If you visited the National Park Service website for the Stonewall National Monument in the past month, you may have noticed a small change. All references to the LGBTQ community were changed to “LGB community.” This shift, while subtle, showcases a change in federal policy concerning the “T,” transgender, and “Q,” queer, in this commonly used acronym, occurring in the wake of President Donald J. Trump’s recent executive orders. This is significant in Stonewall’s case, as it was the site of a riot generally regarded as the beginning of the gay and transgender rights movement.
Since the beginning of Donald Trump’s presidency, he has instituted four executive orders that directly impact the transgender community.
The first, issued on Trump’s first day in office, “Defending Women From Gender Ideology Extremism,” said that the government now only recognizes two sexes, male and female, and that these sexes could not be changed. This EO also required federally funded programs and agencies to adopt the same language and not promote gender identities that are not tied to one’s sex at birth. Additionally, it made it illegal for transgender women to be in ‘intimate’ shared spaces for cisgender women, such as jails.
The next executive order, “Restoring Biological Truth To The Federal Government,” was put into effect on January 27. This order banned anyone whose pronouns do not align with their sex assigned at birth from serving in the military.
On January 28, Trump signed the executive order “Protecting Children from Chemical and Surgical Mutilation.” This EO prohibits any federal funds from going to gender affirming medical procedures for children under nineteen. In addition, it calls for government agencies to revisit any policy that relies on the World Professional Association for Transgender Health’s standards of care.
The most recent EO concerning transgender people, signed on February 5, “Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports,” forbade any transgender woman from participating in federally funded sports, both for primary schools and colleges. This order does not include a policy for transgender men or non-binary athletes.
These executive orders follow a precedent created in the past decade of states banning care for transgender youth, as well as federal limitations on transgender people in the military. These Executive Orders, continuing with that precedent, present a new federal view on healthcare for transgender youth, as well as recognition of only two sexes under the federal government.
Before unpacking the repercussions of these Executive Orders, there are some terms that are helpful to be aware of. First of all, in medical fields, being transgender is classified as gender dysphoria, which is described by the American Psychiatric Association as “psychological distress that results from an incongruence between one’s sex assigned at birth and one’s gender identity.” Effectively, being transgender is when your sex assigned at birth is inconsistent with your gender identity. People who are transgender can also be considered “gender expansive.” The identifier of “gender expansive” is more inclusive of not only trans-male and trans-female people, but also non-binary and other gender identities. A transgender male (trans man) is a person who was assigned female at birth and identifies as male. A transgender female (trans woman) is a person who was assigned male at birth and identifies as female. A non-binary person is a person who was assigned either male or female at birth, and for whom neither gender fits their identity. Being transgender is also distinct from one’s sexual identity, so it does not account for a person’s sexuality.
These executive orders change two major things for trans youth: their access to gender affirming care, and their treatment at schools, particularly at public schools.
The World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) was directly referenced in the newly passed executive orders, where they were said to have “lacking scientific integrity.” WPATH is the publisher of the Standards of Care 8, which is a comprehensive guide to medical and institutional policies regarding trans people. It is over 250 pages long, and has 118 authors and contributors. This document is used around the world as the rulebook for caring for trans people. The EO, “Protecting Children from Chemical and Surgical Mutilation,” requires any federal guidance using the Standards of Care to be reevaluated.
Though Trump’s executive orders claim that gender affirming treatment is unnecessary, the global medical consensus argues for the benefit of gender affirming care for transgender people. The treatment for gender dysphoria is medically recognized as gender affirming care, which includes hormone therapy, surgeries, and other treatments such as laser hair removal.
Hormone therapy can look different depending on the person, but the basic principle is to slowly change the hormones in the body to more closely match those of the gender they identify with. For adults, common methods of hormone therapy include testosterone injections or gel for trans men, and estrogen pills as well as hormone blockers, which prevent more testosterone being produced, for trans women. The most common surgeries for trans men are double mastectomy (top surgery), where their breast tissue is removed to make the chest flat, and trans women have the option to get a breast augmentation. However, for children, surgeries are not often recommended. Instead, hormone blockers, which delay puberty, are used.
If transgender individuals do not receive the aid that they need, there is a higher chance of self-harming behaviors. According to a study conducted by the Williams Institute at UCLA law school, 42% of transgender adults have attempted suicide and 81% have engaged in non-suicidal self harm. Another study by the Trevor Project, a nonprofit organization that focuses on suicide prevention for LGBTQ+ youth, found that by denying access to this care, the rate of suicide attempts and self harm will likely go up. Their research concluded that in areas where anti-trans laws are put into effect, transgender youth are up to 72% more likely to attempt suicide. This increase aligns with the claim that gender affirming care prevents suicide, as the executive orders as well as state laws restrict access to this healthcare, or add roadblocks to the path of social transition.
Social transition is the common first step for minors who come out as trans, as the medical community does not recommend any surgeries or hormones until late teens or adulthood. Social transition usually consists of changing one’s name and pronouns, and other steps like a haircut or new clothes.
This ongoing uncertainty surrounding healthcare access is also very present at the SSSAS Upper School. A faculty member at SSSAS, who is a parent of a gender expansive child, was interviewed anonymously by The Voice. In this interview they expressed their greatest concern: “That we will be prevented from providing the proper care for our child, care that has been recommended by a team of doctors.” Now that healthcare for trans youth is no longer protected this parent said that, “Doctors [providing gender affirming care] are worried because their licenses and their livelihoods are at stake,” adding that, “In order to provide proper care for our child, we may be forced to move out of Virginia. We have even considered moving abroad if necessary.”
Virginia is one of seven states in the US that neither has laws to protect or prevent access to healthcare for trans youth. Additionally, across the country, hospitals, such as Children’s National Hospital in DC, have paused providing gender affirming care, such as hormone blockers to minors. Nonetheless, other centers continue to provide care, and the University of Virginia’s Board of Visitors voted to allow continued access to gender affirming care for students under 19, but just to those that were already in process.
This parent also mentioned that they will support their child, “The exact same way that parents of cisgender kids do: we do everything we can to help them live a happy and healthy life.”
In the SSSAS community, just like every community, there are students who identify as transgender. These policies hit close to home for students, including one transgender student who agreed to an interview.
When a transgender student at the Upper School was asked how he felt about the newest executive orders, he replied, “The new policies just disappoint me.” This student acknowledges that he isn’t old enough to access gender-affirming surgery, but he recognizes how there are a lot of people who are old enough, “and they don’t have access to what they need, and that disappoints me,” he says. Ever since these executive orders were placed, he has been feeling stressed. He says, “It’s very disappointing that old white men get to decide all of this.”
Since St. Stephen’s and St. Agnes is a private school, he says he doesn’t think we will be affected by the new executive orders nor will our school change because of them, however, he does say, “it could change people’s opinions.” However, he adds that, “I feel very welcomed [at SSSAS] because it’s easy for me to get access to stuff, like changing my name for example.”
Because SSSAS is a private school, that means that the school does not need to follow federal policies, such as these executive orders. However, public schools could risk losing federal funding if they do not comply.
Another student at SSSAS who identifies as trans said during an interview, “I see this kind of paralleling gay rights, and civil rights movements in the 1900s, so I see that in the early 2000s for the first point. So, I’m generally hopeful. I think that it’s not great right now, but I think that we’ve always existed. I don’t think that we’re gonna be taken away in the next four years.” While they were generally hopeful, they were concerned about being able to access care, especially because treatments are now restricted for those who are eighteen.
At St. Stephen’s and St. Agnes School, there are policies in place to support all students, including those who are gender expansive. In an interview, Head of School, Mrs. Kirsten Adams shared the school’s policy for transgender students.
When a student identifies to the school that they are transgender, there is a “gender identity support plan” where the school will, “sit down with the family and talk through how [should the school] support [the student].” In these plans she notes that the school’s “practice thus far has been to be in partnership with parents.” It is important to mention, however, that there have yet to be any instances where parents oppose a student’s transition at school.
Mrs. Adams also emphasized that the school tried to make sure “that there are safe adults” for all students to make sure that they have support. If a student wants to use certain pronouns, that is respected by teachers and preferred pronouns are used daily and in report card comments. Smaller things, such as the non-gender specific dress code, enable all students to have flexibility in wearing what best fits how they wish to present.
One transgender student, in an anonymous interview with The Voice commented on some of the other supports that they have noticed, saying, “I know around half the teachers at the beginning of the year have like a Google form and they say, hey, what are your names, your pronouns, how would you like me to refer to you? I think that’s really nice to see, even if someone who’s not out, it’s nice to see that teachers are supportive.”
However, she also mentioned that in some areas, teachers were lacking in action, particularly when it came to conversations with peers. “In the past, [students] say, oh, stop acting like a girl. Now they say stop acting like you’re gay. I think if teachers just stepped up and just said ‘that is not acceptable, if you say that again, you’re going to Ms. McGuire’s office and getting a detention,’ I think people would not say that stuff. I think it’s very much if a figure of authority and not just a fellow student stands up and says, that is not right, you cannot do that, that is not okay. That would definitely help a lot.”
This student also voiced her fears of coming out to her friends at SSSAS. She said of her friends, “I’m not out to you, but if I came out, would you still wanna be with me? Do you, would you, still want to be my friend?”
Additionally, outside the SSSAS community, a faculty member mentioned that, “In [their family’s] experience, outright discrimination is rare. [They] have found it more common for people to quietly withdraw from our presence, which means that our social circle has grown smaller.”
The Voice sent a form out to the entire Upper School at SSSAS, which asked students and faculty what their opinions were and how knowledgeable they were concerning the newest executive orders. Ninety-six students responded and their identities remain anonymous. 83.3 percent of responders were aware of the orders and 16.7 percent of people were not. Out of the 96 responses, only 86 people responded to the question, “How much do you agree with the new orders?”. Out of these responses, 67.4 percent of responders strongly disagreed with the orders, 17.5 percent of responders were in the middle, either neutral or slightly leaning towards agree or disagree, and 15.1 percent of responders strongly agreed with the orders.
The form included an optional free response where responders could write more about their perspective on this. 15 out of those 96 people left a response, one of them saying, “The Bible clearly states there are 2 genders. There is no they/them that is made up nonsense. To pretend that you are a girl but your a boy is like pretending to be a superhero. The reality is your not a superhero and you not a girl your a boy. This disgusting idea that you can change your sex is not possible and I am horrified that it is being taught to the youth. In my opinion teaching kids that you can change you sex is ruining the future of our country. I am very glad President Trump will put an end to this nonsense and therefore save the next generation by stopping the teaching of lies.”
This response references a commonly sighted Bible passage that is used to argue for the existence of only two, unchangeable genders. This passage, in the book of Genesis, verse 1:27, states, “So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.” Nonetheless, there are other interpretations of this passage, one which Reverend Elizabeth Rees highlighted in her interview with The Voice, saying, “the whole of Genesis one is this beautiful story of creating so many things and a binary is being used to show the whole… God creates day and night, but God also creates sunset and… all of the gradations in between.”
In this interview, Rev. Rees also mentioned that the Episcopal church has, “really strong moral clarity on this issue.” According to their website, since 2015, the Episcopal church has opened ordination to members of the LGBTQ community, as well as directly voicing their support of laws that stop discrimination against different gender identities. Additionally, Rev. Rees stressed that, “Jesus was always centering the people that were at the margins,” and because transgender people were not explicitly mentioned, “all we can do, I think, is see Jesus acting in love and care for the neighbor, which is so much broader than we can imagine. And trying not to act out of fear and contempt for others.”
Head of Debate Club here at SSSAS, Finn Moore, was interviewed on his opinions on this topic. Moore says, “I think that our government funds a lot of things that don’t really need to be funded right now, because people are dying of disease, dying of homelessness… should sex change be funded right now? Unless they’re medically necessary, I really don’t want to see tax dollars going to it.” Still, Moore counters, saying “But at the same time, I think that Trump is not sticking to the promise of, ‘I’m trying to get rid of spending waste in the government,’ he’s trying to get rid of transgenderism, which is a civil right that people should have. And I think that it’s wrong that the President is directly targeting Americans.”
Another response to the form states that, “It shouldn’t matter how someone identifies because that is their choice. It is so incredibly stupid that the government should have any control over people’s identity. Our country had been doing well in transitioning and accepting members of the LGBTQ+ community and Trump is bringing us way back down. This needs to stop because people’s identities are no one else’s business.”
With the new executive orders fears remain for the transgender community. One transgender student commented on this saying, “I very much see this is kind of like the start of things. I don’t necessarily see this as the last action that’s gonna be made against trans people. So, I mean, I wouldn’t say this directly affects me super hard right now, but I could see how this could be an avenue. But [if] this stuff is upheld in by SCOTUS or another federal court that this could be a stepping stone for worse things to come.”
The faculty member, previously mentioned, also said to “Learn your history. When small minority groups are targeted by people in power, it rarely stops there. Homosexuals were one of the first groups persecuted in Nazi Germany, eventually forced into concentration camps and labeled with a pink triangle. Recall the warning from Pastor Martin Niemöller, a German Lutheran priest who was sent to a concentration camp for opposing the Nazis: “First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a socialist. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.”
