I hope we can have a reasonable discussion on this topic. To be honest I’m a little afraid of this going badly.
I am a straight married white male. I consider myself a LGBT ally and have many close friends who are gay and lesbian. Over the last 20 years I have supported their efforts to gain equality under the law - of course most specifically related to marriage but certainly other areas like employment protections, medical decision rights, etc. I wept with joy and celebrated with my gay/lesbian friends when gay marriage was made legal. I have since attended many of their weddings.
I wholly agree and support equality and equal protections for transgendered people. I will be honest and admit that I do struggle more with understanding transgender identity and the associated issues than I do with an issue like gay marriage.
Under the current administration all the gains made in the last 10-20 years are under assault, and it seems transgender rights/issues seems to be the spark igniting the severe backlash that is impacting LGBT gains across the board. If you look at one definition of conservative (bolding mine):
Holding to traditional attitudes and values and cautious about change or innovation, typically in relation to politics or religion.
I think most people will eventually come to support equality for minority issues but as a whole we are more cautious about change and need time to absorb and in a way internalize it in ways that build support broadly. Of course with any major change, there were those leading the vanguard way ahead of the changes occurring. But it took years of gay and lesbian people being out in their neighborhoods and in their work environments, years of loud and proud advocacy, years of seeing gay people positively portrayed in media and television before enough support was built and people felt comfortable enough for marriage equality to pass.
Almost immediately afterwards though, the topic switched to transgendered issues. It felt to me that this pushed too hard on a topic that generally speaking the majority of society did not understand nor were prepared to make that next step. The question for discussion is did the hard push for transgendered issues come too early/fast on a society that was simply not prepared?
I do feel the answer to my question is “Yes, it was reaching for too much too fast without any groundwork being laid to help pave the way and it resulted in a more significant backlash.” And no, I’m not suggesting transgendered people be quiet and wait. But I am struggling with what is going on and I look forward to your thoughts and discussion.
No, it did not come “too early”. It’s never too early, in terms of morality and ethics, and I don’t buy that demanding rights and fair treatment before society is “ready” will delay the fair treatment or recognition of those rights.
At worst, the status quo continues and trans people continue to be treated poorly in many ways. At best, progress is made. Since progress on trans rights has already been made (even if there is a long way to go), it was obviously not “too early” to demand that progress.
As far as “groundwork”, gay rights (and civil rights in general) are that groundwork. Never have demanded rights been recognized with “ease” – there’s always been a struggle and a resistance. It’s no surprise that there are still a lot of ignorant folks (and outright bigots) out there who are disconcerted by this, but their confusion, ignorance, and (in some cases) hatred are not legitimate reasons to delay the demands for fair treatment and recognition of rights.
Under the Wilson adminstrative, the strides that black Americans had made towards equality were set back. Why? It had nothing to do with “moving too fast” or “asking too much” and everything to do with Wilson being a racist prick.
I’m not sure I agree with one of the assumptions in the OP. I don’t believe that all that many people fundamentally changed their view on SSM. Sure, some did, but the reason that support went from the high 20s to the high 60s was the passing of the torch to another generation.
You had elderly people who grew up in a time where homosexuality was considered disgusting and sinful. You had people coming of age where, at least in the media, homosexuality was seen as simply a different way of doing things.
As the old people died and the young people became voting age, these votes were replaced. I think the transgender issue is just coming along later in the process. So while in the 1990s at the latest, popular culture portrayed being gay as normal, it has only been in the last few years that transsexuality has had the same.
As late as 10 or 15 years ago, it was very funny to make fun of transgender people in mainstream movies. I predict that its acceptance will follow along the same path, but take time.
Thank you for your response, I think you make some very good points that I don’t really disagree with. Perhaps my view/question is driven by my lack of exposure to the early years when this groundwork was being laid. I can see that the same question was posed back then - “Okay, society as a whole is becoming more accepting of civil rights and equality for black people but… not ready for those homosexuals just yet!”
So by way of follow up, does the past groundwork of civil rights and gay rights pave the way for faster progress? Or does it still take years and years for change to occur? It certainly took a long time from the civil rights protests and gains until gay rights gains were achieved. One did not seem to speed the other.
Perhaps related, I think one of the factors impacting acceptance of trans people is one of visibility and representative percentage of the population. I’d wager that most people do not know a trans person. I know dozens of gay/lesbian people but I only know one person who came out as trans and has transitioned to living as a woman. Yet if I think about every office I’ve worked in since I was 18 (I’m 50 now) there was a gay person. In every neighborhood I’ve lived in I’ve had a gay neighbors. Even friends of mine who live in the suburbs have a common experience of having gay neighbors (granted, it may only be one but it’s no unheard of anymore). Even my Trump supporting conservative in-laws who live in the sticks now know many of our gay friends. Would I say they support gay marriage? On the whole, probably not. But if you asked them if they felt Scott and Jeff shouldn’t be married well… that’s where they begin to open their eyes. Now to expect them to be open to acceptance of transgendered people and… that would be and is still a bridge too far.
Again, thank you for the response and giving me something to think about.
I don’t know. I think it makes/made for faster progress in people deciding to stand up and demand their rights, but I don’t know if it’s actually faster progress in rights being recognized by society.
As a Gen-X’er, I think I’m in that bridge demographic. As a child I was raised by parents and in a church environment that was very much viewed homosexuality as disgusting and sinful. Through exposure to different people and ideas as a result of a broadening of my social circle after high school my views evolved to where today they are 180-degrees from where I was at 18. Certainly millennials, gen-z, and gen-y are experiencing very different societal views on a variety of issues.
Thank you for this response, also helpful (and hopeful!).
That’s a great distinction. My question was related to being faster progress in being recognized by society. I absolutely agree it makes/made for faster progress in people deciding to stand up and demand their rights.
MLK Jr’s Letter From A Birmingham Jail was in direct response to clergymen who insisted that it was “too soon” for the assertion of rights for African Americans.
Trans people’s rights are being trampled daily and their suicide rate is appalling. You want to back off because there might be a backlash? Dude, what do you think is happening either way?
The gay rights movement owes its existence to trans people and specifically trans activists like Marsha P Johnson and Sylvia Rivera. It was not accountants and interior decorators rioting at Stonewall. That we only now are starting to talk about trans rights is abominable and an absolute stain on the gay rights movement. We co-opted their movement and boxed them out for decades. Trans rights should have been part of the conversation the whole time as it was at the beginning. It is not too much too fast. It has been far too little for far too long.
I’m pretty solidly of the opinion that the only way society makes any progress on minority rights is when that minority gets noisy and starts demanding them.
In no way am I saying we should back off because there might be a backlash. I specifically said I am not calling for trans people to be quiet and wait. I am trying to understand attitudes and factors that drive societal change, what actions can result in losses in progress earned vs. what actions can be more effective in gaining support. From my perspective I saw years and years of slow progress that eventually lead to significant change on the topic of gay rights. My own personal experiences shaped my views today and that happened over years. Today I see a rapid demand of acceptance on trans issues and (I suspect) a large degree of that backlash may be due to pushing for too much too soon when society as a whole just doesn’t understand it. That doesn’t mean there shouldn’t be a push but does it risk have far more negative outcomes that leaves hard won progress in tatters?
What could the risk be? I suppose some genocidal madman could somehow gain power and advocate mass murder of trans people… but that could happen regardless of the actions of trans activists. Seems wiser to me to rely on simple maxims like “do the right thing” rather than worry about hypotheticals that one has no control over. In this case, “do the right thing” means pushing for justice, recognition of rights, and fair treatment. It’s hard to see why or how that could ever be wrong or unwise.
But what is “traditional” code for? Regressive social attitudes - sexism, homophobia, and a host of other terrible ideas. Women not getting the vote was once “traditional”, slavery was once “traditional”. We summon up the word “traditional” only when an idea is so bad that it can’t be justified it on its merits.
I visited Memphis a few weeks ago for the first time. There’s a fabulous civil rights museum sited at the motel where MLK was murdered, giving an extensive history. I’m not usually inclined to linger over every exhibit at a museum, but it’s so well presented I spent about 4 hours there - I’m not from the U.S., there were many gaps in my knowledge. One thing was clear - although there was some conflict over the efficacy of MLK’s nonviolent strategy, nonviolence certainly didn’t mean sitting back quietly and accepting persecution for another few decades until people can “absorb” and “internalize” whether they are “ready” to treat other human beings with dignity and respect. It meant getting in people’s faces and demanding change, and that’s the only way that it ever happened at all.
It’s an embarrassment for the human species that it has taken us until the 21st century to even begin to act in a remotely civilized manner toward all our fellow human beings. The notion that we need to move more slowly on LGBT rights in order to accommodate those who have ingrained habits of bigotry is… well, let’s keep this polite and just say misguided.
A complete roll-back of the gains made so far. I think you do make a fair point about hypotheticals. Perhaps I am weighing too heavily the perceived risks or outcomes I see based upon hypotheticals. I’m very afraid of the assault on women’s reproductive rights and what it could mean for my daughter’s futures. I am very afraid of the assault on gay rights for what it could mean for my friend’s marriages. I am struggling with if those (perceived) risks or hypotheticals are a result of the push on trans rights.
This is great discussion so far, I really appreciate everyones comments and passion.
The other thing I’ll say is that some people will never change, whatever speed we go. As Ultravires pointed out, progress is often made simply by the old bigots dying off, and being replaced by younger people with different attitudes. So challenging the status quo in a visible and assertive manner is important, so that young people realize that there are possibilities other than the terrible choices advocated by their conservative parents and their religious leaders. It’s also important, of course, because if you’re LGBT and living in some podunk town in the Bible Belt, it may stop you committing suicide if you can realize that the attitudes you see around you every day are not shared by the whole world.
No doubt there are some people out there who might now grudgingly accept gay rights, but “draw the line” at trans rights. But I’m highly skeptical that any of these people were ever enthusiastically supportive of gay rights - they had to be dragged reluctantly to where they are. (I guess TERFs might be an exception, but that’s a small number of people, and I don’t think that’s what you’re talking about - you’re talking about conservatives.)
The cause of any “roll-back” will not be because there are people who support gay rights but are resistant and “draw the line” if we push for treating trans people with respect. It will be a much more straightforward conflict between progressive and regressive attitudes, what we’re seeing now with Trumpism - people who never really wanted to give up any of their privilege and bigotry becoming empowered to celebrate their regressive attitudes openly.
I’d need to see much stronger evidence that it’s the transgender rights movement driving the current backlash against LGBQT+ acceptance. My skepticism is due to the fact that there’s always been a backlash against acceptance of non-cishet people, and it’s always the same: it’s just the fashionable excuse for the backlash that changes.
Examples: When gay people started becoming more “out and proud” in the 1980s, the “respectable” reason for the anti-gay backlash was the AIDS epidemic: gays were recklessly endangering public health with all their irresponsible promiscuous sex and yadda yadda.
Then in the 1990s and 2000s it was the push for same-sex marriage and acceptance of same-sex parenting and gays in the military that provided the excuse for the backlash, with anti-gay conservatives whining that the gays were destroying marriage and family and national security with all their Heather Has Two Mommies propaganda and sweaty barrack-room orgies and whatnot.
In the 2010s anti-gay conservatives started waving the banner of homophobia as religious freedom, claiming that barring them from discriminating against gays was a violation of their rights. And more recently they’ve latched on to popular transphobia, whipping up outrage over the fact that some of these “alphabet soup types” are not just canoodling with the wrong gender but actually trying to be the wrong gender. :eek:
In short, Mean Joe, AFAICT you’ve got it exactly backwards. The movement for trans rights is not the cause of the current backlash against gay rights. On the contrary, the current backlash against gay rights is a consequence of the fact that homophobes are always pushing for a backlash against gay rights, and are always needing a new gimmick to revitalize the backlash when the old gimmick starts to get too familiar.
This, exactly. The movement for transgender rights is just the latest cultural “hook” for homophobes to hang their homophobia on. If the entire trans-rights movement went totally silent starting tomorrow, the homophobes would simply have to think up a different reason to foment outrage against gays. Possibly that there are too many of them in municipal government or something. :rolleyes:
