You are brilliant, beautiful, and incredible. Not that you need to be reminded, just that it’s not a message we get a lot and I want to add it to the world as often as I can.
And I think you can help me with that. See, thirty years ago Audre Lorde wrote that poetry is not a luxury in an essay that outlined the importance of writing in our daily lives. You should look it up, like all of her writing. I guarantee you’ll love it, because few writers or activists have shown the sheer love in their work and ideology that Lorde has. Anyway, her point was that we must create and find beauty in our daily lives, even in the most mundane aspects. This is something we as Trans* people of color need to do both as a community and as individuals.
We need to begin to define who we are if we are going to organize and move ourselves forward, and one of the easiest ways to do this is by writing poetry. Creating and performing poetry is possibly the most basic way of creating a united community that has existed for as long as human beings have, and contributes to the development of a culture and a shared identity. Take a moment and think about how our writing—your writing—could shape TPOC culture and consciousness. While we have a history, a long and powerful one, the writings that are most influential, those from the Seventies and Nineties are in many aspects as removed from our lives as the white, straight, cis narratives that pervade this country’s culture today. There is an undeniable need for something that defines us now, in a time when the world is constantly changing and being redefined.
Also, I know that in my own case I need a vent for all the frustration and the fury I feel when I confront oppression, in any way I might be doing it. Poetry can be a creative outlet for that, and can give us, a group of people who are never given the opportunity to speak for themselves, a powerful voice. Only we can outline the full extent of our experiences, and we need to do so. Not for others, not for the media that has misrepresented us or the communities that have marginalized us, but for ourselves. For those of us who are just beginning their journey as a Trans* person, and for those of us who are isolated from a welcoming space.
Even more than expressing all the rage we must stifle in our daily lives, we must show our beauty. To portray the inner and outer beauty of our community is one of the most revolutionary things we can do, and one of the most fundamental for us to create a strong community. Nothing remotely close to this exists, certainly not as a cohesive consciousness toward writing. There are some poems online and in Trans* history, but these things are few and scattered. That leaves it to us to add to this body of work and to make a space for our community to thrive and create spiritually and emotionally. These writings can be our love note to one another in a world that has no positive messages for us, they can counter every stereotype, every internalized bit of transphobia, and replace them with strength and self-confidence.
Our words can and will carry power that no one has ever seen before, they can create bonds between us that will never be broken. In my life I know that loneliness and a sense of alienation were some of the biggest struggles I faced, and I know that this is the case for many Trans* people. I firmly believe that when we begin to represent ourselves, when we work to find one another, this situation will end and the TPOC movement will finally begin.
Todo mi amor,
Sam Andazola
Sunday, February 26, 2012
The more work I do in Queer and QTPOC communities the more I realize there is a need to go over the basics of social justice. Without an understanding of the dynamics working between the various groups that live under the Queer umbrella, and the history that created these dynamics, it is not possible to advance the state of our community.
This ranges from an understanding of intersectionality to an understanding of the effects each action taken by the community has in other communities. It is easy for many people to prioritize one identity over another, or to develop a view of social justice that places Queerness as the most important issue. This must be changed if the wounds in our community, those caused by decades of erasure, silencing, and exclusion, are ever to be healed. These wounds are not some abstraction from our lives, occupying the realm of theory, nor are they historical facts that no longer have any impact; they affect us all at one point. They are present in the Gay clubs that cater to a white crowd, they are obvious in organizations that lack Trans people, and they reign in spaces that have been created to be open to everyone yet find themselves dominated by a single group. An understanding of power and privilege, the foundation of all social justice work, can easily explain these circumstances and that is the first step in altering them.
This process is long and difficult, there is no denying that. Deciding to embark on this path requires a kind of self-reflection different from any other, because you will find parts of yourself that you will embrace and other parts of yourself you will want to despise. Maybe authors like Audre Lorde or bloggers like Caroline Narby, who writes “Double Rainbow”, and s.e. smith, who runs “This Ain’t Livin’”, will make you aware of privilege you didn’t realize that you carried, and that is always the most demanding part of this process. I believe that this stage is what causes many people to shy away from this work, because the acknowledgement of privilege can cause guilt and shame, but it is something that is necessary to undertake.
But don’t worry too much, there is another half to this process that includes finding a community and a history you didn’t realize you were a part of. Maybe you’ll find a home in Gloria Anzaldua’s “Borderlands”, or with the Crunk Feminist Collective; maybe you didn’t know about people like Sass Sasot, a Transwoman in the Philippines who created the first Trans organization in that country, or Adelina Anthony, a Chicana Lesbian whose plays celebrate the fierceness of Queer Latin@s, but you will find them and many others as you dig deeper into social justice.
This is not an attempt to call anyone out, this is me asking for your help. In the current political climate, every marginalized community is facing a struggle different from any that has come before, and it is my belief that if we do not unite we will not be successful in fighting this oppression. It is also my belief that Queer people have a responsibility to each other and the greater community to educate themselves on the multitude of issues that affect the different parts of our community, even, and I would say especially, if it is not an issue that affects you personally.
PC Air, an airline out of Thailand, announced in December that they had hired four transwomen in their latest hiring batch, along with twenty-six cis attendents of both genders. Additionally, they publicly announced their pro-trans hiring policies. They released a new commercial that features a little boy walking up some stairs and becoming a beautiful adult woman who appears to be a pageant queen, who then morphs into one of their attendants in uniform on a plane:
While I find it hard to be critical of any kind of publicly pro-trans hiring, I’m skeptical of both the airline’s motivations, and their implementation so far.
Especially with the commercial, this seems more like an exploitative publicity stunt than a well-informed attempt to overcome discrimination. I don’t know what their standards are for the appearance of flight attendants in general (though they do hire men as well), but I couldn’t help notice that all the trans employees look like cisgender super models. They’re hardly representative of trans folks in general.
The airline is also having them all wear nametags that identify them as “third gender,” a policy that is othering and disrespectful. They should have the ability to choose whatever gender identification they want, whether that include mention of their transness or not. It’s basically forcing them to be out to every stranger on the plane, at all times. That’s a hostile, potentially very stressful work environment, and may actually put these women in danger. Thailand has historically been more accepting of gender variance than other countries, but a high possibility for harassment (or worse) remains by forcing these women to be out to complete strangers.
And, as always, I find myself very irritated when people do the basic minimum of human dignity and expect (and often receive!) cookies and accolades and praise. Hiring four transwomen, forcing them to be out and othered at all times, and exploiting these employees to prove how progressive you are does not an ally make.
Some of you may or may not know about something called Body Integrity Identity Disorder, formally known as Amputee Identity Disorder. It’s supposed to be this thing where people feel they were meant to live as an amputee and that they are not complete unless they have some part of them surgically amputated.
According to Dr. Michael B. First, who is helping write the DSM-V, BIIS is not simply about amputation. “It involves any wish to significantly alter body integrity. Some people suffer from the desire to become paralyzed, blind, deaf, use orthopaedic appliances such as leg-braces, etc” But, I’ll focus on amputation since it seems to be most common.
Here’s where I think it gets...complicated. Many have drawn parallels between BIIS and what is known as Gender Identity Disorder because they are both about a problem of identity and wanting to be in a different body.
In case you don’t know, Gender Identity Disorder is still listed in the DSM describing people who experience significant gender dysphoria — “a man trapped in a woman’s body” or vice versa. Transgender individuals who are seeking hormone replacement therapy or sex reassignment surgery are diagnosed with GID. The listing of GID in the DSM is controversial for a lot of reasons, including the fact that there is evidence from studies of transsexual (I say transsexual because I’m talking about those who want hormone therapy and/or surgery) people’s brains along with the fact that it’s called a disorder in the first place. Nonetheless, disorder or not, the concept seems to be the same: a problem of identity and wanting to be in a different body.
This disturbs me. I don’t know about you, but I think wanting a limb removed is pretty fucked up and having it compared to the so-called “GID” freaks me out. If we humor this idea for a bit, there seem to be two possible implications: (1) transsexuals are “as fucked up as BIIS individuals” or (2) BIIS is not well-understood and individuals suffering from it need more support. And because the first implication is dangerous and frightening...well, you can see where BIIS support comes from.
But is this a valid comparison? Some are outraged and think BIIS could mean trouble for the transgender community.
Critics say that supporters of BIIS fail to see that transgenderism is more than wanting to be in a different body and that many, in fact, say its irrelevant to their experiences. They say apotemnophiliacs are using language that is congruent with the concept of GID to validate their illness.
There seems to be some inconsistencies as to what exactly BIIS is. There is a paraphilia called apotemnophilia. Paraphilias are regarded as abnormal sexual behaviors, fantasies and/or urges. Apotemnophilia is a sexual desire for amputation. It seems to happen often in conjunction with BIIS and many websites use the terms interchangeably. Other websites delineate the distinction between the two and contend that they are NOT the same, that people with BIIS are not always apotemnophiliacs. And more parallels are drawn — between transvestitism and amputee-wannabes.
So it’s hard to know exactly what the hell is going on. Furthermore, critics say that BIIS supporters fail to see the differences between sex reassignment surgery and voluntary amputation. SRS involves “fashioning of one living, functional, highly sensitive and sexually responsive organ, from the tissue of another. Genital reconstruction giveth: it does not taketh away.” They also say BIIS supporters often neglect to mention female to male surgeries. Moreover, critics say supporters don’t mention the genetic and neurobiological differences — for example, the life-long commitment to taking hormones. There is outrage because some supporters even regard GID as falling under the umbrella of BIIS.
Neurologically speaking, there is evidence that BIIS results from a failing of the right parietal lobe in the brain, which helps control the brain’s inner body mapping function. “According to this theory, the brain mapping does not incorporate the affected limb in its understanding of the body’s physical form.” This also makes sense because somatoparaphrenia (believing a certain limb does not belong to oneself) is a common result from biparietal or parietal strokes (strokes of that part of the brain) and somatoparaphrenia is linked to BIIS. So, some believe BIIS may be a congenital form of somatoparaphrenia, which can be treated by, basically, squirting cold water in the patients right ear. Also some say studying phantom limb phenomena would help understand how to treat BIIS.
HOWEVER, there is also evidence to suggest “GID” is also medical in nature. Regardless of sexual orientation, men have twice as many somatostatin neurons (found in some limbic nucleus). It was found that MTFs have female numbers of said neuron and FTMs have male numbers of it in their brains. So, there you have it.
Regardless of its possible neurological bases, GID is treated by changing physical appearance and not changing psychological makeup or implementing neurological treatments. Currently, no medical professionals in the U.S. will perform amputations for people with BIIS. This is sad, because many will go to extreme lengths to damage their limbs to the point where they require amputation and some even self-amputate. But the idea of medically amputating the unwanted limb of a person with BIIS is highly controversial and many instead advocate psychological treatment. And in cases where amputation is attained, BIIS sufferers seem to be much happier. This phenomenon dates far back. In France in 1785, there was a man who held a physician to gunpoint asking him to amputate his leg. The doctor did so and later received a thank you letter from the man, who said he’d been made “the happiest of all men.”
Dr. Ray Blanchard, however, is skeptical of the neurobiology of BIIS. He says that if it were truly biological in nature, there would be other symptoms, like difficulty using the leg and signs of neglect. He doesn’t think society will be able to accept BIIS and can’t see the medical community accepting it or performing the surgeries for it. Medicine would see it as administering a disability, which is another way it’s different from GID — gender is not a disability.
These things are important to think about. After all, homosexuality was at one point regarded as a mental illness, not anymore. And Gender Identity Disorder seems to possibly be on its way out of the DSM. What's defined as a mental illness or disorder has strong societal implications. Sadism and masochism are listed in the DSM as paraphiliic disorders. Yet, it’s controversial because both can be practiced by consenting adults under safe conditions. There are some pretty hard to define lines going on there.
Now think about this: we often talk about all kinds of identity equalities but seem to leave out ability as a way to identify. Some people have issues with the term handicapped. In Deaf culture, being Deaf is not seen as a disability and is in fact, celebrated and sometimes even thought of as "better" than being hearing. PfP: remember gender theory, queer theory? If we can deconstruct race, gender, and sex, why not ability?
It all seems so ridiculous at first, but people can, will, and are using logic to win their arguments. And we DO have to think about these things because people commonly think in terms of slippery slopes and domino effects when they think about things. Example: the notion that allowing same-sex couples to marry will make people want to marry more than one person. And more related to the issue at hand: some conservatives in the medical community feel the normalization of SRS was the “start of a slippery slope.”
And so...
Maybe, BIIS is just really misunderstood and not such a weird thing...but I don’t know. It still freaks me out. And I don’t know what to make of its comparison to transgender individuals. Is it a dangerous comparison to make? Should they even be compared — is it a valid comparison or not? And if it’s valid...what does that mean?
Sources: Wikipedia http://www.biid.org/meetings.php?lan=en http://jcem.endojournals.org/cgi/reprint/85/5/2034 http://www.newsweek.com/2008/05/28/cutting-desire.html http://ts-si.org/guest-columns/3643-psychiatric-politics-body-integrity-identity-disorder-biid
So I like sports. Good god I can't play sports to save my life BUT watching sports, especially with hot wings and beer, is my sport and I'm good at it!
Originally, I wanted to write about the coverage of the NCAA National Championships, how the men's was well advertised, while the women's... well... people knew about it. Did they watch? My significant other and I did. It upset me a little. Women have the bracket just like men did so why didn't the President, and EVERYBODY ELSE for that matter, pick a winner for the men's teams but not the women's? These women can PLAY too! They aren't having tea parties on that court for sure. In fact, according to an article written on outsports.com, the women outscored the men by over 50 points during their championship games. And this is the ONLY time you will hear me say this but GO AGGIES! Never again people.
But then I realized how the gender binary factored into this discussion. It isn't inclusive as I would have liked it to be. As a society, we don't recognize (until we recognize) that there are other ways to self-identify besides "male" or "female" binaries. To acknowledge that is to acknowledge all people who want to be gender-non-conforming.
So I went the complete opposite route and looked at an article my significant other found on ESPN about George Washington basketball player Kye Allums. He is an amazing individual. The first out transgender athlete to play an NCAA sport, he decided to not take testosterone so he could continue to play with his teammates on the George Washington women's basketball team. COMPLETE props to ESPN though for using the pronouns he wanted them to use. Even though the article is about concussions, which is sad, they took the time and respect to know and use the proper pronouns to write it.
This is a big deal. Besides the fact that ESPN is owned by the Disney corporation (being a LGBT-friendly company), this is such a male-dominated website. You have to click on the "More Sports" tab just to get to the stories about women's sports, let alone search "Kye Allums" to get stories about him. But I was able to find and watch the ESPN "Outside the Lines" story on him (link below):
OTL: Transgender Athlete
(Warning: the language and content in this video may trigger or upset you)
Personally, I believe this is a huge step in the right direction. I know we talk about baby step all the time but this is a jump. Kye is paving the way for many young transpeople, and LGBT-identified people, to be out and athletic. As his coach mentioned in the video, it was difficult at first but his teammates were able to grow. They use "he/him" instead of "she/her" when referring to Kye and call him Kye instead of his birth name Kay-Kay. To see this progress in sports is wonderful, because the assumption is it's just straight people playing ball. Maybe Kye's stories can give courage and hope to those who might be struggling with their own identities. Below is a FANTASTIC article written by outsports.com, which is now my new favorite sports website.
This past month, I have had the privilege of watching groundbreaking documentaries dealing with important issues in the LGBTQ community. The one that has had the most effect on me was 'Southern Comfort,'
Southern Comfort is a documentary that came out 10 years ago and follows final year of transman, Robert Eads. Before I can go any further, let me just say that this man is one of the most amazing queer figures I have ever seen. He is a Southern Gentleman, oozing with charm and wisdom. He's your typical mans man, rugged bearded hunter with cowboy boots and hat and a love for country music. We then meet his girlfriend, Lola Cola. An elegant transwoman with Betty Boop humor and whit. As we begin to peek into their beautiful Romance and their history of meeting in SoCo (an annual Southern United States convention exploring trans life and issues), we learn that Robert is suffering from Ovarian Cancer. As Robert put it, its quite ironic that the only part of him that was still a woman was killing him. When first diagnosed with terminal cancer, Eads contacted nearly fifty doctors each refusing treatment due to the face that he is transgender. The film explores the lives of other trans men and women and their stories of growing up in the South. In the end, Robert passes away. There is little doubt that he could have at least suffered less and lived a little longer had he not been forced to suffer without treatment. Whatever happened to that oath that doctors take vowing to treat anyone and everyone? I try not to ponder this too much because it is too saddening a thought that there are people on this Earth who have the means of making life so good for others, but by choice make it worse.
This is definitely the best film I've seen all year, and probably the most important I'll see in a while.
Friday, February 25, 2011
So this week I had tons of fun preparing to act like a complete male chauvinist pig in front of an audience. On Wednesday I performed in the drag ball that QPOCA hosted, which was awesome! However, I have tons of questions and thoughts about this. First of all, why was it all about inflating these gender stereotypes that so harm men and women and others on an everyday basis? Secondly, why was that so much fun? What does this all mean?
I don’t really know anything about drag culture at all. In fact, until recently, I thought only men performed as drag queens and I didn’t really know drag kings existed. I also didn’t know about faux queens and kings. Faux queens are women that dress as drag queens and faux kings are men that do male drag. What does that even mean? Drag?
I also just today learned that drag queens inspired the Stonewall riots in New York City. What!? I need to know more about this. Why didn’t I know this and why are transgender individuals now left behind in the LGBTQ movement if they kind of “started it” in the first place? And why am I automatically assuming that drag culture is connected to transgender culture? There’s an obvious literal link but I mean, straight men and women can perform drag. Also, just because a man dresses in drag doesn’t mean he wants to be a woman and vice versa. And there’s faux kings and queens. So what does drag culture really mean, what is it all about and what kind of stereotypes might it be impacting as well as creating?
Well, I didn’t know a lot of these things until recently. I just thought it was men dressing as women; so I can imagine the kinds of assumptions that people who aren’t familiar with drag culture might have. What I really want to know is what the purpose is. It’s obviously tons of fun, but is that just it? Is there some satirical statement I’m missing? That’s what my guess would be. For me, it’s about making fun of the gender stereotypes that exist in society. I wasn’t really thinking about what I was doing while I was practicing until I got closer to performing. I realized that I was basically acting like the kind of guy that I would seriously not like if I came into contact with said hypothetical guy in everyday life. Then I was like, “Why am I having so much fun acting like such a douche? Why am I glorifying this behavior?” Well, to be honest, it was a fleeting thought because it was too much fun for me to really stop and seriously ponder on what I was doing. Maybe it’s all about having fun.
I don’t know though; I feel like it’s got to mean more than that. If that’s the kind of attitude we displayed about everything…well yeah, we have to consider being humane and considerate. Nah, let me just blow up this building because it’s fun. Let me just hide this old short lady’s teeth on the top shelf because it’s fun. Well, that would be really funny. (But mean.) Drag is funny to me. For now, I’ll remain ignorant and bask in the fun of it all. Education will come with time as I continue immersing myself in drag because I definitely need to keep doing this. It’s the perfect place for my genderqueer soul.
iReport, for those who don't know, is a public journalism initiative launched by CNN that allows people from around the world to report on happenings in their own cities and towns. In this case, the iReport is a small collection of photo-portraits taken by self-identified trans iReporters. Of all the submissions, CNN then compiled a slideshow of twelve photos and messages they saw to be the most powerful. It was also followed by a short article by ("special to") CNN reporter Jordan Sarver.
At first glance, especially after reading the article, I was very pleased with this piece. Especially in light of the recent CNN "can homosexuality be cured?" piece, I was relieved to see such a positive article with such a strong message. First of all, Sarver used the gender pronouns that the interviewees self-identified with. Plus, the article brought up issues of rights to healthcare, hiring nondiscrimination, and public accommodations issues. Finally, the photos were more or less equality distributed between MTF and FTM transgender people.
But, after looking through the photos again, I began to have a few questions. First of all, who is the "we" who decided which pictures were the most poignant or powerful? CNN reporters, iReporters, straight people, gay people, white people, people of color, trans people, or cisgender people? I was just a little confused about who gets to make value statements about trans people's messages to the world.
Furthermore, there is only one transgender person who identifies as a third gender. If this piece is meant to educate cisgender people about transgender people and transgender issues, then why is Shaun Pursley the only gender neutral person? And, there is really no explanation of what gender neutral means, nonetheless the differences between transgender and transsexual.
Another issue I had with the photo compilation was the lack of representation of trans people of color. The people in the photos are predominantly white, and it seems to perpetuate a lack of acknowledgment of communities of color in LGBTQ issues. Also, in the article itself there is no discussion of the effects of discrimination: depression, homelessness, suicide, poverty, etc. The people are well-educated and successful, which is certainly a positive and well-deserved representation since many trans people are exactly that. But, I do feel that this pristine representation alone ignores the systematic effects of discriminatory practices and policy.
However, the thing I had the greatest issue with (and I could be overanalyzing this completely) was the obstructed view of people's faces in the photos. I understand the symbolism, and I understand that it can be hard to pose in frame with a full view of a piece of paper and someone's face, but there is still something unsettling to me about it. Of the twelve photos, six had obstructed views of the iReporters' faces. I just wondered why this was such a pattern, and what implicit messages (if any) it sends to the CNN.com readers.
Regardless of the issues I saw with the article, the messages of equality and the necessity for a mutual respect for all people were loud and clear. Hopefully this article will serve to encourage people to question the current state of affairs in America for all people, including a population that is often invisible in the hands of mass media. Let's just hope the discourse can continue.
Watch the film and let's break it down. Please add comments if you’ve got thoughts on the topic.
For reference: LGBTQIAA refers to “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer/Questioning, Intersex, Asexual, Ally...” There are some more letters in the alphabet soup… but I think this should suffice for the moment.
First the speaker, Bruce, wants to make sure we're not offended. "I'm not being prejudiced." Ok... how many times have we heard this phrase? "I'm not prejudiced, but I just don't think interracial marriages are good for society.... but I just don't think women are capable of taking on leadership roles in government... but I just don't like the idea of poor people living next door..." That's totally fair, right? We shouldn't be offended by anything as long as it follows a direction not to be. "Don't be offended, I just don't think straight people should be allowed to reproduce and indoctrinate their children in their 'breeder' ways. They're overpopulating the planet! Destroying our environment!" Really? “Don’t be offended.” Does Bruce think that's a rational preface?
We've also heard the "I'm not racist... my best friend in fourth grade was black," from white people trying to assert their "openness." These feeble justifications are always directed from those groups with privilege to those without. You never hear, "I don't hate people of other religions, I work with a guy who's Christian." It's the same thing with Bruce, " I've had many transgendered friends."
Just because people have the same identity-marker, doesn't mean they share the same opinions. When you say transgender, I'm not sure what you mean. Do you mean anyone who doesn't identify as "man" or "woman" including genderqueer, intersex, transexual, etc. Or are you referring to a specific segment of non-binary-identified individuals? In Bruce's case, he is talking about MTFs and FTMs and telling everyone else they can't use the label transgender.
That's not cool. It's not your identity (from what I gather). You can't tell people how they can and cannot label themselves. You don't get to decide when someone is or isn't "transitioned." People get to decide that for themselves. Transitioning is a process that only the person going though it can understand. It's like college. My parents say I won't be done until I finish my pre-med classes, whereas, for me, I know that my liberal arts degree will be just enough for what I want to do with my life. I'm not being lazy or trying to avoid the expenses of an extra semester, I just don't think I'll enjoy it, ever use it, or feel comfortable in physics. Just like a trans person might not need that extra surgery, hormone, or behavior change. It's not for them. (As a cisgender person, I would appreciate feedback on this argument from transfolk....)
Breaking the binary isn't solely about fitting back into it. In general, trans identities are about being born into the wrong body or socially assigned identity. Well, what if the body you identify with doesn't fit in either of the gender boxes our society accepts? What if they both feel wrong? Should people's goal be "assimilation," as Bruce suggests?
Next, I want to talk about Bruce's suggestion to break up socio-political movements for change.
Split up? Break into smaller identity-based groups? Why are gender identity issues (QTI) and sexual orientation issues (LGBA) lumped into the same acronym? Because they're both dealing with society's perceptions of who individuals should be based on gender stereotypes. Our greatest gender socialization is to be attracted to someone of the "opposite sex." So there is definitely overlap in the issues these identity groups face.
In struggles for women’s equality, lesbian women were integral to progress. However, their needs were often swept under the rug in an effort to encourage assimilative acceptance from those in power- straight men. They had to jump one hurdle at a time. Same here- Bruce says that Lesbians and Gays have been fighting for their rights for a long time and deserve them now… Transfolk can wait.
Well I’m pretty sure that the Lesbian activists of the 1960s and 70s didn’t like it when they were told to wait. Why should Transfolk have to wait? Why are their needs inferior to those of the more socially recognized groups? Why have LG and sometimes B rights been fought for longer than the Ts? Because the groups that have been able to fight longer have had more privilege of voice to fight with. That means that Lesbians couldn’t speak up as much during the women’s rights movement because it wasn’t safe. Now, Transfolk can’t fight as openly because it isn’t as safe, as say, for a white man who’s gay.
Let’s look at safety for a sec: This data on murders of Transfolk is from 2004. (These are only the ones that were reported.)
Shot: 128 Stabbed: 70 Beaten: 49 “Murdered” (no cause specified): 45 Strangled: 22. There are 20 additional causes. 22 individuals died from multiple causes.
The 2007 National School Climate Survey found: 85.1% of transgender students reported being verbally harassed based on their sexual orientation and gender/gender expression
96.1% of students heard negative comments related to students’ gender expression
38.4% of students reported feeling unsafe at school because of their gender expression.
From GLSEN’s 2007 National School Climate Survey
Transfolk need legal protection now more than ever. No one should get left behind or denied equality, especially from folks struggling for the same recognition. We’re all in it for the same reasons- rights and respect.
Third, Bruce makes the point that if Transfolk are grouped with LGB-identified people, the general public will assume that LGB people all want to transition to another gender. If you really didn’t have any prejudice against transfolk, then why would you see this ignorant assumption as a bad thing? Also, I’m pretty sure he completely ignores bisexuals in his arguments, too.
Then he says the “transgendered” community needs to educate people about the misconceptions of their identity. Let’s break this one down with an example: choose your most valued identity. Got it? Now, what’s one misconception people have about that identity? Now, what Bruce is saying, is that it is your job to go out and educate every person about your most valued identity- one that you are emotionally connected to and tired of defending. This would be exhausting, emotionally draining, and people would probably tell you you’re just flaunting it or pessimistic or angry all the time. Maybe that sounds like a challenge to you, but maybe it sounds scary. Either way, you’ll need people to back you up- allies.
We’ve got to be allies for each other. We can’t just be selfish and have our own interests at heart. Either we’re all equal or we’re not. Splitting up the LGBA and the QTI means that LGBA folks might get to be more equal with straight people, but it certainly doesn’t mean equality for everyone.
Bruce suggests that these communities fight for their rights separately and once they’re equal they can be rejoined into one community, “the human race.” Until then, he says, they need to be separate. Really? How is this logical?
I understand that lumping a bunch of different identities under one umbrella confuses people about the differences between gender identity and sexual orientation. But that just means they need a little education. Separate is not equal and being divisive won’t help anyone in the long run.
