An interesting conundrum: Are we harming the LGBT movement?

[androgynouspainter26]

This is stemming from a conversation I had on facebook earlier today; just to be clear, what I'm saying here is purely for discussion's sake, and by no means reflects my own personal views.  It's just a thought experiment.  Before anyone goes into a rant about how our communities are different-I KNOW THAT THE TRANS COMMUNITY AND GAY COMMUNITY ARE DIFFERENT!!!!  However, our oppression stems from the same source, and there have been close ties between us for many decades.  Anyhow, onto the conundrum:

As I'm sure most of you know, post-stonewall, the mainstream gay rights movement did everything in it's power to gain public acceptance; they did this by saying to everyone "we are just like you".  Well, certainly this is true of some, but obviously there are many members of the queer community that aren't like everyone else: Drag queens, trans women, and fem guys among many others were essentially banned from the movement for many, many years, our needs ignored, and our voices silenced.  The reasoning?  Our presence in the community would only alienate the community from mainstream hetoronormitive america.  And, looking at how commonplace gay and lesbian acceptance is in this day and age, I can't help but wonder: Would this progress have been possible if we had been included?

The narrative that the gay rights movement has been spouting for years is: We have no choice, we are just like you, we only want the right to love who we choose.  What about bi/pansexual people?  We have a choice.  You better believe that we're undermining that part of the naritive.  Just like you?  This may apply to normative assimilist (usually white) monogamous gay couples, but what about poly folks, and trans people-people in general who upset the norms of gender?  And the needs of trans people stem far beyond marriage equality.  But, people feel uncomfortable around us.  I feel sick saying this, but in a way I do believe that if we had been included, the gay rights movement would have been utterly hopeless.  We make people feel uncomfortable.  That's a fact.

Even now, looking at the face of the trans* rights movement, it's clear to me that people who don't conform to traditional standards of gender are not at all welcome.  And, that makes me wonder...as a queer trans woman who does not (yet?) pass without question, am I harming the movement?  Should I be trying to help the community, when it's entirely possible my very existence may be putting the rights of thousands of passable, straight transexuals in jeopardy?  I'm genuinely worried about this.  I desperately want to help the community, but I sometimes wonder if I'd be helping the community most if I just kept my head down and let the "normal" people do the talking.

What do you think?  Is putting aside the needs of the few in order to allow the many to gain mainstream acceptance, even if it comes at the cost of our rights?  I don't have an easy answer to this.  I'd love to start a conversation about this-it's an interesting if incredibly uncomfortable topic. 

[Beverly]

Help yourself first. You cannot help others if you are struggling.

[Elis]

Yeah help yourself first but there needs to be more gender non conforming, sexuality 'non conforming' (the sexualities most people know nothing about like pansexuals and asexuals ) and people with different types of relationships like poly that you have mentioned in the public eye to make the difference we need. I don't think it's harming the LGBTQ movement just finally give the full picture of the different types of people there are. I believe we have finally come to the point where trans people are recognised by society, both in terms of equal rights and people generally know what that word means (even though they are under the impression that we 'become another gender). Like the gay movement in the 70s onwards and the strides they have made to get to the point where they have mostly acceptance, understanding and equal rights; now is the time for the other people we haven't given much attention to before. I really think in another 40 yrs coming out as trans, or non binary or pan will just be as normal as coming out as gay. I can't wait.

[Dee Marshall]

In a very real sense, they gained acceptance through a lie. The fact that we give truth to the lie and they get bitten on the butt is not our fault, it's theirs. This is the same situation other minorities find themselves in.

[Devlyn]

This is stemming from a conversation I had on facebook earlier today; just to be clear, what I'm saying here is purely for discussion's sake, and by no means reflects my own personal views.  It's just a thought experiment.  Before anyone goes into a rant about how our communities are different-I KNOW THAT THE TRANS COMMUNITY AND GAY COMMUNITY ARE DIFFERENT!!!!  However, our oppression stems from the same source, and there have been close ties between us for many decades.  Anyhow, onto the conundrum:

As I'm sure most of you know, post-stonewall, the mainstream gay rights movement did everything in it's power to gain public acceptance; they did this by saying to everyone "we are just like you".  Well, certainly this is true of some, but obviously there are many members of the queer community that aren't like everyone else: Drag queens, trans women, and fem guys among many others were essentially banned from the movement for many, many years, our needs ignored, and our voices silenced.  The reasoning?  Our presence in the community would only alienate the community from mainstream hetoronormitive america.  And, looking at how commonplace gay and lesbian acceptance is in this day and age, I can't help but wonder: Would this progress have been possible if we had been included?

The narrative that the gay rights movement has been spouting for years is: We have no choice, we are just like you, we only want the right to love who we choose.  What about bi/pansexual people?  We have a choice.  You better believe that we're undermining that part of the naritive.  Just like you?  This may apply to normative assimilist (usually white) monogamous gay couples, but what about poly folks, and trans people-people in general who upset the norms of gender?  And the needs of trans people stem far beyond marriage equality.  But, people feel uncomfortable around us.  I feel sick saying this, but in a way I do believe that if we had been included, the gay rights movement would have been utterly hopeless.  We make people feel uncomfortable.  That's a fact.

Even now, looking at the face of the trans* rights movement, it's clear to me that people who don't conform to traditional standards of gender are not at all welcome.  And, that makes me wonder...as a queer trans woman who does not (yet?) pass without question, am I harming the movement?  Should I be trying to help the community, when it's entirely possible my very existence may be putting the rights of thousands of passable, straight transexuals in jeopardy?  I'm genuinely worried about this.  I desperately want to help the community, but I sometimes wonder if I'd be helping the community most if I just kept my head down and let the "normal" people do the talking.

What do you think?  Is putting aside the needs of the few in order to allow the many to gain mainstream acceptance, even if it comes at the cost of our rights?  I don't have an easy answer to this.  I'd love to start a conversation about this-it's an interesting if incredibly uncomfortable topic.

Right there. Like most people, they weren't seeking equality for all, they just want admission to the big club that's allowed to kick minorities around.

[mrs izzy]

Personally no.

We are one and the same with the lgb side.

There are very few transitioning or transitioned trans* that are hetro.

Majority in relationships are gay or lesbian or bi.

So to say we are harming the movement is absurd when we are a deep part of that movement.

[Hikari]

More and more I am of the opinion that transsexuals, have different needs than the LGBT community as a whole, many of them coincide, but ultimately the results differ. I find myself at times on differing sides of arguments when it comes to "third gender" recognition, or unisex bathrooms, against others in the transgender umbrella, because I am a binary transwoman. I also find there are quite a few people, especially more conservative who seem totally fine accepting me, whereas; they oppose any notion of "genderfluidity". I suppose when you really think about the idea that gender is this immutable thing that you can only confirm with surgery, and never actually change is much more understandable from a conservative mindset.

I don't know exactly what can be done about this, honestly I see only but so much common ground between members of the LGBT community, and I see lots of the political power within the LGBT community concentrated in the hands of rich, white, gay men. Honestly, I don't know how much good or harm it would do to distance transsexuals or transgender people from the rest of the community (or each other), but I will say I would fight very strongly to separate them culturally I have had far too many people who have watched "RuPaul's Drag Race" think I am very much something I am not, and that infuriates me. I would love to do something that gets across the idea that transsexual women and drag queens are not related.

I think this is an interesting topic, and I have to admit, I have serious doubts if the progress that has been made, would have been made at all had the movement always been as inclusive as it is now. I don't know though, perhaps I am just being a pessimist and we could have made more progress even, but I don't see how. I thank Androgynouspainter26 for bringing up this stimulating and sensitive topic in a thoughtful and tactful way.

[Mariah]

We maybe on different spots in the continuum, but we are one and the same. You have every right express yourself in a way that reflects who you are and need to do so. Doing the opposite of that would cause harm because then your conforming to someone else's standards and beliefs and not your own. As a result you would hurt the movement and harm yourself at the same time by conforming to what they want and not what you need. You come before everyone else regardless though because that is what is more important.
Mariah

[androgynouspainter26]

Just going to butt in here-I think that though we do have separate needs, our causes are invariably intertwined.  As I find myself moving more and more towards a binary destination in terms of presentation (if not politics), it has become abundantly clear to me that some of our needs are far outside the umbrella of the general LGBT rights agenda, BUT, I still think that we are fighting against the same ideology: The one that says "men love women and have Y chromosomes and cocks, and Women love men and don't!".  So, even if we have very different needs internally, I think to an outsider we are very similar, and therefore have to fight against the same sort of people, negative messages, etc. 

Also, Hikari, hon-just because it's not relivent to you doesn't mean it's not very important to other people who actually are asking for said recognition!  It might be best to listen to the people who are asking for these things, and trust that their identities are just as valid as yours.  Although, for the record, not all non-binary people want a third gender marker.  Some of us want markers to go away completely-gender optional!

[BunnyBee]

I have good friends staunchly on either side of this issue, so I just can't have a strong opinion.  Society will be quicker to accept things it understands, so I do believe progress would come more quickly (certainly for passable binary types) if passable binary types carried the banner.  Would it help non-binary people at all if society did expand its little circle of acceptance to binary types?  I don't know.  Not for a while anyway.  Maybe it would be a first step.

I know I don't have the answers on this.  I think it just comes down to whether you want society to change or not.  Some people don't, some people do.  Maybe a hidden aspect of passing privilege is that keeping society the same is viable, where for non-binary people it may not be.  For them the world kind of needs to change.

Anyway, super interesting topic.  You explained it really well.  Also I love your hair so much!  Digression!

[mrs izzy]

I see this starting to get into a binary vs non binary discussion

Please keep it to topic.

Thank you.

[Carrie Liz]

I find this argument funny, because I've heard the exact opposite criticism used... that we are not like gay people because we actually do just want to blend in to heteronormative society and not be noticed, while so much of gay culture is about flamboyancy and "we're here, we're queer, get used to it." There is a very vocal subset of the trans* community, usually from highly gender-conforming trans women, who are basically trying to raise the case that being "truly trans" has nothing at all to do with the "gender expression movement." And radical feminists criticize us because we supposedly actually reinforce the rigid gender-expectation binary that most gay people, effeminate men and butch lesbians alike, are actively trying to do away with.

I was actually kind of expecting this post to be about that... how we somehow reinforce the very gender binary that the LGBT movement is trying to do away with.

If we really do harm the LGBT movement in the way that you've suggested, where gay people are somehow more socially "normal" than us, then honestly I think it's more the societal stigmas that people have about trans people, where they think that we're all flamboyant in-your-face deviant sexual-fetishist crossdressing drag queens or something that are the issue, not the actual reality of being trans, which is more often than not even more boring and "normal" to heteronormative culture than being gay is.

[Elsa Delyth]

Sure, appealing to people's baser, tribal natures, and endearing ourselves to them with a common enemy (the different), and showing how much we're like them (by not being like "the different"), is a good strategy that has a history of working -- if by "working" you mean shifts hate and focus from me, on to someone else, as I mingle back into the crowd. Vicarious redemption; thanks scapegoat!

Imagine if we were talking about racial rights, and you were asking "am I too black? Am I harming our cause by just not being white enough". I'm sure that you know that darker black people get more racism, even by other black people that are lighter. The apartheid in Rwanda was based arbitrarily on how light or dark you were.

It may seem all self-sacrificing, and noble to you to allow people to use you as a vehicle for a better life for themselves -- but climb off the damn cross, you'd be just perpetuating a system of evaluation that is deeply flawed, and deeply harmful. Appealing to people's most base, animalistic sides. Have some faith in humanity, in your fellow humans to be good, reasonable, and just. Appeal to them on those levels, and don't throw in the towel, and think that your life will be the cost of someone else's happiness... no you'd be selling us all up the river. Not just transgender people, but the normies too. All of us.

[Beverly]

Hikari - I think you summed it up very well. I have always known that we are very separate from LGB and some of that has been because ordinary LGB folk (not "leaders") have told me and other transfolk that we are not welcome in their clubs or spaces.  It is a minority but not a small one.  It is not the occasional person.

I think the only reason that the "T" gets tacked on to the LBG is because there is nowhere else for us to go.

[Hikari]

Also, Hikari, hon-just because it's not relivent to you doesn't mean it's not very important to other people who actually are asking for said recognition!  It might be best to listen to the people who are asking for these things, and trust that their identities are just as valid as yours.  Although, for the record, not all non-binary people want a third gender marker.  Some of us want markers to go away completely-gender optional!

The issue is I do respect them, I mean there are all sorts of identities and sexualities that I don't share, but I still see the people as valid and respectable. The issue I have comes into that I actively oppose things  that some people want, because our needs are different. It isn't a matter of what they want being irrelevant to me, because if it doesn't effect me then I generally support within the community.

Basically if third gender or no gender options existed, I would need to be able to opt out of them in order to support them, I am a woman, and I don't want my ID to say anything else.  I don't want a "post-gender" society as some do, that is to me a very negative thing since I view gender as a very important thing, that I want to express.

What I want is for everyone to get what they want and have all the options allowed, on a legislative level. I don't think this is very likely, because legislation tends to be black and white and rarely leaving room for options. This website, is a great example of how things should be, we can have gender markers or not, and we can set them to more or less whatever we want. Getting legislation to see things in such an open and inclusive light seems much more difficult to me than simply trying to get everyone to fit in the existing framework with slight modification.

Hikari - I think you summed it up very well. I have always known that we are very separate from LGB and some of that has been because ordinary LGB folk (not "leaders") have told me and other transfolk that we are not welcome in their clubs or spaces.  It is a minority but not a small one.  It is not the occasional person.

I think the only reason that the "T" gets tacked on to the LBG is because there is nowhere else for us to go.

Don't get my wrong I am a lesbian myself, so I think that my concerns are one in the same with the LGB community when it comes to SSM and other issues, but like it doesn't seem to me to have a connection to my gender. Like I am just a woman who likes women, I don't think that means I should have to buy into any specific culture. So politically the LGB and the T are all things that I go out of my way to support if nothing else thru self interest, but culturally I would like to get a crowbar and pry the T off the LGB, gender and sexuality are not even related like that.

I know this is gonna sound bad, but like, I consider myself a more or less "normal" woman, and I define myself as such, I find the pressure to define myself as "femme" and whatever associated baggage to be just unwanted, and ultimately unnecessary in my life. I am just a woman, I don't want to be defined by who I date, or by what I was assigned at birth.

[ThePhoenix]

Well, as the question is framed, I would have to say "no."  We can't very well be harming the LGBT movement because it's our movement.  We're the T.

But in practice, I am not so sure that there is such a thing as the LGBT movement.  I think it is more of a media & public relations creation that has little to do with real life.  In reality, LGB issues have a lot in common with one another because they are about sexual orientation.  T issues are about gender identity.  The two are not remotely the same issue.  Some trans* people may identify as LGB in addition to being trans*.  And there are many straight trans* people as well.  And many (like me) have sexual orientations other than gay, straight, lesbian, or bi. 

I find it investing that much of the success we are having at all levels seems to come from separating ourselves out from the LGB communuty and insisting that T issues be recognized as different from LGB issues.  Janet Mock, Laverne Cox, et al. are spokespersons for trans* people, not for LGBT as a whole.  Trans* inclusive healthcare has not come thanks to NGLTF or HRC.  I've had enormous local success by talking about T issues separately and apart from LGB issues. 

It also bears noting that we are overshadowed by much more visible, accepted, and welcomed gay and lesbian populations when we try to take a part in LGBT issues.  That leads to cisgender people who happen to be gay or bi being our spokespeople on the issues that affect us.  When trans* people cannot speak up about trans* issues and are not in control of the advocacy around them, that means always being in a secondary unequal role.  Being able to speak for oneself matters.  And part of the change that is happening now is about trans* people becoming the ones to speak about trans* issues.  That's the big revolution that no one seems to be noticing. 

The OP seems to be asking about whether one must be passable and gender nonconforming to do visible work on behalf of the community.  The answer, in my opinion, is "no."  But there are realities here that matter.  I can talk about that if you want me to, but the topic has veered, so I will avoid it unless asked to go there.

[androgynouspainter26]

Hmmm...I don't think "post-gender" is what I'd like; my gender is important to who I am too! What I'd like is a culture in which gender is something that can be a central part of who you are, but does not need to be.  Gender should be, dare I say it, optional: People who would like to express gender should be able to, and those who don't should be able to opt out.  That being said, I think removing markers would be a positive thing since it does contribute to segregation on the basis of sex, which is obviously a very negative thing, as is any mandatory segregation.  I think that having everyone's needs met on a legislative level is never going to happen though-I'm personally hoping for our culture to evolve to a point where we are all able to choose how we relate to traditional structures of gender.  But, I think that in making gender a requirement for identification, we've made gender a difficult thing to "opt out" of.  So, the only solution I see as viable is to de-legeslate gender, and allow it to be what we all see it as: an identity, and to treat sex as a medical status, and nothing more.

And Phoenix, I'd be happy to hear any thoughts you may have...Honestly, it's a question I'm asking because I'd like to do more for my community, but sometimes I worry that I might be hurting other trans people, since I'm pretty queer looking, and not all that passable, at least I don't think I am when I'm not wearing as much makeup as I am in my avatar.  The last thing I want is to set the rights or perception of trans people back, but if my very existence is doing that to many transgender people-well, perhaps I should remain silent and in the shadows.

[Dee Marshall]

It seems to me that gender should be no more and no less significant than hair color.

[ThePhoenix]

And Phoenix, I'd be happy to hear any thoughts you may have...Honestly, it's a question I'm asking because I'd like to do more for my community, but sometimes I worry that I might be hurting other trans people, since I'm pretty queer looking, and not all that passable, at least I don't think I am when I'm not wearing as much makeup as I am in my avatar.  The last thing I want is to set the rights or perception of trans people back, but if my very existence is doing that to many transgender people-well, perhaps I should remain silent and in the shadows.

Okay, well, I think that our communities--all of them--need everyone they can get.  I think that any community that would reject you or claim that you are harmful just for how you look would be weakened by doing so.  I am passable.  I wasn't always. I got my start in activism when I wasn't.  Actually, I got it pre-transition.  Then I continued during transition.  I'm still going after.  I found plenty to do even while not passable.

The places where I think passing has value are those spaces in which you deal with undecided people who don't understand what transgender is and who are not sure whether to support transgender people or not.  Janet Mock, Carmen Carrera, and Laverne Cox are all people who are very much in the public eye.  The public had to get to a place where it could accept any trans* person at all--but only a fairly "normal" looking one.  Similarly, when it comes to appearing before legislators and governmental bodies, I think that someone who looks different might scare some people.  We have to fight against opponents who say that transgender is about men in dresses.  Someone testifying before the legislature and looking like a "man in a dress" doesn't really help.  So when you plan a legislative hearing or anything like it (which, yes, I have done), you have to weigh a person's pluses against their minuses.  The risk of a person putting off voters because  of their appearance is a reality that has to be considered if you want to win. 

But that's a long way from saying that people hurt the community by looking different.  And most activism isn't about being on television or in front of the legislature.  Most of my activism is about the power of relationships.  Something happens for an hour in public because I spent a year having one-on-one conversations, introducing people to one another, telling stories, and making introductions so that other people listen and learn.  There are relationships inside the community and outside the community.  And there is activism to be done in both places as well.

When it comes to work within the community, I think that passing may actually be a detriment.  There's a tendency in this community to be skeptical and distrustful of cisgender people . . . and of people who pass too well.  I know I encounter that all the time and it hurts my ability to work with substantial swaths of the community because it puts something in the way that I must overcome from the start.  I have had transwomen come right out and tell me that I come across too much like a ciswoman and they find that alienating.

What I said about how passing has its advantages in the public sphere needs to change.  And it will.  It will change because people will continue pushing to be heard even if they are not totally cisnormative.  You'd be doing a great service by being a part of that push. 

And the work within the community of building a stronger community, building support systems, etc. is severely neglected,  but it is also crucial.  And in that sphere, not passing too well may be an asset.

So no, it's not harmful to the community.  But the reality is it has pluses and minuses in different settings.

And just for the record, any trans* activist who says that non-binary, non-passing, or non-normative people, hurt the community--and yes, I have heard that said--is a person who has lost their way.  Ironically, the local figure who likes to make those pronouncements most is someone who admits to not being passable themselves.

So come join the party.  Bring some friends.  There's plenty of room for you.

[androgynouspainter26]

I guess I just wish I could be someone that doesn't make cis people uncomfortable :/  It's very isolating, being that kind of trans person, and I really wish I could get to a point in my life where I don't stick out as much.  The truth is, I do sorta think people who stick out like me are hurting our cause sometimes, it's why I started this topic.  But, how much of this is based in fact and not shame isn't clear to me.