- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
To say that acknowledging transpeople in the GLBT community is some sort of modern quixotic big-tent innovation is absurd. Transgendered people were present from the beginning and played a key part in the infamous 1969 Stonewall Riots, the event that is considered to have touched off the modern gay liberation movement. If Aravosis is unfamiliar with this event, perhaps he could look it up.
Second, Aravosis confuses the issue by flailing about wondering what he and someone trans have in common. If we're going to sit around sticking our thumbs up our asses and navel-gazing about our differences, I sure as hell don't have a lot in common with Aravosis. He's a gay male Washington insider and I'm a small-town dyke. However, the same people beat us up and for the same reasons. It's that simple and there's his answer as to what he has in common with transpeople.
Last but not least, he is confusing the issue by presenting it as only protecting the rights of the transgendered. What is being discussed are protections are for people who *do not follow gender norms* but are not necessarily transgendered or even gay.
As to why this should concern him, since apparently he does not give a flying fuck for anything that doesn't directly concern him, gay people are particularly subject to harassment if they do not follow gender norms. However, every effeminate man or masculine woman benefits from these protections. And trust me, this IS an issue. Talk to anyone who doesn't entirely fit the societies expectations and they'll tell you stories.
Last but not least, this bill is not going to pass. Because Bush is going to veto it. So the choice is between presenting an unpassable good bill that brings the LGBT community together or presenting an unpassable bad bill that proves to the rest of us that a certain "expedient" segment of the LGBT community are a bunch of assholes.
