+
upworthy

missouri

As legislation attempting to dictate what transgender people can and can't do crosses the desks of lawmakers across the country, people are sharing their perspectives. While some of those perspectives are rooted in ignorance or bigotry, others are informed by scientific research and medical opinion as well as personal, first-hand experience.

In a March 3rd hearing in Missouri, the father of a transgender daughter spoke from the heart to lawmakers about how he came to understand and accept his child's gender. The Missouri House of Representatives is considering House Resolution 53, which would create a state constitutional amendment banning trans girls from competing in girls' school sports, and Brandon Boulware wanted them to hear how such a law would impact his daughter.

But what really makes Boulware's testimony so powerful is how he explains his own evolution from "not getting it" to seeing his daughter for who she is.

"I'm a lifelong Missourian. I'm a business lawyer. I'm a Christian. I'm the son of a Methodist minister," he said. "I'm a husband, and I'm the father of four kids — two boys, two girls — including a wonderful and beautiful transgender daughter."

"Today happens to be her birthday," he added. "And I chose to be here. She doesn't know that. She thinks I'm at work."


Boulware said a common sentiment whenever transgender issues are brought up is "I don't get it. I don't understand." He said he expected that many of the lawmakers present might feel that way — a perspective he can personally relate to, as he had been in the same boat.

"I didn't get it either," he said. "For years, I didn't get it. For years I would not let my daughter wear girl clothes. I did not let her play with girl toys. I forced my daughter to wear boy clothes and get short haircuts and play on boys' sports teams."

He explained that he did those things to protect his child and her siblings from being teased, and admitted that he did it to protect himself as well. "I wanted to avoid those inevitable questions as to why my child did not look and act like a boy."

Then he laid down a hard truth.

"My child was miserable," he said. "I cannot overstate that. She was absolutely miserable. Especially at school. No confidence, no friends, no laughter. I can honestly say this — I had a child who did not smile."

For years they lived this way, he said, against the advice of therapists and experts. Then one day, everything changed for him.

His daughter had put on one of her older sister's dresses and was playing outside with her brother and some neighbor kids when Boulware came home from work. He told them it was time to come in for dinner, and when she asked if she could go across the street to play, and he said no. Then she asked if she could go across the street if she put on boy clothes first.

"And it was then that it hit me," he said. "My daughter was equating being good with being someone else. I was teaching her to deny who she is."

"As a parent, the one thing we cannot do," he added, "the one thing, is silence our child's spirit. And so on that day, my wife and I stopped silencing our child's spirit."

"The moment we allowed my daughter to be who she is, to grow her hair, to wear the clothes she wanted to wear, she was a different child," he said. "And I mean it was immediate. It was a total transformation. I now have a confident, a smiling, a happy daughter. She plays on girls' volleyball teams. She has friendships. She's a kid."

"I need you to understand," he pleaded, "that this language, if it becomes law, will have real effects on real people. It will affect my daughter. It will mean she cannot play on the girls' volleyball team, or dance squad, or tennis team. I ask you, please don't take that away from my daughter or the countless others like her who are out there. Let them have their childhoods. Let them be who they are."

The question of transgender girls in sports has become a hot topic as society wrestles with transgender people becoming more visible in society. While some argue that transgender girls have a biological advantage over cisgender girls when it comes to sports, the reality is that trans women have been officially competing in various professional women's sports for many years and dominance over cisgender women has simply not been an issue. Most of us couldn't name an elite trans athlete if we tried, despite knowing who the top performers are in various women's sports.

But what about testosterone and fairness? Scientists are divided on that topic, which makes things a bit muddy. As The Swaddle points out, testosterone is not the be-all-end-all of athletic ability:

"For every credible study and statement out there that proves greater testosterone is linked to greater athletic ability in men and women, there are equally credible studies that prove testosterone is just one of the many factors that affect sporting ability — sometimes even negatively. Take the International Association for Athletics Federation's data on elite women athletes. Its initial analysis of two world championships showed that women with higher T levels performed better in only five out of 21 events."

While there may be legitimate questions about how we define men's and women's sports and how trans athletes fit into those definitions, we also have to acknowledge that physical makeup—muscle tone, hormones, height, bone structure, etc.—varies greatly between human beings already, regardless of gender. Individuals with certain builds and certain genetic makeup already have an athletic advantages over others—that's the reality of sports in general. Does a person being transgender automatically give them a clear athletic advantage any more than someone who happens to have been born tall or muscular or having long arms or a low center of gravity?

Most youth athletes, whether transgender or cisgender, simply want to play sports for fun with their friends and won't ever achieve elite status anyway. And again, we aren't seeing trans women dominating in any professional women's sports, so unless or until that happens, this doesn't seem like the legislation-worthy issue some people are making it out to be.

Thanks to Mr. Boulware for advocating for his daughter, showing the world an honest account of his own transformation, and sharing the impact legislating trans people's lives will have.

A new clinic geared toward St. Louis transgender teens hopes to be a sort of one-stop shop for supporting trans youth.

After opening the first week of August, St. Louis' Transgender Center of Excellence is already booked through mid-September. It's one location complete with mental health, hormones, and other essential services, and it's getting rave reviews from patients already.

"Having support and acceptance is extremely important for this patient population," Dr. Christopher Lewis, physician and founder of the clinic, told WGN News. "Transgender patients already deal with harassment and discrimination within the medical community and that is a barrier to them accessing care."


A supportive medical environment is a big win for trans kids — take it from others, like myself, who wish those resources existed when we were growing up.

On Twitter, I reached out to my trans followers to find out what this type of clinic would have meant to them when they were younger. A few common themes emerged.

For many, it would have meant help and support for themselves and their parents.

Others remarked on how a supportive environment would have encouraged them to stop hiding, sidestepping some traumatic early-life experiences.

It would have provided a sense of identity for those who felt alone and isolated, who never saw accurate reflections of themselves in the media.

Then, the emails started rolling in. "If I'd had the words, if I'd known the concepts, if I had a supportive and professional environment to turn to. I would have been able to live without a dysphoria that came close to killing me, repeatedly," writes Alvhild Sand, a trans woman from Norway, about what a difference a resource like this would have made for her.

"It would have been fantastic if such a place had existed," writes Gwyn Ciesla, another trans woman, who grew up in a "highly Catholic town in the 1980s" where she was "not exposed to LGBTQ ideas or openly LGBTQ people."

"The only tools available were in the context of education, religion, and mental health, and were ineffective because they were incomplete," Ciesla explains. "If I had known then what I know now, and a clinic like this had been available, it would have been life-changing."

"Given what I did and didn't know at the time, I might not have been able to get to the point where I could take advantage of the clinic's services," Ciesla admits, expressing hope that "the presence of the clinic might have at least increased the information available to me and helped me to understand and begin to accept myself years earlier."

"I only survived my youth by a narrow margin, and I think this clinic might have widened that margin a lot. I hope this clinic can do that for youth now and in the future."

The new clinic in St. Louis joins a handful of other trans-specific children's medical programs across the country.

One of the most notable is the gender development services at Lurie Children's Hospital in Chicago. The sad fact is that even though the Affordable Care Act effectively banned discriminating against people on the basis of their gender identity, many trans people continue to face either discrimination or confusion from their health care providers.

According to the National Center for Transgender Equality's 2015 U.S. Transgender Survey, 33% of trans people who saw a health care provider in the previous year had at least one negative experience, were denied care, or had to actually teach their provider about trans patients. In other words, there's a lot of work to be done, and taking steps to ensure trans people have competent, knowledgeable medical care is a work in progress.

The new clinic in St. Louis is a big step in the right direction, providing care and benefits for years to come.

After four years as a member of Missouri's House of Representatives and another four as its secretary of state, Jason Kander took a chance and ran for the U.S. Senate in 2016.

While the fresh-faced 35-year-old would ultimately come up short in his bid to unseat incumbent Sen. Roy Blunt in the 2016 election, the race was a whole lot closer than many expected. A Democrat in a traditionally red state, Kander came within just 3 points of Blunt. For comparison, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton lost the state by 19 points.

Though unsuccessful, the campaign helped Kander reach a whole new audience when one of his ads — in which he, a former Army captain and Afghanistan veteran, assembled a rifle while blindfolded — went viral. In defeat, Kander's star only continued to rise.


Photo by Whitney Curtis/Getty Images.

Within days of the election, political insiders began speculating what Kander's next move could be, with some even floating him as a possible presidential candidate in 2020.

But that's not in the cards for him — at least not yet.

In his final days as Missouri's secretary of state, Kander delivered an impassioned plea to the state's lawmakers, asking them to show restraint when it comes to implementing new laws that would suppress voter turnout.

"I'm going to be brief today because I recognize that most of you and your families didn't come here today to listen to me," he said. "And frankly, most of you are not going to like what it is I have to say."

What followed was a powerful case against disenfranchising eligible voters in the name of stopping voter-impersonation fraud, a cause close to his heart that would follow him to his next endeavor.

"We have actually already had this debate in America," said Kander. "American heroes faced down batons and dogs and firehoses to march across a bridge in Selma."

Fresh out of office, on Feb. 7, Kander announced the launch of Let America Vote, a national organization dedicated to fighting voter suppression.

Though those who support voting restrictions such as voter ID laws claim their purpose is to prevent voter fraud, in effect, those laws only make it harder for eligible voters to cast a ballot.

The problem with restrictive voter ID measures goes far beyond Missouri, and Kander knows this. That's why the former chief election official is making it his mission to fight the wave of ongoing voter suppression efforts happening now in at least 20 states. Combine that with the fact that President Trump has made repeated claims that there were more than 3 million ballots illegally cast in the 2016 election (even though the data shows that to be untrue), and it's pretty clear that someone needs to step up to defend the right to vote.

Kander wants to be that someone.

But let's start with the basics. Why are voter ID laws a bad idea?

For one, the type of fraud that these laws prevent is extremely rare. On the flip side, the number of people disenfranchised by these laws remains high.

"The only kind of fraud that a photo ID law can even claim to prevent is voter-impersonation fraud," Kander tells Upworthy. "There's never been a reported case of voter-impersonation fraud in Missouri, and it's so rare nationally that Americans are more likely to be struck by lightning than they are to commit voter-impersonation fraud."

In Missouri, Kander points out, there were over 200,000 "eligible, registered, legal voters" who didn't have the specific type of ID that many lawmakers have proposed making a requirement to vote.

It's those kinds of requirements that he says make it clear that voter ID laws are "a policy that is meant to be a solution to an imaginary problem of voter-impersonation fraud — or at least a very, very uncommon problem of voter-impersonation fraud."

Photo by Ron Jenkins/Getty Images.

The people most likely to be negatively affected by voter ID restrictions are people of color, low-income individuals, and students.

Voter ID laws are often coupled with restrictions on things like early voting, automatic voter registration, and same-day registration.

A voter ID law "is a Republican, partisan solution to the problem that certain people are very unlikely to vote for Republicans," Kander says.

He's not wrong, either. Political scientists at University of California, San Diego found that when strict voter ID laws are in place, Democratic turnout drops by an estimated 7.7 percentage points; turnout for Republicans declines by just 4.6 points. When you look at the effect that has on a national scale, it amounts to millions of additional eligible voters turned away on Election Day.

How much potential voter-impersonation fraud does this cut down on? According to a study done by Justin Levitt of Loyola Law School Los Angeles, just 31 cases out of 1 billion votes. Yep, billion. With a B.

The truth is, no matter what your political views are, we should all be able to agree that free and fair elections in which we can all participate are a necessary part of a functioning democracy.

Anything less is, frankly, undemocratic.

"Republican politicians are working very hard to try and have the voter-suppression campaign exist in the mind of Americans in a voter fraud frame of reference, but once you can point out to voters that it actually exists in a partisan wrangling and partisan politics frame of reference, that is when they realize that the true motivations have been exposed, and they're no longer interested in supporting," Kander adds. "They no longer consider it to be anything other than un-American."

Kander backstage during an election night event on Nov. 8, 2016, in Kansas City, Missouri. Photo by Whitney Curtis/Getty Images.

In the past, we could count on the courts to shoot down some of the more egregious attempts at voter suppression. But given the 2013 Supreme Court decision to cut down key elements of the Voting Rights Act, the confirmation of Jeff Sessions as U.S. attorney general, and the president's own belief that there's widespread voter fraud, it's more important than ever for everyday people to get involved in reshaping the narrative around these laws.

Today, it may be the party you support that benefits most from these laws. But what about a year from now? 10 years from now? A generation from now? What we do now determines what kind of country we aspire to be, and hopefully it's one where we can agree that regardless of one's political views, we all have a right to stand up and be counted.

Kander addresses the Missouri legislature on Jan. 4. GIF from Missourians for Kander/YouTube.

For more information and to get involved, sign up on Let America Vote's website.

Everyone deserves a fair trial. Everyone.

And one of the most important parts of a fair trial is having access to an attorney who actually knows what they are doing — someone who's willing to devote the proper time and energy to defending your innocence.

In fact, it's stated in both the Declaration of Independence and the Declaration of Human Rights that courts have an obligation to provide an attorney to those who can't secure their own. (Hey, did you know that lawyers can be expensive?!)


This is why public defenders — defense attorneys provided and paid for by public funds — are a thing.

But what happens when a state government decides it's tired of spending so much money on public defenders?

In Missouri, recent budget cuts to the public defender program have been frequent and severe. So the department director decided to do something pretty drastic.

Director of the Missouri public defender program, Michael Barrett. Image via ABC 17/YouTube

In a scathing letter to Governor Jay Nixon, director Michael Barrett pointed out all the ways that the budget cuts are undermining the integrity of our legal system.

He said his attorneys' caseloads are way too high and the governor has refused to do anything about it.

"Seven years ago, your office vetoed [a Senate Bill] ... which would have provided caseload relief to an overburdened public defender system. In denying that relief, you acknowledged that MSPD was operating 'under significant stresses' and committed to working ... to fix the problem, but never did."

He explained that the cuts are affecting, most of all, poor minorities — ensuring they don't get a fair shake in our legal system.

"This action comes even after the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice found that poor black children are being systematically deprived of the rights in Missouri due in large part to the lack of public defenders. Choosing in the wake of that report to further debilitate the very organization that ensures an equal system of justice only adds to the escalating sentiment that the poor and disenfranchised do not receive a fair shake in Missouri's criminal justice system."

Finally, Barrett said he only has one extreme option left if he wants his meager budget to last through the year:

"As of yet, I have not utilized this provision because it is my sincere belief that it is wrong to reassign an obligation placed on the state by the 6th and 14th Amendments to private attorneys who have in no way contributed to the current crisis. However, given the extraordinary circumstances that compel me to entertain any and all avenues for relief, it strikes me that I should begin with the one attorney in the state who not only created this problem, but is in a unique position to address it."

Then, in an absolutely epic mic drop moment, Barrett ended the letter by exercising his authority to appoint the governor himself as counsel in an upcoming case.

Yeah, he can do that.

Missouri governor Jay Nixon. Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

"Therefore, pursuant to Section 600.042.5 and as Director of the Missouri State Public Defender System tasked with carrying out the State's obligation to ensure that poor people who face incarceration are afforded competent counsel in their defense, I hereby appoint you, Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Bar No. 29603, to enter your appearance as counsel of record in the attached case," Barrett wrote.

In other words: "You don't want to give me the resources I need to do my job? Fine. You do it then."

A representative of the governor's office said in an email that Barrett's claims are off base and that the public defender has "seen a 15 percent increase in funding."

Meanwhile, Barrett's office has "filed a lawsuit over what it calls Gov. Jay Nixon's unconstitutional decision to withhold $3.5 million in funds for defending indigent people," according to KY3.

They can sort out the exact numbers in court. And it's doubtful the governor will actually have to show up in court and argue a case.

But in the meantime, we have to applaud Michael Barrett, whose letter has gone viral for bringing some much needed attention to the issue of fair trials for all.

It's refreshing to see a public official willing to go to the mat for the people he's sworn to protect.

You can read the full letter here.