Me and We; Call to Worship for National Coming Out Day

 Me and We; National Coming Out Day

Call to Worship for the October 11, 2020 service at Mt. Diablo Unitarian Universalist Church

When we as individuals make choices, we each tend to consider what might be best for ourselves.  This is normal and natural, a way we act to keep ourselves safe.  Something I ask that we consider, though, is how our choices impact others who share our interconnected web of life.

Today we are faced with the consequences of choices made years ago.  As the President said last week; “Elections have consequences.”  Now, years ago, each of us may have been considering our tax situation, our own desires, or perhaps our frustration with The System when we cast our votes.  Those votes have had consequences, however, that have a much broader impact than ourselves.

These consequences are having a profound effect on me, my partner, and many others in my community.  

Today is National Coming Out Day, a day established by LGBTQ activists in order to maintain positivity and celebrate coming out.  Most people think they don't know anyone gay, lesbian, bi, queer, or trans, and in fact, everybody does. It is imperative that we come out, let people know who we are and disabuse them of their fears and stereotypes.

There are a few things each person considering coming out really needs to be aware of:

• You may lose friends and family.
• You’re going to be OK; You are not always going to feel OK, but you’re going to be OK.
• If you want to make it, you’re going to have to learn to ask for help.
• It’s worth it!

When coming out as a transgender person, there are a few additional things to know:

• A gender transition may be too much to bear even for liberal family members.
• Should you try hormone replacement therapy… It’s like being a teenager all over again, both good and bad!
• Your sexuality may shift.

I’d like to disclose that I am a woman who is attracted to other women, and just last week I was honored to be married to Laurie, my life partner, in a ceremony held right here at Mt Diablo Unitarian Universalist Church, officiated by our own lead minister.

I am also a woman of transgender experience, forced to live part of my life pretending to be a man to try to avoid the abuse this culture heaps on anyone failing to meet narrow social standards.

Now, y’all know at least one LGBTQ person.

The consequences of the individual choices made by others have a profound impact on me.  In a 4 page opinion issued October 5, two Supreme Court justices referred to the Obergefell v. Hodges decision that allowed Laurie and I to be married; “The court has created a problem that only it can fix.”  They explicitly want to invalidate my marriage and are awaiting the appointment of a new justice who shares their opinion, an appointment made and to be approved by elected officials in our government.

Elections have consequences, indeed.

As military veterans, Laurie and I were were happy to learn that on June 30, 2016, Secretary Carter and the Obama administration approved a policy rescinding the decades-old ban on transgender persons serving in the military, after a study found no real reason, no real impact on readiness for maintaining the old ban. 

We were dismayed when the current elected Commander in Chief revoked our ability to serve with a midnight tweet.

Elections have consequences, indeed.

The Department of Housing and Urban Development, in a new ruling driven by elected officials, allows homeless shelters to assign individuals to housing based on their sex as assigned at birth.  If I am in a community where shelters operate under this rule, I would be assigned to a mens shelter.  I feel that I would rather sleep rough, on the street, than be placed at risk of violent abuse again.

Elections have consequences, indeed.

When we as individuals make choices, I ask that each of us consider not only our own wishes, but the impact of our choices on:

• The inherent worth and dignity of every person;
• Justice, equity and compassion in human relations;
• Respect for the interdependent web of all existence of which we are a part.

Let us consider this further today, as we worship together.

Commentary on the Alliance Defending Freedom response to the Supreme Court LGBTQ Employment Ruling

As many of us would expect, the Alliance Defending Freedom, an anti-LGBTQ rights organization and hate group, had a few things to say after finding itself on the losing side of the Supreme Court ruling on LGBTQ employment rights.

The Southern Poverty Law Center describes the ADF:

Founded by some 30 leaders of the Christian Right, the Alliance Defending Freedom is a legal advocacy and training group that has supported the recriminalization of sexual acts between consenting LGBTQ adults in the U.S. and criminalization abroad; has defended state-sanctioned sterilization of trans people abroad; has contended that LGBTQ people are more likely to engage in pedophilia; and claims that a “homosexual agenda” will destroy Christianity and society. ADF also works to develop “religious liberty” legislation and case law that will allow the denial of goods and services to LGBTQ people on the basis of religion. Since the election of President Trump, ADF has become one of the most influential groups informing the administration’s attack on LGBTQ rights.

https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/group/alliance-defending-freedom

After Aimee Stephens came out to her employers, the Harris Funeral Homes, and indicated her intention to transition, she was fired, explicitly because she was a transgender person and therefore failed to meet the dress code for male employees her employer demanded she follow.  The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission backed her, and the case was litigated with decisions in Aimee’s favor.  On the opposite side of the case was the Alliance Defending Freedom, representing her employer and funded through it’s very conservative Christian backers.

After losing at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, which ruled that not only was this discrimination, but the Religious Freedom Restoration Act did not allow an exemption in the case, the Alliance Defending Freedom decided to take the case to the Supreme Court.

That court decision has now been published:

“An employer who fires an individual for being homosexual or transgender fires that person for traits or actions it would not have questioned in members of a different sex. Sex plays a necessary and undisguisable role in the decision, exactly what Title VII forbids."

- US Supreme Court, Harris Funeral Homes vs EEOC Majority Opinion, 2020

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/17-1618_hfci.pdf

There it is.  Sex plays a necessary and undisguisable role in the decision, exactly what Title VII forbids. There isn’t any wiggle room in this very clear ruling.

Naturally, this upset the Alliance Defending Freedom, and they voiced their outrage and disappointment on their website today.

https://www.adflegal.org/blog/supreme-court-delivers-troubling-decision-against-harris-funeral-homes

“Redefining “sex” to mean “gender identity” creates chaos, with widespread consequences for everyone.

• It undermines dignity, privacy, and equal opportunities for women.
• It could compel professionals from all walks of life to refer to colleagues with pronouns and other sex-specific terms according to gender identity rather than biology.
• It puts employers like Tom in difficult positions—requiring them to treat men who believe themselves to be women as if they are in fact women, even if that results in violating the bodily privacy rights of other employees.

The bottom line is that ignoring biological reality in our laws threatens our freedoms of conscience, religion, and speech.”

OK, they said their piece.  Let’s dismantle these intellectual droppings.

ADF writes: “Redefining “sex” to mean “gender identity” creates chaos, with widespread consequences for everyone.”

The Supreme Court decision did not do this.  Instead, they simply applied a test.  If Aimee had been assigned a female sex at birth, would she have been fired?  No, she was only fired because she had been assigned a male sex at birth.  She was fired for failing to adhere to the dress code of her assigned at birth sex, while she identified as a woman and adhered to the woman’s dress code of her employer.

Her employer fired her.  Sex played a necessary and undisguisable role in the decision, exactly what Title VII forbids.

ADF writes: “It undermines dignity, privacy, and equal opportunities for women.”

Rights are not a pie, in which a larger slice for one person means smaller slices for others.  Transgender persons, just as women are, are entitled to human rights, the fundamental rights that belong to every person.  Persons who are cisgender (that is, not transgender), or are transgender deserve to live, even flourish within their communities, with freedom to work, love, learn and play.  Both cisgender and transgender persons should be able to build their lives at home, at work, and in public spaces without fear for their safety and survival.  

Each human life, cisgender or transgender, is and should be the prerogative of the individual, deserving of the law’s equal protection.   It is very unlikely that people with a transgender identity simply choose their identity, unlike a freely chosen religious belief, yet the USA protects this choice of religion.  A property as intrinsic to the individual as their gender identity, whether cisgender or transgender, is something at the core of the individual.  The choices each individual makes about the expression of their gender, as a human being, whether cisgender or transgender, affect fundamental aspects of the individual’s identity at work, in school, and in the community, and are supported by our laws and policies, now at the federal level with this Supreme Court opinion.

ADF writes: “It could compel professionals from all walks of life to refer to colleagues with pronouns and other sex-specific terms according to gender identity rather than biology.”

Yes, it’s true.  Professionals really shouldn’t be assholes towards their colleagues.  That’s just... unprofessional.  Professionals don’t typically refer to colleagues with racial epithets, and professionals don’t typically refer to persons of another sex with sexualized or belittling language, either, if they wish to continue their employment.   Colleagues are supposed to be collegial, right?

Oh, and biology?  A person’s being transgender rather than cisgender is almost certainly due to biology, nature and not nurture.  It’s not mere chromosomes, but a complex dance of genetics, the uterine environment, chemistry, timing, and fetal brain development.  This biology appears to set the gender identity, and in some cases, about as common as natural redheads, this biology sets a gender identity deep in the brain that does not match the genitals that determine the assigned sex at birth.

ADF writes: “It puts employers like Tom in difficult positions—requiring them to treat men who believe themselves to be women as if they are in fact women, even if that results in violating the bodily privacy rights of other employees.”

These are not men who believe themselves to be women.  These are women whose bodies were assigned a male sex at birth, but whose gender identity deep in the brain is that of a woman.  These are men whose bodies were assigned a female sex at birth, but whose gender identity deep in the brain is that of a man.  These are non-binary people who decide to live true to their gender identity.

These are people who have made the decision to finally live as their authentic selves, deciding to stop hiding themselves within a false front matching the assigned sex at birth and constructed painfully for the purpose of protecting themselves and pleasing others.  Their gender identity is at the very core of their being.  The choices each individual makes about the expression of their gender, as a human being, whether cisgender or transgender, affect fundamental aspects of the individual’s identity at work, in school, and in the community, and are supported by our laws and policies, as affirmed by this decision of the Supreme Court of the land.

If an employer’s workplace is constructed so as be violating the bodily privacy rights of employees, whether of the same or a different anatomy or sex, that employer may want to reconsider how their workplace is set up.  I know that in the women’s room, no other woman can observe details of my anatomy, as we have doors on each stall.  Mens rooms also include urinals, but there can be dividers installed to afford the men a little more privacy.  There are very nice gender-neutral restroom designs available, should one be planning a significant remodel of the facilities.

ADF writes: “The bottom line is that ignoring biological reality in our laws threatens our freedoms of conscience, religion, and speech.”

The biological reality is that transgender people exist, and are human beings, entitled to the same basic human rights as cisgender persons.  If the existence of these people violates your freedoms of conscience, religion, and speech, I have to ask; what exactly do you expect society to do about this?  

Erasure of an entire population of human beings has been suggested by a few of your supporters, however, I suspect that would be considered a violation of the human rights of that population.

Perhaps, just perhaps, it is time to sit with your conscience, and look deep within yourself to see where these feelings come from.  A deeply held belief system is all well and good, until it conflicts with reality.  Remember that your freedoms end when they curtail the basic human rights of another, just as their rights end where they would curtail your own basic human rights.

Your religion, and your speech are your choices.  You are free to make choices that align with reality and civil behavior.  You are free to make different choices, as long as you do not curtail the basic human rights of others.

These are your choices.  Choose wisely.

Waiting for “a more convenient season”

"First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. 

I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: “I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action”; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a “more convenient season.” 

Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.”

- MLK Jr

Reverend King’s words still ring true, and apply even today to the struggle of all marginalized people to be treated as equals and to dispel the hierarchy of privilege imposed by Western Colonialist culture.  

I hear these words, “Not now.  It’s not your time.  Wait for a ‘more convenient season’, as we have other priorities.”  This saddens me.

Within the path of my own life, I see all too clearly the intersectional nature of the same forces that hold back people of color, the differently abled, the queer community, and transgender people.  None of us quite fit the Western Colonialist culture.  We are all seen as somehow living life improperly, due to factors beyond our control. There’s that taint of the broken concept of ‘original sin’, with our differences seen as somehow being more sinful, thus placing us lower on the hierarchy of privilege.

I think that even those of us involved with a faith that has no room for the concept of original sin have, by being raised and living within a Western Colonialist culture, incorporated the cultural concept into our patterns of thought and action.  There is a subtle tendency to place obligation on those whom we see as somehow less worthy, less privileged or more damaged, even when our intentions are good.

We see this placing of obligation in patterns of speech, those little conversation starters and commentary that some see as harmless, but place obligations on the less privileged.  These often carry demands that others justify their presence, or even their existence, demands that are simply not present between privileged peers.  They may serve to put others in their place on a perceived hierarchy of privilege.

“No, where are you REALLY from?”

“Oh, did you see the dress he is wearing?”

“What are you?”

“You don’t act like a normal black person, ya know?”

“I just don’t understand why you’d want to mutilate your body.”

“No, you’re white.”

“You look just like a real woman.”

“No, I don’t do pronouns.”

We call these microaggressions, although there really is nothing “micro” about them to the person on the receiving end.  Impact is rather different than intention, and whether a person is marginalized by nationality, race, orientation, ability, or gender identity, it hurts to be reminded of having less privilege.  It hurts to be put in what others believe is our place.

It hurts to be told that it is not yet our time.  It hurt when I was 15 years old, and it still hurts to hear this at age 65.  I wonder if I will live long enough to see our time come.

I long for the day when I will not be viewed as being wrong for simply existing.  I hope for the day when simply living as our authentic selves will be accepted by the world, rather than seen as proof of our unworthiness, our sin, our mental illness, or other codewords for hatred.

Is it possible to look to common cause, the intersectional source of much of the poor behaviors that we see as white supremacy culture, as homophobia, transphobia, and the other manifestations that come from Western Colonial culture’s assumption that there is only one right set of beliefs, appearances, and ways to live?   Is it possible to move the conversation towards accepting diversity, not only in race, but in nationality, in ability, in gender, in sexuality and identity?

Or, are we advised to wait for “a more convenient season?”

“Letter From a Birmingham Jail”, King, Martin Luther, Jr. (Southern Christian Leadership Conference), April 16, 1963

https://kinginstitute.stanford.edu/king-papers/documents/letter-birmingham-jail

“The Time Is Always Right to Do What Is Right”, Michelle Paquette, 2019

https://michellepaquette.blogspot.com/2019/01/the-time-is-always-right-to-do-what-is.html

“Thoughts on Privilege”, Michelle Paquette, 2019

https://michellepaquette.blogspot.com/2019/01/thoughts-on-privilege.html

“TRUUsT Releases Report on the Experiences of Trans Unitarian Universalists"
https://transuu.org/2019/01/21/truust-releases-report/

"BORN BAD: Original Sin and the Making of the Western World”, James Boyce, Counterpoint, 2015

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1619024985/ref=nodl_

How Can I Learn If You Won’t Teach Me?

How Can I Learn If You Won’t Teach Me?

Michelle Paquette

In recent conversations, I was exposed yet again to persons of privilege indicating that it was the responsibility of marginalized persons to teach them.  While marginalized persons may have the knowledge or experience that a person of privilege wants to gain, it really is not their responsibility to serve as tutor.  Learning is the responsibility of the person of privilege, and transferring that responsibility to the marginalized persons is an act of privilege.

Now, a marginalized person may very well understand their experience and the issues that they face.  They are engaged with these issues on a daily basis, and yearn for the time when persons of privilege will listen and take in their experience.  That ask by a person of privilege tugs at their yearning, their hope that others will listen, learn, and improve the social environment.  That ask can produce a sense of gratitude, that some privileged person actually values them in some way.

That ask also serves to reinforce the hierarchy between persons of privilege and the marginalized person, however.  Rather than use the hundreds or thousands of resources available on the subject available to the privileged person, whether via the internet, the book store, the library, or professional training and classes, the marginalized person is expected to perform on demand.  That, after all, is their place as an inferior, to accede to one’s demands as a person of privilege.

By insisting that they can only learn if the marginalized person right then and there sacrifices further hours of time going over the ground that they have covered so often in the past, the person of privilege can successfully make the marginalized person question themselves, and the value that sharing their knowledge and experience brings to the table.  With repetition, this experience may succeed in driving the marginalized person away altogether.  

With this transfer of responsibility for education to the marginalized person, the person of privilege communicates that they would very much like to learn, but if the marginalized person fails to respond and educate on demand they are responsible for holding the person of privilege back, preventing them from becoming properly compassionate, understanding, and better connected.  It becomes not the fault of the person of privilege, but blame is dropped squarely on the marginalized person for failing to grant them the boon of education.

This demand, then, becomes another act of privilege, reminding the marginalized person of their lesser privilege, putting them in their place yet again.

Now, as a marginalized person I do care about these issues, and am willing to educate others.  My willingness does not make the education of others my responsibility, however.  Persons who would like me to provide them with information, education, or knowledge need to make a little effort, and show up at a time and place where I am prepared and willing to do this work for them.

It is not my responsibility to educate others.  It is their responsibility to learn, to do the work, engage in even the most basic efforts.  Buy the book, read the article, listen to the recording, watch the video.  Show up for the class.  It is not my responsibility to digest the material and spoon-feed it to others on demand.  

Even marginalized persons have other demands on their lives, other obligations beyond being at the beck and call of privileged persons.  Even marginalized persons have work to do, classes to attend, family to care for.  Privilege does not grant a greater priority on the time of a marginalized person than their own needs demand.

Persons of privilege are not entitled to monopolize the time and energy of marginalized persons merely to sate their own curiosity.  There are other resources available, at very modest effort.  Google it, for goodness sakes!  Read a book.  There are plenty of resources with the information desired already distilled into bits easily swallowed.

If a marginalized person should point out that some behavior is offensive, recognize that they are not taking on the obligation to correct that behavior.  That is the task and responsibility of the offender, to gracefully accept the indication, and do the work to verify and correct that behavior as needed.

If a marginalized person sets aside time to educate others, as a class nor presentation for example, any person of privilege with interest should make the effort to attend.  The marginalized person is offering a gift.  Never assume that the marginalized person will be willing to repeat their class or presentation one-on-one with a person of privilege who failed to attend.  That, once again, is merely an exercise in privilege and serves to put the marginalized person in their place as a person of lesser privilege.

My conversations with people of privilege often feel like I am repeatedly pounding my head against a brick wall.  Oh, sure, if I do it long enough, perhaps I will leave a mark, but it certainly is not comfortable.  And honestly, there are times when I would like to take a break, just enjoy a nice cup of coffee and perhaps some chocolate cake, without having to slam my head into the wall again.

There is no need to remind me that if I only cared about my issues, I should be willing to step up and slam my head into that wall again, surely a small price to pay for a better world!  Unless,of course, the real goal is to slam me down yet again, in the hope that I will go away and stop making the privileged feel slightly uncomfortable.

Are persons of privilege willing to step up, and take responsibility for their own education?

‘The Time Is Always Right To Do What Is Right'

‘The Time Is Always Right To Do What Is Right'

 - Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

We are exactly where we were 50 years ago.  “Don’t ask.  Don’t tell.  Try your best to pass as a straight heterosexual cisgender person.”  We are told to wait, that it is not our time.

We led the protests and were in the front line at Cooper Do-nuts in 1959, at Compton’s Cafeteria in 1966, at Stonewall in 1969.  We were told to wait, it is not our time.  The gay community pushed back, seeing transgender people as “not liberated” for seeking to secure access to competent and respectful legal and medical services, while the gay liberation movement sought to free their community from being seen as a medical or psychological problem.

We are exactly where we were a dozen years ago.  The federal Employment Non-Discrimination Act, ENDA, was to eliminate all employment discrimination based on sexual orientation.  PFLAG and other groups lobbied for transgender inclusion in ENDA, and the primary lobbyist for ENDA, the Human Rights Campaign, included transgender folks in their action.  In September 2007 Congressman Barney Frank polled and determined that transgender inclusivity would cause ENDA to fail, and split the bill into one for sexual orientation and one for gender identity.  HRC endorsed the “sexual orientation only” version of the bill, once more telling the transgender community to wait, that it is not our time.

I have protested the lack of inclusion of transgender persons in modern programs to educate others on treatment and respect for marginalized persons.  I have been told to wait, that it is not our time yet.

I was a transgender person in the US Navy, not out, but a dedicated and patriotic person there to serve my country and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign AND domestic.  Transgender people have served with honor, for decades.  We proudly and patriotically volunteered to serve in our nations armed forces, and we feel this assault doubly on our identity, on who we are.  Our brothers, our sisters, our family and allies have been targeted.  We know the price of freedom, and this test of our freedom and resolve cannot be allowed to stand.  Being transgender but not out made life considerably harder.

Yet, we are told to wait, that it is not our time yet.

https://www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/articles/2019-01-22/supreme-court-allows-trump-s-transgender-military-ban-take-effect

“I had also hoped that the white moderate would reject the myth concerning time in relation to the struggle for freedom. I have just received a letter from a white brother in Texas. He writes: "All Christians know that the colored people will receive equal rights eventually, but it is possible that you are in too great a religious hurry. It has taken Christianity almost two thousand years to accomplish what it has. The teachings of Christ take time to come to earth." Such an attitude stems from a tragic misconception of time, from the strangely rational notion that there is something in the very flow of time that will inevitably cure all ills. Actually, time itself is neutral; it can be used either destructively or constructively. More and more I feel that the people of ill will have used time much more effectively than have the people of good will. We will have to repent in this generation not merely for the hateful words and actions of the bad people but for the appalling silence of the good people. Human progress never rolls in on wheels of inevitability; it comes through the tireless efforts of men willing to be co-workers with God, and without this 'hard work, time itself becomes an ally of the forces of social stagnation. We must use time creatively, in the knowledge that the time is always ripe to do right. Now is the time to make real the promise of democracy and transform our pending national elegy into a creative psalm of brotherhood. Now is the time to lift our national policy from the quicksand of racial injustice to the solid rock of human dignity.”

 - Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., “Letter from Birmingham Jail”

“Letter from a Birmingham Jail”

 http://abacus.bates.edu/admin/offices/dos/mlk/letter.html

“I fought for you.  Will you fight for me?”

https://michellepaquette.blogspot.com/2018/09/i-fought-for-you-will-you-fight-for-me.html

Divide and Conquer works, unfortunately

I am an older woman, attracted to femme presentation, who got this way by being a transgender person.  I have had some interesting things said to me recently.   Women  tell me I am not a “real woman”. Lesbians tell me I am not a lesbian. Transgender persons tell me I am not trans enough, or am a transsexual and not transgender. 

What is going on?  While there has always been some friction between the factions making up the “Q” community (LGBTQQIA2SM+, some 600 recognized identities) recently we have moved beyond friction to see a significant increase in folks who are outright exclusionary.  Perhaps there is a reason this is happening now, when at first glance, we should be standing united against forces hostile to all of us.

In October 2017  the Values Voter Summit, the annual political gathering sponsored by Family Values Council, a strongly anti-Q organization, featured a breakout session on “transgender ideology in public schools.” One panelist encouraged a “divide and conquer” strategy to defeat “totalitarian” school policies on transgender inclusion.

Meg Kilgannon, a panelist and director of Concerned Parents and Educators of Fairfax County, said:

“For all of its recent success, the LGBT alliance is actually fragile, and the trans activists need the gay rights movement to help legitimize them. Gender identity on its own is just a bridge too far. If you separate the T from the alphabet soup, we’ll have more success.”

She laid out a five point plan of attack to the conference:

1. Engage: “Focus on gender identity to divide and conquer.”
2. Educate: No personal attacks!  “If you attack trans people, you become the proof they rely on for demanding protection,” she said. “So don’t play into their victim narrative because in this culture war, they are the bullies, not the victims.”
3. Explain: Use secular arguments to reach a more diverse audience rather than less effective religious arguments.
4. Empowerment: Kilgannon said that the Hands Across the Aisle Coalition—which describes itself as a group of conservative and progressive women that rise above their differences “to oppose the transgender agenda”—includes feminists who argue that gender identity is the “ultimate misogyny” and “erasure of women.”  She said lesbians in the group are concerned that “transing masculine girls is a form of lesbian eugenics.”
5. Elect: She urged activists to run for school board or to encourage other people from outside the “education-industrial complex” to run. She complained that school boards are full of ideological liberals.

The session speakers phrased their opposition to nondiscrimination policies in what sounded like progressive rhetoric, using phrases familiar to feminist moment speakers pushing for transgender exclusion.  Transgender rights were depicted as anti-feminist, or hostile to minorities.  They were framed as being disrespectful to LGB persons, pretenders and predators harmful to ‘the cause’.

This all sounds horribly familiar, and is unfortunately effective.

https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2017/10/23/christian-right-tips-fight-transgender-rights-separate-t-lgb

http://www.rightwingwatch.org/post/values-voter-summit-panelist-divide-conquer-to-defeat-totalitarian-trans-inclusion-polici

Contra Costa Womens March, January 2018

Contra Costa Womens March    

January 20, 2018

Speech by Michelle Paquette

Welcome!

We gather at the intersection of our many paths through life, with our common needs for freedom; we gather to reclaim our common rights, the right of self expression, the right to live our lives as we see fit, the right to control our very bodies.

Hatred, fueled by ignorance and greed for power, seeks to divide us;  by race, by birthplace, even our path to womanhood!  Divided, they seek to control our lives, even our very bodies!  We are not their property!

Dr. Martin Luther King taught us, “Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that."

We gather united by love; love of self; love of friends and family; love of community; love of our country.

We send a message; We will not be divided.  We remain united by love, and are stronger for it.  We refuse to be silent.  We speak with one voice, today and in the voting booth.

• We Resist attempts to divide us and take away our rights.
• We Persist in sending our message of love and unity, in today’s action and at the voting booth.
• We Insist that we have our rights, our hard won freedoms, and no one shall take those from us!

Thank you.