In Brief

Staff Reports

Virginia School Board Abandons Cross-Dressing Ban

SUFFOLK, VIRGINIA -- A school district in this southeastern Virginia city has abandoned a plan that would have banned gender-cross dressing after the American Civil Liberties Union of Virginia threatened to sue if the board implemented the new policy. The National Gay & Lesbian Task Force, the Human Rights Campaign and the state's LGBTQ Equality Rights organisation, Equality Virginia, also criticized the proposed wording of the policy which prohibited students from wearing clothing "not in keeping with a student's gender" and that "causes a disruption and/or distracts others from the education process or poses a health or safety concern."

Reuters reports that new wording released ahead of an expected school board vote on Thursday would ban students from wearing clothing causing "a substantial disruption and/or (which) substantially distracts from the education process, or poses a serious health or safety concern." Documentation from the principal or someone acting on their behalf would need to accompany any prohibition.

In a phone interview, board Chairman Michael J. Debranski told Reuters he will vote for the new wording, which he said leaves up to principals what students can and cannot wear and eliminates any discrimination of freedom of speech or expression. 

"It doesn't matter what the person wears, it's a matter of (whether) whatever it is, if it's not clothes if it's an item of jewellery, is disruptive, and that is a judgment call by the principal," Debranski said. "If it's a disruption in the class, then it would be brought to his attention. Other than that, a person would not be affected by it just because they are a cross dresser." 

The board opted to pursue the ban after teachers at one of the district's three high schools said some male students were dressing like girls, prompting complaints from other students, a district spokeswoman said in February. Board Vice Chair Thelma V. Hinton, who first brought the issue to the board's attention, said she generally supports the new wording but will seek more information at Thursday's board meeting. "There are some words in there that I'm not comfortable with, and I have some questions for the attorney," she said, declining to elaborate.  ~ Reuters