Article Review: “Bruce Jenner: transgender and Republican. Is that a contradiction?”

This article on The Guardian website delves into how the recent news that Bruce Jenner identifies as a woman relates to recent legislative activity. Chief reporter Ed Pilkington writes:

“The former Olympian hopes conservative leaders will be ‘very receptive’ to transgender issues – but recent pushes for ‘bathroom bounty laws’ show otherwise”

The day after Jenner publicly shared this transition with Diane Sawyer another transphobic bathroom bill was announced. Similar to Texas House Bills 1748 and 2802 (see previous posts from this blog for more detailed information), Republican house representatives in Minnesota are endorsing “bathroom bounty laws.” This term is a perfect description of such policies because they encourage individuals to sue for monetary compensation (up to $4,000) if they determine that there is a trans* person in the restroom or changing room with them.

How does Bruce Jenner fit into this bathroom bounty law policy issue?

In addition to announcing his (Jenner requested that people still use the pronouns “he and him”) gender identity, he also revealed that is conservative and a Republican. The Guardian article explores if conservatism and a transgender identity can be compatible by asking the opinion of Mara Keisling, the executive director of the National Center for Transgender Equality. Keisling argues that there are some Republicans whose values are related to reducing the size of the government and that is not irreconcilable with being trans*.  On the other hand, there are Republican values that do seem to contradict the trans* identity which Keisling describes in the follow manner:

“It’s not Republicans who think government should get out of people’s lives who are the problem, it’s those who want to put it right in our faces,” she said.”

The bathroom bounty laws, anti-gay marriage legislation, the maintenance of reparative therapy are all legislative policies put forth by Republican congress people that puts government “right in our faces.” Yet, Jenner is aligning with such individuals:

Diane Sawyer:  “Are you Republican?” Bruce Jenner: “Yeah,” he said. “Is that a bad thing? I believe in the constitution.”

Jenner’s strategy seems to be working from within the Republican institution in order to make changes to such values. He says that he expects conservatives such as John Boehner and Mitch McConnell to be open to conversations about trans* issues. Jenner’s double reveal inspired the Log Cabin Republicans, the conservative LGBT group, to reach out to him. The national executive director of the Log Cabin Repulicans, Gregory Angelo, agrees with Keisling that being a Republican and part of the trans* community is not contradictory.

However, only time will tell whether Jenner’s story, gender identity, and conservative ideals will decrease the proliferation and implementation of transphobic bathroom bounty laws.

Students Campaign for Accessible Gender Neutral Restroom in University of Texas at Austin School of Social Work

Did you know that the White House now has a gender-neutral restroom? This move is in line with much of the trans* friendly facilities. As a politico.com article released in April of 2015 states:

“The newly designated restroom is an example of how the administration has been advancing the discussion by raising the profile of transgender issues, an area of debate that is especially hotly contested right now. The restroom will be located in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, where much of the White House staff works.”

AP Photo

There is also positive movement locally, as the city of Austin now requires all businesses to change their single-stall restrooms to be gender-neutral. In other words, single-stall restrooms must be accessible to anyone, regardless of gender identity or expression. Although tickets are not being written for violations of this policy, individuals can call 3-1-1 to report businesses that are not in compliance. 

At the University of Texas at Austin (UT) School of Social Work (SSW), students are campaigning to have an accessible gender-neutral restroom be implemented (full disclosure: the author of this blog post is leading participant of this campaign). While there is a single-stall gender-neutral restroom in the building, it is difficult to locate; many people who have used the building for years are unaware of its existence.

In an attempt to make the SSW building more trans* friendly, students organized the Gender Neutral Bathroom Campaign (GNBC) to work on this issue. Collaborating with the Social Justice Action Coalition, an established organization that allows students to put their social justice education into action, the GNBC planned a scavenger hunt to demonstrate how difficult it is to locate the current single-stall gender-neutral restroom in the building.

The second step for the GNBC was to distribute a building-wide survey to determine whether there was support for an accessible gender-neutral restroom. The results were favorable and demonstrated that a high majority of the respondents were in support of this campaign.

In April of 2015, three members (one of which was the author of this blog post) of the GNBC presented the results of the survey to the SSW faculty and staff. The GNBC gave a full report of the goals of the campaign, the need for trans* inclusive spaces, the results of the survey, and suggested steps for the restrooms in the SSW building.

The GNBC also distributed a survey to the faculty and staff during the meeting to investigate support or opposition more fully. The results have not yet been tabulated.

Lastly, the GNBC concluded that while creating an accessible gender-neutral restroom was a significant step, the bigger picture of creating gender and sexuality inclusive practices at the SSW should be the long-term goal.

Think Tank Position: Media Matters for America

The Media Matters for America blog published an article titled Debunking The Big MythAbout Transgender-Inclusive Bathrooms in March of 2014 that aimed to confront the assertion that trans* inclusive restrooms would increase assault and harassment of cisgender women by trans* individuals. This article was written by Carlos Maza who stated that conservative news outlets and individuals that have ignorant conceptions and fear of the trans* community are promoting these callous fabrications. While it is important to acknowledge that cisgender women face threats from cisgender men, the argument that trans* individuals should be restricted from using restrooms that fit their gender identity is based on oppressive tactics. As the Media Matters article explains:

“For as long as the transgender community has fought for protection from discrimination in public spaces, conservatives have peddled the myth that sexual predators will exploit non-discrimination laws to sneak into women's restrooms.” 

Unfortunately, this publicity tactic has been succeeded in convincing individuals and groups across the spectrum that multi-stall restrooms should be based on such preposterous limitations such as chromosomes (see post on HB 1748 in the Texas legislature). The Media Matters article notes that such tactics have increased the proliferation of laws that allow discrimination in public restrooms since conservative media outlets promote such baseless fears about trans* individuals.

Media Matters released a report to expose the myths surrounding the dangers of trans* inclusive restrooms. This report includes evidence from twelve states that have implemented non-discrimination laws around public restrooms and locker facilities and have had no issues as a result. Furthermore, Media Matters states that experts from these twelve states have rejected the unsubstantiated fears around trans* inclusive facilities.

But, who are these experts? Law enforcement officials, state human rights workers, and sexual assault victims advocates have all written emails or said on phone calls that there have been no assaults as a result of the non-discrimination laws. Below is a graphic from the Media Matters article that outlines some of the pertinent quotes from this report:

Maza continues the article by including information about a falsified story from the Christian Broadcasting Network that stated a girl was being harassed by a boy claiming to be transgender in the school restroom. Fox News picked up this story, which turned out to be fabricated as corroborated by the school superintendent and students at the school. Many of the news outlets who reported on this story published retractions or apologies.

Detailed information on the Media Matters report can be seen here.

An Article on Advocate.com about HB 2801

           In the article Texas Doubles Down on Transphobic Legislation,Adding $2,000 Fine for 'Wrong' Bathroom Use advocate.com writer Sunnive Brydum describes the effects Texas House Bill 2801 would have on trans* students. As mentioned in our previous posts, HB 2801 requires:
 

“School districts to adopt a policy that only students of the same biological sex may be present at the same time in any school bathroom facility.  It details the school's liability if a student encounters someone of a different sex in their bathroom facility, including $2,000 in damages, as well as attorney's fees and court costs.  This bill stipulates that schools should provide an alternative-use facility for students whose gender identity is different from their biological sex, but does not require that schools construct any such facilities.” (Previous Post)

Texas House Representative Gilbert Peña, who introduced HB 2801

            Brydum details how HB 2801 would affect trans* students, cis students, and the schools themselves should this bill pass. Trans* students would face increased criminalization of their right to gender self-determination. Cis students would be rewarded $2,000 or more for proving that they shared a restroom with a person who is not of the same “biological sex.”

Schools would be highly impacted by this bill because they would be subjected to expensive litigation costs and fines if they decide to respect the gender identity of their students. Furthermore, schools would be liable if:

“"if any employee of the district: (1) knew that the person was not of the same biological sex for which the bathroom, locker room, or shower facility was designated; and (2) permitted the person to enter or failed to take reasonable steps to prevent the person from entering the bathroom, locker room, or shower facility."

            The advocate.com article notes that HB 2801 was introduced after Texas State Representative Debbie Riddle’s HB 1748 & HB 1747 (see previous entries). Pena updated HB 280, imitating the

House Representative Debbie Riddle, who introduced HB 1748

language used in Riddle’s bills.  

There are some exceptions to both Riddle’s and Pena’s transphobic bills; allowing custodial and maintenance staff, parents helping children under the age of 5, individuals helping those with disabilities, and those delivering medical care to enter bathrooms that don’t match their sex assigned at birth. 

Florida and Kentucky have bills that are similar to HB 2801. So far Kentucky has approved their bill in the Republican-led senate in February 2015. The author of this article points out that Texas, Florida, and Kentucky all seem to be ignoring how the trans* population is at greater risk of harassment and violence in restrooms than cis individuals. Also, according to the National Center for Transgender Equality, 59% of trans* students say that they are not allowed to use school restrooms that match their gender identity. Furthermore, these bills are likely to increase harassment and stigmatization towards trans* students, as well as cause this population to disengage or drop out from school.

The one piece of good news is that “in 2004 the Department of Education stated that gender identity is protected under Title IX of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.” However, this is clearly not enough to eliminate transphobic bills from being introduced in various states.

  Brydum closes the article by discussing why much of this legislation is being presented. Based on public testimony, much of the legislation comes from the fear that trans* women will attack ciswomen and children. However, this is an unnecessary fear as demonstrated by the fact that there have never been any reports of attacks by trans* individuals attacking or harassing cisgender people. Nor have their been any cismen posing as transwomen in order to attack women or children.