Bill seeks gender identity guideline
Marjorie Hernandez, Ventura County Star
June 10, 2007

Every week, gay or lesbian teens come to the Ventura County Rainbow Alliance center in Ventura to talk about the bullying and taunting they experience from their peers.

The frustration often takes a toll on many of the young students, Rainbow Alliance Executive Director Jay Smith said.

“It’s happening right here in Ventura County,” Smith said. “It’s still tough to this day to be an openly gay or lesbian youth. We need to recognize that they deal with this every day.”

To protect students against bias and harassment, the state Senate recently passed a bill that would prohibit discrimination in the classroom based on gender identity, sexual orientation or disability.

The California Student Civil Rights Act, or SB 777, would broaden the definition of “protected classes” in the state Education Code to cover all groups protected against discrimination under the state Penal Code, including gays and lesbians.

If passed, SB 777 also would change Education Code references about “handicapped” individuals to people with physical disabilities.

Critics of the bill, however, said its passage would introduce school-sponsored activities and materials that support homosexuality, bisexuality or transsexualism.

Many experience bullying

The bill, approved last month by the Senate on a 23-13 vote, has been referred to a policy committee and is waiting to be reviewed by the Assembly.

Sen. Sheila Kuehl, D-Santa Monica, who wrote the bill, said it would provide nondiscriminatory standards and set clear guidelines for school administrators’ responsibilities to provide a safe learning environment for students who identify themselves as lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender.

According to a California Healthy Kids Survey released last year, about 30 percent of students in grades seven to 11 in California have experienced harassment or bullying based on their actual or perceived race or ethnicity, religion, disability, gender or sexual orientation.

Kuehl said groups who have spoken against SB 777 are misinterpreting the legislation.

“They are trying to raise antagonism toward the gay community, and they generally do it by misrepresenting any legislation that comes along,” said Kuehl. “So far, they have been unsuccessful.”

The Campaign for Children and Families, a nonprofit group based in Sacramento, has taken a stance against the bill. Representatives said it would have an adverse effect on children and expose them to school activities or curricula that positively portray “gay history” and promote alternative lifestyles.

President Randy Thomasson said the bill would change curricula in schools, including instructional materials and school activities.

“The victims here are the millions of children in schools who don’t consider themselves as LGBT,” Thomasson said. “It would teach all aspects of homosexuality to children as young as kindergarten, and all without parental supervision. We are calling on Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to veto this bill.”

‘Protect kids from harm’

Ventura County educators, however, said schools already practice nondiscriminatory policies and SB 777 would not adversely affect the school environment.

“Teachers and educators are generally wired to be very accepting and inclusive not only to students but also to families and the general community,” said Micheline Miglis, Oxnard School District program improvement administrator. “We will continue to support students and families and treat people with respect and dignity.”

Mario Contini, Conejo Valley Unified School District superintendent, agreed. “We need to protect against any form of discrimination,” Contini said. “I think the focus of this bill was to protect kids from harm, and we should do that regardless.”

Change a phrase

Anthony Ramos, general counsel for the Ventura Unified School District, said one interesting facet of the new bill is that it proposes to change a phrase in existing law that says “no teacher shall give instruction that reflects adversely upon persons” because of protected characteristics.

The new bill changes “reflects adversely” to “promotes a discriminatory bias against.”

“That’s the hidden nugget,” Ramos said. “If this passes, it will be interesting to see how that different phrasing will be interpreted. Unless we are provided guidance on how to interpret that change, we won’t know what that really means.” Rainbow Alliance director Smith said any legislation that ensures the safety of all children is a positive step toward tolerance.

“It’s not about special rights, it’s about equal rights,” Smith said. “They should be able to go to school and be themselves and have the same protection as anyone else.”