The later response, in addition to the response from Kimstu is very helpful and I appreciate it.
If I may though on the first point you make - I don’t care if they were enthusiastic, only that they didn’t get in the way. I don’t have data to back this up but I have to think there are a lot of people who although not enthusiastic did not proactively try to stop progress. I know a lot of people like that - they may think “the gay” is icky and don’t understand it but “it’s not my business to tell you how to live your life”. My conservative in-laws are most certainly in this category with a slow movement on the later part towards “it’s not my business”.
I agree with Kimstu, it’s pretty obvious that the assault on trans people is not independent of homophobia, but instead just those same homophobes finding an easier target to focus on. Like MeanJoe pointed out, most people don’t know any openly trans people so they don’t get as much support, and it’s easier to be angry about ‘men dressed as women infiltrating our bathrooms’ when you don’t understand the actual issue or know of any people that it applies to.
That’s funny. Literally everyone in my life knows a trans person. Shit, the most important person in my life sleeps with one of them. Can you imagine?
In all seriousness, I’d wager that most people know one or two. Y’all just don’t know it. This was particularly true 15 years ago, when transitioning often meant going “stealth”. This was in part due to safety (and it still is in many parts of the US and rest of the world), but also because medical professionals often wouldn’t let you transition if they didn’t feel you would blend in cis-normative society. When I started to transition, three acquaintances outed themselves to me. I had no idea. I have a friend from high school who I had long fallen out of contact with. He happened to find me on Twitter randomly. He was about a year into transition, and I had just started.
I live extremely openly, and I’m pretty forgiving and pleasant in person. (I’m an absolute terror online though.) This is largely because – and I certainly didn’t anticipate this – my being trans has made me an unwilling and public representative of all trans people. I wish there had been someone in my Georgia hometown when I was younger to normalize being trans.
So, you don’t have any transgendered neighbors? Really? HOW WOULD YOU KNOW?
My nephew is trans. He and his wife recently moved to a new city. I’d be willing to wager that his coworkers and neighbors don’t know what his genitals look like. It’s not a topic that people typically discuss. He has a beard. And a male physique. I’m sure,to their neighbors, they’re just the new couple in the building.
IIRC, the restroom controversies started on college campuses. Because they are one of the few environments where people may be aware that when their peers are transgendered because so many of them transitioned during their college years. Yes, you may be aware that a neighbor or someone at work is transgender IF you knew them while they were transitioning.
But you really have no idea what the birth gender of most of your coworkers and neighbors is. And you certainly have no idea of the birth gender of the other people in the restroom at your local Target.
UltraVires, certainly some of the change on gay rights has been due to generational shift. But it’s far too big to be explained entirely that way. To go from 20% support to 60% support, you’d need 40% of the population to die off and be replaced, and that’s only if you assume that 100% of the old folks are opposed to gay rights and 100% of the young folks are in favor. It hasn’t been anywhere near that high in the short time the change took.
As far as knowing trans folks, there’s one in my (admittedly large) extended family, and one of my mom’s next door neighbors. The one in the family, I think just took a long time figuring out just what she was, and came out pretty much as soon as she figured it out. The neighbor, though, was in the closet for decades, with nobody having a clue except for (I think) her wife.
I’ve also known at least two trans high school students, and at least one who identifies as nonbinary. But it’s perhaps fair not to count them, because, as a substitute teacher in multiple districts, I know an extraordinarily large number of high schoolers.
We already have an example of the groundwork in that people accepted gay marriage much more quickly than they did “mixed race” marriage. The groundwork for the idea of marriage as a right had already been set up.
I also note that the trans community has been a part of the LGBT community for a long time. Sure, there have been squabbles, but trans people were involved in Stonewall. There’s a reason why the only consistent letters of the name are LGBT.
So I’m not sure that that gay rights lay a foundation as much as both groups have been working together for a common cause.
That’s all I got. I’m no history buff about this or anything. Just little bits of info I picked up along the way.
Wait, one more thing: the Internet has made the world a lot smaller. I don’t currently know anyone in real life who is trans. But I interact with a lot of trans people online. While, sure, the relationships are pretty shallow, it’s still more exposure. Maybe that exposure is part of why both gay and trans rights seem to have been moving more quickly lately.
In practice, it pretty much means “someone who identifies as a gender other than what they were assigned at birth”. That includes actual transmen and transwomen, as well as non-binaries and genderqueers of various types. Frankly, to me it’s just another facet of someone’s personality. It doesn’t harm me in any way and I honestly have no understanding of why some people are so transphobic.
Trans people were INSTRUMENTAL in Stonewall. Marsha P. Johnson and Sylvia Rivera were central to the outbreak of the initial riot. This is one reason that there was so much outrage over Roland Emmerich’s Stonewall, because it was whitewashed/ciswashed by having a FICTIONAL white cisgender (blond, fit, All-American) protagonist be the one to throw the first brick.
Sadly, it’s not just straight folks who can be transphobic. A lot of my fellow fegelahs and lesbians are also intolerant in that area.
I agree. The only thing I ask is the understandable confusion that can come from these “new understanding”. I know this sounds silly, but I have a disability and it’s not easy for me me to to staple down all this information on the corkboard in my head. To others, it may not seem a lot. So basically, my intentions are good and I want to learn.
If there’s a ‘Sexual Orientation For Dummies’ on the net…?
I HAVE done some looking into it.
I hate getting asked about xx and xy chromosomes and how it’s all binary, because they, (these particular people,) say, “You’re an atheist. You care about facts…” But I don’t understand the facts I’ve been given.
There’s a lot to get use to I think, but the burden is in us to figure it out. And seriously, if you’re not living a life you identify with, I hope you can embrace it. Being content with life is one of the most important things.
A representative from an LGBT rights advocacy legal group came to speak to my law school in the wake of the US v. Windsor decision. Apparently there had been some real controversy among advocates as to how and when and with whom to challenge DOMA in the courts. Some, like the org this speaker represented, wanted to wait a little longer, both to allow more time for attitudes to evolve and to find the perfect sympathetic test case, in order to have the best shot at victory. Others, like Edie Windsor, didn’t want to wait.
I think social change is always going to feel like too much, too soon to some people. I’m not aware of any cases of progress towards equality being achieved by the oppressed asking nicely for their rights or sitting quietly until those in power decided to offer it to them. But I do wonder sometimes if deliberately slowing one’s roll can be effective in certain situations. Progress obviously tends to be gradual, but it doesn’t necessarily follow from that that one’s goals must be small and incremental. IOW, if you want a puppy, is the smart thing to ask for a goldfish first, and once everyone’s used to the goldfish, ask for the puppy? Or start out asking for a puppy (or better yet, a pony!) and accept that there’s going to be some pushback but you’ll get there eventually?
I think most people are stronger on empathy than logic. Changing minds usually requires putting a human face on things, and time. I’ve seen plenty of people get over their homophobia and/or transphobia once they realize someone they love is LGBT, though it’s sometimes a slow process. If you try to hustle them all the way to the finish line, it probably won’t work–but will it actually slow them down? I don’t know.
It seems undeniable that there was a segment of Americans who were opposed to SSM ten or fifteen years ago, but who now are supportive of it.
What led to that change is the interesting question, and I lack the sociological knowledge to know what were the most important causes. Was it a decrease in the depiction of gays and lesbians in a negative light in media (and the corresponding increase in depictions of them in a positive light)? Was it more gays and lesbians feeling that they could finally come out of the closet – and, thus, making it more likely that more Americans realized that they do, in fact, know and respect people who are gay? Was it younger Americans exerting pressure on their older relatives to re-examine their beliefs? Was it related to the ongoing decrease in church attendance in the U.S. (since some, but certainly not all, denominations still hold that homosexuality is a sin)? Was it other things entirely? Heck if I know.
I think there is an elephant in the room here. We are alive at possibly a unique juncture in the history of US democracy when the survival of its fundamental values and norms is far from certain.
This is not a time when you want to fuel the bigots and ignoramuses who support Trump and his Republican Guard and who may not even for vote from him in 2020 if left undisturbed. The lesser evil may be to not champion - temporarily - transgender rights.
I would agree the backlash does probably stems in part from how abruptly transgender concerns have broken into the political mainstream. With black civil rights, people had a century to get used to the idea that free black people were a real thing, and they probably should have the same rights as others.
I don’t think we should be listening to people who think they should get a 100 year grace period getting used to the idea that oppressed people should have rights.
As regards the question of whether it was too soon and that we’re seeing backlash, I’ll point out this particular XKCD strip:
In it, you’ll note that the US government was waaaaay ahead of the populace when it came to the question of interracial marriage, back before 1970. But in terms of gay marriage, the government trailed the populace by a few years.
I’ve put a lot of thought into that graph because my view of the government isn’t populist/(little-d)democratic like most people. I understand that the intent of our style of government was to cede power to elected representatives, and allow them to deliberate and make long-term choices that are based on the bigger picture and the basic principles of the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
The graph strongly implies that, before 1970, they were doing that. Somewhere between then and now, that stopped.
Personally, the strongest argument that I’ve come across is that there was a change made to publicize the names of who voted for what, in Congress, that was enacted in 1970. This has had the effect that it allows outsiders to, in essence, commit voter fraud by punishing and rewarding our representatives:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gEz__sMVaY
But the transparency policies weren’t instituted as a counter-reaction to the removal of interracial marriage laws. At least, I don’t think so. I think it was just a matter that they had the technology to start taking an electronic vote and thought it was cool. (Based on my read of the Congressional rules changes that were passed that caused the results to be publicized.)
So in terms of whether, for example, the government can move forward with something before the people are ready for it: Yes. We made a far larger move before and, to be certain, it probably made a lot of people angry and there was probably violence and outlash because of it and there may have been less if we’d waited 50 more years. Maybe not, I don’t know.
But that would have been a long 50 years and, personally, I would leave that choice up to the individuals affected. If LGBTQ people feel like they’d rather have their rights enshrined in law, even if it means some backlash, that’s their choice. I’ll back them either way they go. They probably have a better sense of what that’s going to look like than me and how many are liable to be affected. If transgender people feel like now is the time, then I’ll take their word for it.
But if the time was 20 years ago, and we didn’t make it then because our politicians simply couldn’t afford to do so for fear of political retribution, then that’s a bigger issue so far as I’m concerned.
We could have waited until slavery had become so chock-full of regulations that it simply wasn’t a financially viable option, before axing it. That probably would have taken another 50-100 years. And while Lincoln might not have illegalized slavery, had there been no separatist actions taken, the separatist actions took place because they felt like there was a real possibility that, before too long, it was going to come.
Done right, elected representatives tend to be more progressive than the average populace. The representatives are almost always going to be better educated and, whether they want to or not, they’re going to encounter the people who are affected by their policy decisions and have to hear their side. They’re going to feel the actual weight of their choices. It’s when we take the shackles off them that government is out ahead, not when we tie them hand and foot to the popular vote.
Now, my second point:
I do caution (a very small and almost completely meaningless caution) against whole-sale dive into being pro-LGBTQ.
To be sure, the naturalistic argument is crap. Saying that it’s unnatural to want to be romantically attached to someone of the same gender, or viewing yourself as being of the opposite gender, or whatever is stupid. 1) It’s obviously natural since we’re natural and we’re doing it - it’s not mind control by aliens, it happened on its own - and it’s been happening through human history, 2) if you don’t like what’s natural, then stop living in a house and wearing clothes and taking medicine.
Personally, I’m big on Jefferson’s idea that if it doesn’t break my bones nor pick my pockets, then I have no right to give any fucks. If someone is a different religion or a different skin color or likes to dress as the opposite gender, great. Doesn’t affect me.
But, I do think that there’s a difference between “choice” and “personal circumstances”.
If I’m born without feet, I’m just stuck with that. That’s not a personal choice that I made. It just happened and it affects my life, usually in a negative manner.
If I decide that I like to spend my time writing versus riding horses…I mean there’s some argument to be made that this is based on my underlying personality and that’s determined by my genetics and upbringing and stuff but, on the whole, we can more clearly say that this is a choice. It doesn’t really matter which option I chose, they’re both good.
In the case of homosexuality, even if we assume that all social ills have been fixed and there’s no social consequence of being gay, there could have been a negative to being gay in that you can’t have children. In practical reality, that’s not a real concern though. You can adopt, you can find a surrogate womb or get a sperm donation, etc. It’s probably not a big enough matter, to matter.
With transgender, I don’t know that it’s that simple. Fundamentally, your brain and your body disagree. And maybe we’ll develop the technology to be able to correct that. But, in a sense, then you’re no longer transgender, you’re just a person who had an illness and now it’s fixed. You’re the opposite sex. But if we don’t develop that technology, then you’re never going to be healed.
And the technology might not be to remake the body, it might be to switch the brain back to the other view. I doubt that that’s the easier solution. More likely, we’ll improve our body modification techniques and get things 100% at some point. But it’s not guaranteed.
If someone chooses to be transgender, then I completely support that choice. You be you. But if you were just stuck with it, I certainly want to do anything I can to make sure that you’re as happy as possible. And, if our current level of technology is fully satisfying to you, then I guess that’s great and my quibble wasn’t necessary to say. But if it’s not, and you’re suffering from insensitivity in your genital regions, or depressed that you don’t have a womb, or whatever, then I would worry that we’re too busy being proud that we’re being accepting of transgender folk, when there’s more to it than that. We still need to do some research, which means making sure that we continue to invest and not accept the current state of the art, and the solution we find might not be the one that the entirely pro-transgender ideology would hope for.
As was mentioned upthread, what are these “fundamental rights” that transsexuals are seeking that they do not already have? Marriage? That fight is over. What specific laws are being sought?
