Making it a crime to be transgender in West Virginia?

One GOP state senator's bill aimed at “protecting children” will further dehumanize trans and gender non-conforming people.

At the beginning of every year, state legislatures reconvene to pass new laws. If you're a trans person living in a state with any semblance of Republican control of government, this means you’re waiting to see how your very existence will be questioned, vilified, dehumanized, or, in the case of West Virginia, criminalized.

The GOP obsession with trans people continues

A time-honored tactic in the Republican party is to use children as political scapegoats to emotionally manipulate voters and provide cover for bigoted legislation.

Sen. Mike Azinger, the failed Ohio politician who proposed the bill

West Virginia Senate Bill 630 claims to want to protect minors from “exposure to indecent displays of a sexually explicit nature.” As you may have guessed, the bill does something entirely different.

It was introduced by Sen. Mike Azinger, a failed Ohio politician who had to move to West Virginia to get elected (you’ll never guess where he was on January 6th).

It’s time for a recurring segment!

I’ve read the mind-numbing and antiquated language of the bill and broken it down for you, so you don’t have to! You’re welcome.¹²

What this bill claims to be about

At its core, this bill is LARPing as a “drag show ban” bill. In reality, it bans some drag performances. However, the nefarious part is how it uses the terms “transgender” and “transvestite.”

As you can see in the text, the bill is claiming to protect children from being exposed to certain “prohibited displays” and includes “transvestite and/or transgender exposure, performance, or display to any minor” in how it defines this prohibition.

Bill wants transgender and transvestite to be considered obscene and/or sexually explicit

The bill neglects to clearly define “exposure” and “performance” and instead leaves it up to the reader (or a judge) to infer what they mean. This creates an opportunity for a very broad interpretation of what these words mean:

• Someone identifying as transgender or presenting as gender non-conforming performing a comedy show where someone under the age of 18 is present

• Someone identifying as transgender or presenting as gender non-conforming walking down a public sidewalk where someone under the age of 18 can see them³

Defenders of this bill would say, “It’s obvious this is intended for things like nudity, sexually explicit in nature, etc.,” or “it’s just a ban on drag shows!” but the bill’s muddied language and sloppy composition are anything but explicit about that. And make no mistake, this is by design.

Legally recognizing transgender and gender non-conforming people as inherently obscene and inappropriate for children

The bill intentionally singles out the terms “transvestite” and “transgender” and implies they are obscene or sexually explicit. This is also by design. They want to make trans and gender non-conforming people pariahs of society, and this is an attempt to legally recognize them as inherently obscene and inappropriate for children. It’s disgusting.

Proponents of this bill would try to defend it by saying, “we’re just trying to protect kids from being exposed to nudity/adult performances, etc.”

If this is the case, ask yourself this: why would you need to specify “transgender” or “transvestite”???? Because obscenity laws don’t inherently apply to only cisgender people. Trans people aren’t some magical creature that normal laws governing human beings don’t apply to. Singling out transgender and transvestite people in this bill is designed to criminalize their very existence by classifying them as obscene and sexually explicit. There is no other interpretation. Otherwise, there is literally no need to even have this bill.

Azinger pictured on January 6th with, according to him, …Antifa? (Source)

Does this mean that, if the bill is passed, they’ll start rounding up trans and gender non-conforming people on the streets? No, that would be extremely unlikely (and I would hope a federal court would step in if that were the case), but—like many bigoted laws—it creates a chilling effect and is designed to modify existing behavior. It is designed to make trans and gender non-conforming people feel uncomfortable, like outsiders, like they don’t belong in West Virginia. It is designed to make them think twice about participating in society for fear of being on the wrong side of the law. That is the purpose of this bill.

Some may argue I’m being an alarmist and that this is an extreme interpretation of this bill’s language. I would hope that you are correct, but if we’ve learned anything over the past year, it’s that we can’t leave things up to chance. Republican politicians will not hesitate to impose their worldview on people and use the arms of the government to do so. This bill, if it became law, would give them more legal authority to terrorize trans and gender non-conforming people.

If you live in West Virginia, I would encourage you to sound the alarm on this to your local lawmaker. Most of them are Republicans, but it doesn’t hurt to try. I would recommend framing your opposition as opening the door to unintended consequences and restricting the freedoms of West Virginians.⁴

The regular plugs:

• You can become a paid subscriber to No Elegy Needed if you like what I do and want to support my work (just upgrade your subscription at the button below)

No Elegy Needed is an opinion column Substack. All views expressed are solely the opinions of the author and in no way are to be interpreted as anything besides that. I am not a journalist, I am not a reporter, nor do I claim to be one. This is an expression of opinion for entertainment purposes only.

1. One way to thank me is by upgrading to a paid subscription and supporting my commentary work and general podcast/social media ventures.

2. The whole “thanking me” thing makes me sound like a douche, so to be clear, I’m mostly kidding. However, your financial support for my work is extremely appreciated and makes a huge difference in my life : )

3. It also bears repeating that transgender people are not exactly wearing large neon signs on their heads saying, “LOOK EVERYBODY! IT’S ME, A TRANSGENDER PERSON!” You cannot just look at someone and determine whether they are transgender or not, making this proposed law that much more stupid.

4. Because sadly, getting Republicans to care about transgender people is unlikely to happen