Is Compromise Still Possible on Transgender Rights?

A straight middle-aged white guy’s take on the issue

Conservative states around the country have been on a tear lately passing anti-transgender laws. Dictating what bathrooms to use, prohibiting changing birth certificates, restricting gender-affirming care, banning trans athletes, forcing schools to “out” children to their parents, and even attempting to regulate pronouns. It seems Republicans think they have a winning issue, at least in some states. Of course, Democrats in other areas often see a political advantage in being uncompromising as well. What gets lost in the politics are the real people these policies effect.

Side note: I’m referring to trans women/men and biological women/men in this article. I recognize a trans woman is just a woman, but for the purposes of this article it’s necessary to make this biological distinction.

As stark as the entrenched positions of the two parties are on this issue, when looked at objectively it seems plausible there could be areas of compromise. However, that requires a willingness to compromise that may not exist as long as some see an advantage in division. One problem is the political divide is so strong that each side often locks themselves into a position opposing anything the other side proposes.

If both Democrats and Republicans are willing to take a step back and look at the real issues concerning trans people they’d see most of them come down to the difference between sex and gender. The fact that sex and gender are two separate things isn’t a new idea, but even people who acknowledge this often get sucked into partisan debates that ignore this fact.

Birth Certificates

For example, many Democrats are quick to support allowing trans people to change their sex on birth certificates, but a person’s sex can’t change. That’s just a biological fact. Of course, the only reason Republicans are introducing laws like this is to play to their base. I’m not sure this is an issue that really needs legislating, ultimately though, it’s hard to factually argue against their position. Opposing laws to restrict amending birth certificates risks making Democrats look foolish for ignoring a basic biological fact.

Trans Athletes

Transgender athletes are another area some Democrats are more concerned with opposing Republicans than addressing the real issue. This often puts Democrats in the position of defending positions that don’t resonate with average people. Examples of transgender male to female athletes using their biology as an athletic advantage are rare, but there are examples of it happening. Obviously trans women often have a height advantage. While it’s true that once a trans woman has been on hormone therapy for a year they lose much of their strength advantage over biological females. There are however, studies showing they may still retain some advantage.

One of the most glaring examples was a 6’6”, 52-year-old trans woman who went back to college and became the star basketball player on a community college basketball team. I doubt anyone seriously thinks that if she had remained a male, she would have made the men’s basketball team. Even when height isn’t a factor, allowing trans women to compete is always going to have an air of unfairness to the other female competitors. I think it’s reasonable to tell a trans woman athlete you have to choose, take the hormones and have limited competitive athletic options, or stay off the hormones and compete under your biological sex.

Driver’s Licenses

Sometimes we can avoid the issue altogether by simply adjusting a regulation. Take driver’s licenses for example. In most states driver’s licenses indicate the driver’s sex, which suggests biological sex. But why is this information needed on a license to begin with? Does your sex affect your legal right to drive a car? No it doesn’t. Some may argue that it’s useful in identification. However, in that case you’d want the information on the license to match the gender they identify with.

A driver’s license that indicates the sex is female, but the driver’s gender is male, is only going to cause confusion. In most cases, when an official form asks for a person’s sex, it’s a holdover from an earlier age that no longer serves a purpose. Agreeing to remove sex from official documents unless there’s a reason to know a person’s biological sex is an easy bipartisan win-win.

Bathrooms

Of course, to find compromise means Republicans are going to need to give a little as well. One area Republicans seem very concerned about is what bathroom transgender people use. Many states are passing laws that require people to use restrooms that correspond to their biological sex. To some degree I can understand the knee jerk reaction to the thought of a person with a penis using the women’s restroom. But when you think this issue through, that position simply doesn’t make sense.

A trans man has the outward appearance of being a man. Requiring that person use the women’s restroom is only creating an awkward situation. When a trans woman uses the women’s bathroom, they’re going to use an individual stall, the same when a trans man uses the men’s room. No one’s privacy is threatened. Forcing trans people to use a restroom that doesn’t correspond to their outward appearance is only creating a dangerous situation. It opens them up for both verbal and potential physical attacks. Simply put, these laws are not only unnecessary, they’re actively harmful.

Pronouns

Another rather strange issue Republicans in some states have considered laws on is pronouns. Yes, pronouns. It’s not clear how they would enforce these laws, but they ring of legislative overreach. Deciding how you want people to address you is a fundamental principle of individual autonomy. If someone’s birth name is Robert, but they prefer going by Bob, you’re kind of an asshole if you keep calling them Robert. The idea of passing a law to dictate how someone is addressed is ridiculous. In most cases it’s pretty clear which pronoun is appropriate. There’s always going to be ambiguous situations when the pronoun isn’t clear. But that’s true even when discussing non-transgender people, no law can eliminate that. This is simply a situation that doesn’t require legislation.

Gender-affirming Care

The last issue many Republican states have passed legislation on is gender-affirming care for minors. Some like Florida’s governor Ron DeSantis have declared, “they’re literally chopping off the private parts of young kids . . . they want to castrate these young boys.” In reality, gender reassignment surgery is usually not recommended for people under 18 and is rarely performed on people in this age group. Typically, gender-affirming care for minors involves therapy and puberty blockers that are fully reversible.

Parental rights are one of the Republican big talking points, extending this to gender-affirming care isn’t inconsistent with their values. Banning surgical procedures that aren’t easily reversible, while letting parents, doctors and the child decide other gender-affirming care seems like a reasonable compromise. It addresses the conservative rhetoric that DeSantis and others rail about in speeches, while also reaffirming Republican commitment to parental rights.

Trans Rights vs Conservative Values

The very fact that transgender people are a political issue is problematic. In a republic that values individual rights, it should be a given that people can live as they see fit. In the past that was a conservative principle. I’m proposing a pretty straightforward standard. On issues that involve a person’s sex, there should be a clear understanding that biological sex is an unalterable fact that is determined at birth.

However, in a country committed to equality between the sexes, there aren’t many situations in which a person sex should be a matter of concern. At the same time, we should normalize the idea that gender is a personal preference that the government has no role in restricting.

Part of living in a free society is accepting others are going to make decisions that you may not understand or agree with. To be honest, I don’t really understand the whole transgenderism thing myself. It seems to me if you were born female, but you identify more with masculinity, you can simply be a masculine woman, and vice versa. But if someone tells me they’re a woman, I’m not going to investigate the nature of their genitals. I’m going to accept their right to determine their own identity and treat them like I would anyone else. That should be the approach the government takes as well. In most cases your gender shouldn’t be something the government needs to concern itself with in the first place.

The idea of limited government and individual autonomy has always been a conservative American value. Republicans love stories about a rugged individualist forging their way through the wilderness, unconcerned with societal norms. In many ways isn’t that what a transgender person does. Rejecting expectations to find their own path through life. It doesn’t seem that far-fetched for conservatives to accept that, even if they don’t really understand it.

Conclusion

I hope people from both sides of the aisle can reflect on some of the ideas I’ve presented on their own merit rather than through the lens of their particular political ideology. If everyone can accept biological reality and the principle of personal autonomy there’s nothing preventing compromise on this issue. But that requires getting past our political biases to make our society better for everyone.