So, what is a “Woman”?
During the Supreme Court confirmation hearings late last month Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) by all outward appearances, a “woman” asked another woman, soon-to-be United States Supreme Court Justice Katanji Jackson, if she could define the word “woman.” This line of questioning was followed up the next day by Sen.Ted Cruz (R-Texas) who opined: “I think you are the only Supreme Court nominee in history who has been unable to answer the question ‘What is a woman?’ ”
We all know what these questions were intended to do. The GOP has made no bones about its intention to annihilate the rights of transgender persons, who are fair game given the vulnerability of this emerging segment of the American demographic, and many of whom are young persons and children whose families are struggling with this sensitive and often difficult social issue.
But the better and more brutally honest question put to Judge Jackson (had those Senators the courage to ask it) should have been: “How does one define the term ‘Female’ in the context of gender identity?” And beyond that: “How does the law currently, and how will it moving forward, evolve to address the legal rights of those not ‘born’ female but who claim to have a gender different from the sex to which they were assigned at birth?”
This goes to pivotal social, political and legal issues ranging from questions about which public bathroom transgender persons can use, to how they shall be recognized on official documents and whether they should serve in the US military. The American public remains fundamentally divided on these issues, the latest one to emerge regarding the growing refusal of many jurisdictions to permit transgender females to join female sports teams.
Taking a step back, the term “Women” is defined in the: Black’s Law Dictionary, as: “All the females of the of the human species.”
Some of the esteemed Senators took a more ‘biological’ approach defining a woman as: “Any person with a cervix.”
But the issues surrounding the subject of gender identification are far more complex than mere biology. And the attacks on the transgender community far more far more complex than mere political discourse. More than 300 anti LGBTQ bills have been introduced this year, with 130-plus specifically targeting transgender people according to Human Rights Campaign, America’s biggest LGBTQ advocacy group.
And while many Americans strongly support the expansion of LGBTQ rights, a good may others are deeply concerned about the negative consequences that such expansion may promote, among them: the fear, unsupported by members of the medical community, that inclusion of trans women in some female sports increases the safety risk to women, or is inherently unfair due to the advantages presented by male anatomy and physiology.
Others claim that the expansion of transgender rights presents safety concerns for cisgenders, (women biologically identified as female at birth), in all female spas, gyms, domestic violence safe- havens, rape centers and prisons. There is no shortage of news accounts reporting indecent exposure, rape and other offenses of men posing as transgender women to illegally gain access to such facilities with the intent of committing these egregious acts.
Still others argue that transgenderism impinges on claims by cisgender women regarding sexual discrimination in the workplace and equal pay claims.
On Thursday, the Alabama Legislature voted to ban medical treatment to assist in the transition of transgender persons and threatening imprisonment of up to ten years to doctors and nurses who provide gender-confiring treatment. This would include everything from prescription of hormones ad puberty blocking medications to the performance of interventional surgeries.
The thinking purportedly behind this is to “safeguard” those children who have not yet reached puberty claiming that their brains are not sufficiently matured to make the medical decisions underlying the transition process and the lifetime consequences which such interventions entail.
The AMA maintains this is detrimental to the health of these individuals who according to the article in today’s New York Times piece: Lawmakers in Alabama Cote to Ban Medical Care For Transgender Youth,” Rick Rojas ad Tariro Mzezewa reporting.
It’s fair to say that the United States Supreme Court will be flooded with these cases in due course.
It may very well be time to re-examine both our legal vernacular and our legal approach to all of these sensitive and button issues.
I don’t like the tone those questions took, or the political fire aimed at Justice Jackson, but it’s safe to assume she soon will be taking those very questions when she takes her anticipate seat on the bench