Search

Copyright of Historia Regional is the property of Historia Regional and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

As an act of resistance against the recent surge of anti-transgender legislation targeting transgender and nonbinary youth in the US, we share our experiences of accessing lifechanging, lifesaving gender-affirming surgery with you through poetry. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article details a counter-protest against the "1 Million March4Kids" movement, highlighting concerns over misleading signs and the influence of conservative ideologies on education policies. Topics include the impact on democracy, human rights, and the erosion of inclusive education, with examples from Nova Scotia and other Canadian provinces.

We propose an analysis of the ontoepistemological aspects involved in the current debates around the sex-gendered body in Argentina. We use theoretical tools of feminist phenomenology, feminist epistemology and new feminist materialisms to analyze, on the one hand, how the Argentinian State understands the sex-gendered body and, on the other, a series of statements present in trans-exclusionary discourses that intervene in a conflictive way in these debates. We seek to clear the field of feminist debates in order to determine which positions allow us to advance, and which ones make us go back. We conclude that, while the notions contained in the gender identity law are supported by current feminist knowledge, trans-exclusionary discourses that dispute its content represent a patriarchal ontoepistemological framework of understanding. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this research is to analyze the narratives of psychologists and psychiatrists in terms of how they address matters concerning gender and sexuality. The qualitative research, which began in 2020, involved thirty in-depth interviews with psychologists and psychiatrists working in Buenos Aires. The approach used to conduct the study of the data was narrative analysis. Specifically, the focus is on exploring the narratives related to gender-affirming medical interventions among the LGTBIQ+ community. The unique features of the Argentine context, with its advancements in acquired rights through sexual dissident activism in the last decade, make this study particularly relevant and offer an original contribution from the field of socioanthropological health studies. In particular, the Gender Identity Law enacted in 2012 regulates name change, registry updates, and access to medical interventions (surgical and hormonal) without the need for psychiatric/psychological consultations. This aspect sparks debates within expert knowledge circles, where pathologizing notions are problematized. Simultaneously, it instigates discussions about certain bodily schemas that are more or less recognized/accepted. While the analysis reveals an increasing number of spaces working from a gender perspective, in other cases, conceptions persist that are influenced by a heteronormative and cissexist logic. In these cases, conceptions of corporeality come into play that reproduce, based on the notion of sex as something biological, the female/male binary. Thus, certain practices and bodily interventions fall within the realm of what is expected, while others, such as when the self-perceived gender does not align with the assigned gender at birth, give rise to narratives emphasizing the importance of "going slowly," referencing their "radical" nature, and the "irreversibility" involved. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Over the past few years, the national conversation surrounding youth sports centered on efforts to systematically exclude a vulnerable subsection of children from athletics. Transgender youth, particularly transgender girls, have become the targets of laws with innocuous-sounding titles like "Fairness in Women's Sports" or "The Fairness Act." As of March 2023, eighteen states have enacted laws regulating K-12 and collegiate athletics. The consequences of these transphobic laws are dire. Numerous studies highlight the disproportionate rates of suicide and adverse mental health among LGBTQ+ youth. However, research indicates that gender-affirming policies have life-saving impacts on transgender, nonbinary, and LGBTQ+ young people. Action by the federal government has so far proved ineffective at shaping state and local policies through executive orders. While the Supreme Court recently granted a major win to the LGBTQ+ community in Bostock v. Clayton County, the Court limited its scope. Ultimately, trans children and their families are subject to a fractured national policy, all while increasingly aggressive state legislators wage war against LGBTQ+ people, particularly children. Anti-trans sports laws violate both Title IX and the Fourteenth Amendment; ensuring the protection of trans youth athletes in the coming years requires challenging anti-trans legislation in courts and enacting federal laws that protect transgender student-athletes, including amending Title IX to embrace an expanded definition of sex. This Comment describes the current state of trans inclusion in athletics and aims to forge a path forward for policymakers, activists, and allies alike. By analyzing methods for legal changes and barriers to equality at the federal, state, and local levels, this Comment concludes that a simple approach to trans inclusion in sports is not evident. Rather, to achieve greater inclusion and protect the lives of LGBTQ+ youth, policymakers must work for change at the national, state, and local levels to realize true equality for trans children. By prioritizing strategic litigation and reworking federal statutes, advocates have the power to turn the tide on discrimination, avoid health disparities, and defend transgender youth. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this study was to examine whether anti-transgender rights legislation among state legislators is associated with increased suicide- and depression-related Internet searches. Employing a quasi-experimental non-equivalent control group design, we focused on bills that were introduced to state legislatures from July 2019 to July 2020. As our panel is constructed of 51 states/territories over a 52-week time frame, our final dataset is composed of 2,652 observations. Results showed that states' passing of anti-transgender rights bills were linked with suicide- and depression-related Internet searches. Second, introducing or debating the bills did not have an association with Internet searches. Third, the defeat of anti-transgender bills was linked with fewer depression-related searches. Finally, the LGBT context in the state affected the results: anti-transgender legislation had a particularly strong association with suicide-related Internet searches when the state had a high LGBT population density. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, I think about gender identity of transgender people from George H. Mead’s ideas. I use Mead’s self theory’s concepts, emphasizing links between concepts of Generalized Other and Me, and society’s principles, values and beliefs. Based on these concepts, I think about ways we predominantly understand individuals’ gender in Argentina, I analyze the challenge posed by transgender persons to gender hegemonic conceptions, and I consider changes in ways we conceive gender in Argentina in recent years — specially after Gender Identity law enactment. Conclusions: Mead's ideas allow us to think about individuals’ gender identity as an interaction between subjective experience of self-perceived gender and society’s prevailing gender conceptions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the role of Equality Act in protecting LGBTQ+ communities from discrimination in the U.S. Topics mentioned include the history of the Civil Rights Act, the use of sex discrimination jurisprudence, the implications of the Act for bisexual and nonbinary individuals, the influence of religious freedom issues on the passage of the Act, and the decisions of the court on the case Bostock v. Clayton Country.

Copyright of Revista Colombiana de Sociologia is the property of Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Facultad de Ciencias Humanas, Departamento de Sociologia and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In Bostock v. Clayton County, the Supreme Court held Title VII's prohibition on sex-based employment discrimination applies to discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. Although the opinion is an important victory, if history is any guide, Bostock was only one battle in a larger war against invidious workplace discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. Prejudiced employers and managers will seek alternative, less obvious ways to discriminate. Judges and civil rights lawyers must prepare themselves to recognize and reject pretextual rationales for adverse actions taken against lesbian, gay, and bisexual employees. A better understanding of history can inform those efforts. This Article examines an unexplored chapter in the United States' history of anti-gay discrimination in the workplace: punishing gay workers for concealing their sexual orientation. Beginning in the 1960s, as federal and state law implemented procedural protections for publicsector workers, employers developed a new mechanism to evade those protections: the gay perjury trap. At its core, the strategy is simple. An employer asks job applicants about their sexual orientation. If they reveal that they are gay, decline to hire them. If gay workers conceal their sexual orientation and it is later discovered, terminate them for their dishonesty. Either way, gay workers are purged from the workforce. This Article provides historical examples of the federal government and local school districts using this strategy to terminate highperforming workers who were later discovered to be gay. After discussing the inherent unfairness of the gay perjury trap, this Article explains how prejudiced employers may attempt to deploy this strategy as a means of circumventing Title VII liability in the post-Bostock era. Finally, this Article discusses how courts should prevent employers from using the gay perjury trap in the post-Bostock work environment. Dismantling the gay perjury trap entails three components. First, courts should interpret Title VII as prohibiting employers from inquiring about an applicant's or employee's sexual orientation. Second, courts should not afford employers a general right to penalize gay workers for concealing or misrepresenting their sexual orientation. Third, courts should construe Title VII to protect employees who refuse to answer questions about their sexual orientation. Whether Title VII can effectively deter and remedy anti-gay discrimination will in significant part depend on courts' ability to recognize and prohibit employers from using the gay perjury trap. The post-Bostock Title VII cannot succeed if employers can use alleged dishonesty about sexual orientation as a means of punishing gay workers and avoiding liability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Historia y Sociedad (01218417) is the property of Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Facultad de Ciencias Humanas y Economicas and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The main objective of this work is making evident that the Spanish legislation does not regulate, forgets and even harms many of the rights of Trans people. For that, this research performed a study of the resolutions, recommendation and reports of the international organization, as well as the international norms and jurisprudence. As a result of this, the research was able to prove that Spain is far behind countries such as Argentina in matters of gender identity. One of the conclusions of this work is that the Spanish State should approve a new gender identity law that regulates this right from a de-pathologizing perspective, and apply gender studies in all of its laws. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since 1990s, some theoretical and empirical approaches to bodily construction processes carried out by transgender people were produced by feminism and gender studies. These works wondered to what extent those experiences contributed to reinforce the binary gender system or to put it in crisis. In the same period, several studies carried out in the field of feminism and gender studies produced a critical approach to cosmetic surgeries. Some productions conceived cosmetic surgery as a normalization practice of cisgender women's bodies. Other ones aimed to understand cisgender women as autonomous agents of decision. That is, neither as mere victims of the cosmetic surgery industry nor as subjects alienated by cultural messages that affirm their subordination. Taking these debates into account, this article puts into dialogue feminism and gender studies with the bio-medical field. In order to identify points of agreement and disagreement between those fields, it focuses on the senses that urological surgeons and plastic and reconstructive surgeons elaborate around surgical treatments requested by transgender people. The study is based on the analysis of in-depth interviews conducted between 2015 and 2019 to urological surgeons and plastic and reconstructive surgeons of the Metropolitan Area of Buenos Aires. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As a result of the struggles of sex and gender dissidents, laws that guarantee the recognition of gender-identities have been passed all around the world. The Argentinian Gender Identity Law (2012) offers a definition of "gender identity" as opposed to biological anchorages and pathologization, respecting personal will and leaving no room for endorsement by "authorised" third parties. This law regulates the access to medical practices to freely intervene bodies. However, the theoretical scientific principles of sexual dimorphism on which these procedures are based on are usually denounced for repressing, normalizing and pathologizing especially intersex bodies. I will analyse the issue of gender identities in the light of this tension and, finally, I will argue that identity is transformative, relational and biotechnologically produced. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This Article argues that the expressive components of gender-stereotyping theory serve to delink the equality protections afforded by that theory from fixed and predetermined identity categories in helpful and positive ways. Many have viewed American antidiscrimination law as being normatively grounded in the notion that there are certain identities that, because of their stable and immutable characteristics, deserve equality-based protections. Gender-stereotyping theory can help make the normative case for a more pluralistic understanding of equality, one that is grounded in the need to protect the fluid and multiple ways in which gender is performed or expressed rather than focusing, as American antidiscrimination law has traditionally done, on protecting limited categories of essentialized, fixed, and finite identity categories. In short, gender-stereotyping theory, properly understood, offers a practical way of articulating and implementing a theory of equality that does not depend on the existence of a limited number of privileged identities. A proper understanding of gender-stereotyping theory--one that focuses on how expressive performances of gender and sexuality identities may trigger responses by defendants that are motivated by sex stereotypes--can help antidiscrimination law move away from the notion that plaintiffs must identify according to certain fixed, stable, and predetermined categories in order to succeed in their equality claims. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Thailand has no criminal laws against same-sex acts or cross-dressing. There are numerous commercial businesses catering to LGBT individuals, primarily gay men. Police do not harass LGBT venues, conferences or events. Government policy statements speak of encouraging acceptance, recognising diversity and supporting partnerships. The National Human Rights Commission actively supports LGBT rights. The Gender Equality Act aims to end discrimination on grounds of sex and gender expression. A number of court cases have ruled against discrimination in employment or access to public services. The drafting of a 'life partnership' law has proceeded, intermittently, from 2012, receiving cabinet approval in December 2018, however it was not considered by the legislature before the March 2019 election. Some drafting work on a gender identity law has been taking place. Four 'out' politicians, standing for a major party, were elected to the national legislature in 2019, the first time 'out' candidates have campaigned for office. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Fonseca: Journal of Communication is the property of Revista Fonseca Journal of Communication and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article examines the decision by the U.S. government to resign as member of the United Nations (UN) Human Rights Council. Other topics include the U.S.' reasons for leaving the council like its alleged bias against Israel, the council's mandate to protect, develop, and promote human rights, as well as the council's treatment of sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) rights to discuss the needed reforms in its operation.

Nonbinary gender identities have quickly gone from obscurity to prominence in American public life, with growing acceptance of gender-neutral pronouns, such as "they, them, and theirs," and recognition of a third-gender category by U.S. states including California, Colorado, Minnesota, New Jersey, Oregon, and Washington. People with nonbinary gender identities do not exclusively identify as men or women. Feminist legal reformers have long argued that discrimination on the basis of gender nonconformity - in other words, discrimination against men perceived as feminine or women perceived as masculine - is a harmful type of sex discrimination that the law should redress. But the idea of nonbinary gender as an identity itself appears only at the margins of U.S. legal scholarship. Many of the cases recognizing transgender rights involve plaintiffs who identify as men or women, rather than plaintiffs who seek to reject, permute, or transcend those categories. The increased visibility of a nonbinary minority creates challenges for other rights movements, while also opening new avenues for feminist and LGBT advocacy. This Article asks what the law would look like if it took nonbinary gender seriously. It assesses the legal interests in binary gender regulation in areas including law enforcement, employment, education, housing, and health care, and concludes these interests are not reasons to reject nonbinary gender rights. It argues that the law can recognize nonbinary gender identities, or eliminate unnecessary legal sex classifications, using familiar civil rights concepts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Official identity is a powerful thing. More than just feelings, diagnosis, or behaviors, official identity marks the status by which one can gain, or lose, access to certain social rights, responsibilities, and privileges. It can be predicated on biology or on the "determination" of other social identities. And it can serve as the means by which other identities can be determined. The ability to alter one's official identity is a key mechanism whereby one can essentially change who they are, and what they can become, in the eyes of the law. This paper will examine three principal types of global gender recognition identity laws-those that require official approval by "experts," those that provide options for a third gender, and those that allow for self-declaration. Case studies will be examined of laws in the United Kingdom, Nepal, and Argentina respectively to demonstrate the potential benefits and shortcomings of each type of law. The conclusion will consider the potential ramifications of removing gender as an official identity marker entirely, a move now considered by some to be the end result or goal of many of these laws. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An introduction is presented in which the editor discusses articles in the issue on topics including LGBTIQ+ people struggle, queer history, and queer collective identity.

An editorial is presented in which author discusses on the "Queer Legacies, New Solidarities" conference held at Deakin University in Melbourne, Victoria in 2018. Topics discussed include information on reforms and policy changes in relation to non-binary sexualities in Australia; information on legislation regarding passports that allowed the choice of an X gender on them with the selection of gender; and rising international movement's mobilisations for climate justice.

The article highlights concepts of contemporary gender theory necessary to contextualize the Oregon nonbinary ruling. Topics discussed include history of legal determinations of sex and gender in the U.S.; Oregon and California rulings authenticating nonbinary gender status, as well as pending federal litigation on a similar issue; and need of modernization of gender documentation policies and practices; and decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in the case "Obergefell v. Hodges."

Indian sprinter Dutee Chand made headlines and history when she successfully challenged the validity of an international rule of athletics that disqualified her from competition because of the "masculine" level of naturallyoccurring testosterone in her body. The decision of the Court of Arbitration for Sport in Chand's favor demonstrates that the International Association of Athletics Federations, despite being the duly authorized regulator of international athletics competition, does not operate unconstrained in policing the boundaries of sex and gender, particularly when it does so in a discriminatory manner. Rather, a number of accountability principles and mechanisms of so-called "global administrative law" must be satisfied to justify any rule for dividing elite athletes into binary sex categories. This paper considers the particular administrative law requirements that, pursuant to the landmark decision in Chand's case, must characterize the development, implementation, and review of international sporting rules, particularly those that discriminate on the basis of sex or gender. In doing so, it illustrates that global administrative law has an important role to play in protecting and promoting gender equality in sport. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the use of nonbinary gender identity for confronting outdated notions of sex and gender in the law in the U.S. Topics discussed include concepts of contemporary gender theory; history of legal determinations of sex and gender in the country; and Anonymous v. Weiner court case on the same.

The number of students, in grades kindergarten through high school, who identify as transgender has steadily increased during the last decade. These students seek the same opportunities as their cisgender peers, but are often denied participation in athletic activities because of their non-conforming gender-behavior. Currently, there is no federal law governing transgender participation in sports, which has resulted in an inconsistency among state athletic associations' participation policies; the vast majority of states restricts participation. These states are limiting transgender students' ability to receive the benefits that sports provide. To solve this inconsistency and provide equal opportunity for transgender students, this Note argues that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 be amended to prohibit gender-based discrimination. As a supplementary solution, the U.S. Department of Education should recommend Congress pass a bill conditioning federal funding of state after-school sports programs on the inclusion of all students, including transgender students. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When the U.S. Supreme Court declared that same-sex marriage would be legal throughout the country, that decision did not end the possibility of other types of discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. The U.S. Supreme Court has been very unclear about what standard to use when the courts face claims of discrimination based on these characteristics. In cases decided under the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause, the Court has stated that lower courts should use one of three standards, based on the type of discrimination alleged. These three standards for review are known as rational basis, intermediate review, and strict scrutiny. This article, based on both empirical and normative analysis, will explore the proper legal standard that the Supreme Court should use in these cases. Since several states have begun to enact laws that encourage discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity, this article will argue that the Supreme Court should use strict scrutiny in these cases because the LGBT community is clearly a discrete and insular minority subject to targeted discrimination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although Americans overwhelmingly believe that LGBT people should not be turned away from a business open to the public just for being gay or transgender, no state has enacted protections for all LGBT people against being told that “we don’t serve people like you.” This Article traces the impasse over new state legislation banning discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity (“SOGI”) to one critical assertion: that ensuring LGBT people “equal enjoyment of facilities” means that men will now be allowed “in women’s bathrooms,” threatening the safety of others. Although the claim that SOGI nondiscrimination laws expose the public to victimization by sexual predators reaches back to 2008, it reached a crescendo in 2015 when opponents defeated Houston’s Equal Rights Ordinance by tagging it as a “bathroom bill, and 2016 when North Carolina legislators wiped aside a Charlotte ordinance that was silent about facility access, requiring instead that businesses defined as “public accommodations” must require patrons to use the bathroom matching the sex of their birth.” Despite the punishing treatment of North Carolina after H.B. 2, the 2017 legislative year opened with a raft of bills designed to force individuals to use the bathroom matching the sex of their birth. While proponents of these bills claim that extending nondiscrimination protections to the LGBT community imperils public safety, this Article argues that this claim is not predicated on evidence about—or risks from—trans people. Sex offenders are the source of this threat, as affidavits filed in support of North Carolina’s defense of H.B. 2 acknowledge. Notably, the bathroom narrative has served to obscure pressing religious liberty issues, such as how nondiscrimination laws should interact with—or give way to—religious convictions on questions of sexuality in religious spaces, like the nature of gender itself. This Article concludes that SOGI nondiscrimination laws are necessary to advance human dignity and to secure “a level playing field so that all persons can enjoy the fruits of their labor.” Policymakers should therefore reject the case against SOGI nondiscrimination protections based on public safety. It is, however, incumbent on lawmakers to ensure that civil laws governing questions of sexuality do not inadvertently spill over to houses of worship and other places where religious believers should have discretion to decide such matters for their communities. This Article further concludes that it is possible to authorize businesses to open restrooms to LGBT persons in a way that ensures the safety, dignity, and privacy of all their patrons while respecting the religious convictions of people of faith. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Underlying the United States Constitution is an antitotalitarian principle--i.e., the government cannot define, regulate, or compel aspects of life that are fundamental to identity and personhood. Prohibitions of compulsory childbirth, flag salutes, ideological education, and racial separation most clearly evince this bulwark against totalitarianism. Nonetheless, from birth, the government enforces legal gender, restricts the availability of legal gender reclassification, and prevents individuals from removing themselves from the legal gender system. The government thus affirmatively produces and compels identity on an individual level. Moreover, for trans* people, these laws cause expressive and dignitary harm, increase exposure to violence, and diminish life opportunities. Although these gender identity laws constitute a totalitarian occupation of individual lives, they have evaded constitutional scrutiny. This Comment (1) evaluates the right to identity situated in the midst of the Constitution's proscription of totalitarianism and (2) investigates constitutional arguments supporting trans* people's right to self-determine their gender identity. Specifically, this context illuminates the right to identity and how the government engages in compulsory, affirmative identity formation. Ultimately, this Comment demonstrates that for trans* people and our Constitution alike, we must eliminate totalitarian gender identity laws and totalitarianism in all forms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Trans rights advocates and allies are celebrating as governments around the world relax their standards for obtaining a particular sex designation and expand the available options for gender markers appearing on identity documents (IDs). While this increasing flexibility and diversity will improve the daily lives of countless trans and intersex people, it also raises the question of why government-issued identity documents designate gender at all. This question is particularly pressing for gender nonconforming people and nonbinary people for whom the compulsory inclusion of any gender marker may be especially harmful. As anatomy and identity become less presumptively linked and governments begin to acknowledge the complexity of gender, various countries have adopted a range of new approaches to sex designation. Many of the burgeoning solutions provide immediate, much-needed relief for binary transgender people who identify as male or female. Advocates have rightly prioritized gaining access to gender-affirming ID over abolishing gender from government ID in a world where gender recognition is still critical for survival. However, these approaches also illustrate how the state's increasing respect for an individual's gender identity and openness in recognizing more than two sexes simultaneously results in heightened anxiety over accuracy and security. The increased focus on accurately designating gender identity on government IDs is harmful to gender variant people overall and re-entrenches the primacy of fixed and binary gender. In supporting the state's quest to "get it right," advocates reinforce its hold over an aspect of identity that should belong only to the individual. This Article describes the sex designation policies of a number of international jurisdictions, arguing that each of them falls short by making such designations compulsory, and positing that even making sex designations optional carries a price. Specifically, it highlights New York City's decision, launched at the beginning of 2015, to make sex an optional field on its new municipal IDs. The Article then identifies U.S. birth certificates as a strategic place to start the process of removing sex from government ID, based on their form, history, and use. Ultimately, the Article concludes that, so long as such documents include a sex designation field, new and seemingly progressive government policies of gender inclusivity harmfully reify sex classification. Therefore, it is time to envision genderless ID. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the problems of the fluid race and gender identities discrimination in the workplace and the ineffectiveness of the Title VII of the U.S. Civil Rights Act of 1964 in providing for equal employment opportunity. It mentions that the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in the case McDonnell Douglas, Corp. v. Green related to workplace discrimination. It also mentions the Title VII protection for race and sex discrimination.

This research analyzes recent public policy measures related to sexual diversity generated in Chile in the last five years. Power positions, versions of sexuality, normativity and gender stereotypes that remain present in this policies are reviewed. From a qualitative perspective, the Critical Discourse Analysis is used to analyze four initiatives generated in the health sector, in the education sector, and in the citizen rights sector. The results show the clear presence of the heteronormative frame and a strong control of sexuality in this policies and laws, something which would difficult the subjects achieving recognition from a position of agency and power. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An essay is presented on suggestions of the U.S. Supreme Court to the U.S. Congress for expansion and amendment in Title VII of the U.S. Civil Right Act of 1964. It mentions that the interpretation of Court may have implications for proposed Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) which expands Title VII's coverage to gender identity, disparate impact cause of action as a part of Civil Rights Act of 1991 and pregnancy discrimination under the Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978.

The study goal was to construct and psychometrically validate a negative's attitudes towards trans people scale (EANT) as an expression of prejudice against trans. Two interdependent sequential studies through questionnaires are reported, both rely on non-probabilistic samples: Study 1, involves 203 participants, mainly college students, addresses the construction and exploratory analysis of the EANT. Study 2, involving 408 participants assigned according to sociodemographic quotes established by the national census in the general population, shows confirmatory factor analysis and external validation of the scale. A sole factor 9-item instrument, with acceptable internal consistency (α = .886) was obtained. The results suggest good applicability in general population studies. Expected relations with typical variables (ATLG, RWA, SDO and religiosity) were procured. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]