In response to the Minnesota Child Protection League

In+response+to+the+Minnesota+Child+Protection+League

The Oracle holds a high standard of objective journalism, and we want to give equal representation to the arguments and concerns of those who we may not always agree with personally. Hamline’s values include dedication to diversity and acceptance, and this is a message that we always try to uphold when creating our newspaper each week.

Due to the fact that the Oracle did not have a voice from the Minnesota Children’s Protection League in this week’s story titled “Anti-transgender ad causes outrage,” we would like to address the half of the issue that was not as heavily emphasized in our story. The Oracle spoke to members of the LGBTQIA and Hamline community, but we did not wish to create the impression that the article demonstrated bias or partiality to our own community. We believe that the Minnesota Child Protection League’s concerns are just as valid as the ones that are closer to home. We wanted to devote some space to think about the implications of the proposed transgender athlete policy from the Minnesota State High School League.

The policy, which would affect the over 500 schools, was not well advertised and many were unaware that the policy was coming up for a vote, let alone what it stood for. The full-page ad from the Minnesota Child Protection League served to create a public awareness of the proposal, and upon receiving enough responses to completely table the discussion until December, it is clear that there is a legitimate public concern about the impact that the policy will have.

While the ad itself was presented in an unstable sort of slippery slope argument, (Transgendered athletes in high school sports? Well, might as well say goodbye to your defenseless daughter’s ever-sacrosanct purity!) and while it did imply that transgender individuals (students, nonetheless) are lecherous predators who cannot be trusted, some of the basis of the Minnesota Child Protection League’s oppositional attitude is rooted in legitimate critical concerns.

As mentioned in the article, transgender women (male-to-female transitioning individuals) present a potentially complicated situation due to the fact that their biological male bodies are bigger and stronger on average. This could possibly give an unfair advantage against competitors in girls’ high school sports. Also due to these biological differences, transgender women may show more athletic ability than biological women and thus bar eligible girls from being recruited by teams. The policy also would not allow exceptions for religious schools, whose beliefs about gender might be somewhat different from the beliefs of secular institutions.

The Minnesota Child Protection League have unfortunately buried their concerns within a tangled web of sexist and discriminatory assumptions, but the fact that they have managed to postpone the policy decision means that there is now more time to create awareness of the issue, discover where the differences of opinion lie and create a solution that includes input from as many representative voices as possible. The situation could very easily spiral in a negative direction; why not try for a constructive outcome instead?