Saving All Our Children: Reflections on the MA Transgender Rights Bill Hearing
“A day without human rights is a day without sunshine.” That is what the t-shirt said that I got at one of the first gay rights rallies I attended in 1977. The rally was organized to try to defend a newly passed sexual orientation non-discrimination law in Dade County, Florida that Anita Bryant was trying to overturn. Anita won; we lost.
In 1977, I was twelve years old. I was one of the children that Anita Bryant’s Save Our Children campaign was ostensibly trying to protect. But I was also a kid who had an emerging sense that I was not like the other kids both in terms of my gender and my sexual orientation. Even though I knew that all kinds of discrimination were wrong, I also knew enough not to talk about what I was thinking about my gender or sexual orientation too much in school or among my friends. It was a time before the word “faggot” was constantly heard in school hallways and even just the whisper that some kid or teacher or school administrator was “that way” could near-instantly reshape one’s entire social circle.
I kept thinking back to 1977 late last night as I drove home from the Massachusetts statehouse where the Judiciary Committee held an over 8 hour hearing on the pros and cons of passing a statewide non-discrimination bill that would protect transgender and gender non-conforming people. The proponents did a great job of explaining why this law is so desperately needed. I was so proud of friends and colleagues, trans identified and not, who courageously described the ways in which many of us transgender people face challenges in employment, housing, public accommodations, and education simply because of who we are.
Every time I hear Allie Lie tell her story of workplace discrimination, I feel anger about a society that would marginalize someone so qualified for her job simply for being who she is. I grow angrier still when I hear Ethan St. Pierre describe how his aunt’s life was cut short by a man who brutally murdered her because she made the brave decision to live her life with dignity as a transgender woman.
In response to the proponents’ eloquence, this is the dominant theme we heard from opponents: We are not ready to explain your lives to our children. We are not comfortable talking to our children about discrimination or the ways in which what we have taught them about the proper gender roles of boys and girls, men and women, do not fit for all people. Save Our Children was the opponents’ theme. Save Our Children.
Hearing that theme reminded me of how I felt as a kid in 1977 when Anita Bryant successfully campaigned to overturn Dade County’s sexual orientation ordinance. It felt really shitty. If there had ever been a chance for me to come out in my youth as lesbian or have a fuller understanding of my gender identity, it was squashed that day. The take home message for me was that the vast majority of Dade County residents (my neighbors) did not think that the lives of gay, lesbian, and bisexual people were as valuable as those who were not GLB.
But the take home message last night was different for me—and I hope for everyone listening. Ken Garber, the parent of a transgender son who passed away at the beginning of this year summed it up perfectly. It is the supporters of H1728 and not the opponents who are pro-child and pro-family. It is we who envision and wish to create a world where we can all – transgender or not – walk safely on the street, work in jobs that we are competent to perform, and yes, use public restrooms and gym locker rooms, with dignity and in safety.
I want to save the children. The difference is that I want to save all the children, ours and theirs. I know—because I have had to do it—that we can explain gender differences to our children and their children, too. Neither our children nor their children will be confused or harmed by acknowledging that there are transgender people in the world. Neither our children nor their children will be confused or harmed by going to school with transgender youth whose gender identities are respected. Neither our children nor their children will be confused or harmed by passing a law that enables all of us to live our lives as fully as possible and with the authenticity that allows us to be whole.
David at the blog Dym Sum has a good write up of how the hearing went.