Sustainability suggestions
In the recent Hatchet editorial “An opportunity worth seizing” (Jan. 25, p. 4), the editors rightly note that the Office of Sustainability seeks to engage students in its GW Greenhouse Event. While it is true that the Greenhouse Event will ‘end’ on the 29th, the ability to submit ideas will not. The goal of submitting ideas and presenting at the Greenhouse is to contribute to GW’s dialogue on sustainability and build momentum for these ideas and related initiatives on campus. We hope to use this Jan. 29 event as a jumping-off point, not an end point. Social-media outlets (most likely a wiki) will provide a way for members of the community to build on the ideas. This online resource is intended to help idea-submitters continue the conversation and work together with administrators and others in the community to bring these plans to fruition. The Office of Sustainability will help manage the online and offline discussions and is poised to support implementation of these ideas in the future.
We encourage any and all students interested in submitting ideas to our office to continue to do so by e-mailing [email protected] or by visiting our Web site, www.sustainability.gwu.edu, and clicking on the “GW Idea Garden.” Our sustainability movement on campus is strengthened by student involvement and we look forward to hearing your ideas.
Sophie Waskow and The Office of Sustainability
Co-ed roommates and the law
A supporter of a proposal for gender-neutral housing argued at a recent Student Association meeting that “the University is in violation of D.C.’s Human Rights Act and its own anti-discrimination policy by not providing proper housing for transgender students.” But, as a public interest law professor who has won more than 100 legal actions under that very statute, let me offer another possible analysis.
GW’s anti-discrimination policy, like the Human Rights Act, prohibits discrimination “on the basis of race… sex, sexual orientation, or gender identity or expression.” However, in assigning housing, GW discriminates on the basis of anatomical sex, not on the basis of gender identity or expression.
Thus all female students are treated the same, regardless of “sexual orientation or gender identity or expression,” and all male students are put into a second category, whether or not they are heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, transsexual, transgender, transvestite, etc.
Treating people differently on the basis of sex is justified under the act if it’s a “business necessity” (“where it can be proved by a respondent that, without such exception, such business cannot be conducted”). While it might be a business necessity for GW to have students use different rest rooms and locker rooms based upon their sex, it’s hard to argue that GW could not conduct business if it permitted some willing male and female student couples to share a residence hall room.
The Human Rights Act also strictly prohibits discrimination based upon “marital status” (“the state of being married, in a domestic partnership, single,” etc.) But GW may discriminate on the basis of marital status if it provides housing where a married male-female couple may room together, but an unmarried male-female couple may not room together, solely because of their marital status.
In urging the Faculty Senate not only to adopt – but also strengthen – the resolution which added the words “gender identity or expression” to GW’s Equal Employment Opportunity Policy, I asked the senators to carefully consider the impact of the amendment, and to use clear language in interpretation and application. Unfortunately they did not, so different interpretations can be argued.
Public interest law professor John Banzhaf
