Is the Trans Community under Attack?

A couple of headlines about the LGBTQ community recently caught my eye; one of them had the word “attack” in it, while the other one used the phrase “anti-LGBTQ.” As I skimmed the articles, it quickly became apparent that the authors were referring primarily to bills and laws that are seen as restrictions on the rights of the trans community.

So far in 2023, 33% of such legislation are school restrictions, such as limiting classroom discussions of sexuality and gender; another 27% are health-care restrictions, such as prohibiting trans kids from receiving “gender-affirming care.” Other such legislation includes prohibiting trans-identifying individuals from using restrooms of their choice and playing on sports teams aligned with their gender identity.

There is much that could be (and has been) said about each of these types of legislation. I would like to focus briefly on trans women in sports because of the issue of fairness. Last year, Lia Thomas became a household name because of the fact that he won several NCAA swimming events against women; I use the pronoun “he” in reference to Lia Thomas because Riley Gaines and other female swimmers have seen him naked in the locker room, and he is most definitely a man, not a woman. The vast majority of people understand that it’s patently unfair to allow a biological man to compete against biological women. I think the only solution to this unfairness is to have a third category of athletes, perhaps called “other,” for those who identify as transgender.

One of the aforementioned articles also mentioned corporations such as Anheuser-Busch (the parent of Bud Light) and Target as having “caved” to criticism from conservative groups over their partnerships with members of the LGBTQ+ community. As of June 20, Bud Light has seen its revenue drop ~25% since the beginning of the boycott in early April; the boycott was spurred by Bud Light’s decision to feature transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney in its advertising. One strange thing about supposed “caving,” though; last weekend, Bud Light was one of the sponsors of the Toronto Pride parade, which featured naked men standing around and riding bicycles in clear view of children attending the event. That is not what I would call “caving,” to put it mildly.

In a similar vein, Target doesn’t seem to have learned its lesson from 2016, when it adopted an “inclusive” restroom policy which caused its revenue to plummet. Last month, because of its “pride”-themed clothing, Target also faced a boycott which caused its revenue to drop ~20% and its stock price to plummet to a three-year low. Customers were especially infuriated by “tuck-friendly” women’s swimsuits and “pride”-themed clothing for children being featured front and center at some of its stores. As a result, some Target stores moved their “pride” section to the back, but that has not been enough to satisfy some Target shoppers.

Bud Light’s very recent sponsorship of the naked-featuring Toronto Pride parade, on the heels of the boycott, and Target’s “pride”-themed clothing, even after its restroom fiasco a few years back, has prompted me to wonder whether those in charge at these two companies are primarily focused on sales; it doesn’t seem so. While I usually admire companies that don’t seem to be overly focused on their bottom line, my admiration does not extend to Bud Light and Target.

While researching all of this, I came across some revealing (no pun intended) statistics in regard to Americans’ perceptions of gender. 61% of Americans now think that “defining gender as the sex listed on a person’s original birth certificate is the only way to define male and female in society.” This is a huge increase from 51% just a year ago. In a similar vein, only 36% of Americans now believe that “the definition of gender is antiquated and needs to be updated to include identity.” This number is down significantly from 42% a year ago. These numbers indicate a growing backlash against the push by trans community activists to expand their rights. In a similar vein, I came across an article by a gay man named Ben Appel about his perceptions of what the White House called LGBTQ Pride Month. I was struck by this quote: “Though I’m gay, I feel something besides pride on the occasion. The socially compulsory celebration now is something to dread. It means that for the entire month of June, you’ll get to hear about the plight of transgender people, just like you do the other 11 months of the year.” So, even within the LGBTQ community, there is resentment against the focus on the rights of the transgender community.

Putting it all together, there are three ways in which the transgender community appears to be experiencing a backlash: legislation that limits their rights; boycotts of companies that overreach in their support of trans people; and beliefs of Americans in relation to the definition of gender. You could also add negative feelings, which are often unspoken, at least in public. As for myself: last year I wrote that although I don’t have compassion for transgender activists, I do have compassion for the transgendered, who are often not the same people as the activists. My compassion in this regard is especially strong for those kids who are confused about their identity, plus those who have detransitioned back to their original biological gender. You can read more about that here: https://keithpetersenblog.com/2022/02/23/clarity-and-compassion-for-the-transgendered/

May the Lord continue to use His people to show and tell His truth and love to those in the transgender community. May some in that community come to understand that the Creator God made them in the first place, and that He doesn’t make mistakes; may this lead them to repentance.