Last week, the U. S. Commission on Civil Rights held a briefing entitled “Examining Workplace Discrimination Against Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Americans” (you can watch the first panel here). Its purpose was to discuss the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, which would extend Federal anti-discrimination coverage to the categories of “sexual orientation” and “gender identity.”
Among other things, the proceedings demonstrate a specific reason why opposition to the measure is so difficult. It is signaled well by the oral testimony of Mara Keisling, Executive Director of National Center for Transgender Equality, which you can read and which you can watch starting at 5:26:30. The power of the testimony is simple. Human beings, our fellow citizens, are suffering profound distress.
What I most want the Commission to understand today is that right now, in 2015, transgender people are traumatized. They’re traumatized economically, culturally and physically.
And:
In my 15 year career in this movement, I’ve never seen our community this way and I want to tell you about it.
And:
. . . transgender people are under siege and traumatized economically with an unemployment rate twice the national average. We are four times more likely than non-transgender people to live on less than $10,000 a year. And for transgender people who live at the intersection of transphobia and other kinds of marginalization like racism, or ableism or ageism, it is so much worse than that.
And:
. . . as we win so much positive policy change—the policy advances that my colleagues here have talked about—it remains true that every day real tragedies are happening to lots of real transgender people. People are dying.
And:
But what I really want you to understand today is that transgender people in 2015 are under siege, are on edge, are traumatized, and I thank you very much for having us here today.
What argument can be made against this cry of the heart? Who wants to stand up and deny suffering? The preceding person on the panel spoke against the ENDA revisions by noting mostly the costly and unreasonable litigation that will follow, but you can see how feeble that objection is relative to the pain of these vulnerable souls. So some businesses have to pay a few dollars more—isn’t that worth the healing that will go with it?
Given our current cultural climate and the values of equality, diversity, tolerance, and non-judgmentalism, I see no effective answer to these emotional pleas. There are principled answers, yes, but none that pass muster in public settings.
Mark Bauerlein is senior editor of First Things.
Dear Reader,
Can I be direct with you?
War abroad. Socialists on the rise. AI upending human life. Endless uproar online. The modern attention economy doesn’t want readers — it wants users enslaved to the tyranny of the present.
First Things is the antidote: literary excellence, timeless truths, and a fixed point of reference in a culture that has lost its bearings.
But we can’t do it without readers like you.
Our goal: Raise $150,000 by November 1 to sustain First Things in the year ahead.
Your gift anchors readers in the permanent things.
Make your Fall Campaign gift now using the button below.
If you have any questions or would like more information, please contact Giovanni Del Piero, Director of the Editor’s Circle, at gdelpiero@firstthings.com or 212-627-1985.
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
The Church in the Age of Therapy
In 1966, Philip Rieff wrote in The Triumph of the Therapeutic that “Religious man was born to…
Canada’s Deadliest Blind Spot
On September 20, the Daily Mail ran a story with the provocative headline, “Our 83-year-old Christian grandmother…
The Faithful Joy of Dolly Parton and Fulton Sheen
Dolly Parton and Fulton Sheen seem to have had little in common. She favored rhinestones; he wore…
