Intersections and organizing
I have long held the position that while I am a trans woman (an inevitably political identity in a culture which seeks to eradicate us) and I do a great deal of what one might consider trans activism I always consider myself a social justice activist first. I march for things like poverty and immigration rights, and against the occupation of Palestine and corporate governance because I believe any significant improvement in the lives of trans people can only come if we engage social justice for all. As such, I quite enjoyed this piece by Proma Tagore, from No One Is Illegal Vancouver‘s blog on Queer organizing and Pride.
A quote from the essay:
Let us reclaim the radical foundations of Pride, in which people of colour, poor and working class people, and transgender and transsexual communities have historically led the struggle. These histories are often erased or co-opted by the white middle class.
Amen to that. The sad truth is that when I see concerted effort by LGB’s to erase or subjugate the lives of trans people and trans women especially, it is generally white, middle class cissexual gays and lesbians who are driving it forward. That is not to say I have not experienced transphobia from a range of people, but the ideological underpinning of LGB anti-trans sentiment is almost always by white people of economic privilege (Janice Raymond, Ronald Gold, to name two).
This often unconsidered aspect of class privilege is especially denied in western economies, where those with the most material gain (i.e. gay white men) are the most likely to defend that as the result of a meritocracy. In its extremes we see capitalist greed create groups such as the Log Cabin Republicans, LGBT people willing to engage those who would otherwise have them erased, purely to position themselves for material gain.
The essay I linked to calls for people of colour to organize, re-radicalize, and be visible during Pride, and I’d extend that to all of us marginalized under an LGBT community which has systemic biases against us. I’d be overjoyed if this Pride season we saw queers act up against corporate sponsors, against muzzling of dissent, and if we all remembered that modern queer rights started with a riot.
(Of course this does not mean all white LGBT people of a certain class are benefiting or supportive of this structure, but those folks also tend to know pointing that out is a derail and cookie-seeking and understand why I don’t engage it. If this isn’t about you, don’t make it about you, you know?)
…the ideological underpinning of LGB anti-trans sentiment is almost always by white people of economic privilege…
Don’t forget those who exercise actual political power. Barney Frank being the most egregious example.
I’m thankful that we don’t have people like him in Ottawa. Harper is bad enough without having one of our own holding the knife.
Agreed, agreed, agreed. When the DC Trans Coalition was attempting to get new regulations passed in the city to protect gender non-normative people in education, housing, employment, and public spaces—which presumably would have also covered gay and lesbian people who don’t have traditional gender presentation—our ONLY, and I mean only opponent was a middle-class, white gay man.
He mustered all of his resources against us, which meant testifying at city hall as president of his local gay organization, alerting the ACLU that we might be trampling on other people’s (OTHER people’s!) rights with these regulations, and telling everyone within ear shot that if our bathroom language passed, it would be like letting any man in a dress in the women’s room. Sure. Because there’s so much stopping them from doing that now? And then he tried to isolate us by saying passing these regulations would bring Congress down on us (since the US Congress has oversight and veto power over every law and regulation in the District) and kill any chance of same-sex marriage for the white men who were interested in having that.
DC passed the regulations in 2007. DC got same-sex marriage in 2010. And this opponent now acts like he’s the best friend us transfolk ever had.
To be (grudgingly) fair to the Log Cabin Republicans, its inevitable that *some* LGBT individuals are going to be capitalists, conservatives, Republicans, libertarians, etc. I chalk that up to basic human diversity, and I don’t have a problem with LGBT folk who have different philosophies than me.
Though when push comes to shove, I really don’t see how (in the US for example) LGBT people can honestly push the lever for the Republicans. That seems to me to be fucked up.
Problem is, Jessica, that bill C-250, which had the concerted efforts of the NDP behind it, did nothing to protect gender identity and was passed seven years ago. (Not going to derail here with a discussion on the merits of hate speech laws, just to say if cis gays and lesbians are included, I want to be included too)
There has been a widening of the civil rights denied trans people that have been extended to all other recognizable classes, with the notable exception of the working poor, who have seen their rights crumble over those same 42 years.
So yes, I tend to think we do have people like Barney Frank in Ottawa, but party discipline ensures their venom is safely stored for when it can do the most harm.
That’s why there’s Bill C389.
By “People like Barney Frank” I was meaning that we don’t have any openly gay politicians who are working to remove trans rights from legislation. What we’ve got are the Canadian equivalents of Rush Limbaugh and shrub; people who are actively working to remove all LGBT rights from legislation. Luckily they’re still a minority here and long may they remain so.
Jessica: I’d have replied to your comment directly, but the commenting system here is much like Roberts’ Rules: No sub-sub-amendments.
“What we’ve got are the Canadian equivalents of Rush Limbaugh and shrub; people who are actively working to remove all LGBT rights from legislation. Luckily they’re still a minority here and long may they remain so.”
When we’ve got no rights to start with, removing those that we do have seems rather moot. Instead the focus seems to be on widening the gap. Nixon vs. Vancouver Rape Relief, Lu’s Pharmacy? These are minor compared to the stonewalling that happens in this country on the most minor and easy-to-provide elements of medical care. I frankly don’t care, for example, whether or not the province of Alberta provides funding for a hundred vaginaplasties when it refuses to guarantee timely access to medication for the ten thousand or more transsexuals in the province, with an approximate cohort presenting over that same timespan of six-hundred and twenty-five. And, I’m very sorry, but the most passionate and forceful advocates of the elimination of trans rights aren’t on the right-wing, since they tend to hate about 49.9% of the population. There’s a lot more to fear from marginalization that results from a Michelle Landsberg than a Barbara Amiel: The latter doesn’t imperil what I should consider to be friendly ground.
Yes, I’m quite familiar with the situation : (
*hugs* You and me both dear.
Amen to that. The sad truth is that when I see concerted effort by LGB’s to erase or subjugate the lives of trans people and trans women especially, it is generally white, middle class cissexual gays and lesbians who are driving it forward. That is not to say I have not experienced transphobia from a range of people, but the ideological underpinning of LGB anti-trans sentiment is almost always by white people of economic privilege (Janice Raymond, Ronald Gold, to name two).
It seems the queer community tells Trans folks the same story feminism told WOCs – “We’ll get ours first, therefore legitimizing the movement and then we’ll come back for you!”
Of course they never did and the queer community is similar in that respects. We’re all still waiting for these movements, which achieved visibility in no small part due to the struggle and activism of folks, poorer, browner and female and Transgendered than what the face of the the movement would have anyone believe.
Not only is the queer community not coming back for Trans folks they’ve managed to shut them in an oubliette in hopes nobody will notice they even exist.
Of course pointing this out only means you’re just not a “team player”.
Editorial note: I don’t know why the comments do that. It’s kind of annoying, so I might go with the traditional top-down format.
I think another similarit y is the way that trans people are turned into potential fifth columnists when convenient. If you can’t paint trans protections as unrealistic, trans identity itself as regressive and heterosexist. It reminds me of the implication that it’s anti-feminist to see racism and sexism as of equal importance, especially if you happen to directly experience both.
While I am totally behind the abolition of genderism (in all of its forms) I do have to take issue with the specific example used in this post as an example of genderism – specifically, the political language specifying that people who use the same public bathroom have the same kind of reproductive organs.
My personal solution to this is to get rid of dormitory-style bathrooms and transition to universally accessible lavatory suites (as is still done in some gas stations and restaurants) but I know that that is not likely to happen. In the meantime, I think it is important to acknowledge that, while LGBT folks (and everyone else!) deserve to be treated with dignity and respect, members of the LGBT community are just as capable of committing sexual assault as members of other gender communities.
In plain English: rape doesn’t only happen between straight men and straight women. Rape, and other forms of sexual assault, have their roots in fear, control, and dominance, not in sexual attraction. And since I know that straight men can, and do, rape gay men out of malice and cruelty, it would be foolish of me to think that malice and cruelty are restricted to within the straight male community.
For me, it is a matter of common sense and safety measures. I try not to leave my house or car unlocked to avoid being surprised by strangers in the dark. I carry a cell phone and always let a friend know where I’m going. So far, nobody has interpreted these actions as proof of my gender-prejudice against men for the crime of having penises! Along the same lines, I think that being selective in my choice of toilet stall companions is a matter of safety rather than one of prejudice. Put simply, I would prefer not to put myself in a sexually vulnerable position (with my genitals exposed and my pants tied around my ankles) knowing that in the next stall over is someone who could conceivably impregnate me against my will. I would rather hold it until I get home, folks.