A SPECIAL CANADIAN PRIDE

Justin Trudeau, Mark Carney
and that other guy

When Justin Trudeau stepped down as prime minister of Canada, there were concerns. Actually, my concerns began last summer, Trudeau’s popularity fading fast, which tends to happen when a particular party is in power for what some feel is too long. There are always pendulum shifts. 

 

The leader for the Official Opposition, Conservative Pierre Poilievre, smelled opportunity. He’d already been campaigning hard for over a year and kept going on about how Liberal Trudeau should dissolve parliament and call an election. Had Trudeau done so in late summer or sometime during the fall, I’m certain Poilievre would have won. 

 

Poilievre’s campaign consisted of nasty soundbites, lots of criticism, little in terms of his own proposals. Like all Canadians, he was aware of American politics and saw how being Mr. Nasty worked so well for Trump. I was shocked it was working so well in Canada, too.

 

This is not the Canadian way, I kept telling myself. I still believe Poilievre didn’t need to go low as he smelled blood and could almost taste power as prime minister. Trudeau had done what he could as leader and Canadians were tired of him. A rational, positive campaign by the Conservatives would have been just as potent, even if it generated fewer headlines. But Poilievre chose his path. 

 

Everything went wonky once Donald Trump returned to the Oval Office. Right away, he announced tariffs, specifically targeting China, Mexico and Canada.

 

What? Canada?! It felt like an affront to begin his new term by lumping Canada with China, a traditional “enemy” and Mexico, the country from which the bulk of illegal immigrants were entering the U.S. 

 

It’s no secret that Trudeau and Trump have never seen eye-to-eye. With Trudeau still not relinquishing power, Trump’s attack was supposed to bring Trudeau to his knees. But, no. Suddenly, Canadians clearly had someone to hate more than Trudeau.

 

Making matters worse, Trump talked of Canada becoming the 51^st state, an appallingly aggressive and/or belittling way of relating to the country that has traditionally been the United States’ greatest ally. Canadians boycotted travel to the U.S. and American products. While Trump continued to talk tariffs and refer to Canada as the 51^st state, all-things-Trump were reviled by Canadians. 

 

That included Pierre Poilievre’s campaign style, a carbon copy of Trump’s. Suddenly, the shoo-in next Canadian prime minister saw his popularity plummeting. When Trudeau stepped down as prime minister, all the hate for Trudeau had no place to go. Mark Carney became the interim PM with an election pending. Carney was respected, knowledgeable and, if a tad overly confident/arrogant, he was immensely more likable than Poilievre who had never campaigned on likability. 

 

Poilievre was caught off-guard by Trump’s antagonism and the ensuing backlash. Suddenly, his whiny, pit bull persona proved unpopular. The Conservatives never recovered. In fact, so sure they were of ascending to power—all those months of Poilievre calling for an election—they didn’t even release a party platform until the last days of the campaign, after so many Canadians has shown up for advance voting. 

 

In what no one would have predicted in the last half of 2024, the Liberals held onto power and Carney had his position as prime minister affirmed.

 

As a queer person, I am relieved. While some provinces have jumped on anti-gay and anti-trans initiatives that copy Republican-led American states, things remain protected at the federal level. A week ago CBC News ran a story with the headline, “Carney laments Pride ‘backlash’ and rolls out money to make 2SLGBTQ+ parades safer.”

 

Carney is quoted in the article as saying:

One of the strengths of Canada is recognizing that 

people can be who they want to be and love who they 

want to love. The federal government—we are the 

defenders of those rights.

 

Unfortunately, around the world, there’s a backlash

struggling against the progress that has been made. In

this time, Canada will always stand up for the 

vulnerable and the equal rights we cherish. We can 

take pride in how far we’ve come but we should also 

recognize there’s far more to do.

 

Trump’s aggressive, antagonistic tactics toward Canada have allowed the Liberals to hold onto power and keep LGBTQ protections in place, helping extend rights and normalize them with the Canadian public. During Pride month, I’m particularly proud of Carney’s leadership in affirming our equal rights.

  

 

 

THE WIN COLUMN

A writing colleague, a good friend of mine, is trans. We connect through FaceTime once a week to share a writing session. It starts with a check-in (How’s your week of writing going? What are you working on today?) and is followed by an hour where we disconnect and write before FaceTiming again to talk about how the hour went. 

 

They live in Seattle. As “safe” an area as any for someone who is trans in the United States but it’s still in the U.S. where Trump has already issued executive orders about trans in the military, trans girls and women in sports and trans healthcare for people under eighteen. I have sensed my friend’s unease with every phone call since the election. It’s hard not to feel targeted or to sense walls closing in.

 

For gay white cisgender men such as myself, the equivalent would be to live in a country whose newly appointed ruler issued orders banning gay marriage, gays in the military, gay adoption and discussion of anything gay in schools. If your tendency is to quibble over anything I mentioned that is not an exact equivalent, check your personal feelings and beliefs about people who are trans. How many do you know? Have you listened to them talk about trans issues? How much are you willing to be an ally and to truly include them in the Pride “community” we speak of every June if not throughout the year?

 

I have told my friend I will drive down to Seattle (or Olympia, the state capital) and rally alongside them. Just give me a date. I want them to feel my support is real, that there is substance behind my words.

 

Part of my frustration, however, has been that I’m not seeing rallies. I’m not hearing well-packaged soundbites like the highly effective, enduring “Love Is Love,” that helped people get behind gay marriage. I have not been able to point to an organization that is leading the cause to fight back and advocate for trans rights. GLAAD and HRC exist but their agendas are diverse and I’m not sure how many trans people see these organizations as representing their voices. I imagine trans advocates want trans people actually taking the lead. They need to be empowered while the rest of us, LGBTQ and otherwise, get behind them and lift them up.

 

I asked my friend, “What organization is leading the campaign for trans rights?”

 

I wanted the answer to roll off their tongue. There was a pause, but it didn’t take too long before they replied, “Maybe A4TE?” It was a tentative response. I didn’t ask them to explain what the letters and number stood for. I could do my own research.

 

Advocates For Trans Equality.

 

Not an organization known in households. Not yet.

 

A4TE.

 

A4TE.

 

A4TE.

 

A4TE, A4TE, A4TE…

 

I got it wrong a couple of times in the past week. Not rolling just yet. But I can say I’m getting familiar with the organization.

 

Advocates for Trans Equality is a merger of sorts, coming into being just last year after two organizations established in 2003 joined forces: National Center for Transgender Equality (NCTE) and Transgender Legal Defense and Education Fund (TLDEF). Honestly, I’d never heard of either or, if I had, the names didn’t stick with me. Maybe I had just never made trans rights enough of a priority.

 

I spent an hour going through their website. At first, I was underwhelmed. This is it? That’s all? But then I subscribed to their newsletter and read the first one. I was emailed a link and listened to an excellent 90-minute webinar, “Trans Rights vs. Trump: How A4TE Is Fighting Back.” I started to feel more encouraged. The information is getting out there. A4TE is taking a lead.

 

A4TE, A4TE, A4TE.

 

One part of the website in particular resonated with me. When I scrolled down the ABOUT tab, I clicked on the first option, HISTORY, and reading through the web page, I came upon the heading, What We’ve Done, which begins with:

 

Over the last twenty years, NCTE secured over 100

federal policy changes in various agencies and

helped defeat hundreds of anti-trans state bills

across the country, and TLDEF saw major

victories and had unflappable persistence in

courtrooms across the country, having worked

on some of the most significant trans legal

victories in the nation.

 

The following six paragraphs offered specifics regarding what the separate organization accomplished before merging. There are significant victories arising from battling various institutions and the governments of the day. 

 

While Trump’s executive orders are setbacks and are clearly disheartening if not devastating to trans people and their families, the prior wins represent hope. Change can happen. There is an organization with a track record of victories. Defeats occur as well, perhaps fueling a sense of incensement that can rally people, but the victories motivate too. There are things in the win column. All is not lost. All is not dark. 

 

Hopefully, you will check out the website for Advocates for Trans Equality. I recommend subscribing to the newsletter. (The "subscribe" button appears at the bottom of each page on their website.) Read or skim the ones you have time for in your busy life. Perhaps mark them to be read later. 

 

I want the rallies. I want the “good trouble” the late Congressmen John Lewis mentioned. I want the court challenges. I want safety and security for people who are trans. I want more in the W column.

 

  

TRANS ACTIONS

We’ve got to do better. When we say, “It gets better,” that must apply to everyone in the LGBTQ community. That includes trans. We’ve got to step up and continue the fight for queer dignity and queer rights.

 

Frankly, I knew throughout election season that, not only were trans people being demonized during the campaign, but they would then be blamed by their own side if Democrats lost the election. It’s doubly disgusting. The demonizing worked AND allies, needing to lay blame, pointed fingers at trans pronouns, athletic participation, bathroom usage and early hormone inhibitors. 

 

To be clear, blame does not belong to the trans community. Trans rights were not handled well by the left. Democrats were always playing defense or not playing at all and, in such situations, it’s pretty difficult to score. 

 

The weekend after the election, both The Wall Street Journal and The New York Times published front page stories analyzing the result, clearly stating that trans rights proved to be a deciding issue. The WSJ article focused solely on the topic, the headline stating, “Transgender Rights Took Center State Late in Race.” The article’s summative point: “[A]s the campaign neared the finish line, it was the transgender debate that emerged as a powerful force that—along with..inflation and immigration—worked in Republicans’ favor and against Harris.”

 

An effective campaign conducts its research and highlights the issues and stances that will play best to its key voters and those who are undecided. According to the WSJ, “The Trump campaign spent heavily on transgender issues, accounting for roughly one in five ads it aired in the last couple of months,” costing $37 million. [Emphasis added.] The Harris campaign failed to grasp the damage caused by the ads. It did what Democrats have too often done—ignored issues and statements deemed outrageous. “Harris had an opening to address one of those ads, which focused on her support for taxpayer-funded transgender surgeries for federal inmates, during her combative Fox News interview…[b]ut she ended up dismissing the importance of voters’ concerns on the issue.” Really, how many inmates would be getting trans surgeries in a year? As obscure as the issue may be, the ads caused the voter outrage Republicans sought.

 

This slogan is familiar, but I contend
it hasn't been effective enough.
Time to try a new soundbite.

Never ever let Trump statements go unchecked. Never let distortions go without a strong, soundbite-savvy response. Indeed that ad’s soundbite was “Kamala’s for They/Them. President Trump is for you.” 

 

No strong, easily grasped response from Democrats? Hello, damage. 

 

Same goes for all the fear and outrage lathered up over trans athletes. Even Representative Seth Moulton (D-Mass.) felt freaked out by the issue, telling the NYT, “I have two little girls, I don’t want them getting run over on a playing field by a male or formerly male athlete.” I literally cringed from the quote. Even Democrats don’t understand trans issues or the extent to which issues have real life impact. The director of communications for the Michigan High School Athletic Association told the WSJ, “the issue of transgender girls playing girls sports was inescapable on the airwaves” despite the fact only two girls playing on high school teams in the state were trans. Two out of 170,000. A non-issue, spun hard by Republicans. 

 

Without effective pushback, all that outrage and fearmongering has caused damage to trans people and trans issues beyond election season. 

 

Yes, we failed. We weren’t there. We silently shook heads, tantamount to no response at all. I, for one, await both grassroots and well organized (non-election) campaigns to boost positivity and acceptance regarding people who are trans. 

 

*  

 

History is indeed cyclical and we only need to look at earlier LGBTQ struggles to see when things stalled and when real progress finally happened. 

 

Throughout the seventies and eighties, progress for gays and lesbians was slow. Singer Anita Bryant stepped up as a leading adversary. Senator Jesse Helms relentlessly called out gays as sinners, lumping them in with perverts and pedophiles. AIDS worsened any campaign for gay rights. While gays were in survival mode, bathrooms became a danger zone, with the false perception you could become infected from toilet seats seemingly unshakable. It was in conservatives’ best interest to allow the falsity to persist. Whatever it took to make people remain entrenched as anti-gay. Play it up enough and it meant Republican votes. 

 

Bathrooms remain big in conservative playbooks. So do families, especially children. Once, it was gay men who posed a threat. Recruiters! Abusers! Protect our kids.

 

Updated to trans hate, conservatives now perpetuate pedaling fear that their children will be harmed. “Biological boys” are invading girls’ bathrooms and taking over girls’ athletics! Again, there is little to no substance, no cases put forth as they continue to spin fear. Worse, one common Trump lie at rallies was that parents could send their child to school in the morning and that child would come home the opposite sex. 

 

Sometimes we think Trump’s statements are so outrageous and clearly untrue they don’t get enough pushback. The fact is many Republicans drink whatever Kool-Aid Trump’s serving. They may not truly believe what he spouts, but they’ll spout it too in the name of team spirit. I’ve said many times, Trump and his supporters remind me of WWE arena wrestling—all staged but totally consumed. 

 

Where gays finally made significant strides was during marriage equality campaigns.

 

Progress was not entirely linear. There were setbacks, even in California, which saw the passage of the Proposition 8 referendum, which took away the right to marriage. But the organization became stronger. 

 

One legacy from the AIDS crisis was that gays and lesbians honed advocacy skills. One of the first changes was that more gays came out. They couldn’t sit back quietly while so many gays died. They couldn’t let stand hateful rhetoric that AIDS was God’s wrath. They became politically and socially active because they had to, pushing for more AIDS funding, quicker approval of experimental drugs and protections from job and housing discrimination. Gay men were not united in what was the best approach. Some worked within the establishment while others focused beyond it. 

 

A generation of gay men became well-versed in political and social action. Their experiences then helped with marriage equality efforts. They had a sense of how to mobilize and a track record of what tactics and strategies were most effective. Marriage campaigns at the state level worked together. Each state that passed marriage equality legislation provided momentum. Bit by bit, change happened.

 

In my mind, one of the most effective aspects of the overall campaign was the creation and propagation of a positive, social media friendly sound bite: #LoveIsLove.

 

Where is the trans sound bite? 

 

It’s time for gays and lesbians to join all queers in mobilizing again. We have the experience. We have a better opportunity to affect change with greater numbers of people actively pushing for it. And let me be clear in stating that any gay man latching onto “LGB but not the T” is spinning selfish, hateful nonsense that should be left behind in the last century.

 

It would have been nice if the Democrats had a solid plan to respond to political potshots—no, attacks—regarding trans issues. Nicer if the response not only responded to fearmongering but also put a positive foot forward. If some Democrats believe trans issues hurt them, it’s on them to regroup and rethink how to effectively campaign for trans rights. It’s a no-brainer that, if Republicans found success scaring voters about trans issues, they’ll keep doing it as long as they’re given carte blanche to do so. 

 

But I think it’s incumbent on major queer organizations to strategize their own counterattacks and, more importantly “brand” trans identity as something positive. That’s right, “brand” it. This is something to sell in terms of politics. There needs to be a #LoveIsLove equivalent that people can embrace and that catches on. Keep floating them out there, see what sticks and then fly with it. Something with long legs. Gay marriage has been legal since the Supreme Court’s 2015 decision and people still #LoveIsLove all over the place, perhaps as much as they wave the Pride flag. 

 

A personal suggestion is #LetThemBe. It’s positive. It’s got the pronoun so many associate with trans, nonbinary and other queers. (I do realize many trans people go with she/her and he/him, but I think #LetThemBe gets a simple, positive message across. If a trans person does choose she/her or he/him, well that’s even easier for straight folks to go with. Less pronoun bumbling if they choose to get past archaic resistance with comments like, “You don’ sound like a woman.” (Yeah, I hick-ified it. It seems apropos.)

 

A friend of mine who is trans told me shortly after the election that many trans people are antiestablishment. They won’t get on board a united, seemingly centrist campaign that speaks to acceptance from straights. That’s not their raison d’être.

 

My response was that was fine. Historically, with gay rights, there has been more than one track. During the AIDS crisis, organizations like Gay Men’s Health Center in NYC and AIDS Project Los Angeles appealed to politicians and celebrities for support while ACT UP went with more controversial, in-your-face tactics that some gays felt were a distraction or even detrimental to the cause. I didn’t always like ACT UP’s actions, but I believe that, while traditional organizations went with diplomacy, there was also a time and place for agitation that occurred per ACT UP’s agenda, not GMHC’s.

 

Too often in politics, things take on an either-or, black-or-white dichotomy. Explore all channels. Let the pro-trans movement have diversity in the channels it pursues.

 

If we all get onboard advocating for trans rights, we can contemplate bigger actions and fund a campaign to counter that $37 million anti-trans advertising effort the Republicans put together. Yes, money matters.

 

What are the key organizations to contribute to in advocating for trans rights? A specific trans organization doesn’t come immediately to mind which underscores how much has yet to be done. During the AIDS crisis, ACT UP was known to most everyone. GLAAD and HRC are also well known, but they have broader agendas than solely advocating for trans issues. (We still need to donate to them and push them to strengthen their trans campaigns both in terms of people and resources.) What is a key trans advocacy organization? One or two need to emerge as having household recognition, spearheading campaigns, becoming prominent fund raisers, organizing a powerful national march, targeting states where change is likely to occur, building momentum off these wins and assuming an advisory role with state- and local-level organizations working to establish and/or protect particular rights.

 

If the LGBTQ community doesn’t show in bold ways how it is stepping up, how can we expect our allies to show up and grow. If we organize in bigger numbers with bigger coffers, we can also establish an expertise that can then better advise Democrat positions and responses—there MUST be responses—during the 2026 and 2028 election campaigns. Do better, yes, and do more. Let’s go!

 

 

Newspaper articles cited for this blog post:

“Democrats Sift Through Rubble, Seeking Answers: Assigning the Blame,” The New York Times, November 10, 2024.

 

“Transgender Rights Took Center Stage Late in Race,” The Wall Street Journal, November 9-10, 2024.

 

 

 

 

  

LINGERING ON LABELS

We’re a product of our environments and the times in which we grew up. 

 

I grew up in an industrial city in Ontario, Canada at a time when smoking was absolutely fine—ashtrays were in every room. Tattoos were scary markings on members of motorcycle gangs and long hair on guys represented something nebulously radical or a complete lack of direction. “Retard” was a common putdown. First Nations people were reduced to caricatures. (I recall it being funny to assume a crossed-legged sitting position and raising a hand to say, “How” while jumping off a diving board.) Polack (derogatory for people who were Polish) and Newfie jokes (about people from Newfoundland) were shared without any thought of a filter. Fat people were mocked. Kids with glasses were made fun of. Same for redheads (like me). Sometimes hateful things were said about Germans, Italians, Jews, and Jehovah’s Witnesses. Basically, any group that made themselves noticed as being different and “not like the others” could be disparaged. In an oh-so-white community, race couldn’t be used to rank and hate others so people went with whatever differences stood out. 

 

Pretty much every ridiculed factor mentioned in the preceding paragraph either no longer registers as a negative or is at least no longer something to joke about in most groups. Heck, Newfoundland, formerly abbreviated as “Nfld.,” is now Newfoundland and Labrador (N.L.). Eskimos are Inuit. The Northwest Territories is now smaller after part of it became Nunavut. Change happens. We accept. We adapt.

 

I’ve often wondered if there will ever come a time when we’ll run out of groups for which to be intolerant, when John Lennon’s “Imagine” will no longer be just that, when our seeming need to sort and assert false superiority will end. 

 

Ah, but I suppose that’s a Woke dream which when you think of that as an expression is inherently paradoxical. If that’s not to be, then I wonder what group will be next on the list to mock. Who will be the new punchline? What kind of discrimination will divide society next?

 

As I wrote in last week’s blog post and in several others in recent years, the T in LGBTQ is under attack, not just among homophobes but by some who claim to be L, G or B. For them, the community has gotten too big and, I suspect, too hard to keep up with. There are tantrums and then there are people who can’t or won’t cope that drop to the ground, cross-legged, eyes closed, hands over ears. 

 

No more! Make it go away. Make it stop!

 

The world does not stop. Every generation seeks to define itself differently from the ones before. New looks, new terms and, yes, new identities—or at least newer—seek awareness. Language and the way we exist is supposed to evolve. And yet, there are always groups that fight what seems foreign. “Why can’t THEY just shut up and be more like us?” 

 

History repeats itself, even if the characters change.

 

I’ve often thought the current resistance to transgender identities and rights is a last frontier for conservatives. With gay marriage and adoption now legal, with antidiscrimination laws protecting queer people in housing and employment, homophobia is losing ground. So politicians and many citizens are going all-in to fight against trans rights. This, in turn, causes alarm for some who identify as L, G or B. Just when things seemed settled—protected, safe-ish—the pushback against trans, pronoun choices and everyone else who identifies as any other rainbow/Pride label threatens lesbians, gays and bisexuals anew. It’s like all these “new” sex and gender identities are mucking things up and, well, hello resentment.

 

Much of what people do who go out of their way to identify as “LGB” with nothing else allowed to tag along is argue about how lesbians, gays and bisexuals are DIFFERENT from all the other labels. It’s sexual identity versus gender identity, as if those lines can be so clearly delineated. To them it’s clear, long-established labels versus new gobbledygook.

 

I view their position as conveniently limited and either overtly hateful or implicitly so by means of its intentional efforts to set themselves apart. You can define yourself as narrowly as you want so it’s all about you and you don’t have to advocate for anyone else. Indeed, there has been a backlash against white cisgender gay men based on the fact many gay bars of the past glory days were dominated by them, any racial differences either shunned or fetishized. But it went beyond that. White cisgender gay men was too large a group. There was a sorting system in which “fats and femmes” were funneled out and tops were higher esteemed than bottoms. Basically, gay men, who’d been discriminated against and bullied by straight men, perpetuated the ideals of masculinity even when in spaces free of straight men. We weren’t as “free” as we purported to be when we were in our own bars. 

 

I’ve heard groans of older white gay men. They don’t like the rainbow flag getting “cluttered” with BIPOC and trans representation. No, please go back to being quiet. We see you well enough. You’re equal as long as you’re quiet. 

 

Yeah, I get why that’s a hard sell.

 

I’ll say it again: terminology will continue to change. It’s expanded the numbers in our “community” to a degree but many in younger generations who might have come out as “gay” or “lesbian” in our day are finding more specific labels better represent them. How is that a bad thing? How is being clearer about your identity an affront to those of us who went with what were the only labels available to us. A younger First Nations person today might identify as gay or lesbian but might find that 2-Spirit better embeds a cultural connotation woven into gender and sexuality. 

 

One of the first “break-off” labels was queer. When I first started hearing it, I was uncomfortable. There was something abrasive about it. It wasn’t the conventional, gym-going, bar-hopping, dance-the-night-away gays who were calling themselves queer. Instead, it seemed to be some of the outliers who didn’t fit the mold as a status gay hottie or as something passable. It seemed to be a more politically active group. People more inclined to align during the AIDS crisis with ACT UP instead of the Gay Men’s Health Crisis or AIDS Project Los Angeles.

 

“Queer” was antagonistic. It brought on negative attention. It felt like calling yourself a fag. Why embrace a term of hate and repeat it? I wanted to work within systems rather than against or around them. Of course, I grew up repressed and, despite often describing myself as hating or ignoring rules, I was a conformist. 

 

Obviously, I get what “queer” people from thirty-five years ago were doing. I thank them. I don’t see the word as having any negative association whatsoever anymore. I prefer “queer” to “gay,” which was once the all-encompassing term, often consuming lesbians when used in a broader context. Saying “gay” was less of a mouthful than always saying “gay and lesbian” and maybe tagging on “bisexual” when feeling both generous and verbose. But “gay” meant a male-oriented word was the default term in accordance with more general societal practices. In writing classes, I often wrote “he/she” when speaking of a hypothetical person but it was discouraged by instructors. When unknown, it was a he/him world. So, it’s not just the “gay community” that’s become more nuanced.

 

For many, pansexual better represents sexual orientation than the technically gender-rigid bisexuality. Take your pick. Go for it! To stick to “LGB” and put one’s head in the sand is an obstinate way of saying, “It was good enough for me so…” 

 

Somewhere in that same dinner conversation, I’d expect to also hear any or all of the following sentence starters: “In my day and time…”; “When I was young…”, and “Back in the day.” Yes, things were different. Life twenty years ago is not the same as now. Thirty years ago, perhaps more different. Fifty…you get the point. Some things come back into fashion, but other things just evolve, for better or for worse. 

 

I could go on and on. I love the label “Questioning.” Maybe it feels safer, but it also recognizes there can be an evolution or fluidity in one’s own identity in terms of sexuality and/or gender. Welcome! May some of the older members of the “community” be looked to as mentors instead of scoffers who use words like “rubbish” and “hogwash.” 

 

But trans is still the biggest sticking point. That’s the group that people who put themselves in a “LGB” compound take most offense to. So many straight people they can align with! New mixers to attend! Look at all of us. We are not alone! Maybe “LGB” is itself a nuanced offshoot. The Log Cabin Republicans of old come to mind. If you’re mainstream lesbian, gay or bisexual enough, you can fit right in. Let all the others whose sexual and gender identities are less conforming be damned. 

 

It's the age-old sort of intolerance I saw directed to other groups when I was a kid. Why do you have to be so different?

 

Not everyone fits so neatly. That’s a foundational aspect of the rainbow symbol and its permutations. I suspect that many of the people who make a conscious decision to refer to LGB instead of LGBT or LGBTQ+ fit more comfortably and, to themselves, more clearly in the L, the G or the B. Sexual orientation was the only issue. They felt 100% cisgender. That’s why they are able to so conveniently say that T is about gender so it doesn’t belong with LGB. 

 

I want to harken Dana Carvey’s Church Lady (a drag character, incidentally) and say, “Well, isn’t that special?!” 

 

For me and for many, sexuality and gender blur together. Rejection has come from both. The kinds of discrimination, the forms of hate, the official planbooks against varied sexual orientation and gender are the same. Freaks. Perverts. Out to get your children.

 

Gays and lesbians have seen this played out fully for decades. We’ve seen how being more open and fighting back changes minds. Not the minds that are too entrenched. For them, the fighting back itself is mocked. Oh, look at the gays getting all rattled up. 

 

Again, the parallels are many. Why wouldn’t we want to unite? Why wouldn’t we join what some in the “community” may see as a broadened battle? It sickens me that a gay man or a lesbian would think, Well, I got my rights. I’m done. It sickens me more that they might think, Those trans folks and those who are diddling with gender pronouns are bringing us down with them. Yes, that’s happening but the blame goes to the haters on the right. Breeding hate in our “community” is not what I ever expected when politicians and school moms went after transgender people.

 

“I’m not like them” just doesn’t work for me as a reason to hate.

 

Again, I chose to come out as gay because I had a man’s body, I was sexually attracted to men and not to women. In truth,  I struggled from my earliest years about having been born a boy. Penis? Present. But I never ever felt like a boy. I couldn’t tell anyone and there were no public figures I could look to in order to process my frustration and confusion, but I had a strong sense I’d been born with the wrong body. I felt I was a girl in every way. I felt my life would have been so much easier as a girl. There wasn’t any part of me that aligned with boy thinking, boy feeling, boy being.

 

If I were a young person today, I would identify as nonbinary or, more likely, trans. I would make the medical decision that I chose, rather than that society expected, to live trans. Hormones, yes. Surgery, I’m not so sure. I’m extremely medically squeamish. I view most medical procedures as invasive, including last week’s blood test. (Didn’t faint—though I have in the past. My anxiety was obvious to both the attendant and myself.) Any change would have had to happen when I was much younger, when my conviction was greater, when I had more time to work through a change in gender identity.

 

It’s never too late? Oh, for me it is. And I’m okay with that. I did the best I could, getting through my younger decades with what I knew at the time. I’m mulling over pronouns and whether I want to label myself as nonbinary. Those changes make more sense, but I’m still on the fence. What I do know, however, is that gender and sexuality have always been intertwined with me. The LGBTQ+ umbrella makes perfect sense to me. There are spectrums for everything. There are grays between blacks and whites. The grays actually make life clearer than the absolutism of black and white.

 

So, I’ll restate what I thought was the obvious: LGB with the T.

 

LGBTQ+. Differences within and among, yes, as it should be, but let’s work on building that community into something authentic and affirming.

 

 

 

 

 

GENDER QUEER (Book Review)

By Maia Kobabe

 

(Oni Press, 2022)

 

 

I have the whole banned books brouhaha to thank for leading me to Gender Queer: A Memoir. It’s a graphic novel that may have otherwise escaped my gaydar. I’m the better for reading it.

 

Gender Queer is a quick read that should be widely read. It’s not dramatic in the events that are told. What’s remarkable is the journey the author and illustrator has taken in coming to terms with eir identity. (Finding the “right” pronouns for Maia is its own long, arduous, thoughtful pursuit, leading finally to adopting e, em, eir. I had heretofore been unaware of these pronouns. If you’re rolling your eyes over the pronoun “issue,” all the more reason to read this book. Seek to understand instead of judging what you don’t.)

 

There is a lot of talk about sex talk in the book, but all of it is relevant in Kobabe’s search for discovering eir identity. The exploration is informative but not titillating. It reminded me of all the matter-of-fact sex ed classes I’ve attended as a teacher and a principal, my presence required ostensibly to ensure the students are respectful and to bear witness in case someone discloses an experience that might be construed as abuse or an assault for which follow-up is required. 

 

References to masturbation—how nice to get beyond “you’ll go blind”—include a book ban-triggering drawing of Maia conjuring up an image of men with erections in ancient Greece, one man reading and almost touching the other’s penis. While the drawing is clear, it does not seem intended to arouse. If the banning brood paid any attention to the words below the drawing, their trumped up indignance would lose its luster: 

The more I had to interact with my genitals the less 

likely I was to reach a point of any satisfaction. 

The best fantasy was one that didn’t require any 

physical touch at all.

That’s right, kiddos. Don’t touch your privates! This seems like the kind of message prudish banners would like.

 

While we’re on the sex stuff, there’s talk about buying a vibrator. Maia uses it once. “It’s not that exciting because I don’t really like it.” E gives it to eir sister, with whom e has a trusting, close connection. At the age of twenty-five, Maia goes on a second date with a woman and says, “I’ve never had sex.” Again, sex-repressed book banners should be applauding. The author is giving a voice to the notion that sex isn’t everything; in fact, sometimes it’s nothing. 

 

The other page that book banners specifically object to portrays two graphic novel cells in which the girlfriend performs oral sex on adult Maia or, at least, an appendage attached to Maia: a strap-on penis. Yes, a sex toy, drawn as blandly as possible. Admittedly, the images may give pause. A depiction of the toy while it’s not worn would have diluted any possible objection, but that’s not the choice Kobabe and the publisher made. It’s nothing more erotic than putting a condom over a banana in a high school sex ed class. The author makes clear e doesn’t like it. 

 

Later, e rejoices in realizing, “I never have to date anyone” and “I don’t even have to care about sex.” If the cells depicting Greek men (page 139) or the strap-on (page 171) were postcards available in a high school, the distribution might indeed be shut down, but in the larger context of this graphic novel and the messages provided, any hoopla is overblown. These three cells are an excuse to try to deny access to a book about gender blurring and alternative pronouns.

 

The author’s journey does not seek to go from being born female to representing as male. “I don’t want a beard, and I don’t want my voice to change. I don’t want MORE gendered traits, I want LESS.”[1]

 

I can’t understand how that should be a problem for anyone. There will be a lot of trial and error in terms of friends, family and colleagues using non-gendered pronouns. Kobabe provides many examples of this. People mess up, but they are earnestly and respectfully trying. It reminds me of the adjustment period friends and family go through in coming to terms with someone coming out as queer. The individual’s process took time; likewise, so does the understanding of those around them. I especially appreciated the inclusion of Maia’s aunt, a “lesbian feminist,” who is honest about her struggle to understand:

If you ask me to start using new pronouns for you, 

of course I will. But I’d like you to explain why.

Right now I don’t understand and I’m going

to keep asking until I do.

This particular struggle goes largely unspoken, one in which older gays and lesbians haven’t been able to keep up with an evolution in queer identity wherein there are more options in terms of defining oneself. Online and in a few conversations I’ve had with gay men, the reflex by some is to resist or reject change. Everyone struggles with change. It presents new challenges; it means the person trying/having to change may mess up; it means altering what seemed to be known and established. Sometimes, even in the queer “community,” that doesn’t play out well. I appreciate the aunt’s honesty and her willingness to listen, learn and grow.

 

Maia Kobabe

I learned from reading this book. I have a person’s example, through memoir, to add context to understanding a path to nonbinary identity and to appreciate how this personal search and decision does not come on a whim. I hope young people will access this book, sidestepping any bans to get their hands on it. The book will help those who are struggling to understand their relationship with gender and sexuality. It will help them understand peers who are trying to figure out their own issues. As well, I hope older folks with seemingly fixed minds will be open enough to give Gender Queer a read, allowing the concepts, contexts and personal testimonial simmer long after it is finished.

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

---

[1] This is why the e, em, eir prounouns make particular sense. Not he or she, the h/sh has been lopped off…just e. Not them, just em. Not their, just eir. Any gender connotations are gone.