Note: The Lawrence Times runs opinion columns and letters to the Times written by community members with varying perspectives on local issues. These pieces do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Times staff.
Would you like to send a letter to the Times? Great! Here’s how to do it.
Sen. Marshall,
I am a constituent in Lawrence, and a licensed master social worker. I read your Nov. 22 e-newsletter and was troubled to discover you recently introduced the Defining Male and Female Act of 2024 bill to the Senate. After reading the bill, I was more than troubled for multiple reasons. Your bill conflates the terms “sex” and “gender.” These terms have distinct scientific definitions, which you, as a medical professional, should well know. In fact, American Medical Association (AMA) clearly differentiates the definitions of “sex” and “gender,” directly contradicting your bill.
Another concern: Your bill states that there are only two sexes. In your e-newsletter, you stated that your experience as a labor and delivery doctor informed this bill. How can that be when your medical education must have informed you that some people are born intersex, with conditions such as complete or partial androgen sensitivity, congenital adrenal hyperplasia, or Klinefelter’s?
Furthermore, AMA advocates for inclusive medical care for LGBTQIA+ individuals, and your bill defies this standard by promoting transphobia and erasure of intersex identity. How can you promote your bill by referencing your medical profession while your bill contradicts and defies the policy and ethics of your professional community?
Let me now speak from my own professional experience. As a social worker, this bill violates my professional ethics and practice standards. As a mental health care professional, this bill endangers the mental and holistic well-being of trans and intersex individuals. As a school social worker, your bill endangers trans and intersex students, and it takes focus away from truly important public education issues, such as the need for increased general and special education funding.
Now let me speak as a woman living in Kansas. As a woman, your bill does not protect me. Your bill will likely lead to more difficult access to services and facilities for ALL women, which not only includes trans women, but also women of color, poor women, and disabled women. As a senator for Kansas, aren’t there more important things you could focus on? Like keeping rural hospitals open? And, as I previously mentioned, fully funding public schools? Instead, you’re trying to limit access to health care and education for marginalized individuals.
Speaking simply as a human, I’m baffled, dismayed, and angered that you’ve already spent valuable time on and given focus to a bill that causes harm instead of helps.
If you truly take pride in being a doctor (who took an oath to do no harm), in being someone who wants to protect women, in being a Kansan, in being simply human, it’s time for you to reconsider your bill, your political stance on this issue, and your priorities.
Sincerely,
— Joy Mapes (she/her), LMSW, Lawrence
Don’t miss a beat … Click here to sign up for our email newsletters
Click here to learn more about our newsletters first
More Community Voices:
Letter to the Times: An open letter to Sen. Roger ‘Doc’ Marshall, M.D.
Letter to the Times: City should create oversight committee to guide pool renovation project, rebuild trust
”Our petition’s 1,764 signatures, our supporters’ 75 letters, and our research into the extensive flaws in the (pool renovation) community engagement process all indicate that the previously proposed plan did not reflect public opinion,” Holly Krebs writes in this letter to the Times.
