What to watch for when evaluating a town hall about trans issues
In a recent article, Erin Reed listed: What To Watch For When Invited To A Documentary On "Trans Issues." I found her criteria to be useful in looking at the cancelled event, “Exploring Gender & Identities,” planned by American Public Square (APS) and Kansas City PBS. Below, I look at each of Reed’s points with regard to the planned event.
Conduct thorough research on the producer and your primary contact.
The founder of APS is a lawyer and professor who was appointed as an ambassador by President Obama. The executive director has a background in marketing, networking, and philanthropy. On X (formerly known as Twitter), she follows various groups similar to APS, government officials, several accounts affiliated with Reason (libertarian), Libs of TikTok, 2 of the anti-trans panelists and 0 of the panelists scheduled to speak in defense of trans people. Neither Libs of TikTok nor libertarians are known for increasing trust and civil debate. Although following is not endorsement, the accounts being followed do not inspire confidence.
Inquire about their track record with LGBTQ+ reporting or topics.
Looking back over the ten years of APS town halls, there are no other town halls which focus on any LGBTQ issue. LGBTQ topics have come up in the context of other issues but nothing dedicated to LGBTQ issues.
Since 2015, topics have included inter-religious dialogue, national & local issues.
In 2018, APS had an event: Marriage & Millennials.
Under the heading of Millennials & LGBT: "As of 2016, 7.3% of Millennials identified as LGBT and are more than twice as likely as any other generation to identify as LGBT. As of 2017, 74% of Millennials support same-sex marriage compared to 65% of Generation X-ers, and 56% of Baby Boomers." The page lists the Supreme Court of the US case of Loving v. Virginia for interracial marriage but not Obergefell v. Hodges in reference to gay marriage.
In 2019, APS held the event: Lifelines: Preventing Teen Suicide. LBGTQ impact on teen suicide is listed, but nothing specifically related to transgender teens and the life-saving benefits of gender affirming care.
In 2022, APS had an event: APS Discussion Group: Are You a Feminist?
From the description: "Roe v. Wade has been overturned, some view the #MeToo Movement as unceremoniously abandoned with the Johnny Depp/Amber Heard defamation trial, and 2022 marked the year that Apple launched a pregnant man emoji."
The 2022 annual report reports that at this event participants discussed “what it means to be a feminist in a society grappling with the #MeToo movement, the overturn of Roe v. Wade and the growing narrative about who can identify as a woman.”
The description and summary of the event communicate an anxiety about trans people, both men and women. The event may well have addressed these anxieties but it does not seem particularly welcoming.
Verify if queer and/or trans individuals are part of the production team.
Doesn’t appear to be anyone who is public about it. Annual report does not provide demographics on race, gender, or LGBTQ status.
Find out about other participants.
Participants included several local advocates of trans people (participation was in flux due to doubts about the framing and the selected panelists). The 3 anti-trans participants were cisgender lesbian women from outside the Kansas City area. One is ideologically opposed to transgender people. One got coverage on Fox News for opposing trans women participation in organized sports. And one is a former healthcare worker who has made misleading claims about her former workplace.
Inquire about framing.
Both sides framing: trans people vs. women and minors.
“While the transgender community is being targeted by legislation in both Kansas and Missouri that aims to restrict their rights and access, communities are struggling with how to balance rights and access for all, especially when it comes to impacts on women and minors.” Beyond pitting trans people against women and children, this framing conceals the positive impacts of gender-affirming care for minors. In any case, the laws seem to have another source. The typical anti-LGBTQ legislator tends to be motivated by conservative religious beliefs, distrust of medical science, and concern for declining birthrates and weakening of traditional morality. The framing does not get at the root of the issue, which is that the medical establishment and anti-trans lawmakers have different ideas about what is best for minors (not to mention different ideas about public morality).
Reach out to a reliable contact within the industry.
Good advice for deciding whether to participate in a documentary.
Conclusion
With the lack of any presentations on LGBTQ issues by American Public Square in ten years, the lack of visible LGBTQ representation in staffing, and the treatment of LGBTQ issues as secondary, one would be right to think twice before participating in an APS event on any LGBTQ issue. The biased framing may make for a provocative spectacle but doesn’t get at the deeper issues involved. Finally, the anti-trans speakers may have deeply held and contentious opinions but do not seem particularly influential in the lawmaking process— distracting from the context of laws targeting LGBTQ people.
As a community organization, APS may feel that it’s in their rights to put on a panel discussing transgender issues, but until they take the responsibility of putting in the work to get to know LGBTQ people and issues, it will be difficult for people in LGBTQ circles to trust them.