“How dare you think you can take advantage of our community’s tragedy! Who do you think you are? You think you can waltz in and capitalize on this? This is our community’s issue not yours! In case you haven’t figure [sic] it out yet, Matthew Shepard is not transgendered, he’s gay!” — Mario H, formerly of a Houston HIV charity organization.
“I think it’s a wonderful idea! … Actually, I foresee a day when our movement starts achieving its goals of equal rights, and it’s very possible the voice leading that charge could be transgendered.” — Harry Livesay, of a different wing of the same organization in response to Mario.
The two quotes above at first glance a non sequitur on an article about the upcoming International Transgender Day of Remembrance. It’ll be explained more later in this entry.
For now, the ninth DOR celebration (tenth if you count the initial ones in San Francisco and Boston) is upon us tomorrow night, November 20. The first ones in Boston and San Francisco were an initial response to a tragedy within the transgender community – again in a tragedy-overflowing community in seemingly liberal Boston, MA. Some of the highest profile murders, indeed both of the murders determining the initial and subsequent date of Day of Remembrance were both Boston-area transgender hate murders.
After the commencement memorial, cities across the nation began observing Day of Remembrance the following year – cities like New York, Philadelphia, Columbus, Atlanta and Houston. Many of these cities were locales that had their own ignominy as being cities with inordinate numbers or high profile cases of bias-based murders on trans people.
Today, cities across the globe observe the now international Transgender Day of Remembrance. Many localities even have more than one observance in different locations. One such locale is Washington DC, where the transgender community will be meeting with Earline Budd and Us Helping Us in Washington’s near southeast side, and another coordinated by the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) at their headquarters in trendy DuPont Circle. Last year, Mara Keisling and Dana Beyer of NCTE helped them coordinate their event, though it’s unknown if they will attend this year.
I reside in the latter of those first cities involved in DOR after going national: Houston. Our only awareness of hate victims has been in recent years. But of all cities involved in DOR, Houston alone has had at least one if not two victims in every DOR except for two. Some cities have had more in one year – Rio De Janeiro and Washington DC both had four in one year. But none have had the notorious consistency of Houston – something that continues to bedevil us.
We’re also a city whose homegrown state senator was the author of the nationally noted James Byrd Hate Crimes Bill passed in 2001. It’s a bill that has no coverage for transgenders. It seems that presidential aspirations in 1999 of our then-governor George W. Bush, and claims of subsequent usage of transgender inclusion sinking any future bill killed any hope with the author in 2001’s bill and eventual enactment into law.
Houston’s a great town to live in if you’re transgendered, with an active community and even an inordinate number of national-level activists and community leaders. But along with this we have an ever-present backdrop of violence. It was reported to me that two of Houston Transgender Unity Committee members were attacked this year, one beaten so bad that according to HTUC’s Cristan Williams her face appeared shredded afterwards. It’s sad, but not surprising. Think of an industrial, blue-collar version of Dallas with lots of smog. Or perhaps, more appropriately, a Texas version of Los Angeles: that’s Houston.
We’d like to play up Houston’s better aspects – community pride and all. Ultimately it is Texas, with all its revelry in its own mystique, and it’s underlying culture of brutality as machismo. Violence is. You live with that the same way people living next to the refineries live with the fact it will either take their lives in a spectacular catastrophe, or at least lead to a gradual shortening of their lives due to the toxicity belched forth daily.
One of this year’s victims, Bret Turner, was a crossdresser who’d moved from Houston a year earlier to what would seem more friendly environs: Madison, WI. College town, seemingly more progressive – what would seem a nice place to escape? Bret was found stabbed fourteen times in her own home in Madison – not Houston. Perhaps there is no easy escape from this problem.
Ultimately, we need to find a fix to the problem that can only come from legal protection (or a uniformly understood, codified deterrent). One disagreement I’d had with Cristan earlier about DOR was about politicizing the event – this immediately before they brought in the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) as a co-sponsor. Last year, I quietly but firmly boycotted the Transgender Day of Remembrance in my own town.
Meanwhile, HRC continues to do what it can to sponsor, and finagle its way into Transgender Day of Remembrances around the country. Why, you may ask? It’s one of the precious few things the transgender community has done for itself that has struck a chord with straight America, as well as gay and obviously transgender America. Most of the folks in straight America who have gotten this message and participated have been youth – high school and especially college youth.
And HRC, being the professional organization it is with an eye always to both fundraising and getting active volunteers to be their extra foot soldiers and help magnify their voice, sees this as a good thing. A good thing for HRC – a gay and lesbian created, fed, led and staffed organization.
Notice that there’s nothing in the above paragraph about transgender. We trans folk weren’t there to help create the HRC. We weren’t there to staff it over the vast majority of their history. We were never part of their legislative push until the last couple of congressional session. In fact we weren’t part of their mission statement until it was made clear to them that the trans community was going to demand its own voice (something they felt was out of their control and which they needed to stay ahead of). Even their mission expansion didn’t occur until 2001.
However, HRC has long known the trans community is cash-poor, intently non-opportunistic on our community issues – especially tragedies such as hate crimes – and they can’t let good opportunities go to waste! We saw this rather blatantly in 2001 with then-HRC Exec. Dir. Elizabeth Birch’s speech at a vigil for transgender hate crime victims Stephanie Thomas and Ukea Davis when she took the opportunity to use that most evocative of tragedies to push for passage of the pending Hate Crimes Bill in Congress. What wasn’t said was that Birch, HRC and others (including the majority of the trans community) were well aware of the exclusion of coverage for transgender.
To try to draw a correlation, think of a trans person pushing for passage of trans only legislation while speaking at a vigil for Matthew Shepard – a victim of an anti-gay hate crime.
Maybe individual HRC members would have no problem with that approach. “Hey, take whatever opportunity you can, and if you can cash in, even better” – or something to that effect. Somehow though, I doubt that.
Somehow I think some segment of the gay and lesbian community would take umbrage at the exploitation of their own community for the benefit of another segment that treats them as lesser beings, that perpetuates the aforementioned perceptions and that mines their tragedies as fundraising tools for much less needy organizations such as Concerned Women for America or Focus on the Family.
Which all brings me back to the quotes I prefaced this with. The first quote I withheld the last name of the first and organization of both individuals, as I did not have their permission of either of the two, much less their current contact information.
What inspired the first quote was my outrage at the beating of Matthew Shepard and my initial reaction upon reading the details. An ad-hoc list of Houston activists and leaders sprung up in the wake of the initial news of the attack in Wyoming. To the list I proposed a march on Austin to push for a Hate Crimes Bill in Texas in light of the Shepard beating a few days before his death. (This was October 1998 – three years before Texas would enact an actionable law punishing for hate crime enhancement.)
In response, there were (if memory serves) nineteen Emails in favor of the proposal and two opposed. One of those was the visceral first quote from Mario, who began his rather rambling post with the words “I hope you fall flat on your face! I hope you fail miserably. How dare you ….” It was pure invective and pain.
That, of course, drew Harry Livesay’s response (surprisingly someone affiliated with the same organization) to my defense.
I learned something from both posts actually. From Harry I learned there is hope in some circles out there, and even some who have confidence in our abilities, even allowing us a voice of our own.
Mario’s response, however, was a sudden direction-change from being a community tragedy to being one that was undeniably an attack directly on the gay community. What initially infuriated me was Mario’s snap presumption that this was my attempt to opportunistically seize upon the tragedy for my own gain. Nothing could’ve been further from the truth – no more than, say, the people who sparked the makeshift altar and vigil in the median of Montrose Blvd. after Princess Diana’s death initiated by members of Houston’s Gay and Lesbian community.
As I tend to do often, I walked away from the initial post and re-read it twice more before replying. Ultimately I decided not to respond at all. Yes, I could defend my motives and explain myself adequately – but would that necessarily change his perception? Would it instead come across as appearing defensive?
When I dug into Mario’s response, there was something more key that was overlooked. It wasn’t simply about ownership or proprietorship of a tragedy. This was a community that was at the time still struggling for acceptance in society and had just suffered the most brutal of symbolic crimes, one that needed to be vented and made public. However, it didn’t need just anyone drawing the public’s attention. It needed to be their community’s voice expressing the anguish, the pain, the outrage. It needed to be their energy leading to doing something proactive for their own.
As a transgender my organizing or leading on this issue would’ve been viewed by some as interloping or co-opting, regardless of my motives.
A few days after my comment, Matthew Shepard died in a Wyoming hospital. After his death, a natural vigil sprung forth and I volunteered to help. Indeed, I made effort not to lead but to assist, and not to take a prominent role. The vigil was beautiful, well-attended, and everything came off without a hitch.
In recent years, I wish I would’ve met Mario personally and to be able to speak with him today. One thing I’d like to point out is the coming to fruition of transgender issues. I’d also like to point out the faces and the organizations that are that are leading this charge, that are reaping the lion’s share of the press for themselves and that are even prominently noting their involvement in their transgender community events in fundraising efforts.
I’d like to ask Mario his opinion of these unfolding of events. I’d also like to point out that I haven’t similarly eviscerated these individuals or organizations for capitalizing on this sudden awareness of transgender issues. In my mind, I wonder if Mario would be interested in responding to these of his own community with such vitriol he reserved for me? Or would he be okay with such a personal double standard?
Ultimately, we all need to be our own heroes and experience our own victories. When the time comes that we suffer such heinous loss, we need to suffer our own tragedies as well with our own words and our own sentiment. The last thing any community needs – especially the neediest among us – is to have what voice we should have ripped away from us and used as a megaphone for an outside individual or organization’s grandstanding and profiteering. This not only does not help, it steals from those who already suffer.
Yes, HRC will be holding a Transgender Day of Remembrance this year, with or without NCTE, at their national headquarters. Many in the transgender community see it as a clever way for them to make more money for themselves. Meanwhile, a number of national level transgender members will be going in to Washington and observing the Day of Remembrance with Earline Budd and UHU in the gritty and tragedy-wrack southeast side of the nation’s capital.
As a post-script, I attended this year’s weekend event for the Day of Remembrance in Houston – not the one I’ll be organizing tomorrow night on City Hall steps, but the HTUC version at the Holocaust Museum. Contentious as the discussion may have been, they’ve decided it best to remove HRC as a sponsor of their event. Until the day that we in the Transgender community considered equals to HRC, may it ever remain that way. Amen.
“[Y]e whose hearts are moving with a power that ye know not, arise, wash your hands of this innocent blood! Lift your voices, chosen ones; cry aloud…” — from the Gentle Boy, Nathaniel Hawthorne
“Pain is meant to wake us up. People try to hide their pain. But they're wrong. Pain is something to carry, like a radio. You feel your strength in the experience of pain. … Pain is a feeling. Your feelings are a part of you. Your own reality. If you feel ashamed of them, and hide them, you're letting society destroy your reality. You should stand up for your right to feel your pain.” — Jim Morrison of the Doors
Tampilkan postingan dengan label hate / phobia. Tampilkan semua postingan
Tampilkan postingan dengan label hate / phobia. Tampilkan semua postingan
Senin, 19 November 2007
Selasa, 16 Oktober 2007
His Own Private Idaho: Senator Larry and the Pecking Order of Queerness vs. Straightness
“You’re living in your own Private Idaho …
Underground like a Wild Potato …
It leads you straight,
Right through the gate.” — Private Idaho, the B-52’s
It was painful to watch the Matt Lauer interview with Sen. Larry Craig on ABC’s Tuesday Night interview. Why they would allow a show to watch a man struggle mightily with his guilt on national TV escapes me. Perhaps the GOP couldn’t stop him – or maybe they decided this would help clear one of their many black marks over the recent years for the upcoming election season. Either way, it was like watching Dick Cheney wax about all the WMD’s and nuclear weapons that are still stashed by Saddam somewhere there in Iraq from somewhere around the time Hussein contracted all the hijackers to fly into the World Trade Towers. Yeah ....
When scrambling to defend ourselves we can cover most things we wish to hide, but there are almost always little telling clues that betray the ones trying to obfuscate truth. Both Craigs were well disciplined in their answers and facial reactions. Watching his wife’s expression during the answering process while speaking to Lauer, and then watching her expression while sharply looking over her husband’s answer was a bit of a giveaway. You could palpably feel the a) Love, b) Desperation, c) Anger!
Mrs. Craig’s trying hard to do the dutiful “stand-by-your-man” routine that now Sen. Hillary Clinton did as first lady to then Pres. Bill Clinton during the Lewinsky scandal. It’s ironic that it was Craig's husband doing the less-than-charitable piling on during that affair with his now infamous “It’s a bad boy, Bill Clinton … in fact, a nasty bad boy” comment.
Of course, Bill Clinton’s multiple sexual impropriety claims were always coming from the behest of rather partisan individuals, either directly or via bankrolling. With Sen. Larry, he was outed by none other than Roll Call, a not-so-liberal publication that acts as a non-partisan newspaper for Capitol Hill – not the New York Times, or the L. A. Times, or even the Idaho Statesman. Rats! That takes the punch out of the liberal media witch hunt claims!
“Don't let the chlorine in your eyes
blind you to the awful surprise
that's waitin' for you.” — Private Idaho, the B-52’s
It was oddly amusing to note how the good senator from Potato-land now sees the condemnable actions of cops who “profile” and how easily innocents can get swept up into this (ahem) dragnet. Perhaps good news for all the longhairs, the blacks or Latinos who’ve been pulled over and searched for drugs or unlicensed weapons – a good conservative senator sees their injustice of how they’ve been railroaded as was he! You can also bet good Sen. Larry will seek a cessation of the profiling of guys ‘cruising the men’s rooms or other gay hot spots’ for possible sex simply because they’re fitting a profile. Criminy, all those men in the bathhouses weren’t sexually insatiable and immoral – they’re just poor men looking for a place to take a bath! Isn’t bathing a natural and hygienically admirable thing? Cleanliness is next to godliness, so they say.
One damnable part of the entire public interview was when Sen. Larry decided that after his guilty plea, he demanded a do-over “to the extent that all Americans” would want to defend themselves. When does the rest of America get a do-over upon their guilt pleas? Maybe those “profiled” hippies, ethnic minorities, hookers and gay men can use his precedent to reclaim their clean records – or not. Or maybe we can all just get together and agree that rich folk, especially politically-connected and most especially if they’re conservative, connected, rich folk, have a standard of law that’s very special and one we can all envy (but in all likelihood, never enjoy ourselves).
Hey! Why have one standard when you can afford two? One for everyone else, and a special one just for you! Capital idea!
The second, and most damnable part was Craig’s explanation that he should’ve fought the charges and that (as Matt Lauer supposedly was to understand) Sen. Larry Craig is “a fighter.” As Lauer himself pointed out from earlier in the interview per Sen. Larry’s own words, he initially pleaded guilty, went to work, told neither his attorney, nor his staff or colleagues, nor even his own wife and family in hopes that he could avoid this hitting the media. Does that sound like “a fighter”? If he was such a “fighter”, why even admit guilt in the first place, rather than the typical Republican approach (a la Tom DeLay, George W. Bush, Richard Nixon, et. al.) of denying it to his final breath. So what if your hand is photographed in the cookie jar? Denial to the point of deceit is good in conservative values – admitting guilt is defeat and shows poor resolve (no matter how true it may be.) You never lose until you admit it.
“Get out of the state! Get out of the state you’re in!
Walkin' through the gate that leads you down,
down to a pool fraught with danger:
It’s a pool full of strangers.” — Private Idaho, the B-52’s
What came through loudly and clearly was the order of things. There’s an obvious pecking order of being queer. There are shades of queerness to straightness along a continuum, with the higher-echelons always looking down upon and disparaging those beneath. Just as the transgender community found the last few weeks how gay and lesbian community (at least the straight-acting portion) still consider trannies trash. They look down on dykes, fems, leather boys and bears too, so we shouldn't feel alone.
But even the Disco gay set is held at arms’ length by the more denial-oriented gays a la Andrew Sullivan, Matt Drudge, the khaki pseudo-straight gays and lesbians and closeted politicos a la Rep. David Dreier or former Rep. Mark Foley, for whom “outness” is anathema. Indeed, in conservative circles, outing is a career-ender.
Then you have the straight folks who at times sidle up to the straighter of the G&L folks, but damn near stampede themselves to death when someone in their party is scandalized by being labeled “gay.” Then you have the hyper-straights who look disparagingly upon the straights who occasionally sort of “understand” gay colleagues, and create a buffer between their sanctimony-by-example lives and those of their “welcoming, tolerant” set. In hyper-straight America, God is always unforgiving. That welcoming-and-understanding garbage was spewed by some hippie kid of His, the liberal! Who’s gonna listen to that kid when they can follow Paul instead?
Everyone tries to be top-of-the-heap in order to look down on the others. It makes them feel big. Is this what it’s all about: success is the ability to look down upon all the others (or as many as possible)?
Sometimes just being you is liberating beyond belief. It makes me sad for Sen. Larry that he’s cut himself off from ever knowing this feeling (at least with any credibility left intact). It reminds me of the sexuality rumors that flew for so long about a local weatherman in Houston, Frank Billingsley. Even the gay community (desperately seeking heroes or validation) was pushing him out of the closet – one that Billingsley fought. Eventually, he settled down and let it gradually seep out. Meanwhile his weather forecasting and reporting style was also reaping him kudos, even among those who once salaciously awaited his public outing with a hangman’s baited breath.
In the end, Frank became simply a good weatherman, everyone was pleased with his job, and folks basically moved on to other topics beside his personal life. The sexuality controversy faded into a complete non-issue. It became that way for many gays and lesbians over the past decade or so – once discovered or outed, as long as they weren’t in religiopolitical or conservative environs, their talent, their output, their surpassing the obstacles became what they were known about. We’re in the very seminal stages of that in the Transgender Community as well.
Ultimately, all these folks needed was a chance to prove themselves. Sadly, for many like Sen. Larry – conservative, but also gay – they will never have that opportunity to prove themselves in this lifetime without being self-loathing and denouncing their own lifestyle. Even as we speak, the GOP folks have circled their wagons, and Sen. Larry is not on the inside of that circle. He’ll be left out to the wolves.
Who knows what Sen. Larry could’ve done if he’d just been allowed to be himself, free from prejudice and judgment. But then again, we live in America. What were we expecting: humanitarian compassion?
“This above all: to thine own self be true,
And it must follow, as the night the day,
Thou canst not then be false to any man.” — from the play ‘Hamlet’ by William Shakespeare
Underground like a Wild Potato …
It leads you straight,
Right through the gate.” — Private Idaho, the B-52’s
It was painful to watch the Matt Lauer interview with Sen. Larry Craig on ABC’s Tuesday Night interview. Why they would allow a show to watch a man struggle mightily with his guilt on national TV escapes me. Perhaps the GOP couldn’t stop him – or maybe they decided this would help clear one of their many black marks over the recent years for the upcoming election season. Either way, it was like watching Dick Cheney wax about all the WMD’s and nuclear weapons that are still stashed by Saddam somewhere there in Iraq from somewhere around the time Hussein contracted all the hijackers to fly into the World Trade Towers. Yeah ....
When scrambling to defend ourselves we can cover most things we wish to hide, but there are almost always little telling clues that betray the ones trying to obfuscate truth. Both Craigs were well disciplined in their answers and facial reactions. Watching his wife’s expression during the answering process while speaking to Lauer, and then watching her expression while sharply looking over her husband’s answer was a bit of a giveaway. You could palpably feel the a) Love, b) Desperation, c) Anger!
Mrs. Craig’s trying hard to do the dutiful “stand-by-your-man” routine that now Sen. Hillary Clinton did as first lady to then Pres. Bill Clinton during the Lewinsky scandal. It’s ironic that it was Craig's husband doing the less-than-charitable piling on during that affair with his now infamous “It’s a bad boy, Bill Clinton … in fact, a nasty bad boy” comment.
Of course, Bill Clinton’s multiple sexual impropriety claims were always coming from the behest of rather partisan individuals, either directly or via bankrolling. With Sen. Larry, he was outed by none other than Roll Call, a not-so-liberal publication that acts as a non-partisan newspaper for Capitol Hill – not the New York Times, or the L. A. Times, or even the Idaho Statesman. Rats! That takes the punch out of the liberal media witch hunt claims!
“Don't let the chlorine in your eyes
blind you to the awful surprise
that's waitin' for you.” — Private Idaho, the B-52’s
It was oddly amusing to note how the good senator from Potato-land now sees the condemnable actions of cops who “profile” and how easily innocents can get swept up into this (ahem) dragnet. Perhaps good news for all the longhairs, the blacks or Latinos who’ve been pulled over and searched for drugs or unlicensed weapons – a good conservative senator sees their injustice of how they’ve been railroaded as was he! You can also bet good Sen. Larry will seek a cessation of the profiling of guys ‘cruising the men’s rooms or other gay hot spots’ for possible sex simply because they’re fitting a profile. Criminy, all those men in the bathhouses weren’t sexually insatiable and immoral – they’re just poor men looking for a place to take a bath! Isn’t bathing a natural and hygienically admirable thing? Cleanliness is next to godliness, so they say.
One damnable part of the entire public interview was when Sen. Larry decided that after his guilty plea, he demanded a do-over “to the extent that all Americans” would want to defend themselves. When does the rest of America get a do-over upon their guilt pleas? Maybe those “profiled” hippies, ethnic minorities, hookers and gay men can use his precedent to reclaim their clean records – or not. Or maybe we can all just get together and agree that rich folk, especially politically-connected and most especially if they’re conservative, connected, rich folk, have a standard of law that’s very special and one we can all envy (but in all likelihood, never enjoy ourselves).
Hey! Why have one standard when you can afford two? One for everyone else, and a special one just for you! Capital idea!
The second, and most damnable part was Craig’s explanation that he should’ve fought the charges and that (as Matt Lauer supposedly was to understand) Sen. Larry Craig is “a fighter.” As Lauer himself pointed out from earlier in the interview per Sen. Larry’s own words, he initially pleaded guilty, went to work, told neither his attorney, nor his staff or colleagues, nor even his own wife and family in hopes that he could avoid this hitting the media. Does that sound like “a fighter”? If he was such a “fighter”, why even admit guilt in the first place, rather than the typical Republican approach (a la Tom DeLay, George W. Bush, Richard Nixon, et. al.) of denying it to his final breath. So what if your hand is photographed in the cookie jar? Denial to the point of deceit is good in conservative values – admitting guilt is defeat and shows poor resolve (no matter how true it may be.) You never lose until you admit it.
“Get out of the state! Get out of the state you’re in!
Walkin' through the gate that leads you down,
down to a pool fraught with danger:
It’s a pool full of strangers.” — Private Idaho, the B-52’s
What came through loudly and clearly was the order of things. There’s an obvious pecking order of being queer. There are shades of queerness to straightness along a continuum, with the higher-echelons always looking down upon and disparaging those beneath. Just as the transgender community found the last few weeks how gay and lesbian community (at least the straight-acting portion) still consider trannies trash. They look down on dykes, fems, leather boys and bears too, so we shouldn't feel alone.
But even the Disco gay set is held at arms’ length by the more denial-oriented gays a la Andrew Sullivan, Matt Drudge, the khaki pseudo-straight gays and lesbians and closeted politicos a la Rep. David Dreier or former Rep. Mark Foley, for whom “outness” is anathema. Indeed, in conservative circles, outing is a career-ender.
Then you have the straight folks who at times sidle up to the straighter of the G&L folks, but damn near stampede themselves to death when someone in their party is scandalized by being labeled “gay.” Then you have the hyper-straights who look disparagingly upon the straights who occasionally sort of “understand” gay colleagues, and create a buffer between their sanctimony-by-example lives and those of their “welcoming, tolerant” set. In hyper-straight America, God is always unforgiving. That welcoming-and-understanding garbage was spewed by some hippie kid of His, the liberal! Who’s gonna listen to that kid when they can follow Paul instead?
Everyone tries to be top-of-the-heap in order to look down on the others. It makes them feel big. Is this what it’s all about: success is the ability to look down upon all the others (or as many as possible)?
Sometimes just being you is liberating beyond belief. It makes me sad for Sen. Larry that he’s cut himself off from ever knowing this feeling (at least with any credibility left intact). It reminds me of the sexuality rumors that flew for so long about a local weatherman in Houston, Frank Billingsley. Even the gay community (desperately seeking heroes or validation) was pushing him out of the closet – one that Billingsley fought. Eventually, he settled down and let it gradually seep out. Meanwhile his weather forecasting and reporting style was also reaping him kudos, even among those who once salaciously awaited his public outing with a hangman’s baited breath.
In the end, Frank became simply a good weatherman, everyone was pleased with his job, and folks basically moved on to other topics beside his personal life. The sexuality controversy faded into a complete non-issue. It became that way for many gays and lesbians over the past decade or so – once discovered or outed, as long as they weren’t in religiopolitical or conservative environs, their talent, their output, their surpassing the obstacles became what they were known about. We’re in the very seminal stages of that in the Transgender Community as well.
Ultimately, all these folks needed was a chance to prove themselves. Sadly, for many like Sen. Larry – conservative, but also gay – they will never have that opportunity to prove themselves in this lifetime without being self-loathing and denouncing their own lifestyle. Even as we speak, the GOP folks have circled their wagons, and Sen. Larry is not on the inside of that circle. He’ll be left out to the wolves.
Who knows what Sen. Larry could’ve done if he’d just been allowed to be himself, free from prejudice and judgment. But then again, we live in America. What were we expecting: humanitarian compassion?
“This above all: to thine own self be true,
And it must follow, as the night the day,
Thou canst not then be false to any man.” — from the play ‘Hamlet’ by William Shakespeare
Senin, 24 September 2007
Freak Of The Week: The Tabloid Media
"Give 'em an act with lots of flash in it
And the reaction will be passionate.
Give 'em the old hocus pocus ….
Give 'em the old three ring circus”
— Richard Gere as Billy Flynn in the song "Razzle Dazzle" from the movie “Chicago”
What the hell is up with being trans?
Seriously, why is it such a heinous scandal to have someone attached to anything hinting of crossdressing or transsexualism? One would think that in 2007 we’ve progressed beyond that stage, but clearly that’s not so.
A couple of items jumped out at me this week prompting this. One was a tabloid (Star or Enquirer, can’t remember which) with a blaring headline replete with photos showing a sad looking Cher, and an alternate photo of daughter Chastity Bono in what appears to be a man’s suit. The headline was: Cher’s Heartbreak Over Chastity’s Sex Change Decision.
The other item concerns photos released of Oscar DeLaHoya and trumpeted as lead story on Entertainment Tonight for multiple nights in a row, even bleeding over into the nightly six o’clock local news at one point. The photos have what appears to be the boxing champ in a fishnet bodysuit, spike-heeled pumps and even wearing a wig with a jaunty fedora in one photo.
It’s very possible that both of these stories could turn out to have no veracity at all. We are, after all, talking about tabloid print and gossipy, paparazzi-esque TV tales (I hesitate to fix the word “news” to it).
The problem is why they make such a hugely salacious issue over them. It’s because using transgenderism or anything that peripherally smacks of it is for humor or titillation is still PC to America. Yes, anyone can gleefully and freely pick up the cudgel of “transgender” and beat the target of their derision into ultimate character assassination.
It’s not a new phenomenon, to be sure. For years it’s provided easy (and openly hateful) yucks for conservative pundits, but even daytime talk, sitcoms and night-time stand up comics have mined this subject with morbid fascination. Even a Gay Comedy Showcase on cable a couple years back had four of the five gay comedians tossing out tranny jokes early in their set. One comic even lamented the disappearance of transgender hookers in Times Square: “where are my tranny hookers?”
How nice … after so many years of effort, we in the transgender community are still simply reduced to “Tranny = hooker.” We’re always open season for them all. We’re the Freak of the Week!
In the case of Cher’s daughter, Chastity, she did look good in the suit. She’ll probably be able to transition over fairly easily, if indeed she decides that’s where she wants to go. But there are good ways to go about announcing someone’s transition, and not so good ways. This was a “not so good” way. Why, after years of being lesbian, is it suddenly so sensational a headline for her to be transsexual?
Keep in mind if Chas decides to transition to male, this will not (or should not) be a capricious decision. There’s a lot of heart-wrenching changes this makes to both family and perhaps more importantly societal relationships. Many are the times I’ve heard of lesbians making the transition to male only to lose most of their friends, their lovers and their previous community support base. An activist I know who worked for the Human Rights Campaign for many years, and for many years desired to make the transition but never did. When I directly posed the question to her, she was taken aback by my bluntness, but also confirmed that indeed that loss of lovers, peers and even career to that point were what stopped her (or rather, him) from moving forward. These will not be small-time concerns for Chas, who’s been long involved in the gay & lesbian community.
As for Oscar DeLaHoya, the story seems a bit more improbable. It certainly gives the tinge of someone vengeful wanting to put out a reputational hit on the pro boxer. However, if it is true, so what? I’m sure if you bring it up to his face, he’s likely to beat your ass to a pulp, trans or not. Would his being trans somehow lessen his prowess in the boxing ring? We’re not talking about steroids or other performance enhancement drugs. Should we place DeLaHoya in a lesser light than a Barry Bonds because America likes drug use better than transgenderism? For that matter, should DeLaHoya even be considered on the same level as the steroid-headed athletes populating much of sports today? If so, why? Simply because he wore what some would consider inappropriate clothing in what was supposed to be intimate (read bedroom) environs?
It’s a safe bet that none of us would like our private moments, or private fantasies and any dalliances in costumed play-acting publicized widely. The DeLaHoya photos were obviously not at a public event. Republican presidential candidate, Rudy Giuliani’s drag performances in front of live audiences were public. Note the airplay that’s gotten, especially during an election season. There are photos of President Bush himself in a cheerleader costume – a female cheerleader outfit – during his prep school days. I’m sure that if these would’ve made the media mill in similar fashion that it would’ve drawn a strong rebuke from conservatives spouting the need to keep people’s private lives private.
But apparently folks like Chastity Bono and Oscar DeLaHoya are, as Karl Rove would put it, “fair game.”
The thing that truly bothers me is the ease with which media equates transgender with something automatically lascivious whenever it does choose to publish. You would think that after more than a decade of transgender activism that I’d be more numbed to this practice. In my case, the endorphins didn’t kick in. Instead it’s been like an upper arm that’s continually whacked in the same spot with a baseball bat until it becomes swollen with the bruising and perhaps even more tender than when it all began.
We’ve got innocent civilians in Iraq dying by the score daily in a war they didn’t request. We’ve got American soldiers stuck in a long-term civil war between two power-grabbing factions doing an impossible task, bored, underpaid, scared, angry and coming home in by the dozens flag-draped coffins every week. We’ve got millions of people slowly dying from diseases in the richest country in the world simply because they can’t afford insurance or healthcare. We’ve got people losing their homes to foreclosure, and workers being laid off while others get hired overseas, and income disparities like nothing we’ve seen since President William McKinley at the start of the 20th century. We’ve got people from New Orleans and a few who’ve returned there trying to piece together their lives in a country who doesn’t want to be distracted by their problems.
No, we’re a nation that would rather be distracted by more titillating news; something to get our heads wagging and our tongues clicking. Let’s focus on the Freak of the Week and impugn someone’s character by affiliating them with that! Yeah, that’s gotta draw in a few advertisers!
Let me say, I’m sick of being considered nothing more than a freak, and I’d daresay the rest of my community – the transgender community – feels likewise. Go make your money casting aspersions on some other community, and leave us be.
“Razzle dazzle 'em
And they’ll never catch wise ….
Give 'em the old flim flam flummox.”
— Richard Gere as Billy Flynn in the song "Razzle Dazzle" from the movie “Chicago”
“The longer we listen to one another -- with real attention -- the more commonality we will find in all our lives.” — Barbara Deming
And the reaction will be passionate.
Give 'em the old hocus pocus ….
Give 'em the old three ring circus”
— Richard Gere as Billy Flynn in the song "Razzle Dazzle" from the movie “Chicago”
What the hell is up with being trans?
Seriously, why is it such a heinous scandal to have someone attached to anything hinting of crossdressing or transsexualism? One would think that in 2007 we’ve progressed beyond that stage, but clearly that’s not so.
A couple of items jumped out at me this week prompting this. One was a tabloid (Star or Enquirer, can’t remember which) with a blaring headline replete with photos showing a sad looking Cher, and an alternate photo of daughter Chastity Bono in what appears to be a man’s suit. The headline was: Cher’s Heartbreak Over Chastity’s Sex Change Decision.
The other item concerns photos released of Oscar DeLaHoya and trumpeted as lead story on Entertainment Tonight for multiple nights in a row, even bleeding over into the nightly six o’clock local news at one point. The photos have what appears to be the boxing champ in a fishnet bodysuit, spike-heeled pumps and even wearing a wig with a jaunty fedora in one photo.
It’s very possible that both of these stories could turn out to have no veracity at all. We are, after all, talking about tabloid print and gossipy, paparazzi-esque TV tales (I hesitate to fix the word “news” to it).
The problem is why they make such a hugely salacious issue over them. It’s because using transgenderism or anything that peripherally smacks of it is for humor or titillation is still PC to America. Yes, anyone can gleefully and freely pick up the cudgel of “transgender” and beat the target of their derision into ultimate character assassination.
It’s not a new phenomenon, to be sure. For years it’s provided easy (and openly hateful) yucks for conservative pundits, but even daytime talk, sitcoms and night-time stand up comics have mined this subject with morbid fascination. Even a Gay Comedy Showcase on cable a couple years back had four of the five gay comedians tossing out tranny jokes early in their set. One comic even lamented the disappearance of transgender hookers in Times Square: “where are my tranny hookers?”
How nice … after so many years of effort, we in the transgender community are still simply reduced to “Tranny = hooker.” We’re always open season for them all. We’re the Freak of the Week!
In the case of Cher’s daughter, Chastity, she did look good in the suit. She’ll probably be able to transition over fairly easily, if indeed she decides that’s where she wants to go. But there are good ways to go about announcing someone’s transition, and not so good ways. This was a “not so good” way. Why, after years of being lesbian, is it suddenly so sensational a headline for her to be transsexual?
Keep in mind if Chas decides to transition to male, this will not (or should not) be a capricious decision. There’s a lot of heart-wrenching changes this makes to both family and perhaps more importantly societal relationships. Many are the times I’ve heard of lesbians making the transition to male only to lose most of their friends, their lovers and their previous community support base. An activist I know who worked for the Human Rights Campaign for many years, and for many years desired to make the transition but never did. When I directly posed the question to her, she was taken aback by my bluntness, but also confirmed that indeed that loss of lovers, peers and even career to that point were what stopped her (or rather, him) from moving forward. These will not be small-time concerns for Chas, who’s been long involved in the gay & lesbian community.
As for Oscar DeLaHoya, the story seems a bit more improbable. It certainly gives the tinge of someone vengeful wanting to put out a reputational hit on the pro boxer. However, if it is true, so what? I’m sure if you bring it up to his face, he’s likely to beat your ass to a pulp, trans or not. Would his being trans somehow lessen his prowess in the boxing ring? We’re not talking about steroids or other performance enhancement drugs. Should we place DeLaHoya in a lesser light than a Barry Bonds because America likes drug use better than transgenderism? For that matter, should DeLaHoya even be considered on the same level as the steroid-headed athletes populating much of sports today? If so, why? Simply because he wore what some would consider inappropriate clothing in what was supposed to be intimate (read bedroom) environs?
It’s a safe bet that none of us would like our private moments, or private fantasies and any dalliances in costumed play-acting publicized widely. The DeLaHoya photos were obviously not at a public event. Republican presidential candidate, Rudy Giuliani’s drag performances in front of live audiences were public. Note the airplay that’s gotten, especially during an election season. There are photos of President Bush himself in a cheerleader costume – a female cheerleader outfit – during his prep school days. I’m sure that if these would’ve made the media mill in similar fashion that it would’ve drawn a strong rebuke from conservatives spouting the need to keep people’s private lives private.
But apparently folks like Chastity Bono and Oscar DeLaHoya are, as Karl Rove would put it, “fair game.”
The thing that truly bothers me is the ease with which media equates transgender with something automatically lascivious whenever it does choose to publish. You would think that after more than a decade of transgender activism that I’d be more numbed to this practice. In my case, the endorphins didn’t kick in. Instead it’s been like an upper arm that’s continually whacked in the same spot with a baseball bat until it becomes swollen with the bruising and perhaps even more tender than when it all began.
We’ve got innocent civilians in Iraq dying by the score daily in a war they didn’t request. We’ve got American soldiers stuck in a long-term civil war between two power-grabbing factions doing an impossible task, bored, underpaid, scared, angry and coming home in by the dozens flag-draped coffins every week. We’ve got millions of people slowly dying from diseases in the richest country in the world simply because they can’t afford insurance or healthcare. We’ve got people losing their homes to foreclosure, and workers being laid off while others get hired overseas, and income disparities like nothing we’ve seen since President William McKinley at the start of the 20th century. We’ve got people from New Orleans and a few who’ve returned there trying to piece together their lives in a country who doesn’t want to be distracted by their problems.
No, we’re a nation that would rather be distracted by more titillating news; something to get our heads wagging and our tongues clicking. Let’s focus on the Freak of the Week and impugn someone’s character by affiliating them with that! Yeah, that’s gotta draw in a few advertisers!
Let me say, I’m sick of being considered nothing more than a freak, and I’d daresay the rest of my community – the transgender community – feels likewise. Go make your money casting aspersions on some other community, and leave us be.
“Razzle dazzle 'em
And they’ll never catch wise ….
Give 'em the old flim flam flummox.”
— Richard Gere as Billy Flynn in the song "Razzle Dazzle" from the movie “Chicago”
“The longer we listen to one another -- with real attention -- the more commonality we will find in all our lives.” — Barbara Deming
Minggu, 15 Juli 2007
Justice, American Style
July 15, 2007
It was striking seeing a blurb by a spokesperson in the Iowa Republican Party responding to the prospect of former-President Bill Clinton lobbying for his wife Hillary’s presidential campaign: “After Bill Clinton tarnished the name of the president of the United States, the Republican Party restored hope, respect and morality within the Oval Office by bringing positive ideas and conservative values back to the White House.”
Reading this caused me to respond with one of those GEICO© caveman moments: “Yeah, I’d like to respond to that. Uh … WHAT?!?”
As if that reality-disconnected soundbite weren’t enough of a head spinner in the era of the three-man destruction crew of George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and Karl Rove, we get more reinforcement of Republican morals a couple weeks ago. Credence, increasingly a rare commodity among the R-suffixed folk, was suspended fully when our President the Decider decided to commute the sentence of Irving Lewis ‘Scooter’ Libby, former chief of staff of Dick Cheney.
Basically, there will be no sentence, no punishment, no fallout from the outing of a CIA agent. An outing during war, no less! And who was CIA agent, Valerie Plame’s body of work specializing in? Iran. Bush/Cheney’s wet dream of a new conquest: Iran. But hey, America went into Iraq fairly blindly, and look how well that turned out, eh?
After news of the commutation of Libby’s sentence, Bill and Hillary Clinton did themselves no favors by criticizing the decision. Pres. Clinton pardoned some 140 odd folks at the final hour of his presidency, something no Republican would ever forget. Just pointing that out only appeared as cynical hypocrisy on the Dems side. But, not to be outdone, the hypocrisy was quickly one-upped by the GOPpers in criticizing the Clintons’ criticism. Why I can hear the Straw-man singing now … “If I Only Had a Brain”.
The message of all this? Outing CIA agents apparently isn’t treason any more. Hey, why not just write treason out of the constitution entirely with one of the President’s signing statements? In fact, who needs that? Just have the Vice President in his unitary executive powers call it unconstitutional and have it excised. Atty. Gen. Alberto Gonzales will sign off on it, loyal man that he is. Treason is AOK … until a Democrat, or any other non-conservative commits the act.
The last scene in this episode shows the President the past week finally admitting that someone in his Administration may have outed Valerie Plame, but that this whole affair has “run its course” and he doesn’t expect any further investigation or charges. In fact, he hasn’t ruled out a full pardon for Libby. All that money spent, all that time investigating, and absolutely nothing was accomplished.
Yep, you’ve gotta love the justice system in the U.S. of A.
Meanwhile in West Palm Beach, Florida, a trial was taking place to prosecute a 17-year old who severely beat a transwoman he’d picked up outside of a bar. Later that evening, he discovered she still had male anatomy, he “beat the transsexual until his hand was sore,” according to an officer who took the statement. After the assailant went back to his car, he returned and, according to a witness who was seated atop a lifeguard stand, “forced her to kneel in the sand while he punched her and slammed her head into [the] lifeguard stand. The impact of the head-slam shook the lifeguard stand.
Once the case came to the judge’s decision, Judge Peter Blanc said Monday that he does not believe the boy was guilty of a first-degree felony hate crime. The judge opined in court "Your anger, from your perspective and from many other people's perspective, may be justifiable anger."
"In many ways it appears from the testimony that was presented here that there are two victims in the case," the judge added. Unique concept: if you’re trans in America, and someone attacks you, the attackers are the victims. But this is typical of justice in America. We've seen it play out more times than we care to recount when the victim was transgender. If you commit treason, you’re much better off than being a trans person who is attacked for victimizing someone by ... being out in public!
To the attackers’ credit, he said the victim threatened his life. The witness testified that the trans victim did not fight back, but as he described during the initial investigation, he had a “couple of sissy scratches” to show for his “attack.” Certainly sissy scratches are serious -- considered life threatening in Florida’s justice system.
The judge added that teen did not seem to beat the victim “because of sexual orientation,” Blanc said, but because of his anger and desire for retribution. Retribution for what?!? Realizing he was making out with someone who was anatomically male??? Certainly nothing about sexual orientation, and the hate derived from that, eh?
At the least, I suppose the trans community can take solace in that their arguments made and dismissed over the years by gay and lesbian leadership, and legislators as well, have specifically been proven as inadequate. So much for gender or sexual orientation covering transgenders.
Small consolation that is.
But such is justice in America. If you want to avoid punishment most severe, don’t be transsexual. Even if you’re attacked or victimized, you’re culpable for making your attacker the victim. If you do want to avoid punishment, even treason, simply be a connected Republican, like Libby.
Knowing what kind of Democracy and system of justice our President is exporting to the rest of the world really gives you a warm spot in your heart, doesn’t it? Kinda like … heartburn.
It was striking seeing a blurb by a spokesperson in the Iowa Republican Party responding to the prospect of former-President Bill Clinton lobbying for his wife Hillary’s presidential campaign: “After Bill Clinton tarnished the name of the president of the United States, the Republican Party restored hope, respect and morality within the Oval Office by bringing positive ideas and conservative values back to the White House.”
Reading this caused me to respond with one of those GEICO© caveman moments: “Yeah, I’d like to respond to that. Uh … WHAT?!?”
As if that reality-disconnected soundbite weren’t enough of a head spinner in the era of the three-man destruction crew of George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and Karl Rove, we get more reinforcement of Republican morals a couple weeks ago. Credence, increasingly a rare commodity among the R-suffixed folk, was suspended fully when our President the Decider decided to commute the sentence of Irving Lewis ‘Scooter’ Libby, former chief of staff of Dick Cheney.
Basically, there will be no sentence, no punishment, no fallout from the outing of a CIA agent. An outing during war, no less! And who was CIA agent, Valerie Plame’s body of work specializing in? Iran. Bush/Cheney’s wet dream of a new conquest: Iran. But hey, America went into Iraq fairly blindly, and look how well that turned out, eh?
After news of the commutation of Libby’s sentence, Bill and Hillary Clinton did themselves no favors by criticizing the decision. Pres. Clinton pardoned some 140 odd folks at the final hour of his presidency, something no Republican would ever forget. Just pointing that out only appeared as cynical hypocrisy on the Dems side. But, not to be outdone, the hypocrisy was quickly one-upped by the GOPpers in criticizing the Clintons’ criticism. Why I can hear the Straw-man singing now … “If I Only Had a Brain”.
The message of all this? Outing CIA agents apparently isn’t treason any more. Hey, why not just write treason out of the constitution entirely with one of the President’s signing statements? In fact, who needs that? Just have the Vice President in his unitary executive powers call it unconstitutional and have it excised. Atty. Gen. Alberto Gonzales will sign off on it, loyal man that he is. Treason is AOK … until a Democrat, or any other non-conservative commits the act.
The last scene in this episode shows the President the past week finally admitting that someone in his Administration may have outed Valerie Plame, but that this whole affair has “run its course” and he doesn’t expect any further investigation or charges. In fact, he hasn’t ruled out a full pardon for Libby. All that money spent, all that time investigating, and absolutely nothing was accomplished.
Yep, you’ve gotta love the justice system in the U.S. of A.
Meanwhile in West Palm Beach, Florida, a trial was taking place to prosecute a 17-year old who severely beat a transwoman he’d picked up outside of a bar. Later that evening, he discovered she still had male anatomy, he “beat the transsexual until his hand was sore,” according to an officer who took the statement. After the assailant went back to his car, he returned and, according to a witness who was seated atop a lifeguard stand, “forced her to kneel in the sand while he punched her and slammed her head into [the] lifeguard stand. The impact of the head-slam shook the lifeguard stand.
Once the case came to the judge’s decision, Judge Peter Blanc said Monday that he does not believe the boy was guilty of a first-degree felony hate crime. The judge opined in court "Your anger, from your perspective and from many other people's perspective, may be justifiable anger."
"In many ways it appears from the testimony that was presented here that there are two victims in the case," the judge added. Unique concept: if you’re trans in America, and someone attacks you, the attackers are the victims. But this is typical of justice in America. We've seen it play out more times than we care to recount when the victim was transgender. If you commit treason, you’re much better off than being a trans person who is attacked for victimizing someone by ... being out in public!
To the attackers’ credit, he said the victim threatened his life. The witness testified that the trans victim did not fight back, but as he described during the initial investigation, he had a “couple of sissy scratches” to show for his “attack.” Certainly sissy scratches are serious -- considered life threatening in Florida’s justice system.
The judge added that teen did not seem to beat the victim “because of sexual orientation,” Blanc said, but because of his anger and desire for retribution. Retribution for what?!? Realizing he was making out with someone who was anatomically male??? Certainly nothing about sexual orientation, and the hate derived from that, eh?
At the least, I suppose the trans community can take solace in that their arguments made and dismissed over the years by gay and lesbian leadership, and legislators as well, have specifically been proven as inadequate. So much for gender or sexual orientation covering transgenders.
Small consolation that is.
But such is justice in America. If you want to avoid punishment most severe, don’t be transsexual. Even if you’re attacked or victimized, you’re culpable for making your attacker the victim. If you do want to avoid punishment, even treason, simply be a connected Republican, like Libby.
Knowing what kind of Democracy and system of justice our President is exporting to the rest of the world really gives you a warm spot in your heart, doesn’t it? Kinda like … heartburn.
Love Thy Neighbor?
July 14, 2007
As the Hate Crimes amendment to the Defense Funding Authorization is being debated in the Senate, it’s funny hearing some of the arguments coming from those opposed to allowing the additional protections to sexual orientation and gender identity. Many of the callers advocating for killing the Hate Crimes amendment have taken liberty of saying it infringes on free speech.
Nothing in the Hate Crimes bill (S. 1105), nor the amendment to the defense-spending bill with the exact same wording, makes any notation of hate speech. Nothing.
Yet still, the callers and advocates – specifically from the conservative religious groups – continue to equate this with being locked up for speaking their minds! Literal calls to senate offices have beseeched senators to not let the bill pass, and “don’t let them lock up my preacher.”
Hearing these arguments, the terms “specious” and “exaggerated” come to mind, but those descriptions fall way short of accuracy. Even hyper-exaggerated is inadequate. Their arguments are nothing short of absolute fabrication, pathologically so.
There’s always the perennial argument as well: protecting people who made choices to be gay, to be transgendered. At least that argument had validity, to an extent. We could choose to repress who we are. But then, why?
Religion itself is a choice. Back in the day, when Ronald Reagan railed about the “evil empire” – then known more commonly as the Soviet Union, or U.S.S.R. – religious citizens of all stripes were choosing to repress who they were. The government back then would come down on Soviet citizens who chose to express their faith openly. There were consequences for their choice. And we correctly considered that a travesty of human rights.
Indeed, people can choose to be religious or not, or even choose to change their religious faith. Why would any of the religious faithful speak with anyone outside of their own sect about their faith if it weren’t, at some level, to hope to draw others to their own religion? That’s choice, and America officially embraces that to the point of protecting those from being attacked for their choice. With the multitudes of various denominations, people should have the right to choose and not be condemned for it.
So why are so many opposed to what they see as choice of a different kind. (Yes, I’m aware of the studies on gender identity and sexuality that have pointed to biological underpinnings – that’s an article for another time. For the sake of argument let’s just agree to “choice” now and continue.)
To say that religion, or “the churches” are opposing hate crime expansion is inaccurately broad. Many progressive and humanitarian denominations support it. To my knowledge, we haven’t heard one religious denomination officially come out and categorically oppose expansion of hate crimes for sexual orientation and gender identity. They will officially state they don’t approve of the lifestyle choices. But opposing laws deterring hate violence against these expanded communities, as a denomination is a step beyond the pale. It states that that religion tacitly approves of hate-borne violence against gays, transgenders, etc. because of their choice.
Ultimately, this opposition for hate crime protection on GLBT people it has less to do with religion and nothing to do with Christ-like spirituality. It has everything to do with individuals leading congregations, or those using religious affiliation out of convenience and taking liberty to speak representatively in their behalf.
As we’ve seen, it’s a wonderful shield against reproach for these opportunists. Nobody cares to be seen as taking on a religion, which can easily be flipped into an assault on God. This built-in irreproachability gives them automatic advantage, something they never lose sight of.
It also allows these opportunists the ability to weigh in on and indirectly influence others’ choices by encouraging or protecting punitive reaction against them. Their ultimate hope is to effectively end choices made which these self-appointed arbiters deem wrong. Once they successfully deny protections against gay or lesbian, bisexual or transgender Americans, what do they do for an encore?
One glaring omission from the current hate crimes bill is the homeless. Will these same folks speak out, railing against protecting these people who they feel made the wrong decisions in life? Will they feel the homeless have chose to be too slothful or incorrigible to be protected, and that free speech – or wielding bats as seen on TV in Florida – should be what is protected?
And how about religion, the other choice mentioned earlier? We live in what we advertise as a pluralistic society, and that all are free to worship howsoever. But does everyone agree with such open tolerance toward those who choose religions that may contradict our own scripture?
Just last week during Senate prayer, a Hindu priest provided the opening invocation. Shortly after beginning his prayer, jeering yells like “abomination,” “there is only one true God,” and “we are Christians and Patriots” came down from above. No – not from heaven but from the gallery of visitors over the Senate Floor. Christians upset with a Hindu prayer, upset with a man who made different religious choices then they.
If precedence is given to those who would implicitly oppose any stoppage of hate violence to those who made “choices” they didn’t agree with, then where does this leave others whose choices they don’t agree with. Even though religion is a category currently covered by hate crimes law, what about those whose religion is deemed by the prevalent faith to be what they consider “making the wrong choice?” How long before they begin turning a blind eye toward violence against them?
As the Hate Crimes amendment to the Defense Funding Authorization is being debated in the Senate, it’s funny hearing some of the arguments coming from those opposed to allowing the additional protections to sexual orientation and gender identity. Many of the callers advocating for killing the Hate Crimes amendment have taken liberty of saying it infringes on free speech.
Nothing in the Hate Crimes bill (S. 1105), nor the amendment to the defense-spending bill with the exact same wording, makes any notation of hate speech. Nothing.
Yet still, the callers and advocates – specifically from the conservative religious groups – continue to equate this with being locked up for speaking their minds! Literal calls to senate offices have beseeched senators to not let the bill pass, and “don’t let them lock up my preacher.”
Hearing these arguments, the terms “specious” and “exaggerated” come to mind, but those descriptions fall way short of accuracy. Even hyper-exaggerated is inadequate. Their arguments are nothing short of absolute fabrication, pathologically so.
There’s always the perennial argument as well: protecting people who made choices to be gay, to be transgendered. At least that argument had validity, to an extent. We could choose to repress who we are. But then, why?
Religion itself is a choice. Back in the day, when Ronald Reagan railed about the “evil empire” – then known more commonly as the Soviet Union, or U.S.S.R. – religious citizens of all stripes were choosing to repress who they were. The government back then would come down on Soviet citizens who chose to express their faith openly. There were consequences for their choice. And we correctly considered that a travesty of human rights.
Indeed, people can choose to be religious or not, or even choose to change their religious faith. Why would any of the religious faithful speak with anyone outside of their own sect about their faith if it weren’t, at some level, to hope to draw others to their own religion? That’s choice, and America officially embraces that to the point of protecting those from being attacked for their choice. With the multitudes of various denominations, people should have the right to choose and not be condemned for it.
So why are so many opposed to what they see as choice of a different kind. (Yes, I’m aware of the studies on gender identity and sexuality that have pointed to biological underpinnings – that’s an article for another time. For the sake of argument let’s just agree to “choice” now and continue.)
To say that religion, or “the churches” are opposing hate crime expansion is inaccurately broad. Many progressive and humanitarian denominations support it. To my knowledge, we haven’t heard one religious denomination officially come out and categorically oppose expansion of hate crimes for sexual orientation and gender identity. They will officially state they don’t approve of the lifestyle choices. But opposing laws deterring hate violence against these expanded communities, as a denomination is a step beyond the pale. It states that that religion tacitly approves of hate-borne violence against gays, transgenders, etc. because of their choice.
Ultimately, this opposition for hate crime protection on GLBT people it has less to do with religion and nothing to do with Christ-like spirituality. It has everything to do with individuals leading congregations, or those using religious affiliation out of convenience and taking liberty to speak representatively in their behalf.
As we’ve seen, it’s a wonderful shield against reproach for these opportunists. Nobody cares to be seen as taking on a religion, which can easily be flipped into an assault on God. This built-in irreproachability gives them automatic advantage, something they never lose sight of.
It also allows these opportunists the ability to weigh in on and indirectly influence others’ choices by encouraging or protecting punitive reaction against them. Their ultimate hope is to effectively end choices made which these self-appointed arbiters deem wrong. Once they successfully deny protections against gay or lesbian, bisexual or transgender Americans, what do they do for an encore?
One glaring omission from the current hate crimes bill is the homeless. Will these same folks speak out, railing against protecting these people who they feel made the wrong decisions in life? Will they feel the homeless have chose to be too slothful or incorrigible to be protected, and that free speech – or wielding bats as seen on TV in Florida – should be what is protected?
And how about religion, the other choice mentioned earlier? We live in what we advertise as a pluralistic society, and that all are free to worship howsoever. But does everyone agree with such open tolerance toward those who choose religions that may contradict our own scripture?
Just last week during Senate prayer, a Hindu priest provided the opening invocation. Shortly after beginning his prayer, jeering yells like “abomination,” “there is only one true God,” and “we are Christians and Patriots” came down from above. No – not from heaven but from the gallery of visitors over the Senate Floor. Christians upset with a Hindu prayer, upset with a man who made different religious choices then they.
If precedence is given to those who would implicitly oppose any stoppage of hate violence to those who made “choices” they didn’t agree with, then where does this leave others whose choices they don’t agree with. Even though religion is a category currently covered by hate crimes law, what about those whose religion is deemed by the prevalent faith to be what they consider “making the wrong choice?” How long before they begin turning a blind eye toward violence against them?
Kamis, 12 April 2007
Hate Crimes bill?
4/12/07
Well, it will be a short entry tonight due to a long day at work. Any overtime that comes down the pike will be taken in times like these ... make hay while the sun shines, ya know?
We got word late last night about introduction in the Senate of a Hate Crimes bill that will, for the first time, be transgender-inclusive. It sounds very promising, but we need to refrain from celebrations until we know for certain that it's trans-inclusive and get a chance to see the language. While the person who broke the news is a prominent trans activist, truth be told she's not known for the truth being told. She comes from a sales and marketing background where making the sale is paramount, regardless of how little the marketing lives up to the advertised product.
Meanwhile back at the ranch, the ponies are getting restless in anticipation of heading up to DC to round up support from our Congress-critters. Surely the critters are getting restless as well, trying to figure out how to duck, dodge and weave and trying to decipher whether voting or not voting for hate crime protections for all will keep them from being unseated from their Congressional seat. And if the critters get skittish around the trannies, will the gay and lez-peradoes work in the dark to bushwhack or bolt on us, grab the herded critters and try to make a break with the entire kit and caboodle, leaving us behind to choke in the dust? Again?
Time will tell. One thing that is well-known is that DC is the treacherous Badlands, and we must go to their inhospitable environs to get this done once and for all. It is worth the fight though, if for no one other than Gwen Araujo and the Guerrero family ... for Stephanie Thomas and her mom Queen Washington ... for NTAC Chair Ethan St. Pierre and his mom Ellen, and for Ellen's sibling, Debra Forte. For all the loved ones gone due to bias violence, and their families that remain involved in the fight to live without fear of hate.
While it wasn't necessarily a hate crime, Don Imus got canned today for his bias -- albeit of the verbal variety. To be sure, his attempt at humor was both cheap and astonishingly boneheaded. However, the press surrounding this story is rivaling Anna Nicole Smith in over-importance and overkill. Note how an idiot toadie like Michael Savage can savage (what a wonderfully appropriate surname he has!) the transgender community after what is apparently another hate crime. And note the hue and cry -- or rather the lack thereof -- in response! Oh well, it's not like we're human, right?
Trans people are still viewed as objects of humor, a freebie for portraying the butt of sick or debasing jokes or comments. And it's PC -- even in a Gay Comedy Showcase I saw on cable a couple years back! To paraphrase Danielle Rosengarten, a legislative aide in Rep. Christopher Shays' (R-CT) office, "you would think they, of all people, would know better!" God's got a wonderful sense of irony. Sadly, trans people haven't progressed beyond "object" in the eyes of most of America -- even a sizable portion of Gay & Lesbian America.
Yet any attempt by us to point this up is beaten back with criticisms of "being too shrill, having no sense of humor," etc. And how free are other groups able to engage in similar shows of unified outrage? Beyond the Don Imus incident, note the public outcry over the Snickers Bar commercial series during the Super Bowl, where two mean nibbled on the same candy bar until (horror!) their lips touched. Admittedly the ad execs' concept wasn't in good taste, but it was relatively innocuous compared to Savage's savages (sorry, couldn't help it). Note that it bought gay and lesbian leadership a lot of cheap national press for the talking heads to natter about. But note how the transgender leaders who point out objectification, subjugation, or outright hateful speech are, at best, benignly ignored if not targets of whisper campaigns and malignant isolation. I suppose it's our fault for noticing.
Perhaps someday we'll all be considered equally. But for now Don Imus is out and inexplicably Michael Savage is still in. And transgenders are still "lesser than --fill in the blank" Perhaps someday we'll be equals ... Or maybe I have completely lost touch with reality.
Well, it will be a short entry tonight due to a long day at work. Any overtime that comes down the pike will be taken in times like these ... make hay while the sun shines, ya know?
We got word late last night about introduction in the Senate of a Hate Crimes bill that will, for the first time, be transgender-inclusive. It sounds very promising, but we need to refrain from celebrations until we know for certain that it's trans-inclusive and get a chance to see the language. While the person who broke the news is a prominent trans activist, truth be told she's not known for the truth being told. She comes from a sales and marketing background where making the sale is paramount, regardless of how little the marketing lives up to the advertised product.
Meanwhile back at the ranch, the ponies are getting restless in anticipation of heading up to DC to round up support from our Congress-critters. Surely the critters are getting restless as well, trying to figure out how to duck, dodge and weave and trying to decipher whether voting or not voting for hate crime protections for all will keep them from being unseated from their Congressional seat. And if the critters get skittish around the trannies, will the gay and lez-peradoes work in the dark to bushwhack or bolt on us, grab the herded critters and try to make a break with the entire kit and caboodle, leaving us behind to choke in the dust? Again?
Time will tell. One thing that is well-known is that DC is the treacherous Badlands, and we must go to their inhospitable environs to get this done once and for all. It is worth the fight though, if for no one other than Gwen Araujo and the Guerrero family ... for Stephanie Thomas and her mom Queen Washington ... for NTAC Chair Ethan St. Pierre and his mom Ellen, and for Ellen's sibling, Debra Forte. For all the loved ones gone due to bias violence, and their families that remain involved in the fight to live without fear of hate.
While it wasn't necessarily a hate crime, Don Imus got canned today for his bias -- albeit of the verbal variety. To be sure, his attempt at humor was both cheap and astonishingly boneheaded. However, the press surrounding this story is rivaling Anna Nicole Smith in over-importance and overkill. Note how an idiot toadie like Michael Savage can savage (what a wonderfully appropriate surname he has!) the transgender community after what is apparently another hate crime. And note the hue and cry -- or rather the lack thereof -- in response! Oh well, it's not like we're human, right?
Trans people are still viewed as objects of humor, a freebie for portraying the butt of sick or debasing jokes or comments. And it's PC -- even in a Gay Comedy Showcase I saw on cable a couple years back! To paraphrase Danielle Rosengarten, a legislative aide in Rep. Christopher Shays' (R-CT) office, "you would think they, of all people, would know better!" God's got a wonderful sense of irony. Sadly, trans people haven't progressed beyond "object" in the eyes of most of America -- even a sizable portion of Gay & Lesbian America.
Yet any attempt by us to point this up is beaten back with criticisms of "being too shrill, having no sense of humor," etc. And how free are other groups able to engage in similar shows of unified outrage? Beyond the Don Imus incident, note the public outcry over the Snickers Bar commercial series during the Super Bowl, where two mean nibbled on the same candy bar until (horror!) their lips touched. Admittedly the ad execs' concept wasn't in good taste, but it was relatively innocuous compared to Savage's savages (sorry, couldn't help it). Note that it bought gay and lesbian leadership a lot of cheap national press for the talking heads to natter about. But note how the transgender leaders who point out objectification, subjugation, or outright hateful speech are, at best, benignly ignored if not targets of whisper campaigns and malignant isolation. I suppose it's our fault for noticing.
Perhaps someday we'll all be considered equally. But for now Don Imus is out and inexplicably Michael Savage is still in. And transgenders are still "lesser than --fill in the blank" Perhaps someday we'll be equals ... Or maybe I have completely lost touch with reality.
Langganan:
Postingan (Atom)