We're in, we're out.
 |
| Vancouver parents opposed to the trans-inclusive policy, June 11, 2014 |
Last night, I attended a meeting at the Vancouver School Board (VSB) as I listened to the final presentation from medical experts. The issue being considered is revising a 2004 VSB policy that spells out the district’s guidelines for providing a safe, positive environment for trans and gender-variant students in all grades, from kindergarten to grade 12. The associate superintendent said, “The biggest change was about getting some clarity of language.”
This simple administrative procedure became the entrée for a well-organized and vocal group of conservative parents who self-described as Chinese Evangelical Christians. They used this as an opportunity to lobby against the adoption of the proposed updated policy, arguing that this policy took away their rights as parents and guardians to decide what was best for their children. Unfortunately, these parents are using both race and religion cards.
They demanded more scientific research and that the BC Medical Association and the College of Physicians and Surgeons of BC weigh in on this issue. While claiming that they care about trans students, they don’t want their children to be subjected to having trans and gender-variant students in their classrooms.
What they seem unwilling to recognize is that the original policy has been in place for several years and that the policy aligns with both Federal and Provincial guidelines for the school board’s responsibility to provide a safe space for all students, regardless of race, ethnicity, religion, and sex and is in keeping with both the Federal and Provincial human rights codes.
The updated policy adds language to help schools create a more inclusive and safe space for trans students, including calls for schools to provide single-stall, gender-neutral washrooms, to “reduce or eliminate the practice of segregating students by sex,” and to respect the rights of transgender students to decide how much information about their gender identity to share and with whom, among other things.
Additionally, the policy has the full support of the Vancouver Coastal Health Authority, designated by the Provincial Health Ministry to oversee these things. In other words, all the demands these parents are making were already met years ago.
This policy not only protects students who are LGBTQ+ but also those who are perceived as such. There have been instances of students who are “straight” but for whatever reason are perceived as gay or lesbian, or some other letter in the “alphabet soup,” who have been bullied or made to feel unsafe at school.
In summary, the difference between the policy from 2004 and the updated version from 2014 is how it incorporates a more inclusive and comprehensive approach to supporting LGBTQ+ students, particularly addressing the needs of transgender students. These differences reflect the substantial social, legal, and cultural changes during that decade.
This was the fourth and final public meeting before the proposed updated policy went to a vote the following week. In the previous meetings, the board patiently listened to countless persons who spoke passionately for and against this policy. At the end of the session last night, all of the trustees had a chance to make a final comment, and each one, without exception, thanked all who made presentations and shared their stories, including a Chinese mom of a young trans boy who eloquently shared her family’s story of acceptance. Except for two of the nine trustees, all said they would vote in favor of the proposed updates to the policy.
What is their fear?
You only have to engage some parents in conversation to realize how much misinformation exists about transgender people and issues. The persistent fear is that their children will be turned into transgender persons by the school staff.
I was flabbergasted when I asked one of the mothers, whose name tag said “Organizer,” if she knew any transgender persons. I recognized a slight language barrier, so I asked the question again. She nodded that she did, but still wanting to make sure she understood my question, I asked her if she knew them personally. She felt sorry for them and added, “I don’t want to become trans, and I don’t want my children to be made transgender. Schools should be about education.” Oh, the irony.
The irony, too, is that within a week of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services ruling that people receiving Medicare may no longer be automatically rejected for coverage of sex reassignment surgery, the Southern Baptist Convention passed a resolution that opposes attempts to change a person’s “bodily identity” through such treatments as gender reassignment surgery and adds “God’s good design that gender identity is determined by biological sex and not by one’s self-perception” and “we continue to oppose all efforts steadfastly by any court or state legislature to validate transgender identity as morally praiseworthy.”
We're in, we're out.
