There has been an increased focus on promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion within organizations and communities. This is reflected in many ways, including changes to organizational policies and procedures that aim to make these spaces more welcoming and accessible for all members.
Despite these efforts, some groups may still face barriers to participation due to unintended exclusionary language in bylaws or other governing documents. One such group is transgender, non-binary, and intersectional LGBTQ+ individuals, who may find themselves excluded from decision-making processes and membership criteria due to outdated and binary language. Bylaws are essential documents that govern how organizations operate and make decisions, but they can also reinforce exclusionary practices if not updated regularly. In this article, we will explore how bylaws may inadvertently perpetuate exclusion and what corrective strategies exist to address these issues.
How Bylaws May Perpetuate Exclusion
Bylaws are important documents that outline the rules and regulations of an organization. They define membership criteria, decision-making processes, and voting rights. While these documents may be well-meaning, they can still perpetuate exclusion by using language that does not account for the diverse identities and experiences of their members.
A common practice in many organizations is to require members to identify as either male or female when joining or participating in activities. This binary classification can exclude transgender, non-binary, and intersex individuals who do not fit into these categories. Similarly, use of gendered pronouns like "him" or "her" may exclude those who do not identify with these terms. Other examples include exclusively referring to marriage as between two people of opposite sexes, which excludes same-sex couples, or requiring members to live within a certain geographic area, which excludes those who cannot meet this requirement. These types of language may unintentionally create barriers to participation and can cause feelings of alienation among members.
Corrective Strategies
To address these issues, organizations should consider implementing corrective strategies that aim to update their bylaws to reflect the diversity of their members. One approach is to revise membership criteria to allow for self-identification rather than relying on binary classifications. This means allowing members to indicate how they want to be identified, whether that be through checkboxes, drop-down menus, or open-ended responses.
Organizations should avoid the use of gendered pronouns and instead use neutral terms such as "they/them." When it comes to decision-making processes, organizations should ensure that all voices are heard and represented, including those from marginalized groups. This can involve creating committees dedicated to promoting diversity and inclusion or inviting guest speakers from diverse backgrounds to share their perspectives.
Organizations should also regularly review their bylaws to ensure they remain relevant and inclusive. By staying up-to-date with evolving language and practices, organizations can continue to promote equity and belonging for all members.
How might bylaws inadvertently perpetuate exclusion of transgender, non-binary, or intersectional LGBTQ+ individuals, and what corrective strategies exist?
Trans people are often excluded from bylaw provisions due to their lack of representation in policy processes. This can be because they may not feel comfortable sharing their gender identity with others, for fear of discrimination or violence. Additionally, non-binary identities may not fit into the binary options that many policies require (e. g. , male/female).