Stephen Rassi, a 50-year-old transgender individual and a doctoral student in social work and psychology, said that he is often unsure of whether he is being discriminated against because of his sexual identity.

“All of my life I’ve been different,” he said. “There are situations where you’re not sure whether someone just doesn’t like you as a person or whether they are treating you badly based on what group they think you belong to. People of any minority group go through that.”

Rassi said adding the phrase “gender identity and expression” to the nondiscrimination clause of the University bylaws would help eliminate the transgender community’s uncertainty over whether they are being discriminated against. He said it would also curb discrimination as a whole and protect the community’s safety.

But despite widespread support within the LGBT community and its supporters for the language, University administrators and members of the Board of Regents remain solid in their refusal to make the addition, claiming that the phrase and its implications are already included in the discrimination clause of the bylaws by the word “sex.”

“It is already in the policy that we do not discriminate against transgendered people,” University Provost Paul Courant said.

University President Mary Sue Coleman and University spokeswoman Julie Peterson echoed Courant’s statement but would not elaborate.

“The University is saying that it’s not necessary because the existing policies can already be applied,” Peterson said.

Four schools in the Big Ten — the University of Wisconsin, Ohio State University, the University of Iowa and Northwestern University — offer gender identity and expression protection outright in their policies. Two others — the University of Illinois and the University of Minnesota — have it in their state laws (Michigan does not,) bringing the total to six out of 11 Big Ten universities.

An LGBT taskforce created by Courant in March 2003 to investigate transgender issues on campus — including a possible addition to the bylaws — explicitly called for adding the phrase.

“The change in the bylaws would provide a strong internal protection for transgender people,” said Law School Prof. Bruce Frier, who chaired the taskforce. “This is a community (that) has had trouble getting protection. They still live in a certain state of fear.”

Rassi said not adding the phrase creates the impression that the University does not value transgender people.

“It tells people that they are not approved of,” he said. “It sends this implicit message that, while some people at the University may value you for being yourself, the highest levels do not. That’s not a really a message they should want to send.”

Courant sent an e-mail to the entire campus community on Feb. 23 notifying it that “the University will interpret and apply the prohibition against sex discrimination in its equal opportunity and nondiscrimination policies to include discrimination based on gender identity and gender expression.”

Frier said that while the gesture was appreciated, an e-mail is not a strong enough signal that the University will not stand for discrimination on the basis of gender identity and expression.

“It’s not going to be enough just to have this e-mail message,” he said.

During the public statements portion of last month’s regents’ meeting, Frier pleaded with the regents to consider the effect of not taking action to add the phrase. He said the lack of a statement in the bylaws leaves transgender people vulnerable to violence and could even indirectly incite potential harassers to take violent action against them.

“Those who would harass may be emboldened by knowing that the regents have not put this into the bylaws, and they may view this as a tacit approval of harassment and even violence,” Frier said.

The University’s stance that “gender identity and expression” is already covered is based on a 2004 6th U.S. Circuit court case — Smith v. City of Salem — that says “sex” encompasses “gender identity and expression.”

Gloria Hage, the lawyer in the University general counsel’s office who worked on determining the legal implications of adding or not adding the phrase, refused to comment on or explain the University’s stance.

Frier said the interpretation that “gender identity and expression” is covered under “sex” is unusual.