Consequences of the Bathroom Bill

Once the Public Bathroom Accommodations Bill is signed by Governor Baker and becomes law, will MA schools follow Washington State’s health education standards?

Washington State To Teach Transgenderism To Kindergartners

Peter Hasson,  Reporter, Associate Editor

6:15 PM 06/01/2016

By fall 2017 Washington state public schools will begin teaching gender expression to kindergarteners under newly-approved health education learning standards that designate sexual health a “core idea” of public K-12 education.

While some aspects of sexual health aren’t taught K-12 (HIV prevention begins in fourth grade), one component of sexual health titled “Self-Identity” begins in kindergarten, where students will be expected to “Understand there are many ways to express gender.”

The state’s health education glossary defines gender as “A social construct based on emotional, behavioral, and cultural characteristics attached to a person’s assigned biological sex.” Gender expression, meanwhile, is defined as “The way someone outwardly expresses their gender.”

These definitions differ from the state’s definition of “biological sex”: “Based on chromosomes, hormones, and internal and external anatomy.”

Nathan Olson, a communications manager for the statewide Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI), told The Daily Caller that the glossary “was developed to support classroom instruction.” The new standards were finalized in March but OSPI has yet to issue a press release informing the public of the changes.

As part of an aspect of sexual health titled “Healthy Relationships,” kindergarteners will learn to distinguish between “safe and unwanted touch.” They will also learn to “Recognize people have the right to refuse giving or receiving unwanted touch.” OSPI did not answer a question from TheDC about whether this lesson plan amounts to teaching consent to kindergarteners.

By third grade, students will be expected to “Explain that gender roles can vary considerably” and “Understand [the] importance of treating others with respect regarding gender identity,” as part of the “Self-Identity” component of sexual health.

Gender identity is defined by the state as “Someone’s inner sense of their gender.”

“The standards don’t define ‘gender spectrum.’ But self-identity is a key component,” Olson said when TheDC asked whether learning that gender is a “spectrum” is considered part of learning about “gender identity.” Last month, Fox News’ Todd Starnes described a Virginia county’s lesson plans on gender spectrum as “the idea that there’s no such thing as 100 percent boys or 100 percent girls.”

That lesson plan–which was met with outrage from parents–was designed for middle and high school students.

By fourth grade, Washington students will learn to “Identify how friends and family can influence ideas regarding gender roles, identity, and expression” and define sexual orientation. The state defines “gender roles” as “Social expectations about how people should act, think, or feel based on their assigned biological sex.”

In fifth grade, students will learn to “Describe how media, society, and culture can influence ideas regarding gender roles, identity, and expression.” Under the guidance of school employees, fifth graders will also “Identify trusted adults to ask questions about gender identity and sexual  orientation.” It’s not clear if parents are automatically considered “trusted adults.”

By the end of elementary school (typically around age 11 or 12), students will be expected to “Understand the range of gender roles, identity, and expression across cultures.”

In seventh grade, students will learn to “Distinguish between biological sex, gender identity, gender expression, and sexual orientation.” By eighth grade, students will be expected to “Recognize external influences that shape attitudes about gender identity, gender expression, and sexual orientation.”

This education continues through high school where students will “Evaluate how culture, media, society, and other people influence our perceptions of gender roles, sexuality, relationships, and sexual orientation.”

OSPI denied that the state intends to force a set of beliefs upon its students.

Bathroom Bill Opposed by the WRTC

The Westford Republican Town Committee strongly opposes the passage of House Bill 4253, “An Act Relative to Gender Identity and Nondiscrimination.” This bill modifies a law passed in 2011 affording rights and protections on the basis of male and female to that of gender identity.  The new law recognizes one’s feelings, a legal concept the Attorney General is struggling to define. Gender can now be variable.

The “Bathroom Bill” affects all public spaces, from Westford Academy restrooms, the Westford Regency locker room, Marshall’s fitting rooms to the local Dunkin Donuts. Segregation by gender will no longer be legal. What’s more, law enforcement, school officials and small-business employees will be prohibited from addressing any individual who makes others uncomfortable in conventionally private spaces.

The bill opens a number of negative possibilities that could endanger the frail and offend the rights of the general public. Safety is of paramount importance along with the constitutional rights to privacy and religious freedom. It is an affront to the concept of modesty as practiced by the world’s major religions. The Bathroom Bill intrudes on how private businesses are to conduct commerce, as they deem appropriate.

HB 4253 has not been a historically debated or  a wide spread civil rights issue as it affects less than three tenths of one percent of the population. This overreaching legislation is an overnight cultural shift in thinking and behavior. This rushed, poorly written, ill-thought-out type of legislation omits the most important stakeholders in such a drastic change, the voter. It is wrong for the Massachusetts Legislature to unilaterally tell us how we are to live.

The Westford Republican Town Committee urges all greater Lowell citizens to contact their representative (in Westford contact and oppose HB 4253.

Westford Republican Town Committee members


An Urgent Look at the Transgender “Bathroom Bill”

I decided to take a closer look at the proposed transgender “Bathroom bill” that my friends were talking about and it does not look good. This article shares what I found.

The Massachusetts legislature is considering Bill H4253 which is titled “An Act relative to gender identity and nondiscrimination.” Some refer to it as the “Bathroom bill.” This law would modify our current law passed in 2011 by inserting after the word “sex,” the following words “gender identity.” This proposed amendment reads, “any public accommodation including without limitation any entity that offers the provision of goods, services, or access to the public that lawfully segregates or separates access to such public accommodation or other entity based on a person’s sex shall grant all persons admission to and the full enjoyment of such public accommodation or other entity consistent with the person’s gender identity.” 

Sex refers to the anatomy of an individual’s reproductive system while gender refers to either social roles based on the sex of the person or personal identification of one’s own gender based on an internal awareness (gender identity).  Essentially, this bill will be amended to reflect those who believe themselves to be, or choose to be, a particular gender. In other words, the person has a mental choice of gender versus actual biology. This bill is being thrust upon citizens in the name of “tolerance” against the majority who accept their biological sex and gender.

This bill is very concerning in terms of its impact on safety, privacy, and enforcement issues.

Safety: Given that women and children tend to be more vulnerable to men because of their size and physiology, this bill would put women and children at risk. Consider the potential ramifications of persons with male anatomy and ill intentions entering venues like public bathrooms, locker rooms, showers, dressing rooms, women-only fitness facilities, and other intimate places.  Consider this situation in light of the statistics from the United States Department of Justice: about 20 million (18.0%) in the United States have been raped during their lifetime. Approximately 1.8 million adolescents in the United States have been the victims of sexual assault. With those statistics and the fact that pornography, sex and violence in the media add to the problem, we certainly don’t want to make these cases more prevalent.

Privacy: Up until now, men and women have been able to have their own private spaces based upon their sex. Seeing a man in a private, female-only space such as a locker room or “women-only” gym infringes on a women’s sense of privacy. The same is true for men who prefer a “men-only” space.

Enforcement: It would be difficult for law enforcement, school administrators or any other person charged with protecting the safety or privacy of persons using gender-designated bathrooms, to determine if a person claiming to be transgender is legitimate. There is no evidence-based proof of transgender claims so how is one to distinguish between a voyeur or predator and someone who is gender-confused wanting to use the women’s dressing room?

This Bill passed the House Ways and Means by a 19-4 margin on May 26, 2016. It now moves to the full House of Representatives. The current law is fine as is. Please contact your legislator and oppose HB 4253. Time is of the essence as the vote will be this Wednesday, June 1, 2016.

Kathy Lynch


Defeat of House Bill 4253

House Bill 4253, which be voted upon shortly, at first glance appears innocuous  and right – it seems to further human rights to a previously ignored minority (less than 3 tenths of one percent of the population) by redefining sexual rights for transgenders.  However, by doing so, the result of the Bill opens a set of negative possibilities that could endanger, or offend, the general public, especially children and women, and is already covered by existing legislation that defines a person’s “gender identity”.


By defining and including the wording “gender identity “, a person’s physical condition is replaced by what he or she “thinks” they MIGHT be at the particular time they are ready to use public facilities.  No longer is a male or female, whether born as, or transformed by surgery, restricted to a men’s or women’s room or shower facility, but if the person believes at that moment that he or she is of the opposite sex, they can use a facility that has been designated as a “women’s or men’s room” – Think of the consequences!– men with male genitalia sharing facilities with young girls and women who find such behavior as offensive by their religious and/or moral beliefs or family values; men or women “posing” as the opposite sex to get access to innocent children or adults for the purposes of committing rape or sodomy, and the embarrassment to the general public for witnessing someone of the opposite sex’s genitalia.  Further, the enforcement of the resulting House Bill is unenforceable by law enforcement officers and, in some cases, may be used by violators who Impersonate” themselves as a person of the opposite sex with the purpose of committing sexual crimes


We believe that true transsexuals (those who have physically transformed their sexual parts and mental status) already have the right to use facilities corresponding to their physical identity, however, the whole class of transgenders who are not so defined by their physical make-up, should not be granted the same rights –therefore, we encourage everyone to broadcast this message with the purpose of encouraging subscribers to call their representative and demand the defeat of House Bill 4253.


Colonel Harry I. (USAF-Retired) and Dawn Gillogly

Westford, MA