A New Thai Uniform Policy

We in the US often forget that students--even at the university level--all over the world still wear uniforms.  

I wore a uniform to Catholic School. That was more years ago than I care to admit.  Some Catholic schools still require them, and there are some public and charter schools that have adopted them. But, for the most part, American students can wear whatever they want to school.

That is, as long as what they're wearing conforms to the accepted gender norms of their community.  Speaking of which:  While some parents say that uniforms are a "leveler" (If all kids are wearing the same outfit, none is "cooler" than the others), they also are a way of enforcing accepted gender norms.  Typically, males wear black (or other dark-colored) trousers and a white shirt with a plaid tie in the school's colors, while females wear a  skirt in that plaid with a white blouse.


In very few countries are transgenders more visible than they are in Thailand.  But even in the country that does more sex-reassignment surgeries than any other and whose Miss Tiffany transgender beauty contest is a national event, students are expected to wear the uniform that conforms to the gender on their national ID cards, which is all but impossible to change, even after transition and surgery.

Also, trans females are still referred to as "ladyboys" and trans males as "tomboys", which represents a different view from those in the West regarding transgenderism, not to mention an underlying male bias.

So it is significant that Bangkok university has changed its uniform policy to accommodate trans students.

A "ladyboy" can wear either of the uniforms shown above.  On the left is the female uniform; on the right is a modified male uniform with the trousers cut tighter than the ones males wear.

A "tomboy" can wear the modified female uniform shown on the right or a male uniform with the trousers cut a little looser than the ones biological males wear.

Hmm...Do you think Catholic schools will follow suit (pun intended)?  Prep schools?
 

Now It's Really A Women's College

What does it mean to be a "women's" or "female" college?

Not long ago--say, twenty or even fifteen years ago--almost anybody would have defined such a school (which were still called "girls' colleges" when I was in elementary school) as one that admitted only students whose birth certificates identified them as female.  And, I believe, very few people would have questioned such a definition or the policies derived from it.

Over the past few years, that's been changing.  Actually, most women's schools did not have clearly-articulated policies about gender, except to say that those who are born male are not eligible for admissions.  

A number of trans men have attended those schools.  Most lived as female during their days in those schools; a few transitioned to male and the schools,  to their credit, usually did what they could to support those men.  However, as more than one official is quick to point out, such a policy is not an endorsement of the mistaken notion that trans men are "really" women.

Still, until last year, none of the country's female-only schools was willing to admit someone who identifies as female but was born as male.  Mills College, in Oakland, CA, was the first to do so and to craft a "welcoming" policy for transgender women.  Mount Holyoke College soon followed.

Now Smith College has done likewise.  In doing so, the Massachusetts liberal-arts college has become the first "Seven Sisters" school to say it will consider applications from transgender women.  The move came after the school came under heavy criticism--and threats of withheld donations from alumnae--after it denied the application of Calliope Wong, a trans woman from Connecticut.  To be fair, when Ms. Wong applied, she was not yet legally recognized as female in her home state of Connecticut.  Still, she was--and is--living as a woman, and her situation generated a petition that gathered over 4000 signatures.

How long before the other Seven Sisters colleges--and other single-sex schools--follow the lead of Mills, Mount Holyoke and Smith?

 

The Best States For Transgender Student-Athletes

It's actually easier to be a transgender student-athlete in Nebraska than it is in New Hampshire--or New York.

Yes, you read that right.  At least, in Nebraska, a trans girl who wants to play on her school's volleyball team--or a trans boy who wants to play basketball--has more legal rights and protections than his or her peers in my home state or the one whose motto is "Live Free Or Die."

What makes this all even weirder is that New York and New Hampshire have both legalized gay marriage, while very few people expect Nebraska to do the same any time soon.

Or would it?

Rhonda Blanford-Green, the executive director of Nebraska School Activities Association, had previously worked in neighboring Colorado, which has had a policy trans-inclusive non-discrimination policy for five years.  She decided to introduce something similar in the Cornhusker State.  It passed the NSAA board unanimously during the winter.  However, as it is a school policy and not a state law, it attracted little attention.  So far, nobody has invoked it.

On the other hand, the Empire State, which was among the first states to include language to protect sexual orientation in its human rights laws, and the fifth state to legalize same-sex marriage, has been behind the curve in helping transgenders.  There is still no language in the State's anti-discrimination laws to protect gender identity or expression.  Former Governor David Patterson issued an executive order banning discrimination against State workers.  As I understand, there is no time limit on it; however, it could be rescinded by Andrew Cuomo's successor.  

New York City passed its own laws banning discrimination on the basis of gender identity and expression in April of 2002, but 74 other cities--including, interestingly, upstate Rochester--beat them to it.

When one considers this history, perhaps it's less surprising that New York is less progressive than Nebraska when it comes to trans student-athletes. Then again, some might argue that Nebraska's policy is the work of one particular person (even if it did pass unanimously). Others might say that it passed just because people pay more attention to school sports in the Cornhusker State than in New York.  

Here is a map showing which states have specific policies for student-athletes (in dark blue), which ones have overarching athletic or educational  policies that cover trans people , and which ones have no protections (lighest shade) at all:

IFI Wins (For Now)

The Illinois Family Institute are savoring their victory.

Yesterday, I mentioned that the IFI was trying to get the East Aurora School District to rescind its new transgender-friendly policy, which was adopted only four days ago.

The rules allowed students to use bathrooms, locker rooms and other facilities intended for the gender of their minds and spirits.  Of course, that's not the language that was written into the short-lived regulation.  But, for a brief period of time, at least one member of that school board showed an understanding of the fact that our genders are not simply a mater of sexual apparatus or chromosomes. 

Today, the Board is expected to capitulate to the pressure of the IFI--which helped to spur a campaign of negative letters, e-mails and phone calls--and reverse the policy.  

 According to School Board President Annette Johnson, passing the new regulation was a "mistake."  She claimed that board members had been misinformed that the district had to implement the guidelines in order to conform with a constantly-changing Illinois school code.  


The National Center for Transgender Equality says that allowing students to live in the gender in which they see themselves is critical in preventing bullying as well as host of other problems that follow.  When students can express who they actually are, and there are policies to protect that expression, most would-be bullies realize that they can't get away with the violence and harassment they can commit when young people are forced to repress their  expression of gender identity and sexuality.

Maybe the IFI will fall apart, or Board members will see the ight they saw this past Monday, when they voted for the transgender policy. Or so I hope.

PFLAG On LGBT Students

In the month of September, we hear and read much about education and young people.

Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG)-New York City has published some remarkable data on both.  In particular, I was struck by the following:  

• "LGBT students are twice as likely to say that they were not planning on completing high school or going to college."
• "Gay teens are 8.4 times more likely to report having attempted suicide and 5.9 times more likely to report high levels of depression compared with peers from families that reported no or low levels of family rejection."
• "Nearly a fifth of students are physically assaulted because of their sexual orientation and a tenth because of their gender identity."
• "About two thirds of LGBT students report having ever been sexually harassed (e.g., sexual remarks made, being touched inappropriately) in school in the past year."

It's hard not to see that the last two items are causes of the first two.  Why would someone willingly go to a school, or other any place, where he or she has been beaten up or sexually harassed, or faces the prospect of experiencing one or both?

I myself finished high school only because my parents wouldn't allow me not to.  That was one of the rules they had for me and my brothers:  We had to finish high school.  I graduated with a pretty high class ranking, but I can't help but to think about how much better I might have done had I felt safer, and therefore more motivated, in school.  

Now, I didn't announce my gender identity or sexuality in school, mainly because I didn't have the language for either--and, truthfully, almost nobody in that place and time had it, either.  Still, most of the boys in my school knew that somehow I wasn't quite one of them.  They projected their lurid fantasies (which, of course, were not in any way informed by reality) about what it meant to be gay or a "boy/girl" onto me. 

I did the best I could at "laying low" and got through most days without incident.  Even so, I could always feel the hormonal hostility in the air of the school hallways and the field where we had gym classes and soccer practice.  And, of course, the locker room was pure terror and torture.  I don't think I was ever again as afraid--or disgusted--as I was there.

Somehow I graduated.  Then I went onto college.  Living on campus wasn't any better, really.  There was just as much hormone-fueled bullying there.  The difference was that those conflagrations had another, equally potent fuel:  alcohol.   I very nearly flunked out after my freshman year.   

Back in those days, though, most of us didn't talk about such things, except with each other.  That is, if we decided to out ourselves.  More of us just "soldiered onward" or dropped out, saying that the schools we attended "weren't quite right" for us.

And I know of some who committed suicide, whether in the ways we normally think of, or in slow-motion (e.g., with drugs and alcohol).  

Today, there are organizations like PFLAG and people with whom LGBT students can talk.  And more of them talk openly to each other.  However, they still face the same threats we faced in my youth.  I hope that, one day, such will no longer be the case.