Letters to the Editor
-
First they came for
The saying concerns any human tendency to disown or ignore injustice towards others because you think it doesn't have anything to do with you. Just because it was written during and in reference to the Holocaust does not make it applicable only to the Holocaust. Which, sadly, was hardly unique in human history.
And I am categorically NOT saying that ENDA without the transgendered included will be like the Holocaust. I'm saying that in every battle over human rights, big or small, we all have a stake in each other, whether we like it or not.
-
First they came for
The saying concerns any human tendency to disown or ignore injustice towards others because you think it doesn't have anything to do with you. Just because it was written during and in reference to the Holocaust does not make it applicable only to the Holocaust. Which, sadly, was hardly unique in human history.
And I am categorically NOT saying that ENDA without the transgendered included will be like the Holocaust. I'm saying that in every battle over human rights, big or small, we all have a stake in each other, whether we like it or not.
-
Ah, if only we were all just gay!
In simpler times we were all gay.
Ah, the conservative's lament. STFU! All of you people, demanding rights just GO AWAY because you're making this all too complicated and messy.
Transgendered people deserve inclusion in ENDA because they are more strongly discriminated against than gays and lesbians, particularly around employment. What do gays and lesbians and bisexuals have in common with transgendered people? Well, we're scapegoated and hated for who we are and for transgressing social norms and expectations about gender and sexuality. Apparently that scapegoating even includes "leaders" within the gay and lesbian movement (see And that's when today's trouble started.)
I agree that in many ways there is a gulf of misunderstanding and alienation between many of the communities represented by the letters of our GLBT community. Splitting off into ever smaller groups of people with whom we are "closely related to" may feel less challenging and more comfortable to people such as Aravosis but it is a sure fire recipe for an even vaster defeat, which is that of our shared human dignity regardless of our sexual orientation or gender presentation, or however those two might overlap or combine.
If I thought Aravosis was sincere in his effort to understand commonalities with transpeople, I would point him to resources such as the Transgender Day of Remembrance (http://www.gender.org/remember/day/) or NGLTF's Transgender Activist page (http://www.thetaskforce.org/issues/transgender) but his article contained so many half baked justifications to support his point that "Someone is always left behind... but it's the way it's always worked" that I suspect it was just a rhetorical question.
Rather than dividing to conquer, another time tested conservative tactic (very actively at work against this bill it seems), there is much more to be won in standing what is so obviously right, if not expedient to Aravosis and his put-upon ilk. I wouldn't think it would be difficult to find commonalities among gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgender folk. Just look at the venom we individually or collectively evoke in our society for daring to exist, to be ourselves without justification or explanation and to demand equal rights under the law. Even among our so-called allies.
-
Hypocrisy
Well, then it wouldn't bother you if ENDA didn't pass at all... because, well, LGB never had those protections, so why do they need them now? And if they don't need them, why not leave the T in the bill and let it not pass with everyone instead of cut them out when it's not going to pass anyway? It's the same argument made by the hard right about gays: why do you need special rights? You're being a complete hypocrite. Which is fine, just admit you don't care about the T's. Admit your own rights are the only ones that matter. Honest bigotry is better than hypocritical false-equality.
-
I think your forgetting who the real enemy is.
I've never understood the conservative argument that things are progressing "too fast". What does that mean? When will the time be right for gays to get the same rights as everyone else? My guess is never in their minds.
It's easy to gang up on the trannies for wanting their piece of the pie but lets not lose sight of the real problem: the conservatives who are fighting you on this have no stake in it to begin with. For all intents and purposes, they are sticking their noses in where it doesn't belong. Compromising on a bill that no one has any real reason to oppose in the first place doesn't get you anywhere unless you call them on this little fact.
The fact that they have no interest in what causes homosexual attraction in the first place should be your first clue that they don't even understand what they are opposing to begin with.
I don't think homosexuality and gender reassignment are all that far off in relation. Both require the same type of understanding that what goes on in that persons head is not what is going on in a straight persons head. Until a light is shined on this simple fact, society at large will not change. This has to become more then about rights, it has to be an argument about nature. Critics can't argue that it's "unnatural" unless they can explain both what causes it and why it should be condemned. They also have to be able to show why it is any of their business in the first place.
The LGBT community can show what they have a stake easily by pointing out the legal rights they are being denied that everyone else has. At best, the most their critics can do is argue why the rights aren't necessary. After the argument over the nature of homosexuality, they may not be able to make a "moral" argument anymore. The debate must change if any real progress is to be made. It must become an argument about the cause of homosexual attractoin and it must put the burden of proof back where it belongs: on the obstructionist conservatives who stand in the way of equal rights for all.