Special to the Vanguard
Davis, CA – We were dismayed to learn today that Davis Parent University and the Davis Joint Unified School District decided to change a scheduled in-person event on trans and gender-expansive kids to an online-only event to protect the physical and emotional safety of the speaker, parents, and children who would attend this event. We fully understand and agree with their choice to protect the speaker and our community members.
We are angered that once again—following a national pattern—an event that aims to educate families about trans identity and youth and connect them with supportive, life-saving resources has been forced to change venue due to transphobic, hateful threats of violence.
Hateful speech that promotes biases such as racism, misogyny, ableism, and homo- and transphobia is often platformed under the argument of “free speech,” without a nuance 
of analysis that recognizes how hate speech leads to acts of violence against marginalized communities.
But when an event is planned to support people who are marginalized by race, gender, sexuality, ability, etc., those same “free speech advocates” infringe upon the free speech of others by using the tools of bullies, threatening physical harm in order to silence voices they disagree with. This is not only a hateful act, but it is fundamentally un-American.
We are glad that technology will allow the speaker, Dr. Rachel Pepper, to still reach Davis’s parents, youth, educators, and others concerned about the wellbeing of trans and gender-expansive kids with valuable information and resources. Additionally, we are proud to be one of many local resources that supports families with LGBTQ+ kids as well as the youth themselves.
As an organization dedicated to ending prejudice and hate, we feel compelled to point out how these threats of violence effectively silence or sideline voices advocating for access to physical and mental healthcare for youth that can save their lives.
A UCLA study found that around one in four California teens says that their peers view them as gender-nonconforming. While these teens may be a minority, we firmly believe that their safety, their inclusion, and their lives matter, and we are committed to standing up for their rights to be seen, heard, and respected.
The far right perpetrators must be brought to justice!
The article doesn’t even describe what was said, or who it was directed at (other than “against the event” – whatever that means).
And if it was an actual threat, this is something that the police would be involved with. Given that there’s no mention of that, it’s likely not illegal.
It’s not “platformed” under the argument of free speech.
It IS free speech, up until the point at which it directly encourages violence or other illegal activity. (At which point, once again – the police would be involved.)
What I actually see here (from groups like the Phoenix Coalition) is not helping to “heal” anything in society, at this point. It’s likely having an opposite effect, further marginalizing those who are already marginalized from the rest of society.
Rallying “support” from those who already agree with you is not accomplishing anything whatsoever.
The underlying concern (which I’m not taking a “position” on) is that some apparently fear that schools are promoting an “agenda”, which ultimately leads to life-changing, irreversible, “gender affirmation” medical intervention for minors.
Maybe THAT’s what the Phoenix Coalition should be talking about. The folks that are concerned about THAT are not necessarily a minority.
There’s evidence that the medical profession is starting to “support” this, as well. (It’s covered under the Affordable Care Act, at this point. Not sure if it covers this for minors.)
I strongly disagree with this point: “Rallying “support” from those who already agree with you is not accomplishing anything whatsoever.”
That misunderstands how public opinion operates.
Part of the problem was laid out in an Intercept article this week that noted that the left rallied to abortion rights but not trans rights.
Maybe some on the “left” are concerned about exactly what I described, above.
There’s a vast difference between hating individuals who suffer from “gender dysphoria”, vs. being concerned about societal forces encouraging sex-change interventions (especially on minors).
Some on the “left” fail to acknowledge this difference.
There is an incident (caught on video) in which a leader at a hospital (in a meeting) notes the amount of money that hospitals can make from this, while simultaneously “encouraging” staff who have concerns to find employment elsewhere.
Apparently, that hospital temporarily shut down these procedures, after this came to light.
Gender affirming surgery is part of the treatment for some individuals who suffer from gender dysphoria. This is where I think the conversation needs to go. It took a long time for people to come around on marriage equality. Ignoring the issue, is not going to make it go away.
I do agree with you regarding this:
That is, what controls should be in place before allowing/encouraging minors to undergo life-altering, permanent medical interventions (including hormone blockers, hormones, sex “reassignment” surgery, etc.), based upon a belief that they were born in the wrong sex.
Primarily for their own sake, though also to (what degree) government should pay hospitals/doctors for that.
Totally different issue.
Again, this is not about denying “rights” (such as the right to marry) for transgender people. They can marry anyone of any sex.
In fact, it’s not really about transgender people, themselves. It’s about systems which encourage life-altering medical interventions, including on minors.
(Personally, I think that marriage could probably be done-away with altogether, but that’s a different issue.)
I will admit that I personally don’t believe that one’s sex is a belief.
It’s just a biological reality (and almost everyone “believed” that until about 5 years ago). And for the most part, that’s still what most people “believe” – even if they don’t acknowledge it.
There have always been a few people who believed that they were born in the wrong sex (and took steps to change it). From what I gather, some are subsequently happy that they’ve pursued this, and some are not.
I had a supervisor one time (some 30 years ago) who I believe had undergone that procedure. It was visually obvious, though no one talked about it, and no one had anything against “her” (used to be a “him”, I believe). (Actually, one of the nicer supervisors I’ve had. My guess is that she was satisfied with the procedure, so more power to her. Certainly, she held a higher position than I did at that organization.)