Disabilityqueer: Federal Disability Rights Protection for Transgender People

K. Barry
{"title":"Disabilityqueer: Federal Disability Rights Protection for Transgender People","authors":"K. Barry","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2084351","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Americans with Disabilities Act does not protect everyone. It notably excludes people with Gender Identity Disorder (GID), an impairment involving the misalignment between one’s anatomy and gender identity. Many would say this is as it should be — gender nonconforming people are not impaired and so they should not be covered by disability law. But this argument misapprehends the reason that GID was excluded from the ADA in the first place. GID was excluded from the ADA because, in 1989, a small handful of senators believed that gender nonconformity — like pedophilia, pyromania, and kleptomania — was morally harmful to the community. In the eleventh hour of a marathon floor debate, and in the absence of an organized transgender lobby, the ADA’s sponsors and disability rights advocates reluctantly agreed to sacrifice GID and nine other mental impairments in exchange for passage in the Senate. The fact that Congress went out of its way to exclude GID, along with nine mental impairments that involve some harm to oneself or others, sends a strong symbolic message: people with GID have no civil rights worthy of respect. The ADA is a moral code, and people with GID are its moral castaways. In 2008, when Congress decided to expand the ADA’s definition of “disability” to protect more people, things should have been different for people with GID. Sadly, they were not. Instead of removing the GID exclusion once and for all, Congress enshrined its moral opposition to people with GID by preserving the exclusion intact. The ADA’s message to people with GID, and to the transgender community more broadly, is now clearer than ever: nearly twenty years after the passage of the ADA, people with GID are still despicable and even dangerous, and therefore undeserving of legal protection. The ADA’s moral code remains. In order to achieve true equality, transgender advocacy must rebut the moral case against transgender people. The ADA should play a prominent role in this project because the ADA’s GID exclusion “is” the moral case against transgender people. The ADA should be righted once more through passage of a modest bill, the “ADA Inclusion Act,” which removes GID from the ADA’s list of excluded impairments.","PeriodicalId":364528,"journal":{"name":"Yale Human Rights and Development Journal","volume":"38 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-02-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"12","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Yale Human Rights and Development Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2084351","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

Abstract

The Americans with Disabilities Act does not protect everyone. It notably excludes people with Gender Identity Disorder (GID), an impairment involving the misalignment between one’s anatomy and gender identity. Many would say this is as it should be — gender nonconforming people are not impaired and so they should not be covered by disability law. But this argument misapprehends the reason that GID was excluded from the ADA in the first place. GID was excluded from the ADA because, in 1989, a small handful of senators believed that gender nonconformity — like pedophilia, pyromania, and kleptomania — was morally harmful to the community. In the eleventh hour of a marathon floor debate, and in the absence of an organized transgender lobby, the ADA’s sponsors and disability rights advocates reluctantly agreed to sacrifice GID and nine other mental impairments in exchange for passage in the Senate. The fact that Congress went out of its way to exclude GID, along with nine mental impairments that involve some harm to oneself or others, sends a strong symbolic message: people with GID have no civil rights worthy of respect. The ADA is a moral code, and people with GID are its moral castaways. In 2008, when Congress decided to expand the ADA’s definition of “disability” to protect more people, things should have been different for people with GID. Sadly, they were not. Instead of removing the GID exclusion once and for all, Congress enshrined its moral opposition to people with GID by preserving the exclusion intact. The ADA’s message to people with GID, and to the transgender community more broadly, is now clearer than ever: nearly twenty years after the passage of the ADA, people with GID are still despicable and even dangerous, and therefore undeserving of legal protection. The ADA’s moral code remains. In order to achieve true equality, transgender advocacy must rebut the moral case against transgender people. The ADA should play a prominent role in this project because the ADA’s GID exclusion “is” the moral case against transgender people. The ADA should be righted once more through passage of a modest bill, the “ADA Inclusion Act,” which removes GID from the ADA’s list of excluded impairments.
残障酷儿:跨性别者的联邦残障权利保护
《美国残疾人法案》并不能保护所有人。值得注意的是,它排除了患有性别认同障碍(GID)的人,这是一种身体结构与性别认同不一致的缺陷。许多人会说这是理所当然的——性别不一致的人没有受到损害,所以他们不应该受到残疾法的保护。但这一论点误解了最初《美国残疾人法》将性别歧视排除在外的原因。性别认知障碍症被排除在《美国残疾人法》之外,因为在1989年,少数参议员认为性别不一致——就像恋童癖、纵火癖和盗窃癖——在道德上对社区有害。在马拉松式辩论进行到最后一个小时的时候,在缺乏有组织的跨性别游说团体的情况下,《美国残疾人法》的发起人和残疾人权利倡导者勉强同意牺牲性别认知障碍症和其他九种精神障碍,以换取参议院的通过。国会不顾一切地将认知障碍症和九种涉及对自己或他人造成伤害的精神障碍排除在外,这一事实发出了一个强烈的象征性信息:认知障碍症患者没有值得尊重的公民权利。《美国残疾人法》是一种道德准则,患有性别认知障碍症的人是它的道德落难者。2008年,当国会决定扩大《美国残疾人法》对“残疾”的定义以保护更多人时,对于认知障碍症患者来说,情况本应有所不同。遗憾的是,事实并非如此。国会没有一劳永逸地取消性别认知障碍症的排除,而是通过保持排除的完整性,将其对性别认知障碍症患者的道德反对奉为神圣。《性别认知障碍法案》向性别认知障碍患者和更广泛的跨性别群体传递的信息,现在比以往任何时候都更加清晰:在《性别认知障碍法案》通过近20年后,性别认知障碍患者仍然是卑鄙的,甚至是危险的,因此不应该得到法律保护。《美国残疾人法》的道德准则依然存在。为了实现真正的平等,跨性别倡导者必须反驳针对跨性别者的道德案例。《美国残疾人法》应该在这个项目中发挥突出作用,因为《美国残疾人法》对性别认知障碍的排除“是”针对跨性别者的道德案例。《美国残疾人法》应该通过一项温和的法案——《美国残疾人法包容法案》(ADA Inclusion Act)——再次得到纠正,该法案将性别认知障碍症从《美国残疾人法》排除在外的残疾名单中删除。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信