENDA because of his obsession with trans womens’ penises again,  I’m going to take a dump in box and send it to Barney Frank with a note saying, “I couldn’t use a bathroom thanks to you, so this shit is your responsibility.”

Does that sound too harsh?

US Representative Barney Frank (D, Massachusetts 4th) is selling out the transgender community on the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) again.  He spearheaded the effort in 2007, then backed by Senator Kennedy, and trans activists and bloggers are hearing the exact same language from him as the House prepares to take up the issue again.

It’s been well-documented that, like the Christian right, he’s obsessed with trans women using women’s bathrooms, “penises in showers,” and claims that “If you insist on the right for unrestricted access to bathrooms – we lose.” He’s stated that he’s crafting the language in secrecy.  The only reason to do this so privately is if he’s planning to make huge “concessions” on this point to the right, although it would seem he’s in agreement with the right on this anyway.

Most importantly, since the bill currently under discussion is intended to apply not only in the federal public sector but all the way down to the private sector locally (as long as the employer is not a religious institution and has more than 15 employees)…

Barney Frank’s plan could strip away current protections for his own constituents and others in the 12 states and other localities that already have trans inclusive laws.

Let me say that again, slowly, despite earlier gains on the basis of Title VII legal interpretations and legislative wins in the District of Columbia and California, Colorado, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Vermont and in cities like New York and Philadelphia, Barney Frank’s top-secret negotiations might sell out current trans protections with a new law that gives moderate protections to gays and lesbians but could leave trans people segregated or simply barred from restrooms where they work.  Some of these people are his own constituents.

Barney Frank is bad for trans people.  So, sure, call your representative and demand trans inclusion in the ENDA bill, but also contact Barney Frank and tell him that we won’t forgive so easily this time: (202) 225-5931