Big Sky Times

The Montana Senate has passed a controversial bill, Senate Bill 458, defining sex based on a person's reproductive system, sparking a debate among advocates and lawmakers. 

The proposed legislation seeks to clarify the definition of sex, but opponents argue it would undermine legal recognition for transgender and intersex individuals. The bill will now move to the House for further consideration amid concerns that it is part of a broader trend of anti-trans bills across the country. Proponents of the bill argue that it aims to provide a clear and consistent definition of sex for legal purposes, NBC Montana reported. 

“We’ve heard bills this session about the purported existence of multiple genders, gender fluidity, gender expression and transgenderism. That’s not what this bill is about,” Sen. Carl Glimm (R-Kila), the bill’s sponsor, said. “Biological sex is immutable. You can’t change it.” 

Senate Bill 458, which attempts to define sex based on how a person's reproductive system functions, was given final approval by the Senate with a vote of 28-22. While supporters of the bill believe that it would make the definition of sex more clear, opponents of the bill argue that it would deny transgender persons and those with intersex problems the legal recognition they are entitled to.

The bill also describes “female” as a human who, under “normal development,” produces “relatively large, relatively immobile gamete, or egg,” and defines the term “male” as a human who “under normal development, produces small, mobile gametes, or sperm.” 

The measure, which intends to give precise definitions for terms that have wide applicability across the Montana Code Annotated, received a proposal for an amendment from Glimm. The term "sex" is defined as the biological indicator of male or female, without consideration to an individual's psychological or subjective perception of gender. The proposed amendment would define "male" and "female" based on their reproductive systems, with "sex" being defined as the biological indication of male or female. 

The proposed amendment also says that the terms "man" and "men" encompass the terms "woman" and "women" unless the surrounding text makes it clear that they do not. In addition, the statutes will be updated to include clearer definitions of the phrases "heretofore" and "hereafter," according to the proposed modification. 

The argument that it is part of a larger trend of anti-LGBTQ+ and anti-trans legislation being adopted across the country is made by opponents. Concerns have been raised by numerous civil rights organizations and LGBTQ+ advocacy groups regarding the possible impact of the measure and its potential to further marginalize people that are already at a disadvantage, Montana Free Press reported. 

“Here are a few things that are at stake in this debate," Jay Richards, a representative of the national Heritage Foundation, said, according to Montana Free Press. "First, fair athletic competition separated by sex. Second, the freedom of women to have private spaces such as locker rooms and bathrooms. Third, the safety of women in prisons and domestic abuse shelters. And fourth, protection against gender ideology in public school instruction and programming. To preserve these goods, Montana needs to anchor its legal definition of sex in the solid ground of biological facts.” 

The legislation will next be considered by the House.