Founded in 1823, The Lancet is a well-respected, peer-reviewed British medical journal. Not a hotbed of politically correct ideologues. Though if all you read were the McCrory et al federal court filing in defense of HB2, you might be granted temporary forgiveness for thinking so. When in fact, The Lancet's works stand squarely on the scientific evidence.
Yesterday, in a letter to the Lancet, UNC Medical School professor Joseph D. Tucker, MD, and UNC Professor of Public Health Policy Benjamin M Meier offered North Carolina as a clear example of bigotry's counterattack on LGBTQ rights.
It is, and they get right to the root issue:
HB2 supporters say that it will prevent men from entering women's bathrooms, but this faulty logic relies upon three misunderstandings. First, transgender individuals are far more often the victims of sexual violence,3 not the perpetrators. Second, many transgender individuals have long used bathrooms that match their gender identity without conflict and, in most cases, without notice. Third, sexual violence in public bathrooms is rare and unrelated to antidiscrimination laws, with no detected influence of transgender antidiscrimination laws on sexual assault.4
Although they dealt with the bathroom predator myth, Tucker and Meier did not address the issue of whether transgender individuals actually exist.
It isn't a scientific issue.
Although McCrory et al partnered with members of a hate group, the American College of Pediatricians, in an attempt to make an issue of it. The group's activities are documented by the Southern Poverty Law Center.
Tucker and Meier conclude that "North Carolina's bigotry bill serves as a powerful reminder of the need to ensure the rights that underlie health."
The brief filed Wednesday in "OPPOSITON" (sic) to the federal motion for a preliminary injunction barring enforcement of HB2, illustrates the lengths to which bigotry will go in an attempt to have its way with us all.