On Monday, April 11, the Southern Adventist University Assembly approved updates to the institution’s Sexual Integrity Policy along with transgender policy guidelines. As reported in a previous Accent article, the university’s policy on public display of affection (PDA) is now more clearly defined, and policy on pregnancy, pornography and transgender topics were added.
According to the PDA part of the policy, the university does not condone PDA that may be sexually suggestive, including but not limited to intimate touching, fondling and prolonged kissing.
Although the pregnancy section states that the university does not condone extramarital sexual relationships, the university will provide support and/or resources to pregnant students, according to the document.
The new policy on pornography defines pornography and declares that accessing, creating, viewing or distributing pornography is unnacceptable on and off campus.
Under the new transgender policy, bathroom and locker room usage, housing situations and intramural sport participation would be determined by an individual’s biological sex.
The policy and guidelines will undergo a final legal review before implementation, according to Senior Adviser for Sexual Integrity Alan Parker in a statement to the Accent. Parker said the updates will be implemented in the next academic year if they go through the approval process in time.
Implementation guidelines for the transgender policy is considered a separate document from the Student Handbook policies, but the handbook will contain a link to the guidelines. One of the listed guidelines state that special housing considerations may be considered for certain transgender students.
The guidelines document further states that clothing and dress should reflect an individual’s biological sex. Dress that is intended to represent the opposite sex would be considered incompatible with the university’s biblical principles, as stated in the document. Parker said because intentions are difficult to assess, that area would require further legal review.
Another guideline called for student leadership positions to be reserved for students who abide by the university’s policies and respect the Seventh-day Adventist Church’s stance on the congruence between biological sex and gender.
Biological sex refers to the sex an individual was assigned at birth. Gender refers to “the behavioral, cultural or psychological traits typically associated with one sex,” as defined in the Merriam-Webster dictionary.
According to a General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists’ statement regarding transgender topics, the church does not recognize the separation of an indivudual’s gender identity and biological sex.
“From a biblical perspective, the human being is a psychosomatic unity,” the statement reads. “For example, Scripture repeatedly calls the entire human being a soul (Gen 2:7; Jer 13:17; 52:28-30; Ezek 18:4; Acts 2:41; 1 Cor 15:45), a body (Eph 5:28; Rom 12:1-2; Rev 18:13), flesh (1 Pet 1:24) and spirit (2 Tim 4:22; 1 John 4:1-3). Thus, the Bible does not endorse dualism in the sense of a separation between one’s body and one’s sense of sexuality.”
The guidelines for transgender policy implementation would not apply to individuals who have been medically-identified as intersex, according to the document. Guidelines for personal pronouns are still in development.
In a statement to the Accent, Parker said he does not believe policies “adequately describe an institution.”
“Policies are boundary-markers, expressing what is allowed or not allowed according to the institution’s values,” Parker said. “If you drive through a city, you may notice there are speed limits (boundaries for how fast you can go), but these limits tell you very little about the city and its culture. In the same way, policies don’t fully describe Southern. The richness of our diversity, the caring and compassionate people you find here, the depth of our faith, the excellence of our academics and the commitment to our mission are what make Southern what it is.”
6 thoughts on “Southern Adventist University Assembly approves updated Sexual Integrity Policy, transgender guidelines”
SAU does not and will never care about LGBT students. I implore everyone at Southern that identifies anything other than cisgender and heterosexual to please go somewhere else. It will save you time, money, and your mental health.
I appreciate Southern’s goal to abide by the church’s biblical stance. It is a positive step forward and reduces any ambiguity that may have previously made decisions in this regard challenging. Standing up for one’s beliefs is challenging, especially in this day and age where mob rule distinguishes what is and is not morally acceptable. Kudos to Southern for ignoring the voice of the many and following the prescripts of God.
No matter how much Southern talks about “welcoming diversity” on campus, they have never, ever meant it, and they never will. If you’re not heterosexual and you’re not cisgender, you’re not the kind of “diversity” they want. They either want to “change” you, or they want you to be invisible. It’s disgusting. I’m so glad I made it out.
So proud of Southern. If people don’t agree with it they have every opportunity to leave and go somewhere else. No one is Forcefully dragging students to the University. Probably 99% of universities don’t care what God’s word has to say and I’m so thankful that southern still does.
I personally disagree with the stance, but knowing the kind of school Southern is and the official SDA guidelines on the topic, I’m not surprised that this is the response. However, even from a neutral standpoint, the policy on clothing in particular is laughably arbitrary. Hate to be the “gendered clothing is a social construct” individual, but there is no such thing as inherently feminine or inherently masculine clothing, and the policy deliberately disadvantages masc presenting folk over fem presenting folk. A woman wearing pants is fine, even though it wasn’t fine not that long ago, and a really long time ago in many cultures both genders wore long, one pieced garments, not disimilar to dresses. It’s subjective and varies over time and by culture, so if the culture is changing, why does that need to be policed? Not only does it limit the personal expression of individuals experiencing disforia or body envy, it puts retrains on cisgender people as well. Do women have to stop wearing suits? Do men have to stop wearing nail polish? Where are the limits? What guidelines are used to determine clothing associated with the sexes?
I understand that the policy is still in legal revision for this very reason, but I think that clause should be thrown out entirely. It’s unnecessary at best and harmful at worst. I also don’t want my short dismissal of the rest of the policy at the beginning of my comment to be taken as acceptance with it, either. Preaching a message of love and acceptance but doing little loving and no accepting is S Tier gaslighting, and quite on brand. I would love to see more nuanced discourse on the topic from this community that’s more than just “good on ya for sticking to your values,” but I’m not getting my hopes up.
Our universities should remain faithful to biblical principles. I pray that Southern continues to draw boundaries for the sake of our children. Otherwise, might as well be a public university