It’s one of the many reasons why I frequently draw parallels between transgender equality and the civil rights movement of the 60s. There are so many common struggles, events, tactics and strategies being used in the transgender equality movement that almost identical to those used to bring civil rights to black people.
You may remember Sarah McBride. She made history by becoming the first transgender woman to address a major political party when she spoke at the Democratic National Convention. Her new memoir is called Tomorrow Will Be Different: Love, Loss, and the Fight for Trans Equality.
We also had a small cameo in her illustrious life, featuring her on our YouTube show this year.
I’m not surprised McBride got the Obama-era VP to write the forward for her memoir, just as I’m not surprised at the parallels between this modern-day civil rights issue and the one from the bygone era. I’m just happy to be doing my part with The Transamorous Network to make it possible for transgender people everywhere to get the rights they deserve.
Kudos Sarah. And thanks to Biden for recognizing the plight of transgender Americans.
The number of transgender people running for office recently has skyrocketed. That’s such wonderful news, because it more representation in our “lawmaking halls” will mean more legislation favorable toward transgender people.
Here’s an awesome perspective on this, which was excerpted from this report:
The reason behind this appears to be that simply knowing someone who is LGBTQ makes people more likely to support LGBTQ rights.
“Being visible and present continues to change hearts and minds, and humanize us and our issues,” Aisha C. Moodie-Mills, President and CEO of the Victory Fund, told NBC OUT.
According to Reynolds, “When LGBTQ people come out, they become your daughter, uncle, friend, work colleague. They become humanized, normalized. We know that the number of people who support marriage equality tracks the number of people who say they know someone who is gay.”
Check out this great graph. It shows the increasing number of transgender people running for office and the number elected. These data are from 2015. They don’t include this year or last. What this tells me is, the future is bright. Very bright. That’s cause to celebrate.
Now, if you frequent our content, you know that focusing on news like this, creates more awareness of similar news. As you focus on more of that kind of news, you feel better. As you feel better (whether you believe it or not) you are creating by virtue of feeling better, more experiences of connecting with more similar kinds of news. That means you create more of this kind of progress in physical reality.
If instead you focus on news that is depressing, negative, and disempowering, the same holds true. You feel worse. As you feel worse you are creating through your negative feelings more experiences of connection with similar kinds of news. That means you create more of this kind of (negative) progress in your physical reality.
And this is where your freedom comes in: you are free to create whatever “reality” you want to experience. The choice it completely yours. So why not create what you want, instead of what you don’t?
The term “tranny chaser” is often thrown at men who are attracted to transgender women. Usually by the very women the men are attracted to. We talk a lot about stories here at The Transamorous Network. A story is a thought a person repeats to themselves until it becomes a belief. Beliefs are stories a person repeatedly thinks until it becomes “unconscious” – it becomes so familiar to the person, they don’t have to think about thinking about it. It just is.
When a story becomes a belief, it is very powerful. Long before that point, such stories are attracting to themselves physical phenomena – events, people, circumstances – which match the story’s content. Of course, there is evidence disproving, or not matching, the story. But the storyteller cannot see that evidence. The predominantly only see matching evidence. The more the person repeats the story, the more difficult it is to see contrary evidence. That’s why, for example, some transwomen claim they will “never” find a guy, while pointing to the mound of her failed relationships. So long as she continues to believe that story, she continues to have that life experience.
At some point a story, particularly a negative one, has so much momentum behind it, it becomes automatic or knee-jerk. For example, a woman who happens to be trans can have an experience with a guy who definitely is NOT a “tranny chaser” observe some behavior that “triggers” her “tranny chaser” story and, in no time, that story becomes active in her mind. When that happens, the guy becomes a chaser. Even if he really isn’t one.
There are, of course, plenty of transgender women who do not have such stories. So guys, you’re in luck! For those women who do have such stories, there’s little you can do to defend yourself against them. Other than, of course, changing your stories about transgender women so you don’t encounter them.
What’s fascinating about transgender women who do have this story, or any other which demeans the men naturally attracted to them, is the state of hypocrisy involved. This wonderful Medium story by Julia Serano, which I’ll refer to several times in future posts, characterizes the state of being “transgender” as a process. Serano brilliantly describes how a person who is “cis-gender” could at any time become “trans” as soon as that person decides to coincide their appearance with an already existing or emergent internal identity:
…in discussions about trans identities and trajectories, [the words “transgender” and cis-gender”] often give the false impression that “cis” and “trans” are immutable and mutually exclusive categories, when in fact they are not.
For example, there are many people out there who (at this particular moment) would describe themselves as cisgender or cissexual, but who in the future will identify as transgender or transsexual. And (in the case of those who detransition) some people who self-identify as trans today may not in the future.
In fact, when discussing matters of identity and gender transition, people are by default presumed to be “cis” until they say or do something (e.g., voice a trans identity, express gender non-conforming behavior) to denote otherwise. This point is crucial, and I shall be returning to it shortly.
Furthermore, there is no test (medical, psychological, or otherwise) to determine whether or not a person is “really trans.” The terms transgender and transsexual are experiential — individuals have an internal experience of gender that they can either try to repress, or outwardly express via being gender non-conforming, or transitioning to their identified gender, respectively.
The same can be said for a man who exhibits “tranny chaser” behavior. As I said above, first, just because a guy speaks or acts in a way that looks like “chaser” behavior, doesn’t make him a chaser. And even if he consistently behaves that way and therefore may be accurately called such a person, that doesn’t mean he will remain that way. To the degree the observer continues to refer to that person as a “chaser”, it is impossible to see evidence in his behavior that is not “chaser”-like.
Got it?
Why am I defending men who “tranny chase”? If you think I am, then you’re missing the point.
The point is, your stories determine the reality you experience. That includes how people behave in your life experience. Giving grace to others (men, transwomen….anyone) is a overt act of countering stories which create realities we prefer not to have.
And in giving that grace, not only do you free others to be human BE-ings, which is decidedly a process rather than some fixed state, you free yourself from a limited life experience where only those things you dislike are your reality.
In a word, I’d say the interim policy is “reasonable”
So last week, Defense Secretary James Mattis came out with a four-point “interim guidance” on how Trump’s transgender “ban” would be implemented. In my opinion, as a nine year military veteran, the guidance strikes a balance between what the president decreed and honoring our service members who happen to be trans.
The guidance’s four points begin with a direct statement from the defense department, which speaks volumes about how defense department considers and respects transgender service members. This is straight from the policy, quoted word-for-word:
“First and foremost, we will continue to treat every service member with dignity and respect,”
It then lists the four points:
Accessions: The procedures dated April 28, 2010, which generally prohibit the accession of transgender individuals into the military services remain in effect, because existing or history of gender dysphoria — a state of unease or generalized dissatisfaction with life — or gender transition does not meet medical standards subject to the normal waiver process.
Medical care and treatment: Service members who receive a gender dysphoria diagnosis from a military medical provider will be given treatment for the diagnosed medical condition. As directed by the memorandum, no new sex reassignment surgical procedures for military personnel will be permitted after March 22, 2018, except as necessary to protect the health of an individual who has already begun a course of treatment to reassign his or her gender.
In-service transition for transgender service members: The policies and procedures in DoDI I300.28 dated July 1, 2016, remain in effect until the defense secretary puts into effect DoD’s final guidance.
Separation and retention of transgender service members: Service members who have completed their gender transition process, and whose gender marker has been changed in the Defense Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System will continue to serve in their preferred gender while the interim guidance is in effect.
Now, I’ve learned, and heard it said, that a policy is a good one if both sides leave the negotiations table unhappy. This means both sides had to “give” in order to reach a compromise. It should be noted that these four points are a perfect example of that.
For one, it offers a reasonable rationale for not allowing transgender people suffering from “gender dysphoria” to enter into the service. There are of course, gradations of what gender dysphoria looks like or how it is experienced. I do understand many markers of gender dysphoria are exacerbated by an intolerant society. In many cases, a person suffering from gender dysphoria is not in a condition to whether battlefield conditions or the stress of being in the military. The same is true for other mental issues, including depression or schizophrenia example.
There are policies in place in the DOD to screen out people suffering from all kinds of conditions. These policies are not an indictment of individuals. The DOD is not saying a schizophrenic, or a person without a high school diploma for that matter, is a bad person, for example, or morally unworthy, so he can’t serve. I think the same would be the case for a transgender person.
This would be a great test of this new policy —-> if a person already has had their GCS and can show he or she or they do not suffer from gender dysphoria, can they then serve? It seems, according to this interim policy, that there will be room for these kinds of people to serve with no problem. It is a critical distinction that will have to be tested in real life.
For example, a potential recruit who is transgender would have to test whether what I’m saying here would work. I think it might.
I’ve written the DOD the question. Here’s what I wrote:
I have a question about the interim guidance on transgender people in the military. I’ve read the interim guidance news release. I’m a former Marine (9 years 1st MarDiv).
So let’s say a transgender person shows up at the recruiting station. They already have had their surgeries and possess a medical document attesting a clean bill of health vis-a-vis “gender dysphoria.” All other factors being equal, can that person join the service of their choosing presuming they are otherwise qualified?
I’m eager to see how they respond.
The second guideline relates to all this. It seems a bit contradictory when the military will gladly, for example, pay for someone to go to college. Such an expense is high in many
Defense Secretary James Mattis
cases.
Service members who become higher-educated are better service members. Can’t the same thing be said for providing GCS surgeries? I think they are comparable in price. And it could be argued that both not having a higher education and requiring GCS are pre-existing conditions. But I can also see the other argument here.
The good news of the second guidance point is the DOD isn’t cutting off current service members who are in the midst of transition. Such military personnel have until 2018, and, if the procedure is needed for life-threatening reasons, it can still be performed after that.
I’ll skip point three because it preserves the status quo.
Which brings me to point four. The interim guidance allows existing trans service members to continue to serve – for now – once they have “completed” their transition. I know, “transition” lasts a lifetime. But in the world of policy making, more distinct definitions must be drawn to come to agreement.
Intrestingly, the guidance also allows existing qualified transgender service members to reenlist if they desire. That’s a plus.
Then there’s this:
As directed by the memorandum, no action may be taken to involuntarily separate or discharge an otherwise qualified service member solely on the basis of a gender dysphoria diagnosis or transgender status. Transgender service members are subject to the same standards as any other service member of the same gender: They may be separated or discharged under existing bases and processes, but not on the basis of a gender dysphoria diagnosis or transgender status.
This is the coolest part of the directive. It prohibits any current service member being involuntarily discharged from the military because of their status. I think that’s great. It’s nod to honoring those currently serving.
I’m eager to hear what you think. I’m not suggesting my view is the right one. It is one though that comes from seeing the positive side. If you do respond, please be prepared to elaborate on your statements. I prefer a dialogue, not drive-byes.
#TitheTrans invites Christian LGBTQ allies to raise money for trans surgeries
Sheesh.
Just a few weeks ago, I published a post about how great it is that so many people and organizations are rising up in support of the transgender community. It’s almost as if (wink wink) for every negative ned that rises up against those people we love, another person or organization rises up to counter him.
But this most recent one was a pleasant surprise even to me. A Christian organization has come out not only friendly to transgender people, they are asking church-goers to tithe to raise money to support confirmation and other surgeries for trans people. How cool is that?
According to many news outlets, including HuffPost, FaithfullyLGBT is running, for the month of September their new campaign called #TitheTrans. Their goal is to raise at least $10,000 which they will give to the Jim Collins Foundation, a charity which grants money for trans surgeries.
Now FaithfullyLGBT seems to be a website representing “a collection of stories from people
living at the intersection of faith, gender and sexuality.” It’s not so much a group as it is a photo-essay website. Eliel Cruz, the founder says in a newspaper article:
“Meeting so many LGBT people of faith made me want to share their stories to begin to put a face to those of us who live in the intersection of faith and sexuality,”
So he curated a number of willing folks to tell their stories. That was back in January this year. The site is still going strong.
As of the time of this post, the #TitheTrans funding campaign on indiegogo has achieved five percent of its $10,000 goal.
The term “tranny chaser” is often thrown at men who are attracted to transgender women. Usually by the very women the men are attracted to. We talk a lot about stories here at The Transamorous Network. A story is a thought a person repeats to themselves until it becomes a belief. Beliefs are stories a person repeatedly thinks until it becomes “unconscious” – it becomes so familiar to the person, they don’t have to think about thinking about it. It just is.
In a word, I’d say the interim policy is “reasonable”
