The U.S. chapter of the Women’s Human Rights Campaign (WHRC USA) opposes H. R. 3684, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (the infrastructure bill).
WHRC USA is the United States chapter of the international WHRC organization. We are a group of volunteer women from across the country focused on protecting women’s sex-based rights. Our volunteers are women from every walk of life: academics, writers, organizers, health practitioners, and activists. We are forming a broad, cross-partisan coalition of women across the nation who have had enough and are rising up to protect their rights, dignity, privacy, and safety. WHRC USA is driven by the Declaration on Women’s Sex Based Rights, a document created by the founders of WHRC to maintain language protecting women and girls on the basis of sex rather than “gender” or “gender identity.”
The infrastructure bill is a 2700-page piece of legislation that contains two provisions to which WHRC USA objects:
- Section 60307 reads: “No individual in the United States may, on the basis of actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, age, or disability, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity that is funded in whole or in part with funds made available to carry out this title.
- The definitions section of the bill states that “gender identity” means what it means in 18 U.S.C. § 249(c). This refers to the U.S. federal law regarding hate crimes, which states that “gender identity” means “actual or perceived gender-related characteristics.” These terms are not defined further under the law.
WHRC USA is in alignment with the objectives of protecting people against discrimination on the bases of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, and sexual orientation. We have an obligation, however, to take a firm stance against the inclusion of so-called “gender identity” as a legally-protected category. Any protection of “gender identity” in the law poses a threat to women and girls.
Opposing the infrastructure bill was an extremely difficult decision for our organization. Americans need sound infrastructure and WHRC USA supports efforts to provide that required infrastructure. H.R. 3684 would accomplish some very important objectives that Americans, especially women and girls, deserve.
However, it is likely that the nondiscrimination provision in the infrastructure bill will be interpreted in such a way that erodes the sex-based rights of women and girls. We all want adequate infrastructure – bridges, roads, emergency services, and the like. What the nondiscrimination provision in this bill does is protect “gender identity” as a characteristic, which, if it is understood to define “women,” is at odds with women’s sex-based rights.
Article 1 of the Declaration reaffirms that the rights of women are based on the category of sex. It states that countries “should maintain the centrality of the category of sex, and not ‘gender identity,’ in relation to women’s and girls’ right to be free from discrimination.”
Any inclusion of a “gender identity” concept in the law which is vaguely defined enough to imply that it could be used instead of “sex” to define who is a woman and who is a girl, poses a threat to the rights, privacy, and safety of women and girls, and must be opposed on that basis.
The infrastructure bill could still be enacted in a manner that protects the rights of women and girls. The U.S. Senate voted to pass it in its current form on August 11, 2021. The House of Representatives now has an opportunity to remove “gender identity” from the nondiscrimination provision. If it does so, WHRC USA is likely to change its stance on the bill.
We encourage all Americans to be in touch with their Representatives, call their attention to the threats that inclusion of “gender identity” in the nondiscrimination provision poses to women and girls, and urge them to remove “gender identity” from it.
Let’s go forth, together, as Americans, with a strong and viable plan to improve our nation’s infrastructure in a way that protects women and girls on the basis of sex.
*Please note that the Women’s Human Rights Campaign USA (WHRC-USA) is now officially known as Women’s Declaration International USA (WDI-USA)
Re: Why was “gender identity” slipped into the 2,700 page, one trillion dollar infrastructure bill?
Could someone please explain to me what “gender identity” has to do with infrastructure such as roads, bridges, tunnels, etc.? Please remove “gender identity” from the infrastructure bill.
I agree with this section as it relates to race, sex, and disability. It’s my understanding that it’s already against the law to discriminate based on race, religion, and disability. And, I have no problem with sexual orientation. The problem is “gender identity” because it’s highly divisive, can’t be accurately defined, and it negatively impacts the female sex.
Race and sex are immutable human characteristics. There has NEVER been a clear definition of “gender identity”. And, people can change their gender identity at any time.
Section 60307
“No individual in the United States may, on the basis of actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, age, or disability be excluded from participation in, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity in whole or in part with funds made available to carry out this title.”
The infrastructure bill being decided by the US Senate would enshrine “gender identity” in U.S. federal law. Countless hundreds of thousands of businesses and agencies will be funded under the programs being created or expanded under the law. None of them will be permitted to discriminate on the basis of “gender identity.”etc.
The words on the basis of “actual or perceived race, color, sex, age [etc.]” are also confusing.
Question:
Will females who work on any of these projects be forced to share a restroom with a male?
The Bostock decision states,
“The employers worry that our decision will sweep beyond Title VII to other federal or state laws that prohibit sex discrimination. And, under Title VII itself, they say sex-segregated bathrooms, locker rooms, and dress codes will prove unsustainable after our decision today. But none of these other laws are before us; we have not had the benefit of adversarial testing about the meaning of their terms, and we do not prejudge any such question today. Under Title VII, too, we do not purport to address bathrooms, locker rooms, or anything else of the kind. The only question before us is whether an employer who fires someone simply for being homosexual or transgender has discharged or otherwise discriminated against that individual “because of such individual’s sex.”
Read it again, “Under Title VII, too, we do not purport to address bathrooms, locker rooms, or anything else of the kind.” Bostock v. Clayton County
Question:
Employment statistics and demographics matter because that is how we gauge whether or not different groups of people are being excluded from specific jobs.
Since “gender identity” is included, will employment statistics be based on “gender identity” or sex?
Again, please remove “gender identity” from the infrastructure bill.