"Transgender Biological Men": Brown’s Ohio Ad Signals the Danger Of Dems Hesitating On Trans Rights

The ad is the second ad from a Democratic candidate in a swing state responding to an onslaught of anti-trans advertising.

Still from Sherrod Brown Ad, 10/14/2024

On Sunday, Sherrod Brown released a commercial responding to the surge of anti-transgender advertising across Ohio, making him the second prominent Democrat to do so in the last week. In the ad, Brown aligns with Governor Mike DeWine, emphasizing that decisions about transgender participation in sports should be made by individual sports leagues, not the government. However, some local activists find other parts of the ad troubling, particularly the statement that transgender girls “have already been banned” from Ohio sports and the inclusion of a fact check stating it is “false” that Sherrod Brown “voted to let transgender biological men participate in women’s sports.”

The commercial, which according to readers aired during Sunday Night Football in Ohio, opens with clips from his opponent’s ads, featuring transgender swimmer Lia Thomas and a tall transgender basketball player from the early 2010s. Brown’s ad directly calls these commercials misleading and highlights three key points. The first states that “In Ohio, this has already been banned.” The second emphasizes Brown’s agreement with DeWine, who said, “This issue is best addressed outside of government, through individual sports leagues and athletic associations.” The final point features a WKYC fact check, with an anchor stating, “We can verify, the claim that Brown voted to let transgender biological men participate in women’s sports is false.”

You can see the full ad here:

The new ad comes in response to a massive ad campaign against Brown targeting him over transgender policies. In Ohio, Senate Leadership Fund, a prominent Republican PAC, announced $83 million worth of advertising buys, with most ads dedicated to transgender people. One of the ads that the Brown Campaign responds to says that “Brown voted multiple times to allow transgender biological males in women’s sports” and that “Brown supported allowing minor children to receive sex change surgeries.”

You can see the anti-trans ad from the Senate Leadership Fund here:

Some aspects of the ad may be seen as troubling to transgender individuals. In particular, the use of Lia Thomas’ imagery followed by the claim that “this has already been banned” in Ohio suggests a degree of distancing from transgender athletes. The second statement, which discusses leaving decisions about trans athletic participation to local sports leagues, has been better received and reflects the approach taken by most states in recent years. However, the third statement explicitly claims that accusations of Sherrod Brown “voting to allow transgender biological men to compete in women’s sports” are false. This language reinforces the narrative that transgender women are “biological men,” amplifying the rhetoric while defending Senator Brown.

Brown is the second prominent Democratic Senate candidate to respond to anti-transgender ads with messaging that risks reinforcing Republican framing. On Friday, Texas Senate candidate Colin Allred released his own ad in response to similar attacks, stating that he “does not support boys in girls’ sports.” The ad was swiftly criticized by transgender advocates, who accused Allred of “throwing transgender people under the bus.”

Speaking with local Ohio activists and those familiar with the Brown campaign, the response was one of shock. While many noted that Brown's ad wasn’t as harmful as the one from the Allred campaign, the fact that Brown released an ad at all was deeply disheartening. “I truly believe Sherrod Brown is a staunch ally to our community,” said one advocate familiar with the campaign, who spoke on condition of anonymity. “The fact that he’s even slightly rolling on this should be a wake-up call for everyone concerned about the strength of attacks on trans people. I’m also really, really scared about how the effectiveness—or perceived effectiveness—of this will impact down-ballot and future races.”

Despite the barrage of anti-transgender ads aimed at Democrats, most have opted to ignore them. History and polling suggest the ads are largely ineffective at swinging races—Republicans in several states leaned heavily on anti-trans rhetoric in 2022 and 2023, with little success. Take Kentucky’s Andy Beshear, for example. In an R+30 state, he vetoed an anti-trans sports ban and delivered a forceful defense of his decision. Despite millions spent on anti-trans ads targeting him, Beshear won re-election by a wider margin than his first race.

However, Democratic responses to the ads may make Republicans more likely to run them. At least one anti-trans organizational leader, Terry Schilling of the American Principles Project, celebrated the response in Texas as a win for the anti-trans right: “Beautiful Ted gets a major W here — first candidate to go on offense enough to get his opponent to directly address the attack. W.”

Recently, some on social media have speculated that transgender athletics may be a “losing issue” for Democrats—a view that could gain traction among campaigns wary of a wave of anti-transgender ads. But this notion is likely misguided. For organizations targeting transgender people, the end goal has never truly been about kids or sports. Anti-trans legislators are on the record stating the broader goal is the end of transgender people altogether. If they can convince the public to place an asterisk next to the gender identity of transgender athletes, it becomes much easier to extend that asterisk to bathrooms, youth rights, literature, and beyond. Of the 26 states that have enacted transgender sports bans, only two have yet to pass a ban on transgender youth healthcare, with most pushing through a broader suite of anti-transgender legislation.

Capitulating on transgender issues has not proven to be an effective strategy. After Allred’s ad aired in Texas, local news outlets accused him of lying, citing his positions on the Save Women’s Sports bill and the Equality Act. As Allred prepares to debate Cruz on Tuesday, he should be prepared for Cruz to press the issue more.

While a few Democrats have responded to anti-transgender ads with questionable strategies, Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris has yet to issue such an commercial. Lately, she’s faced a barrage of attacks from the Trump campaign, accusing her of supporting “transgender surgeries for inmates and illegal aliens.” In a Fox News interview last month, Harris distanced herself from the 2019 ACLU questionnaire that the ads reference, stating that it no longer reflects what she is “proposing or running on.” With Harris set to appear on Fox News for a live interview October 16th, it's likely she’ll face further questions on the issue.

Democratic strategists looking for a more effective approach have alternatives to engaging with anti-transgender issues through a Republican lens. Karleigh Webb, a transgender journalist, proposed a different tactic—shifting the focus away from transgender people, an issue of low salience for most voters, and onto more pressing concerns. The message Webb suggested for Allred? “Transgender Texans did not weaken our electric grid. Ted Cruz supported the laws that did.”

This issue seems unlikely to fade anytime soon. Senators who feel pressured to distance themselves from transgender athletes during the election may face even more pressure when it resurfaces after 2024. In December, a likely government shutdown fight during the lame-duck session could see Democrats pressed to accept bans on federal funding for transgender healthcare, Title IX protections for trans athletes, bathroom access, and military participation. These proposals have only been narrowly defeated so far, making Democratic unity crucial to preventing them from moving forward.

Looking forward, the stakes couldn't be higher. Some fear that anti-transgender sentiment could seep into the Democratic Party, much as it has with Labour in the U.K., while others see a second Trump presidency as the most dangerous outcome for transgender rights, with a cascade of bans becoming law. The future of transgender protections may rest on a Democratic Senate's ability to confirm judicial appointments under a Harris administration. But perhaps the greatest threat is the potential for fracture within the Democratic Party itself. If Democrats begin to compromise on transgender rights, following Labour's path of accepting asterisks on trans identity, the damage could be irreversible. The only way to protect transgender rights for the long term is through unwavering Democratic solidarity—because once the line is crossed, there may be no turning back.