Last Monday, I had the pleasure to meet Randy Berry, the US State Department’s first-ever Special Envoy for the Human Rights of LGBTI Persons. He has been in his post since April and was visiting Malta as part of his mission to support LGBTIQ persons beyond the borders of the United States of America as well as to see what the situation in other countries is with regard to the rights of LGBTIQ persons.
It was a very pleasant meeting during which we exchanged views on what is happening in both our countries as well as in other parts of the world. He was clearly very positively impressed by what has been achieved in Malta over the last couple of years.
It also struck him how in Malta we have managed to move to a situation where laws, such as the Gender Identity Act, managed to receive unanimous support in Parliament.
The US is an interesting case study when it comes to LGBTIQ rights given that you can find all sorts of positions ranging from the mostly religiously-inspired right wing that attempts to halt legislative initiatives furthering these rights to the more liberal-minded who advocate full equality in all respects.
One must not forget that laws relating to family, marriage, civil union, adoption, anti-discrimination and age of consent are regulated on a State level and not by the federal Congress.
As I write, the US Supreme Court is deliberating its judgment in a case brought by gay couples to challenge State laws banning same-sex marriage. James Obergefell is one of the plaintiffs.
He married John Arthur in Maryland, a State that allows same sex marriages. Arthur died in 2013 and the State of Ohio refused to acknowledge their marriage on his death certificate. As a result, Obergefell is suing Ohio and challenging its ban on same-sex marriages.
When I asked Berry for his views on what the outcome could be, he replied that he would tend to agree with the many legal experts who are predicting that the Supreme Court will decide that the US Constitution guarantees equal treatment and due process under the law, which would prohibit the individual states of the union from banning same-sex marriages. In effect, by so doing, the Supreme Court would be legalising same sex marriage in all of the United States of America.
Much closer to home, last Sunday, an estimated one million persons (although the Italian Home Affairs Ministry puts the numbers at 400,000) took part in a so-called Family Day in Piazza San Giovanni, which is the huge square outside Rome’s cathedral of San Giovanni Laterano, the Pope’s see as bishop of Rome.
At the opening of the manifestation, Massimo Gandolfini, spokesman for one of the organisations behind the event, which goes by the name Difendiamo i nostril figli (Let us defend our children), declared that the aim of the event is to safeguard and ensure respect for the family founded upon marriage and to reiterate the central role of parents.
He added: “We strongly reject the attempt to infiltrate in schools educational projects aimed at the deconstruction of the sexual identity of children. They are theories that lack scientific basis” (my translation).
Naturally, the event was also meant as a show of force against renewed attempts to introduce some form of civil union or partnership for same-sex couples in Italy. Following the referendum in Ireland, where the majority voted in favour of same-sex marriage, the debate has been reignited in Italy although this tends to happen from time to time and one has to wait and see whether there will be some positive outcome or just another postponement.
All students should be educated to feel at ease with those among them who are not like them
But back to Gandolfini. Just a few days before the Family Day in Rome, the government in Malta launched a new policy to help schools address the needs of trans, gender variant and intersex students.
The aims of the new policy, as outlined in the document just published by the Ministry for Education, are “to foster a school environment that is inclusive, safe and free from harassment and discrimination for all members of the school community, students and adults, regardless of sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression and/or sex characteristics; promote the learning of human diversity that is inclusive of trans, gender variant and intersex students, thus promoting social awareness, acceptance and respect; and ensure a school climate that is physically, emotionally and intellectually safe for all students to further their successful learning development and well-being, including that of trans, gender variant and intersex persons”.
Among the procedures outlined in the new policy, one finds that students are to be addressed with their preferred name and pronoun congruent with their gender identity once the application for gender transition has been filed in court.
Other procedures relate to dress code, privacy, access to gender-specific facilities and areas, PE classes, school activities, school documentation, bullying, discrimination and harassment.
I wonder whether Gandolfini would include these procedures as being aimed at deconstructing the sexual identity of children. However, I am aware that there are parents in Malta who are feeling uneasy with what is being proposed.
Following the launch of the policy I had the opportunity to have an exchange of views with two mothers online. Both are in their 20s.
It all started when someone commented that the policy amounted to a “’progressive’ enslavement” by minorities, claiming that all forms of lobbies could lead to the tyranny of the minorities.
At one point, one of the young mothers replied that what the policy is proposing will apply to everyone and that she is being denied to choose what is best for her son. The other mother spoke in a similar vein in terms of her being denied to right to decide what is best for her daughter.
This does strike a chord with what Gandolfini referred to as the central role of the parents in the upbringing of children.
I have not seen much discussion on the new policy. Does this mean that, apart from my two young mother friends, everyone else feels comfortable with what is being proposed?
Let me state from the outset and make it clear that I agree with the policy. One’s school years are the years during which one normally comes to term with one’s sexuality. They are defining years.
Hence, it is of paramount importance that an environment is fostered that, first and foremost, allows the individual to feel comfortable with who he or she is.
Secondly, the institution itself must not be one that appears to be hostile to a student who is different from most of the others.
Thirdly, all students should be educated to feel at ease with those among them who are not like them and accepting these individuals as their equals in all respects.
However, it is important that individuals such as my two young mother friends do not feel threatened by laws and policies aimed at reinforcing the rights of LGTBIQ persons.
Although fear should not be a determining factor in halting progress in this area, parents need to be taken on board to reassure them that the school environment is indeed a totally inclusive one and that no minority is attempting to enslave society to its way of thinking.