Identification NECCESSARY in political realm

 

"The problem with legally allowing people to freely and easily declare themselves as transgender is that not everybody is willing to accept the classification. It’s just reality."

In the op-ed, "Identification unnecessary in political realm," Engie Salama argues that since most people are "uncomfortable" with people who identify themselves as transgender, the government should not have anti-discrimination laws for transgender people. Although there were many points in the article that I personally disagreed with, the main flaw that I saw with this argument was, "Why do we have to worry about what "many" people are "comfortable" with?" If humans were to stay within their comfort zones their whole lives, society would never advanced. In fact, the earliest humans probably would have not even civilized, because they would not have be "comfortable" with changes in location and food resources. Although it should not have to be like this, sometimes it takes the most momentous measures to really stretch people's capacities for understanding and acceptance of "difference." ["Difference" is an arbitrary term though, because whose to say what groups are within the "norm" and what groups are not?] While it is true that not everybody is willing to accept people who identify themselves as transgender, it does not mean that measures should not be taken to ensure that transgender people have the same rights and freedom of expression as everyone else. And without anti-discrimination bills such as the Gender Nondiscrimination Act (AB 887) and Vital Statistics Modernization Act (AB 433, the "uncomfortable" people that Salama speaks out would not have any reason to not discriminate against transgender people. So to answer Salama's question, "Is it really necessary to create a law to expedite that transition?" Yes, yes it is.

The second flaw I saw in the article was in the notion that the government should not be spending time and effort working on anti-discrimination laws for transgender people, and instead should be focusing on "fix[ing] our broken budget or [...] other worse forms of injustice." Who says the government is not working on other important issues, just because two new anti-discrimination laws just passed in California? Although there are many other other forms of injustice in society, why does the discrimination that transgender people experience have to go by unrecognized, while "other" forms are addressed? And who is to decide which forms of injustice are "worse" than others? All of these issues need to be fixed.

The third major flaw apparent in the article was the speaker's belief that being transgender is a "personal issue" and something that people "choose to be." Through this false impression, it is clear that the speaker is not familiar with the complexities of gender and gender identity. Although I was first exposed to the idea in psychology class, this gender course has really solidified my conviction that one's sexual orientation/fluidity is not a choice. It is something that is more connected to "nature" rather than "nurture," although the environment and people that one grows up in also plays an meaningful role. So maybe before making broad generalizations and synthesizing false ideals, the speaker should consider and learn more about the intricities and multifaceted attributes of gender and the transgender community.