A Wyoming Resident Highlights Hypocrisy in Senate Bill 77
A recent exchange during a Wyoming Senate committee meeting has sparked controversy and debate over the state’s approach to free speech and pronoun usage. Britt Boril, a Wyoming resident, deliberately addressed Senator Tim French as “Madam Chairman” during a virtual meeting of the Senate Agriculture, State, and Public Lands & Water Resources Committee. This action was a pointed critique of Senate File 0077 (SF77), which asserts that “compelled speech is not free speech” and explicitly states that state employees are not required to use another employee’s preferred pronouns. Boril’s decision to misgender Senator French was an intentional act of defiance, aiming to expose what she perceives as hypocrisy in the bill’s language and intent.
The Exchange Between Britt Boril and Senator Tim French
During the meeting, Boril’s address of Senator French as “Madam Chairman” quickly caught attention. French promptly corrected her, asking to be referred to as “Mister Chairman,” to which Boril responded, “I cannot be compelled to use your preferred pronouns.” This exchange was not merely a matter of personal preference but a deliberate challenge to the principles outlined in SF77. Boril’s actions were a direct response to the bill’s assertion that individuals cannot be forced to use specific pronouns, arguing that if the state does not compel others to respect pronouns, then she, too, should not be compelled to adhere to French’s preferences. The tension in the moment underscored the broader debate over free speech, personal identity, and the role of government in regulating language.
Britt Boril’s Testimony and Her Stance on the What Is a Woman Act
Beyond her exchange with Senator French, Boril was present to testify against another controversial bill: the What Is a Woman Act. This legislation defines a female as someone who has, had, or will have a “reproductive system that at some point produces, transports, and utilizes eggs for fertilization.” Boril criticized the bill, arguing that it puts women in “real danger through government overreach.” She questioned the practical consequences of such a definition, raising concerns about potential invasions of privacy, such as forcing individuals to undergo genital inspections to use public restrooms. Boril’s testimony was impassioned, urging lawmakers to focus on issues that “actually matter” to Wyoming citizens rather than targeting women and transgender individuals. She also called on legislators to vote against the bill, emphasizing the need for them to “do their jobs” responsibly.
A Trio of Anti-Trans and Anti-DEI Bills in Wyoming
The What Is a Woman Act is part of a trio of bills in Wyoming that have been met with significant opposition from LGBTQ+ advocates and allies. In addition to defining what constitutes a female, the other two bills aim to close Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) offices in the state and at the University of Wyoming, and to ban transgender students from participating in sports at the University of Wyoming and other community colleges. These bills have been criticized for their anti-trans and anti-inclusive rhetoric, with opponents arguing that they perpetuate discrimination and exclusion. Boril’s testimony and actions are part of a larger movement to challenge these policies and highlight their potential harm to marginalized communities.
Reactions to Britt Boril’s Actions
Britt Boril’s deliberate misgendering of Senator French has sparked a mix of reactions. While some have praised her for creatively highlighting the hypocrisy of SF77, others have condemned her actions as disrespectful. In a video posted on her Instagram, Boril acknowledged that misgendering is “not cool” and that it is “always disrespectful and dehumanizing, whether intentional or not.” However, she defended her actions as a necessary message to legislators who she believes are not listening to the concerns of Wyoming residents. Boril also expressed concern that others might use similar tactics in “bad faith,” potentially undermining the validity of her own critique. Her actions have ignited a broader conversation about the limits of free speech, the importance of respecting personal identity, and the role of activism in challenging government policies.
The Broader Implications of the Debate
The debate over compelled speech, pronoun usage, and anti-trans legislation in Wyoming reflects a larger national conversation about identity, free speech, and government overreach. Britt Boril’s actions have brought attention to the potential consequences of bills like SF77 and the What Is a Woman Act, which opponents argue could erode protections for transgender individuals and create a hostile environment for marginalized communities. While proponents of these bills often frame them as measures to protect free speech or traditional values, critics argue that they perpetuate discrimination and harm. As Wyoming lawmakers continue to grapple with these issues, the exchange between Britt Boril and Senator French serves as a reminder of the ongoing struggle to balance individual rights with collective responsibility in a divided society. The outcome of these debates will likely have far-reaching implications for Wyoming residents and could set a precedent for similar legislation in other states.
