The power of two: Behind the GOP move to axe ‘transgender’ from language

 The power of two: Behind the GOP move to axe ‘transgender’ from language




The Scene

It was a regular commitment from Joe Biden’s White House: A meeting between LGBTQ “stakeholders” and the Office of Public Engagement. Groups like GLAAD got direct access to the administration, helping craft policy and language for a president who called transgender rights “the civil rights issue of our time.”

Times change.

One month into Donald Trump’s presidency, pro-LGBTQ language, including nearly every reference to “transgender” people, has been pulled off of federal government websites. The impact on sports and on people changing their government documents was obvious. But the scale of the pullback, announced on Trump’s first day in office, goes far further than his first term, with pages and terms that were kept online then getting taken down now.

“The trans pages remained online because Obama purposely created a mess for the rest of us to clean up on the way out the door,” said Terry Schilling, the president of the conservative American Principles Project, which supports the changes. “Obama didn’t even start really pushing the trans issue until his second term.”The result of this faster, deeper approach has been the erasure of “transgender” identity and terms from whatever the federal government can control. Law enforcement training on “building relationships in transgender communities,” education resources for “LGBTQI+ students,” references to trans people at the Stonewall National Monument, where they were instrumental in sparking the modern LGBTQ movement — gone, gone, and gone.

“If the government itself doesn’t see you, doesn’t recognize you, the resources won’t be there to help,” said Barbara Simon, the senior director of news at GLAAD. The Biden approach, she said, “wasn’t always perfect; but at least included the people directly involved, who know what they’re talking about.”

Title icon

Know More

Trump’s more aggressive rollback of pro-LGBT language was previewed throughout his 2024 campaign, and by the conservatives who wanted to staff a new administration. Trump himself promised to make it “the official policy of the United States” that there were only two biological genders; in Mandate for Leadership, the public manual for Project 2025, Heritage Foundation President Kevin Roberts recommended that a new president start “deleting” terms like “gender identity,” to undo what “woke culture warriors” had wrought.Words matter. Change the words, change the culture,” said Bethany Kozma, a former deputy chief of staff at USAID in the first Trump administration, in a Project 2025 training video published last year by ProPublica. “We should never use the word ‘gender,’ as conservatives. It’s not specific, and it’s nonsensical. Instead, use the word ‘sex,’ or ‘biological sex,’ or ‘male and female.’”

Hours after being sworn in, Trump did just that. Some websites with transgender-specific language have been taken offline; some have been edited to remove “transgender” and gender references completely. Sensitivity training sessions, still available off government websites, have been de-linked and scrubbed from official sources.

“We are dealing with an administration that is trying to cloud what reality is to suit its own political agenda,” said Brian Dittmeier, the public policy director at GLSEN. “The administration’s efforts will not be limited to only trying to suppress transgender people’s identity.”Those changes first affected transgender Americans who were immediately cut off from access to change-of-name or -gender forms. But the rewrite has gone much deeper. In December, HHS recommended getting the monkeypox vaccine if you “are a gay, bisexual, or other man who has sex with men or a transgender, nonbinary, or gender-diverse person” with multiple recent sexual partners. After Jan. 20, this was edited to advice for “a gay, bisexual, or other man who has sex with men or sex-diverse person.” The new language was in line with the official HHS guidance released on Wednesday: “A person’s sex is unchangeable and determined by objective biology.”

The effects of this are being litigated right now. After Doctors for America sued to restore information about trans healthcare on HHS and other relevant sites, a federal judge appointed by George W. Bush ordered the administration to comply. It did so — with banners on each page clarifying that the information did not “reflect biological reality.” Nothing compels the administration, or any administration, to use language that advocates or healthcare organizations say is outdated.

“We are in new territory here, with the government censoring scientists and public heath experts, forcing them to make statements in line with the federal government’s political assertions, rather than scientific facts,” said Jack Turban, a pediatric psychiatrist and advocate for youth gender medicine.

“The government can say whatever it wants, and there’s no real First Amendment prohibition on that,” said Scarlet Kim, a staff attorney at the ACLU. The Administrative Procedure Act set the rules for how language and regulations could be changed, but it was not automatically enforced. One month ago, there was an administration that used GLAAD and GLSEN and the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH)’s terminology. And now there isn’t.

“The policy change has to be subject to a particular standard, both procedurally and substantively,” said Kim. “But if the government wants to go into an international forum and say, ‘this is the biological reality of sex,’ there’s no real argument that we can marshal against that.”

Title icon

The View From The White House

“As the front door to the White House, the Office of Public Liaison hosts a wide range of groups to bring the public into the fold of the policy process,” said White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly. (As in Trump’s first term, the administration has changed the name of what Biden called “the Office of Public Engagement.”) “There is significant interest from groups around the country to meet with President Trump’s representatives, so those seeking to undermine his widely popular agenda are not prioritized.”

Title icon

David’s view

Two years ago, when Trump first laid out how he would restore binary sex definitions in official policy and communications, it was often covered as a wedge issue. I always thought that this underplayed the importance of language to the conservative movement — and the fragility of the changes GLAAD et al had won.

When the Biden administration (and before that, the Obama administration) adopted new definitions of “gender,” it didn’t generate a ton of news. When it did, the coverage tended to focus on how subtly the language had been changed, with massive downstream effects for people who did not identify as their sex assigned at birth. And it comes as some of the groups with influence here, like GLSEN and the Human Rights Campaign, are shrinking staff as a response to decreased donations.

Conservatives saw an existential threat to language, norms, and civilization. Liberals saw the rising number of people identifying as LGBT as progress, as more Americans identified as what they truly were; conservatives and gender-critical liberals saw a “social contagion,” inflamed by the government. For at least the next three years and 11 months, there will be a conflict between the United States, which now officially categorizes gender as immutable and assigned at birth, and non-government institutions like the Associated Press — and the overwhelming majority of medical and science bodies — which don’t.

This happened so quickly, and so definitively, that the politics of the shift are unclear. Polling during the Biden presidency captured a backlash to its positions on gender fluidity, making Republicans more confident that they could roll it all back. But how much public support is there for — to pick one example —refusing to call the first transgender member of Congress “she”? How will the administration’s defense of “free speech,” here and internationally, blend with efforts to force the Stonewall Museum to change its language and limit what flags it can fly? That is going to be tested.

Title icon

Notable

  • At his LawDork newsletter, Chris Geidner covers the court proceedings over the transgender military ban, where a Biden-appointed (and openly gay) judge has been unmoved by the administration’s argument. “You cannot tell me that transgender people are not being discriminated against… We are literally erasing their contributions to modern society.”
  • In Axios, Marc Caputo explains how the Trump administration’s fight with the AP over the “Gulf of America” is rooted in older, deeper disagreements with its stylebook. “The first notable conservative complaint surfaced in 2013, when AP discontinued ‘illegal immigrant’ following a pressure campaign from immigrant-rights advocates.”
  • In the Washington Post, Kelsey Ables and Mark Johnson talk to scientists who say that the administration’s hard binary definition of gender is inaccurate.

visit :business-strategy-conferences.scifat.com

Nomination link: https://jut.li/GmQbl

contact:managementstrategy@scifat.com


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Artificial Intelligence Revolutionizes Customer Relationship Management

The World’s Best Management Consulting Firms

Booming Cross-Border E-Commerce Activity in Asia Presents Opportunities for European Merchants VARIOUS Booming Cross-Border E-Commerce Activity in Asia Presents Opportunities for European Merchants by Fintechnews Switzerland September 12, 2023 International e-commerce spending by JCB cardholders based in Asia increased by 52% between 2021 and 2022, presenting a significant opportunity for merchants in Europe as shoppers across the region show increasing willingness to purchase goods online from foreign businesses, a new paper by the Japanese credit card company shows. The report, titled “Click into Place: Unpacking Card Abandonment”, provides insights on online spending from Asia, sharing the latest research and data on e-commerce trends to help businesses boost e-commerce sales and stand out from the crowd. According to the report, cross-border e-commerce activity increased substantially last year, with India leading the region with a staggering five-fold growth, followed by Indonesia and Vietnam, where cross-border e-commerce more than doubled between 2021 and 2023. In Hong Kong and the Philippines, global e-commerce spending grew by around 80%, while China, Taiwan and Thailand saw growth of about 50%. Further growth is expected in the future as the cart abandonment rate in Asia’s e-commerce industry is currently the highest in the world, standing at over 84% as of March 2023 compared with about 70% for customers globally. High cart abandonment in Asia suggests that there is potential for more expansion in the region if merchants are able to solve customers’ friction points and improve experience, the report says. cross border e-commerce image via freepik Addressing cart abandonment Cart abandonment is the act of a shopper adding an item to an online shopping cart but leaving the website without completing the purchase. It represents a significant amount of lost revenue for merchants in the online space. According to JCB, there are several cause of cart abandonment, with the first common one being the payment journey. In Asia, complicated checkouts and unexpected payment processes are cited as a reason for abandoning carts, with 55% of online shoppers in the region identifying long login and sign-up forms as a key source of frustrated. To address this paint point and boost sales, merchants must enhance customer experience by streamlining their checkout process with a well-designed website. They should also leverage advanced technology and design practices to balance security with user experience, using for example pre-fill information and tokenization to speed up the checkout process, as well as technology like 3DS authentication to increase consumer trust. Such improvements not only increase immediate sales and conversion rates but also foster long-term brand loyalty, the report says. The second cause of cart abandonment outlined in the JCB report is unmet customer expectations around how they can pay, and how easy it is to do so. Understanding customer psychology is vital to reduce cart abandonment in e-commerce, the report says. To cater to local preferences, merchants should offer multiple languages and payment currencies, provide a personalized customer journey, and ensure that payment processes are seamless across both mobile and desktop platforms. This is critical become mobile purchases are on the rise, representing 43% of e-commerce sales globally in 2023. In Asia-Pacific (APAC), that share is even higher, with mobile commerce constituting 75.8% of sales in 2022. Finally, the third and final cause of cart abandonment outlined in the report is the failure to react to external factors, such as market trends and changes in consumer behaviour. During the COVID-19 pandemic, e-commerce surged, especially in Asia, due to increased internet and mobile device access, the report says. However, the global economic downturn has somewhat hindered e-commerce growth and altered customer behaviors. This has led many consumers to start using online carts as a modern form of window shopping, adding items for future consideration or price comparisons. This behavior, which may lead to cart abandonment, is likely to rise with economic concerns and decreased impulse buying, it warns. To counter this, merchants should offer competitive pricing and employ strategies like remarketing and non-intrusive exit-intent pop-ups. They should also bolster customer confidence with reviews and security guarantees. e-commerce cart abondon image via Unsplash Cross-border e-commerce on the rise Over the past couple of years, cross-border e-commerce has witnessed significant growth, driven by the proliferation of the Internet and mobile devices, improved logistics, payment innovations and the rise of global e-commerce platforms such as Amazon, Alibaba and eBay. With disposable income rising in developing markets, e-commerce merchants and marketplaces will continue pivoting towards them, pushing cross-border online shopping to new heights. According to Juniper Research, cross-border e-commerce transaction values will reach US$1.6 trillion this year. Through 2028, that number is projected to grow by more than twofold to US$3.4 trillion. In comparison, domestic e-commerce transaction values are set to grow by 48% over the same period, implying that much of the growth in the e-commerce payments market will in the cross-border area. In 2022, around 168 million Chinese customers had engaged in cross-border import e-commerce, growing from 155 million the previous year, data from market research and analytics platform Statista show. The trade value of cross-border import business reached approximately 34 trillion yuan (US$4.6 billion) that year. In Southeast Asia, about a quarter (23%) of consumers said they are shopping more at merchants based in other countries in the region since the start of the pandemic, while a similar number (22%) are shopping more in stores outside of Southeast Asia, a 2021 study by ACI Worldwide and YouGov reveals. Featured image credit: Edited from freepik Get the hottest Fintech Switzerland News once a month in your Inbox email address ASIA CROSS-BORDER E-COMMERCE ABOUT AUTHOR MORE INFO ABOUT AUTHOR Fintechnews Switzerland Fintechnews Switzerland More by Fintechnews Switzerland