Women Going Topless; Men Using Women’s Bathhouses; Welcome to Massachusetts

topless-women-2Only in Massachusetts could the people pass an amendment to the Massachusetts Constitution that said judges have to retire at age 70 and judges decide they do not have to retire at age 70. The problem with having these people on the public payroll is they want to stay on the public payroll as long as they possibly can so by saying retire at 70 does not mean retire at 70 they can continue to live off the public teat until they croak.

The sad thing about this is that the Legislature goes along with it. It funds payments for judges who are over 70 years of age. You would think that by 70 all judges would retire. It would allow for younger people to become judges; people that will have to live in the future with the decisions they make.

Things are so bad that the attorney general has to sue some district attorneys who refuse to follow the law concerning public records. What are they hiding? How are people supposed to follow the law when the people who are supposed to enforce it are violating it?

Drip, drip, drip it seems everywhere you look those in public positions of trust feel no responsibility to the public. That is how you end up with inane laws that prohibit discrimination against weirdos and fails to protect traditional values as Massachusetts gender protection law does. Yes, there are weird people in our society who we should not be forced to employ or associate with or be offended by but in Massachusetts you can be sued if you do.

Massachusetts gender protection law passed this year reads: “Whoever makes any distinction, discrimination or restriction on account of . . . gender identity, . . . in any place of public accommodation,  . . . shall be punished by a fine of not more than twenty-five hundred dollars or by imprisonment for not more than one year, or both, and shall be liable to any person aggrieved thereby for such damages . . . This right is recognized and declared to be a civil right.” 

A place of public accommodation, . . .  within the meaning hereof shall be defined as and shall be deemed to include any place, whether licensed or unlicensed, which is open to and accepts or solicits the patronage of the general public.” (my emphasis)

The MCAD speaks about gender identity: “Some individuals who fit this definition of transgender do not identify themselves as such, and identify simply as men and women, consistent with their gender identity. Some individuals transition from living and working as one gender to another. . . . The statutory definition of gender identity does not require the individual to have gender affirming surgery or intend to undergo surgery, nor does it require evidence of past medical care or treatment. . . .  Gender identity refers to a person’s internal sense of their own gender and its expression(my emphasis)

It goes on to say: The law also protects persons whose gender identity is consistent with their assigned sex at birth, but who do not adopt or express traditional gender roles, stereotypes or cultural norms. . . . For example, discrimination against a person designated as female at birth and who identifies as a woman but who does not act, dress, or groom herself in a manner consistent with feminine stereotypes, is unlawful discrimination based on sex and gender identity.”

Yet the definition of public accommodation includes “a rest room, barber shop, beauty parlor, bathhouse, seashore facilities or swimming pool, except such rest room, bathhouse or seashore facility as may be segregated on the basis of sex;”

Now answer me this: how can you segregate rest rooms, bathhouses, or seashore facilities on the basis of sex when there is no way of determining a person’s sex. Under Massachusetts law a person’s sex is that which the person says it is regardless of external appearances.

Our rule makers seem out of sorts with what many of us have come to accept which are “traditional gender roles, stereotypes or cultural norms.” If we look askance at the 300 pound five foot five bald guy in a mini skirt and spike heels we are well on our way to interfering with his civil rights especially if we say anything to him.

The MCAD tells us it is unlawful to discriminate against a woman who does not “dress . . . herself in a manner consistent with feminine stereotypes.”

How does that square with this statement:   “In most parts of the U.S., it is illegal for women to go topless in public. Women may legally do so only in six states, and specific cities and beaches. If a woman goes topless in public anywhere else in America, it is considered indecent exposure. In Massachusetts, the maximum penalty for indecent exposure is up to six months in jail and a $200 fine.”

Now if a Suzie wants to dress as a man on a hot day and go topless we cannot discriminate against her even if she identifies as a woman. If Suzie goes topless and identifies as a man we also cannot discriminate against him.

The MCAD noted: “Some individuals transition from living and working as one gender to another.”  So if Annie who identifies as a woman at work decides not to wear a top one day and goes to work she can be arrested when she gets there; but going and coming from work without a top she cannot be since outside of work she identifies as a man and men can go topless.

It will get worse.

9 thoughts on “Women Going Topless; Men Using Women’s Bathhouses; Welcome to Massachusetts

  1. American culture is evolving so quickly the law can’t keep pace. When a grown man dressed in a girl scout uniform can stand on a busy street corner pushing cookies, I’ll know we’re close to social perfection. But, if that guy is a poser, and, is simply using the uniform as sales gimmick, he’d be ripping-off the Girl Scouts of America, and, should be punished to the full extant of the law.
    Who cares what people look like, as long, as, they aren’t hurting anyone.

  2. Wow, I never thought of that according to the new “gender” law in Massachusetts women can go topless in public, there is a silver lining to everything.

  3. K … you are a riot,. Matt … Why get exercised over PC mania bs like this … Life is too short. Look at those lost souls in … The Ghost Ship … Oakland/ Vermin infested tinderbox / cavernously large / Industrial Warehouse, no windows on deathtrapping vast second floor dance space / WTF

    A single staircase of jerry built pallets? ” Artist “detritus ” randomly heaped and readily fueling that Inferno. There was no sprinkler system and inoperable extinguishers were artfully placed about this Free Spirit enclave of impending hell. This is PC run amok and if it makes your blood boil then you know what happened to 36 souls and counting.

    That … Crowd … is not my type of Crowd. It is Lefty Mainline territory. I am sure many loathed President Elect Trump and giddily surged to the radical Demo Berkley beat … lionizing the Democratic greedheads whose PC … Permissivness … allowed that Californian Season In Hell to take material infernal form on earrh for those poor kids.

    I can violently disagree with people politically if they want to push that way. But I always concede that people get passionate …however stupid their politics are. .. about politics. Did the Cali Municipal mandarins ever hear of the COCONUT GROVE here in The Bean? Do Firecodes find sanctuary in Sanctuary Cities. You get my point.

    Those largely young people got played by PC shits for whom so called Progressive social views mask their venality, their avarice, their lack of a truly deep sense of Care For The Other. DISGRACEFUL .

  4. Matt,

    You may have some of the only people in Massachusetts who voted for President-Elect Trump right here on your very own blog.

    I’m one of them.

  5. So, my questions are:

    1. Who are the legislators that voted for this wonderful piece of legislation?

    2. Do they truly represent the wishes of the citizens of Massachusetts?

    3. Which governor signed this wonderful piece of legislation?

    4. Will these legislators and governor be re-elected so that they can generate more of the same with the consent of the governed?

  6. Matt:
    Elbows Wychulis wants to give you a big shout out
    from Flying Pond Variety home of the Green Mountain coffee
    Dispensr.

    We want to thank you for providing a therapeutic millieu
    for the political down and out in a warm/fuzzy/safe environment
    where people can express their stand up. Comedy of the Divine.

    Sometime in the mid 1960″s I landed a job at O’Duggan Stained
    Glass Studios on St Botolph street.
    The studio designed and built stained glass windows for churches.

    Befriended by the in house artist I was invited to accompany
    him to a life drawing class complete with nude female models.
    I eventually hired my own models at $3.00 hour and found
    myself invited by one model to visit a nudist camp in Southern
    Mass in a town called Freetown.

    I dutifully went.

    ugh!

  7. All of these folks who want rule by majority will be in for a big surprise someday when the fickle voters shift left or right.

    How about a vote in Massachusetts about abortion? What will they do when/if the voters — a majority, of course — vote to make abortion illegal? They won the ‘popular vote,’ after all.

    Or the majority vote to make same-gender marriage illegal?

    The solution to non-gender toilets might be to make them single occupant only. Like airplanes.

    Personally, I’d love to see another Barbara Anderson bring to the ballot a state law limiting professor’s salaries at all state-run universities to $150,000 per annum and with minimum teaching duties required. Socialism in action can be problematic for the advocates.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *