I'm confused.....Since I really can't call myself a member of the LGBT community, there are occasions when I detect some animosity between the different groups and I have to ask what it's all about. Most notably the willingness of a sliver of LGB and allies to toss around the word "trans" as though it were a school yard insult.
I saw it as much the same when somebody casually says 'fag'. I don't necessarily believe that there's transbigotry in the gay community, rather I believe there's some trans-insensitivity, in much the same way that there's gay insensitivity.
All things being equal, I get the clear feeling that the LGBT blogosphere treats trans folks as a side show, little more than peripheral issue and I do get the feeling that sometimes trans folks are given similar pariah status to bi folks. At least, that's the feeling that I get. Maybe I'm off the mark - but it's just my observation.
...
I guess I have a few questions to help me understand what's going on here:
1. How did the T get into the LGBT? What are the specific common interests, besides fighting gender discrimination?
2. Is this difference in image of the hows/whys the reason for the trans community sometimes getting picked on by the LGB community?
First off, I think Dan (who is both a conservative and a straight ally, and I wish there were about 20,000 more just like him) has been drinking too much of the "we're a happy family" kool-aid. "I don't necessarily believe that there's transbigotry in the gay community" -- come now, Dan needn't qualify it like that. There is transbigotry in the gay community, a fair amount of it. In fact, I think it might be inappropriate to suggest that there is significantly less transbigotry in the gay community than there is in what passes for the straight community. Less -- probably in a mathematical sense that is true; significantly less... nope. If Dan really wants to water it down to just trans-insensitivity, I'm afraid I'm going to have to call Dan a trifle naive. But yes... there is a boatload of trans-insensitivity in the gay community as well.
ON to this idea of the LGBT blogosphere treating trans folks as a side show... I'd have to know who he reads when he says something odd like "LGBT blogosphere." I'm guessing that Dan is actually reading the "gay blogosphere" and not the "LGBT blogosphere." Gay issues are paramount in the gay blogosphere... hence the name. All other issues are side shows. Some gay bloggers actually suffer poor reputations on the basis of the excess of these side shows they cater to. I have no idea if bi folks give trans folks a pariah status -- the bi folks are quite good at speaking for themselves. Now technically, 'pariah' DOES mean peripheral, but the word is too loaded. Lots of issues are peripheral in the gay blogosphere... it doesn't make them less worthy, it makes them not gay issues. There's nothing wrong with issues that aren't gay. You just aren't likely to read about them all that often on the larger gay blogs. Fortunately, there are ample other venues for non-gay issues. This is the chief problem with the LGBT acronym... people use it as a one-size-fits-all euphemism for gay or lesbian or bi or transgendered. Such a word is useless. People should stop using LGBT to mean "gay" if "gay" is what is being discussed. Gays are not the same thing as lesbians, gays and lesbians are not the same thing as bis, and orientation is not the same thing as being transgendered. People should say what they mean. One transgender blogger does not make a reading list LGBT if it's otherwise full of gay men with a few lesbians for perspective.
On to the questions:
1. It was a marriage of convenience. In my neck of the woods the 'T' turned up in the 80s. Prior to that everyone used the word 'gay,' the words 'gay and lesbian' (or 'lesbian and gay,' depending on how much we were fighting at the time) or the acronym GLB. My neck of the woods was pretty much the sticks though... I do not doubt that the 'T' turned up earlier elsewhere. Specific common interests? We have the same enemies. The gender discrimination thing is by no means universal. Oh, its popular enough. The only specific common interest I know of between gays and lesbians and trans folk is that we have exactly the same enemies. Beyond that, there is loyalty. The enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend, but in the case of the transgendered, they have always, always been there. The 'T' belongs in GLBT, and the G and the L and the B should cough up what they owe... with interest.
2. The difference of image -- being gay is not a medical condition / being transgendered is a medical condition -- is very likely NOT the reason the trans community gets "picked on" by the LGB community. It is more likely a mix of sexism and just plain bigotry.
There... I'm off my soap box. Anyone else want to take a shot at it?