Thursday, 7 August 2008

Today's Battles

Over at the Washington Times, though again, that's on GLB rather than TS/IS issues. Not my fight, but I can't be a mere bystander.

At the Greeley Tribune once more. They wrote:
Buck's actions and words diffused any notion that Greeley, which is seen by some as an intolerant town, would put up with this kind of behavior just because Zapata was transgender. And he also showed that Greeley would mourn her like we would anyone else killed in such a vicious manner.
My reply
I'm crying as I write this.

Oh, I know the facts, that transgendered people are 17 times more likely to be victims of homicide than the general population. I know that (to quote several papers) "Religious conservatives are hoping a referendum on a Montgomery County law protecting transgender people could become a template to repeal similar measures across the country." I know it, but I'm used to it, it's just the way things are. Water off a duck's back.

It's like Cancer, a fact of life, bad things happen to good people, you just move on. I don't cry over the persecution, I do what I can to end it.

So why the tears?

I'm not used to being treated as ... Human. I don't know how to handle it. And I wonder how it is that things could ever have come to this pass, that I'm so accepting of being treated as an animal, as if it's normal.

Thanks, Greeley. I needed reminding of my humanity.
I meant it too. I've become far too accustomed to this new definition of "normal" I've had since 2005. It seems far too easy to think "well of course I have to fight, the situation's unusual, you can't expect people to treat me as human".

On to Catholic Online, assuming they publish my comments. My bet is they will, the Catholics in general are pretty tolerant of polite dissent.

Thence to the Gainsville Sun, and the Bathroom Question.
Rob11UF wrote:
I am absolutely amazed at this. Everyone who has taken a stance on this issue, from the supporters to the protesters, is definitively, factually wrong. Call the Florida Senate and confirm what I have already checked: there is NO law in the state of Florida that prohibits, or even addresses, who uses which bathroom. At this moment, it is perfectly legal for a man to enter and lawfully use a bathroom marked WOMEN, and vice versa. In every square foot of the state of Florida. Fools. There has never BEEN a law that made any criminal or civil penalty for a person using a bathroom designated for another gender. It's just been a closely grained social norm.

pennst99 replied:
Then why did they feel is necessary to pass the law in the first place?

Because it's not about the Bathrooms at all, stupid, it's about being able to put the niggers gays back in their place. They're LYING.

I was a little more diplomatic though in my wording.

Finally, not a battle, but a worthwhile commentary. A Heart Condition at To a T.

2 comments:

SA-ET said...

"TG" advocates set themselves up all the time as different, part of the GLB, "transgender" instead of simply female..."less than" and a whole hosts of other caveats. The blogosphere and media is saturated with that mind set...all presented by trans advocates like yourself, Zoe. Why does it surprise you in the least that statements such as the one you quote by the Greely Tribune are made daily?

But, the trans advocates won't stop there gender screwed presentation...and society won't change their opionion.

Battybattybats said...

Please correct me if I missunderstand you sa-et... but your saying that standing-with/being-like Gays and Lesbians makes Transgender people less than women? So Gay men are lesser men and Lesbian women lesser women? That by association we become lesser?

"But, the trans advocates won't stop there gender screwed presentation..."

That might be because for some they don't fit into the skewed presentation of the standard sexist stereotypes maybe? Because lots of non-trans people dont fit into those standard gender stereotypes anyway?

"...and society won't change their opionion."

So what about all those periods in history when gender variance was not just acceptable but downright fashionable? Societies views on this issue have hanged in the past. It wasn't so long ago women weren't allowed to wear pants. At other times male effeminacy was quite popular. Heck at one point Castrati singers were being swooned over by women and fought over by men with some castrati becoming quite infamous for their romantic escapades.

If society has changed on this before then why do you insist it has stopped changing now?

After all as a Goth I find there is a fair amount of acceptance of gender variance in the society. I've been complemented by strangers on my long natural nails (painted black or red or purple and even with cute heart-eyed skull decals on them) and complimented also on my eyeliner while shopping wearing a fairly unisex-ish womans top and black cargo pants.

A lot has changed in acceptance in the last decade and a half.

And as far as I'm concerned us goths getting public acceptance is paving the way for a lot of different people. As people realise we look scary but are in the vast majority nice friendly people who like to read old poetry not sacrifice their babies we are paving the way for people to find almost any harmless public expression acceptable.

So if I can get acceptance from society being a gender blurring goth over a decade and a half in small rural city and if at times society has not only accepted gender variance but had it at the height of fashion then on what grounds do you claim that society will never change their opinion on the subject?