One of the most recent events I have seen in the media that has sparked controversy has been the Trump administration's decision to withdraw "Obama-era protections for transgender students in public schools that let them use bathrooms and facilities corresponding with their gender identity" (CNN). There are two main competing narratives regarding this issue. One narrative involves individuals who support the Trump administration's decision, and claim that the Federal Government should have never gotten involved in the first place. The second competing narrative is that of individuals who believe that this decision goes against basic human rights and is unconstitutional in its very nature. Ariane de Vogue, a writer for CNN, states that Civil Rights groups "denounced the withdrawal as a politically motivated attack that will endanger transgender children and sow confusion over the federal government's role in enforcing civil rights" (CNN). Proponents of the decision also support the notion that, unlike Obama's interpretation, Title IX does not protect gender identity.
With many political issues, the competing narratives can often be categorized into being right or left. With this specific event, I noticed a strong appeal to emotions among opponents of the Trump admin's decision (the left). Quotes from these individuals use strong, emotional language that only seem to appeal to other left-leaning opponents of Trump’s decision. For example, in a quote from Mara Keisling, executive director of the National Center for Transgender Equality, she calls the decision a “mean-spirited attack” (CNN).
Right-leaning supporters of Trump’s decision (including other government officials) firmly believe that this so-called “bathroom debate” should have never been and should not ever be a federal matter. Jeremy W. Peters, Jo Becker and Julie Hirschfeld Davis, writers for the NY Times, state that many Republicans “argue that it is time to move away from social issues and focus more on bread-and-butter pocketbook concerns” (NY Times). Many social conservatives and supporters of the withdraw have celebrated Trump’s decision based on beliefs that allowing transgender students to use any bathroom would “allow potential sexual predators access to bathrooms and create an unsafe environment for children” (NY Times). This beliefs plays off of instilling fear into others which, while effective, can be potentially misleading.
Both sides of this debate have their own narratives, whether it is a belief that the withdraw is unconstitutional and endangers basic human liberties, or that federal government has no business being involved with gender identity and laws surrounding it. Either way, both sides only seem to attempt to connect with individuals of the same mindset or political affiliation. Both sides also make use of several rhetorical and persuasive strategies including appeal to pathos and the “slippery slope” (i.e. ‘If we let transgender students use any bathroom, it will allow opportunities for sexual predators endanger non-transgender students).
NY Times article: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/22/us/politics/devos-sessions-transgender-students-rights.html
CNN article: http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/22/politics/doj-withdraws-federal-protections-on-transgender-bathrooms-in-schools/
