MSU is looking at a proposal that would add gender identity to its anti-discrimination policy. The change will be discussed at today's Faculty Council meeting.
Considering that the proposed change would do nothing but protect the rights of a certain segment of MSU's population, there is no reason why the university shouldn't adopt it.
The proposal must be approved by both the Faculty and Academic councils, then it will go on for decision by the MSU Board of Trustees.
As it stands, MSU is one of five remaining Big Ten schools that does not list gender identity as being protected against gender discrimination. MSU finds itself trailing behind its fellow Big Ten schools in this key decision.
That MSU already lists gender identity in its anti-harassment policy is a good sign, but in order to take a firm stance against all forms of discrimination, MSU needs to take this crucial step to ensure equality.
At any rate, it would be a positive boost for the university's image, particularly following MSU's relative lack of action following the passage of Proposal 2. By taking gender identity into consideration in its anti-discrimination policy, MSU would affirm to those who may be skeptical that it is a university that it is indeed dedicated to equal rights.
Furthermore, certain offices like the Lesbian, Bisexual, Gay, Transgender Resource Center cannot apply for funding from private organizations and foundations that expect gender identity to be present in an anti-discrimination policy.
By not including gender identify, the university is needlessly depriving offices of funding. Admittedly, this is not an intentional or malicious slight, but it nevertheless exists and directly affects certain funding.
Naturally, there are concerns about how changing the anti-discrimination policy to include gender identity would affect certain aspects of the university, such as restrooms and dorm assignments. In truth, the proposed change to the policy would not likely affect any of these issues.
But if it did, the university would need to sit down and find a way to adapt the school to the policy. It should not simply raise these issues and weigh them against the proposed change. Whatever changes that would have to be made —if any — likely would be negligible in the face of protecting the rights of a segment of the staff and student population.
Speaking of staff, an adoption of the proposed change would go far to ensure the job security of transgender staff members and provide a welcoming potential workplace for transgender job applicants.
The fact of the matter is that in 2004, the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in Smith v. City of Salem, Ohio, that gender identity discrimination falls under the heading of sex discrimination and is prohibited by the 14th Amendment.
Having MSU assume the same stance against transgender discrimination would do nothing but improve the image of the university in the eyes of the public and make it a more welcoming school and workplace.
