Connect with us

Texas

A push to remove LGBTQ-themed books in a Texas county could signal rising partisanship on school boards

Hood County’s refusal to remove two books from the children’s section of the library sparked a yearslong political battle. Now school board races have taken on a deeply partisan tone, and elections serve as a purity test for far-right politics.

Published

on

(Dominic Bodden/ProPublica & The Texas Tribune)

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune

Nearly seven years ago, Melanie Graft’s 4-year-old daughter was in the children’s section of her local North Texas library when she picked up a book about an LGBTQ pride parade. Within the colorful pages of the book, “This Day in June,” children and adults celebrate with rainbow flags and signs promoting equality and love over hate. Adults embrace and kiss one another.

Alarmed, Graft launched a campaign against the book and another about a boy who likes to wear dresses, suggesting that their presence in the library foisted inappropriate themes on unsuspecting children. By June 2015, the Hood County Library Advisory Board had received more than 50 complaints asking that the two books be removed from the shelves of the children’s section. The board refused, saying the books did not promote homosexuality, as some complaints had suggested, and arguing that the library already required parents of young children to accompany them and check out materials. Librarian Courtney Kincaid called “This Day in June” a tool to teach respect and acceptance of the LGBTQ community, but she agreed to move it to the adult section. She kept “My Princess Boy” in the children’s section.

Opponents of the books then turned to the entirely Republican Hood County Commissioners Court, which appoints members to the library advisory board. After an emotional three-hour meeting that July, commissioners declined to remove the books on the advice of the county’s attorney, who concluded that such action could spur a lawsuit over unlawful censorship because of potential violations of state law and the U.S. Constitution.

Anger over that decision helped fuel a seven-year effort by far-right Christian conservatives in Hood County to seize control of elected offices and government boards from more traditional Republicans. They won spots on the commissioners court, grabbed seats on the library advisory board and, last year, launched a monthslong campaign to oust Michele Carew, the county’s independent elections administrator, accusing the Republican of harboring a secret liberal agenda.

In November, the group claimed a major victory after Graft won a seat on the school board in Granbury, the county seat. Also elected was Courtney Gore, the co-host of a local far-right internet talk show who has railed against masks and vaccines and promoted Donald Trump’s false claim that the 2020 presidential election was stolen. On the campaign trail, the women promised to comb through educational materials for any signs of “indoctrination” in the form of books or lesson plans that they charged promote LGBTQ ideology or what they referred to as critical race theory, a university-level academic discipline based on the idea that racism is embedded in U.S. legal and other structures.

Advertisement

“When my daughter was 4 years old, my parental rights were taken away here at the public library in Hood County,” Graft, who said on the campaign trail that her school-age children did not attend Granbury public schools, told attendees at a GOP forum before the election. “I stood up for my daughter then, and I’ll stick up for our kids now.”

The yearslong journey in Hood County offers a window into the fiercely contentious debates over curriculum and library books that have cropped up across the state and country in recent months. Once-nonpartisan school board races are taking on a decidedly partisan tone, and administrators are now sounding like political operatives.

Peter Coyl, a librarian who testified on behalf of the American Library Association in 2015 against removing the books, recalls thinking at the time that Hood County was an outlier because of how extensively the fight consumed the community. In retrospect, Coyl said, Hood County foreshadowed the larger battle that is playing out in school board races and over library books across the country.

“It was obvious that there was a portion of the community that was not happy with the outcome,” said Coyl, who now leads a library in Sacramento, California. “But I think now we are in an era, a time where people aren’t willing to have discourse or conversations about things. They want their way and they want to impose their view on anyone and everyone because they feel that they’re right.”

The Granbury Independent School District elections last fall served as a litmus test of loyalty to the GOP’s most conservative wing, which pushed candidates for nonpartisan posts to declare their party affiliation and to explain how they would actively push far-right initiatives.

Melanie Graft and Courtney Gore are sworn into the Granbury ISD Board of Trustees at the GISD Administration Building on Nov. 15, 2021. (Shelby Tauber/The Texas Tribune)

“This was the first election where candidates felt the need to put ‘conservative’ or ‘Republican’ on their campaign signs and in their literature that they sent out,” said Nancy Alana, a self-described conservative Republican who lost to Gore in November after serving on the school board since 2009. “And I have always shied away from that because I understood that the school board position was nonpolitical. And that was what I was trying to uphold.”

A career educator who spent 30 years as a teacher and principal, Alana shares views similar to those of Graft and Gore on books and curriculum, but was pegged by some far-right Republican activists as too passive for their vision of a more uncompromising “new Granbury.” Alana said she worried that the focus on culture-war battles over books and curriculum could distract leaders from important issues like overcrowding in the growing district.

Advertisement

Graft did not respond to requests for comment. Gore said in an email to ProPublica and The Texas Tribune that declaring party affiliation makes school board elections more transparent. She said that the board “​​more accurately reflects the population now.”

“Any entity that taxes or oversees school curriculum is inherently partisan, whether people want to admit it or not,” Gore said. “I proudly ran as a Conservative Republican and will never apologize for being one.”

Challenges to books about sexual orientation and racial identity in Texas are the latest in a wave of divisive national political issues driving local campaigns. In October, Matt Krause, a Republican state representative from Fort Worth who was then running for attorney general, sparked national attention when he released a list of 850 books that he said should be investigated and potentially banned from school libraries. The majority of the titles dealt with LGBTQ themes, and some were targeted for merely including LGBTQ characters, according to an analysis by BookRiot.

Gov. Greg Abbott, facing a Republican primary challenge from two opponents running to his right on education issues, later ordered the Texas Education Agency to investigate the availability of “pornography” in public schools, a term that some politicians and district leaders have interpreted as a catchall for books on sexuality and sexual orientation. He urged criminal prosecutions under the state penal code of educators who make such material available.

At a January school board meeting, Granbury Superintendent Jeremy Glenn, who is appointed by the board, referenced Krause and Abbott in defense of the district’s recent decision to remove more than 130 books that deal with race and sexual orientation from school libraries, pending a review.

The Granbury school board went a step further during its meeting Jan. 24. Led by Graft, the school board cleared the way for the district to strip any material deemed vulgar or unsuitable by administration and the board from its shelves without a committee review.

Advertisement

The next night, at Brazos Covenant Ministries church, Glenn assured attendees at a Republican Party gathering that school board members would act as gatekeepers against books and “woke” curriculum about sexual orientation and racial identity.

Speaking in partisan political language not common among school superintendents, Glenn pointed to decreasing margins of victory for Republican presidential candidates in the state, and warned local party leaders that “there are individuals out there that want to destroy what you believe.”

“They don’t believe in the same America that you and I grew up in, and that’s just the truth,” he said. “Our community has to decide whether or not we want to hold the line.”

Members of the community attend the GISD board meeting to view the swearing in of two new board members, Melanie Graft and Courtney Gore, at the GISD Administration Building in Granbury on Nov. 15, 2021. (Shelby Tauber/The Texas Tribune)

An old fight resurfaces

A week after the November election, Emily Schigut, a fifth grade reading teacher and soccer coach, put her house on the market. She knew it was time to leave her job.

Schigut, who has family in Hood County, was teaching in Midland five years ago when the principal of STEAM Academy at Mambrino in Granbury reached out to her about an opening at its campus.

She recalls her excitement at coming to the district, which she said was a model of innovation. Now she worries that politics have taken hold in a way that makes it difficult for teachers to do their jobs. And as someone who identifies as queer, she is concerned about the message the district is sending to educators and students.

“It’s absolutely terrifying,” Schigut said in an interview. “All anyone has to do is listen to the words they’ve said. They aren’t there for the kids. They are there for a political agenda. You watch all these things happening around the country, and in the blink of an eye, it was happening here.

Advertisement

“It’s very sad because I 100% believed in this district. But I do not feel safe here any longer.”

While the shift in tone at the school district felt sudden to Schigut, far-right Republicans had spent years working toward electing candidates to local political offices. Their efforts gained steam in the summer of 2015 amid outrage over two failed fights: one over the LGBTQ books and another when Hood County was required to comply with the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark decision legalizing same-sex marriage. County Clerk Katie Lang initially refused to issue a marriage license to a gay couple.

Despite losing the debate over books, opponents claimed a major victory that year when Kincaid, Granbury’s librarian, resigned. She said she could no longer endure harassment and bullying by the group, which she recalled had posted someone at the library’s circulation desk every day to watch her.

“Even going out to lunch was a gamble because I didn’t know if my food would be tainted in any way by someone who disagreed with my decision to keep the books. Whenever I would leave the library, be it during my lunch time or running an errand for work, I was followed,” Kincaid told the American Library Association in 2017 after her resignation. Kincaid, who faced additional harassment following her departure from Hood County, declined an interview.

Graft became increasingly active in local politics, serving on the local library advisory board and as a Republican Party precinct chair. Her fight against the books made her popular in far-right circles, giving her a platform across the state.

Melanie Graft joins the Grandbury ISD Board of Trustees as one of two newly-elected members at a meeting at the GISD Administration Building in on Nov. 15, 2021. (Shelby Tauber/The Texas Tribune)

During an interview with Doc Greene, a self-described conservative activist radio show host, at the 2016 state Republican convention in Dallas, Graft described the moment her daughter encountered “This Day in June” by Gayle Pitman.

“She picked it up, turned to the page and showed it to me, and I was appalled,” Graft said. “There were political issues. Signs like love over hate, equal rights, things that a child certainly can’t understand. And this book on the back binding was recommended for children ages 4 to 8.”

Advertisement

She continued, “They have an agenda and an indoctrination for our children. It’s not enough to tolerate. They want us to participate. And they want our children.”

After Graft had finished, Greene said he was not a violent man, then added, “But something like this enrages me to such a degree that violence is not completely ruled out. Because when you go after the children, this is not the time to just stand by and talk about it.”

Graft responded that she was not a proponent of violence, but Greene continued pressing.

“If you’re not willing to kill for what you believe, you’ve already lost the war. Our children are worth saving,” said Greene, who did not respond to requests for comment.

“I can’t argue with that,” Graft said. “I agree.”

A month later, the Northeast Tarrant Tea Party near the library where Kincaid had relocated uploaded a video of Graft speaking at one of its meetings to YouTube.

Advertisement

“This is Courtney Kincaid. You need to know her name,” Graft told the group as a screen flashed behind her. “We have to stand in the gap between the liberal left and our children. It only takes one liberal library with an agenda to steal the innocence of your child.”

Two years later, one of Graft’s allies in the fight against the books, Dave Eagle, a former Tea Party leader, was elected to the Hood County Commissioners Court. Eagle, who lost a bid for the school board in 2016, had vowed in a letter to the Hood County News the previous August that the Hood County Tea Party would “continue to reap political dividends” from the fights over same-sex marriage and LGBTQ books, as he complained about the local news organization’s coverage.

Eagle, who claimed credit for Kincaid’s departure, frequently sparred with members of the library’s advisory board and worked to change the makeup of the panel. In 2019, the Hood County Republican Party issued a formal resolution calling for the board to be disbanded, claiming that it failed to represent the “moral character” of the community. County commissioners dissolved the board last year after political divisions had made it difficult for the board to get much accomplished.

“It has become a lightning rod,” David Wells, the former library advisory board chair, said after the board disbanded. “It’s lost its sense of purpose, of what it’s there for. It’s way beyond the purpose for which it is designed.”

Eagle, who did not respond to a request for comment, also helped lead an effort last year that sought to abolish the elections administrator position held by Carew and transfer her duties to Lang, the county clerk, who has used social media to promote baseless allegations of widespread election fraud. Aside from saying that she would abide by the Constitution, Katie Lang has declined to discuss how she would approach elections management if given the role. Carew resigned in October. She is now running for office against Lang, an effort she said she undertook to prevent partisans from taking control of elections if commissioners decide to dissolve the independent election office.

Debates over national issues have left the ground fertile for takeovers in rural counties and small towns across Texas, provided local far-right activists can organize as they have in Hood County, said Brandon Rottinghaus, a professor of political science at the University of Houston.

Advertisement

“Local organizers can ride these national waves to power,” Rottinghaus said. “With the right spark, I think that’s a model they can replicate across the state.”

Pitman, the author of “This Day in June,” one of the children’s books targeted by Graft and Tea Party members in 2015, said the school board election in Hood County marks a worrisome escalation of rhetoric that previously seemed more isolated. “It just seems like there’s been a shift in the political climate,” Pitman said, adding that she never expected to see the massive wave of current book challenges.

“I think the most disturbing thing about this to me is that if you look historically at book challenges, for the most part, books were challenged because of the ideas that were in them,” Pitman said. “And that, to me, is really disturbing because it’s no longer about ideas or exchange of information or discourse, it’s about marginalizing an entire community.”

Emily Schigu, a 5th grade reading teacher at Mambrino STEAM Academy in Granbury ISD, poses for a portrait on Nov. 15, 2021. Schigut spoke out during a school board meeting against the anti-CRT movement occurring in the district, which was followed by criticisms throughout the Granbury community. “I stood up and I spoke, and people came out of the woodworks…but there’s only so much that you can do before your own mental health and well being is jeopardized.” (Shelby Tauber/The Texas Tribune)

Reviewing 130 Books

In January, administrators in the Granbury school district summoned its librarians to a meeting to review library offerings “based upon the Governor’s criteria,” according to emails obtained by a Granbury parent through the Texas Public Information Act and shared with ProPublica and The Texas Tribune.

District officials immediately removed from the library shelves five books unrelated to LGBTQ themes by Abbi Glines, an author known for including explicit sex scenes that push the boundaries of young adult fiction. They also pulled about 130 other titles from school libraries, pending a review by a district committee composed of teachers, librarians and parents.

“​​Let’s not misrepresent things. We’re not taking Shakespeare or Hemingway off the shelves,” Glenn said at a school board meeting last week in which he blasted opponents of the book removal effort. “And we’re not going and grabbing every socially, culturally or religiously diverse book and pulling them. That’s absurd. And the people that are saying that are gaslighters, and it’s designed to incite division.”

Glenn made no mention of the dozens of LGBTQ-themed books that had been pulled from the shelves for further review. Of the 130 books temporarily removed, about 94, or 73%, feature LGBTQ characters or themes, according to a ProPublica and Tribune analysis of the popular book review site Goodreads.

Advertisement

Coyl said he is concerned that political candidates are increasingly using the issue of book censorship to win public office. “People need to be very vigilant and aware of it,” he said. “It’s a slippery slope. If we allow the restriction of one thing, it’s very easy to slide into more suppression.”

Experts say waves of backlash against LGBTQ communities often follow moments of cultural transformation. Schools have long been the battleground, dating at least to the 1970s, when anti-gay crusader Anita Bryant led a national movement to save children from gay adults.

But fed by social media, the same message today is spreading farther and faster than during past waves, experts said.

The Granbury ISD Board of Trustees convenes for a meeting at the GISD Administration Building on Nov. 15, 2021. (Shelby Tauber/The Texas Tribune)

Vox Jo Hsu, an assistant professor of rhetoric and writing at the University of Texas at Austin who specializes in the effect of public rhetoric on racial, gender and sexual minorities, said movements to censor LGBTQ books can leave young people feeling alone.

“I can’t overstate the type of damage it does to create a culture of shame and silence around LGBTQ topics,” Hsu said. “You are teaching them, from a young age, these false narratives about who they are that they will have to unlearn and you’re depriving them of resources and communities they will need to do so.” Leaving a school district is not an option for all LGBTQ students or families, and children who are left behind when others depart will only become more isolated, Hsu said.

Last month, students in the Granbury district launched an online petition opposing the book removal effort. Within days, the petition had gathered more than 600 signatures. Students also spoke against the removal at last week’s school board meeting.

“I don’t think that little children should be shocked or disgusted by our identities,” a queer senior at Granbury High School said at the meeting, warning that removing the books would send a dangerous message. “It’s disgusting that, even in 2022, we still have to have these discussions about censorship.”

Advertisement

Glenn saluted the students for speaking out, but then took aim at those who questioned the removal of the books.

“During my tenure, I have witnessed radicals come into our boardroom and go onto social media platforms to distort the truth, exaggerate issues and bad-mouth our trustees,” Glenn said. “To those individuals, please know, like the little boys who cried wolf, you have lost all credibility to the majority in this community. We will not back down from you.”

In an email, Gore applauded the book removals and said the district is not taking aim at LGBTQ students or community members. “All students at GISD are loved and cared for by the amazing staff and administration,” she said. “With that, public schools are not the place for young people to express themselves sexually.”

Near the end of the discussion, Graft made a motion to amend the district’s policy on book removals, eliminating the requirement for campus-level committees that have determined whether concerns are merited.

The revised policy, which passed unanimously, will allow the district to remove books the administration and board deem “pervasively vulgar” or educationally unsuitable without going through the district’s existing process. Before the change, books had to stay on shelves until a review was completed.

“This is going to align the policy so that in the event that we do have a book that is in our library that is vulgar and overtly sexual, it can be removed without review,” said Tammy Clark, an assistant superintendent in the district.

Advertisement

Despite the policy change, district spokesperson Jeff Meador said a committee will review the books, and most of them “will likely be returned to the library shelves.”

Jonathan Friedman, the director of free expression and education at nonprofit PEN America, which promotes literary culture and defends freedom of speech, said the Supreme Court has not settled the constitutionality of removing school library books without a review. Still, he said it’s “highly concerning” that Hood County school board members “appear to have changed the policy just in order to appease the state lawmakers’ list of books.”

Friedman said that while there hasn’t been a recent legal challenge related to the spate of book removals, districts could find themselves in legal jeopardy if it becomes clear that their motive was based on “hostility towards the views in those books.”

Efforts to censor material usually fail, but the process can still be divisive and counterproductive, said Whitney Strub, a history professor at Rutgers University.

“I think history shows that these movements don’t actually succeed, but they do a lot of damage and inflict a lot of destruction and harm along the way,” Strub said. “And I absolutely think that’s likely to be the case at the local level.”

Two empty frames hang along with the portraits of the Granbury ISD Board of Trustees prior to the election of two new board members, Melanie Graft and Courtney Gore, at the GISD Administration Building in on Nov. 15, 2021. (Shelby Tauber/The Texas Tribune)

Seeking safety

The escalation of anti-LGBTQ rhetoric worries one Granbury mother of a 4-year-old, who asked that her name not be used as she fears retaliation because she is gay.

She recalled feeling reassured after county commissioners denied efforts to ban LGBTQ books from the local library in 2015 when she lived in a neighboring county. Although she didn’t have a child at the time, she believed that the books provided an opportunity to teach children that having gay parents is normal.

Advertisement

On election night in 2021, she was shocked when Graft, who had led the fight against the books, won. It was then that she and her wife decided to send their son, who is entering kindergarten, to another district. “It makes me worried that someone like her would tell kids that it’s not OK to be like that,” she said.

The woman can tick off the incidents of hate she has experienced since moving to the county four years ago: the stranger at the grocery store who called her a “faggot,” the senior citizen who threw his arms in the air in disgust and stormed off when he saw her kiss her fiancee goodbye.

She wanted school to be a safe space for her son, one that didn’t vilify him for having two moms.

“I wouldn’t put it past someone to physically harm me because I gave my fiancee a kiss,” she said. “Seeing stuff like the school board election definitely opens my eyes. Even though this is a small town, and I know most of the people, and I grew up next door, when it comes to sexuality nobody’s safe.”


Disclosure: The University of Houston and the University of Texas at Austin have been financial supporters of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune’s journalism. Find a complete list of them here.

The Texas Tribune is a nonpartisan, nonprofit media organization that informs Texans — and engages with them – about public policy, politics, government and statewide issues.

Advertisement

Jeremy Schwartz has been an investigative reporter in Texas for nearly a decade, covering issues including voting rights and border security for the Austin American-Statesman and USA Today Network. His work has resulted in the overhaul of Texas' inspection process for farmworker housing, sparked Congressional investigations of a failed Department of Veterans Affairs research program and uncovered misleading border arrest and drug seizure statistics maintained by the Texas Department of Public Safety. Schwartz won the National Association of Hispanic Journalists' Latino Issues award for his 2017 investigation into the political underrepresentation of Latinos in Texas cities and counties, and the Headliners Foundation of Texas Reporter of the Year award, among other honors. He previously served as Cox Newspapers' Latin America correspondent in Mexico City from 2005 to 2009, and before that, he covered the U.S. Border Patrol and immigration at the Corpus Christi Caller-Times.

88th Texas Legislature

Texas bill advancing in the Senate would block minors from updating gender on birth certificates

Opponents of the bill call it a “power play aimed at making the lives of transgender children as difficult as possible.” The chamber is expected to vote on this legislation Wednesday.

Published

on

A protester waves a transgender pride flag during a protest at the University of North Texas in Denton on March 23, 2022. (Emil Lippe/The Texas Tribune)

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune

A bill seeking to block transgender and nonbinary Texas youth from updating their birth certificate with their gender identity has received its first approval from the Texas Senate.

Senate Bill 162, filed by Republican state Sen. Charles Perry of Lubbock, proposes requiring an individual’s sex assigned at birth to be included on their birth certificate and limiting the circumstances in which this information could be changed for minors. The proposal lists very few exceptions.

“Senate Bill 162 prohibits sex listed on the birth certificate of a minor from being amended unless the change is to correct a clerical error or complete the birth certificate if the sex was not listed at the time of birth or if the child is intersex and the sex is later determined,” Perry said during the Senate meeting.

The Republican-controlled Senate preliminarily passed SB 162 on Tuesday with a vote of 19-11 after hearing no debate. The bill now awaits its final vote from the full chamber before it could advance to the House.

LGBTQ advocates said the legislation would make it impossible for trans and nonbinary Texas youth to update their birth certificate and subsequently other government documents — such as those required for identification for education, traveling and employment — with their gender identity.

Advertisement

“Birth certificates are a foundational document,” Sasha Buchert, a senior attorney with Lambda Legal, testified during the bill’s committee hearing. “And when people have identity documents — especially trans folks — that are inconsistent with who they are, it places them at risk of violence, bullying and even harassment.”

Beyond these dangers, this proposal could interrupt the process of enrolling in school, participating in extracurricular activities and applying for a passport — according to Ash Hall, a policy and advocacy strategist on LGBTQ rights with ACLU Texas who also testified against the bill at its committee hearing.

The process to change a minor’s gender on a birth certificate is lengthy and convoluted, Hall said. Currently, there is no difference in the process for minors and adults requesting a change to the gender marker on a Texas document — such as the sex listed on a birth certificate — according to a guide from the Texas Legal Service Center. The guide recommends that families seek the advice of an attorney for changes to a minor’s gender marker.

A court order is required to change gender markers on Texas documents. The decision to allow or deny a gender marker change resides with local judges, who have discretion over what proof is needed to confirm the change before issuing a court order.

Individuals seeking a gender marker change on their documents then present the court order to make changes to IDs, such as birth certificates or driver’s licenses.

The proposal would essentially erase trans and nonbinary youth from public life, according to the bill’s opponents.

Advertisement

“It’s already really difficult for trans people to update their birth certificates, and the vast majority of trans people are forced to live with inaccurate documents [that don’t] reflect who we are in the first place,” Hall told The Texas Tribune. “It’s deeply unnecessary, and it is only meant to harm.”

Jacqueline Murphy, a trans woman, testified during the committee’s hearing earlier this month that she was able to update her birth certificate as a minor — and that has made it easier for her to acquire identification for college enrollment and employment.

“The benefits for my peace of mind and physical safety cannot be overstated,” she said. “I expect the aim of this bill is to undermine the legitimacy of trans identity as a whole, particularly among children. … This is a power play aimed at making the lives of transgender children as difficult as possible.”

Hall added this bill includes vague language about designating the sex of intersex children. The bill would require those issuing birth certificates to fill in this field for intersex children “whose sex is later determined.” But missing from the legislation, Hall said, is when that determination is made.

“The intersex community, one of the basic rights they’re asking for is that their bodies not be operated on as infants when they can’t consent and that they get the opportunity to decide what their gender is, instead of having one forced upon them,” Hall said. The bill could eliminate the option for intersex children to change the gender initially determined for them.

Meanwhile, SB 162’s supporters said the bill is needed to “protect current laws that we have to actually protect biological sex,” such as existing restrictions in Texas on trans student athletes’ participation at the high school level. Senate Bill 15, which seeks to extend these restrictions to the college level, has also received preliminary approval from the full chamber — and there’s already enough support for the proposal in the House.

Advertisement

“It’s vitally important to know a person’s sex at birth,” said Jonathan Covey, policy director for the conservative group Texas Values. “It’s particularly important in light of fairness in women’s sports competitions.”

The bill’s backers also support Senate Bill 14, which was heard in the same committee hearing as SB 162 and dominated the meeting. SB 14 seeks to block trans kids from accessing transition-related medical treatments such as puberty blockers and hormone therapies. The ban would also include surgeries, though these rarely happen for youth.

SB 14 is also a priority legislation for Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, who presides over the Senate. The full chamber is expected to discuss and vote on this legislation this week.

William Melhado contributed to this story.

Disclosure: ACLU Texas has been a financial supporter of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune’s journalism. Find a complete list of them here.

The Texas Tribune is a nonpartisan, nonprofit media organization that informs Texans — and engages with them – about public policy, politics, government and statewide issues.

Advertisement

Continue Reading

88th Texas Legislature

Texas Senate committee advances bills restricting certain drag shows

Proposed legislation from Sen. Bryan Hughes, R-Mineola, would criminalize explicit performances where children are present and strip libraries of state funding for hosting any event featuring performers in drag. Critics say the bill is discriminatory and unconstitutional.

Published

on

Drag artist Brigitte Bandit and other attendees wait to give witness testimony for the Senate’s discussion of SB12 in the Capitol rotunda on Thursday. The bill defines drag shows as sexually oriented performances and would fine businesses that host events allowing in children. (Leila Saidane/The Texas Tribune)

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune

It’s been a long day for Robyn Valentine.

Standing in a packed Capitol hallway, the Corpus Christi-based drag performer could be spotted with her pink wig, stage makeup and baby blue clown outfit that comes with a ruffle collar and tulle sleeves. The look had taken about three hours to put together.

“I woke up at about 1 in the morning, just so I could get ready to be in drag,” she said.

For her, being in drag has always come naturally.

“I have always felt drawn to femininity,” she said. “Drag shows me an outlet in which I can embrace being a feminine gay male, but also doing so in an artistic way.”

Advertisement

It’s also business. Valentine has been a drag entertainer for over a decade, and in recent years she’s been performing live and hosting her own shows. And following the COVID-19 economic closures, she said one of her biggest focuses has been working with local businesses — something that has “created a sense of community.”

But now, she worries that Republican legislation designed to limit certain drag performances — on top of rising threats to and protests against these shows — could take away most of what she has built. So it was a no-brainer for her to drive four hours from the coast to Austin in the early morning to fight these bills, which she said target a minority group instead of protecting children, as the bill authors say.

“I came here because the attacks on the LGBTQIA+ community are not going to stop,” Valentine said. “I do fear for the future and what it could mean for my community and my own personal safety, which is why we need to draw a line in the sand now.”

Several other drag performers said they felt the same way as they gathered Thursday around the rotunda and eventually inside the Senate chamber — many of whom came decked out in higher heels, bigger wigs and brighter outfits — to make their voice heard on Senate Bill 12 and Senate Bill 1601. Four days later, the Senate State Affairs Committee voted to send both bills to the full chamber on a 6-2 vote along the partisan line. These proposals would have to pass both the Senate and the House before it could become law.

“I do get nervous. I do get scared. I’ve even had to cancel a show because I’ve had severe anxiety about it,” said Brigitte Bandit, an Austin-based drag performer who donned a bright pink floor-length gown and a big pink wig. “But ultimately, what am I going to do? Hide? I can’t hide. I have to be able to continue fighting for these things in being present and being visible.”

During the Thursday committee hearing, dozens of drag performers and their allies testified against these bills, outnumbering the the bills’ supporters. Opponents of the legislation also said the Republican-led efforts to criminalize certain drag performances were attacks on Texans’ First Amendment rights, while others said the legislation took away Texas parents’ rights to decide what content or culture their children are exposed to.

Advertisement

On the other side, the smaller contingent of the bills’ supporters say the legislation is needed to protect children from sexually explicit materials.

Filed by Republican state Sen. Bryan Hughes of Mineola, SB 12 would impose a $10,000 fine on business owners who host drag shows in front of children — if those performances are sexually oriented. The bill defines a sexually oriented performance as one in which someone is naked or in drag and “appeals to the prurient interest in sex.” The U.S. Supreme Court defines prurient interests as “erotic, lascivious, abnormal, unhealthy, degrading, shameful, or morbid interest in nudity, sex, or excretion.”

Compared to several other Republican proposals that seek to restrict drag shows — including Senate Bill 476 that Hughes previously filed — SB 12 scales down the proposed restriction on drag shows. But performers and their allies said the bill’s language is still vague.

“The bill being proposed is being left purposely vague to scare people out of interpretation,” Valentine said prior to the hearing. “I’ve seen many different people propose different interpretations already.”

During the Thursday hearing, Democratic Sen. José Menéndez of San Antonio voiced a similar concern about SB 12.

“I am concerned that what this is going to do is just put a target on the backs of certain people in certain businesses,” he said.

Advertisement

Hughes also filed SB 1601, which would withhold state funds from municipal libraries that host events in which drag performers read kids’ books to children.

These libraries don’t receive their operational funding directly from the state, according to a statement from the Texas Library Association. Instead, libraries can get money through competitive grant programs run by the Texas State Library and Archives Commission, the association said — around $2 million is distributed each year. SB 1601 could stop libraries hosting drag shows from being able to receive such grants the year after the events were held, the TLA said.

Baylor Johnson, the marketing and public information program manager for the Austin Public Library, is opposing SB 1601. In the past three years, the Austin Public Library has hosted at least two drag queen storytime programs at the request of members, which he said were age-appropriate and earned positive responses from families.

“Austin Public Library supports a parent’s right to make decisions about what kind of learning or entertainment experiences are appropriate for their child,” Johnson said. “Would a female librarian donning a Santa hat and beard to read ‘Twas the Night Before Christmas’ jeopardize the library’s state funding?”

The bills’ opponents also spoke about the importance of drag shows to the Texas economy, with these events drawing patrons to restaurants and bars to serve as an economic driver for small-business owners. They have also been a key way to raise funds for charities.

Janson Woodlee, who spoke on behalf of the Equality Alliance, an LGBTQ advocacy and philanthropic organization in Central Texas, testified that drag performances were a central component of the organization’s annual “Unite The Fight Gala.” Woodlee said last year’s gala raised over $200,000 for LGBTQ organizations in Texas.

Advertisement

On the other hand, less than a dozen supporters of the bills spoke at Thursday’s hearing. They said the legislation is needed to protect children from explicit materials and performances.

“Bringing children around sexual content is a targeted assault on their minds and bodies that should never be tolerated in a civilized society,” said Kelly Neidert, a conservative activist and founder of Protect Texas Kids, an organization that protests drag events.

Protect Texas Kids has been part of at least 14 drag event protests since it was founded just before Pride Month last June.

But the bills’ opponents said lawmakers are focusing on the wrong issue if they are trying to protect kids. Instead, they implored lawmakers to turn their attention toward gun violence or sexual abuse by church members.

Additionally, they say drag is simply an art form that shouldn’t be attacked.

“To restrict drag — an art form — in any way is a direct attack on my fundamental rights as an American and as a performer,” said Jay Thomas, an Austin resident who performs in drag as Bobby Pudrido.

Advertisement

William Melhado contributed to this story.

The Texas Tribune is a nonpartisan, nonprofit media organization that informs Texans — and engages with them – about public policy, politics, government and statewide issues.

Continue Reading

Amarillo

West Texas A&M University president cancels student drag show, saying it degrades women

Students and First Amendment lawyers say President Walter Wendler’s portrayal of drag shows is off base and the cancellation violates free-speech rights.

Published

on

Old Main Building at West Texas A&M University in Canyon, Texas (J. Nguyen/Wikimedia) [CC BY-SA 3.0]

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune

West Texas A&M University President Walter Wendler is drawing ire for canceling a student drag show, arguing that such performances degrade women and are “derisive, divisive and demoralizing misogyny.”

Students and First Amendment lawyers reject those assertions, calling his comments a mischaracterization of the art form. They also argue that the cancellation violates students’ constitutional rights and a state law that broadly protects free speech on college campuses, potentially setting the university up for a lawsuit.

“Not only is this a gross and abhorrent comparison of two completely different topics, but it is also an extremely distorted and incorrect definition of drag as a culture and form of performance art,” students wrote in an online petition condemning Wendler’s letter and urging him to reinstate the show.

Students plan to protest every day this week on the campus in the small West Texas city of Canyon, according to a social media post by the Open and Affirming Congregations of the Texas Panhandle.

Advertisement

“Drag is not dangerous or discriminatory, it is a celebration and expression of individuals,” student Signe Elder said in a statement. “Amidst the current climate of growing anti-trans and anti-drag rhetoric, we believe that it is important now more than ever to stand together and be heard.”

Elder is part of a group of students who have organized under the name Buffs for Drag, referring to the school’s buffalo mascot, to protest Wendler’s actions.

Drag shows frequently feature men dressing as women in exaggerated styles and have been a mainstay in the LGBTQ community for decades. Drag performers say their work is an expression of queer joy — and a form of constitutionally protected speech about societal gender norms.

But Wendler said drag shows “stereotype women in cartoon-like extremes for the amusement of others and discriminate against womanhood” in a Monday letter that was first obtained by Amarillo news site MyHighPlains.com. Wendler said the drag show was organized to raise money for The Trevor Project, a nonprofit that works to reduce suicides in the LGBTQ community. Wendler noted that it is a “noble cause” but argued the shows would be considered an act of workplace prejudice because they make fun of women.

“Forward-thinking women and men have worked together for nearly two centuries to eliminate sexism,” Wendler wrote. “Women have fought valiantly, seeking equality in the voting booth, marketplace and court of public opinion. No one should claim a right to contribute to women’s suffering via a slapstick sideshow that erodes the worth of women.”

His comments and decision to cancel the campus drag show come amid surging uproar over the lively entertainment as far-right extremist groups have recruited conservatives to protest the events, claiming that drag performances are sexualizing kids.

Advertisement

Republican Texas lawmakers have also homed in on the performances with a handful of bills that would regulate or restrict drag shows, including some legislation that would classify any venue that hosts a drag show as a sexually oriented business, regardless of the show’s content. On Thursday, a Senate committee will debate a scaled-back bill that would impose a $10,000 fine on business owners who host drag shows in front of children — if those performances are sexually oriented. The bill defines a sexually oriented performance as one in which someone is naked or in drag and “appeals to the prurient interest in sex.”

Rachel Hill, government affairs director for LGBTQ advocacy group Equality Texas, said drag doesn’t mock women. Instead, she said, it’s an art form that allows performers to explore their gender expression and take back power from what she said can be stifling gender norms.

“Drag has always been a way for people who don’t easily fit into the gender binary to embrace different facets of themselves,” Hill said in a statement to The Texas Tribune. “Womanhood comes in all shapes and sizes and is what we make of it. That’s what makes drag so powerful.”

West Texas A&M student groups were organizing the drag show, called “A Fool’s Drag Race,” for months. The LGBTQ student group Spectrum advertised the show on its Instagram page, encouraging people to sign up to perform.

Wendler argued in his letter that the West Texas A&M drag show goes against the U.S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s purpose, saying it’s inappropriate even if drag shows are not illegal.

A lawyer for the national campus free speech group Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression rejected that argument as “nonsense.”

Advertisement

“The only prejudice in play here is his,” said lawyer Alex Morey, arguing that Wendler has violated state and federal law by canceling the show.

In a statement to The Texas Tribune, Morey said that performances on campus such as drag shows are protected by the First Amendment.

“By unilaterally canceling the event because he personally disapproves of the views it might express, WTAMU’s president appears to have violated both his constitutional obligations and state law,” Morey said. “It’s really surprising how open he is about knowingly violating the law, especially because government officials who violate clearly established First Amendment law will not retain qualified immunity and can be held personally liable for monetary damages.”

The students who started the petition also accused Wendler of violating university policy, which states the school can’t deny student groups any benefits “on the basis of a political, religious, philosophical, ideological, or academic viewpoint expressed by the organization or any expressive activities of the organization.”

In 2019, Texas lawmakers passed a law that required universities to allow any person to engage in free-speech activities on campuses. The law passed with broad bipartisan support.

A West Texas A&M spokesperson said Tuesday morning that Wendler did not have any further comments. The Texas A&M University System, which oversees West Texas A&M, also declined to comment.

Advertisement

This is not the first time Wendler has been criticized for his comments related to people in the LGBTQ community. When he was chancellor of Southern Illinois University, he was criticized for pushing back on the board’s decision to extend certain medical benefits to same-sex partners, saying the measure would encourage “sinful behavior,” according to a local newspaper at the time.

Last year, Texas A&M University in College Station drew criticism from students when the office of student affairs announced it would no longer sponsor Draggieland, the annual drag show competition that started in 2020. Students held the performance last year after raising money through private donations. This year’s event is scheduled for April 6.

Alex Nguyen contributed to this story.

Disclosure: Equality Texas, Texas A&M University, Texas A&M University System and West Texas A&M University have been financial supporters of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune’s journalism. Find a complete list of them here.

The Texas Tribune is a nonpartisan, nonprofit media organization that informs Texans — and engages with them – about public policy, politics, government and statewide issues.

Advertisement

Continue Reading
Advertisement
 
 
Advertisement
 
 

Trending