The article doesn’t really elaborate on what they mean by a “transgender ban”…
There is this section:
Despite there being transgender and nonbinary members in our organizations, no Black fraternity or sorority has a truly gender-inclusive policy, especially for people who transition after initiation. Coming into your gender identity does not equate to wanting to stop affiliation with the organization. But stepping back from our organizations is usually a byproduct of little to no pro-inclusion policies.
Which seems to imply that the issue is with people who are initiated (as men) and then transition away (and no longer are men). If this is the case, it seems a lot less egregious. Just like sororities are organizations by and for women, fraternities are organizations by and for men.
Whilst it may seem unfair, losing access to gendered spaces of the gender someone is transitioning away from is, in a way, a recognition of their new identity.
The definition being adopted is:
any male defined as a human being naturally born male, who remains and continually identifies as a male,
https://glaad.org/glaad-exclusive-alpha-phi-alpha-fraternity-considers-transgender-ban/
Would many trans women want to stay in the fraternity after transitioning?
On the one hand, it feels mean to force them out, especially with how close people in a group like that can be. But on the other hand, if the goal is fraternity, is the frat still meeting the trans person’s needs? Is it meeting the needs of the remaining group?
Either way, this really feels like something each chapter should be able to handle on a case by case basis – I can’t imagine there’s enough trans people transitioning at that time where you need a fixed rule for it.
