Butch Wonders
  • Blog
  • Butch Store: Genderqueer Us
  • About
  • Contact

The Most Interesting Possible Upcoming Supreme Court Case You Haven't Heard Of

9/20/2017

1 Comment

 
Picture
Jameka Evans was a security guard at Georgia Regional Hospital in Savannah, Georgia.  From the beginning of her employment in 2012, Evans was treated badly.  She was harassed verbally and physically; she was criticized for wearing a "male" uniform and having a short haircut, and for not carrying herself in a "traditional woman[ly] manner."  In short, she was being harassed for both her gender presentation and her sexual orientation. 

Evans left her job about a year later, sick of the constant harrassment, and filed a complaint under a federal law known as "Title VII."  Title VII prevents  discrimination on the basis of sex, including sex stereotyping.  The case went to a federal district court, where she lost because the court said that Title VII was intended to protect "sex," not "homosexuality."

Evans then appealed to the next court up (the 11th Circuit, since she lives in Georgia), saying that Title VII prevented discrimination against her on the basis of sexual orientation and gender presentation.  That court, too, ruled against her (and as a Slate article pointed out, the ruling was weird in a variety of ways).  The court separated the gender nonconformity part from the sexual orientation part.  They vacated (basically overturned, but without creating precedent) that part of the district court's order, saying that she could go back and try with that part of the case again.

Evans and her lawyers then asked for something called an "en banc" hearing, which means that instead of the usual three-judge panel, all the judges on the 11th Circuit would have heard the case.   This was denied, meaning that the ruling against Evans stands--at least, until the U.S. Supreme Court says otherwise.

So Evans, represented by Lambda Legal, decided to petition the Supreme Court to hear the sexual orientation part of the case.  The petition (which you can download from this site if you're interested) is terrific, clearly explaining why discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is a form of gender discrimination.  It states, "It cannot be that Title VII allows an employer to fire Sharon for exercising her constitutional right to marry her girlfriend while retaining her co-worker Samuel after he marries his."

Will the Supreme Court take the case?  Who knows.  But I suspect it will, since nearly all the circuits have weighed in, there's a circuit split (thanks to the 11th Circuit), and it's an important issue.  


To go back to the gender nonconformity piece for a minute: it's kind of interesting: Title VII definitely applies to "sex stereotyping" (as the Supreme Court decided in a 1989 case called Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins), which is what courts rely on to explain that gender nonconformity is covered.  Which would seem to mean that trans people are definitely covered, right?  So if the Supreme Court ruled against Evans, a few things would happen that seem like sort of untenable outcomes:
  1. Title VII would protect trans people but not gay people.
  2. Title VII would protect butch lesbians but not femme lesbians.
  3. In a Title VII case where a butch lesbian was claiming discrimination, she'd have to show that she was discriminated against because of her gender presentation and not her sexual orientation, and the defendant could win the case if they could prove that they were discriminating against her because of her sexual orientation, not her gender presentation.

​Anyhow, it's an exciting case with huge implications. Keep an eye on this one, dear readers.

1 Comment

GAY MARRIAGE!  oh wait...  MARRIAGE!

7/2/2015

1 Comment

 
Picture
One of my readers just shared this image from NYC Pride, and it seemed too jubilant not to share immediately.

As you all know, the Supreme Court decided a little under a week ago that all states must issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.  I was really moved by the decision, which was more inclusive than I expected it to be, and it's been so interesting watching people's responses to it.  I learned about it when my partner woke me and said, "Hey!  We can get married anywhere now.  The Supreme Court legalized gay marriage."  I'm butch enough to admit that this brought tears to my eyes.  

Though there's plenty to say about the decision itself, what it does and doesn't do, and what this means for the future of LGBTQ people in America and beyond, today I just wanted to share a collection of responses I've gathered from LGBTQ Americans in response to the decision.  Some are from social media, some from face-to-face conversations.  But I thought the breadth of them might interest my beloved BW readers.

I don't want to get married but I am so stunned to finally have full civil rights that I'm still a little 'high.' When I came out 50 years ago, being gay was loathsome and illegal. I'm grateful for all the organizations that put in the work to create a culture change.

I really didn't imagine this would happen in my time. I cannot even imagine how all the seniors must feel. It saddens me to know that so many never got to freely love whom they wished. They're the real heroes.

I was way more emotional about it than I thought I would be. I just kept thinking that I finally wouldn't have to worry about whether or not I would be able to see my wife in the hospital or whether or not we could adopt each others' kids. Then I thought that it was kinda messed up that I was so happy that it was finally legal for me to have a family.
It was a joy, indescribable... To see years of activism, its fruition, and then to see many who have been dreaming, hoping, and thinking the day would never arrive within their lifetime, folks in their 60's, even 70's. That made those countless marching in the suffocating heat, sleepless nights planning , organizing... Someday, when I meet the right one, my soulmate, I can get on my knee, with the certainty that wherever I am, we can plan our wedding, our marriage... not just a bunch of legalities and notarized paperwork...

Told my sister I am so excited about the Supreme Court decision and she asked 'Which one?'  I felt like I was going to vomit, or like I was suddenly about two feet tall.
I felt so proud that we as a community helped make their dream, and mine come true by standing our collective ground telling this country... we have rights.  We're not asking for privilege; we're demanding rights [that are] rightfully ours. And this time, they listened.

My parents didn't seem to get what a big deal it was.  I told them and they were just like, yeah, okay.  I was like, how am I supposed to be close to people who can't realize how monumental this is. 
I took care of a friend the last year of her life.  She was 88. She told me stories. Terrible what she had to go through. She was kicked out of nursing school for a note she had written. The home she and her partner bought together was taken from her when her partner died. She was shunned from the family business, because she refused to marry. She's been gone 17 yrs now. She would be very happy.

It is a big victory, to be sure.  But it makes me sad that as an LGBT movement, marriage is what we have chosen to focus on.  We used to be radicals. Now we are excited to be just like everyone else?
I'm happy about the decision, but now my mom and stepdad will be on me more than ever to get married and have kids like my siblings, and that is not the life I necessarily want!  I love my partner and maybe will marry her eventually, but I am just a different kind of person and don't want the same life.  The marriage decision doesn't prevent me from feeling less valid in their eyes.

The decision was all about couples, couples, couples.  What about the fact that in a lot of states, we can still be fired for being gay?

Married to my wife in FL and loving every second... I am 48 and never thought I'd be this happy!
Marriage... is a washed out concept in my opinion. Having the same rights is what is important.
This isn't, and never really was, about gay people being able to marry.  Its about telling our young lgbt people that they are finally accepted and respected.  It's about choice and it truly is a wonderful time to be gay and out.
I was struck with emotion I didn't expect. My partner of 14 years and I probably won't get married... but to feel "equal" or even a part of the "norm,"is something of unexpected joy. To have that choice is amazing.

This means everything to me, as my wife and I are expecting our first baby in December. We are in California (married 2 years ago yesterday). Her entire family is in Texas, so whenever we've visited Texas since we've been married, I've reminded myself "we're not actually married when we're here." Because of the Supreme Court decision, we can travel to Texas with our child and be recognized as a family just as we are in California, and our child will never live in a world where their moms' marriage only exists in some states.

I'm still getting all teary-eyed thinking about all this...  I mean, I know we have a LONG way to go before we have achieved true equality across-the-board... but still, this is so much farther than I ever dreamed we would get when 30 yrs ago this-here spikey-haired dykey 19-yr-old gave a ring to my then-girlfriend, and wished like hell that such a thing as marrying her was even possible.

So there you have it, dear readers--a sampling of the breadth of the LGBTQ response to the ruling.  Thanks to everyone who wrote to me with their thoughts.  I hope that regardless of your take on it, you're getting a chance to bask in this victory a little, in whatever way is meaningful to you.
1 Comment

The Olympics and Principle 6

2/5/2014

2 Comments

 
Picture
I love sports (almost) as much as the next dyke, but I have awfully mixed feelings about the Olympics this year.  Russia's LGBT community is under constant, hateful, and often violent siege from its government.  Gay "propaganda"--defined as anything depicting LGBTQ relationships in a positive or neutral light in a form accessible to minors--is illegal.  This includes, as you can imagine, such "propaganda" as holding hands with your partner, wearing a T-shirt with a pink triangle on it, or even just being queer parents.  Just a few weeks ago, the Russian government fined the editor of a newspaper who published an interview with a gay teacher.  An interview, people.  In a newspaper.

Gay people in Russia are regularly bullied, chased, beaten up, and subjected to all kinds of hateful acts.  In a way, maybe it's good that the Olympics are being held in Russia this year, since it will draw attention to the human rights violations that go on in Russia every day.  Principle 6 is the Olympic principle that forbids discrimination on the basis of politics, race, religion, gender, or otherwise--a principle decidedly not embraced in Russia. 

The Principle 6 campaign is designed to raise awareness of the way LGBTQ people are treated in Russia and "
and underscore that Russia's anti-LGBT discrimination is incompatible with the Olympic movement."  I urge you to take the Principle 6 logo and make it your Facebook or Twitter image.  I guarantee that people will ask you about it, which will give you more chances to spread the word.

Picture
And if you're a schwag-lover like me, you'll be happy to know that American Apparel has designed a very cool "Principle 6" clothing line, and it's money well-spent, since proceeds will support LGBTQ groups in Russia. 

I hope you'll spread the word, and help LGBTQ folks in Russia imagine a better world.

2 Comments

What We Talk About When We Talk About Diversity

12/30/2013

7 Comments

 
A few years ago, I attended a professional graduate school at a good university.  Recently, an acquaintance asked me how diverse my 200-person class was.

“Hmmm…  I think I was literally the only lesbian,” I said.  

“But there were lots of LGBT people, right?” my acquaintance asked.  And then she named seven or eight gay men who had, indeed, been in my class.  

In the moment, I murmured something like, “Oh, yeah that’s right.”  But internally, I raised an eyebrow.  Not only were these all men, but they were gender-conforming men, men who went to fancy prep schools, men who use “summer” as a verb and net annual salaries I could live off for a decade.

But in my acquaintance’s mind, we were all people who slept with people of the same sex; we all checked the LGBT box.  We were all undeniably, certifiably, and irrevocably queer.  So why did I blanch being lumped in with these gentlemen?  (BTW, I know a few of them personally, and they truly are great guys.)

I think it’s because the things that made me feel alienated in graduate school did not have much to do with my attraction to women.  In the upper echelons of this particular profession, no one cares who I carouse with or wake up beside.  The things that made me feel alienated were, in order of their significance:
(1) social class
(2) gender nonconformity
(3) persistent lack of interest in making lots of money

The Nice Gay Men (NGM) of whom my acquaintance spoke shared none of these traits.  Yet these are the traits that made me different from my peers, that let me bring a distinct perspective to the classroom, and that will continue to shape my voice in the future. But to the admissions committee, we all looked similar: white homosexuals with good grades from well-regarded undergraduate institutions.  

(Obviously, lots of other kinds of diversity are important: race, disability, religion, ethnicity, and others.  I’m just focusing on one kind here, which isn’t intended to negate the importance of these other kinds, nor of the intersections of these other kinds of diversity with queerness.)

I’m not suggesting that the NGM’s experience of LGBT life is somehow less “valid” than my own, nor that I embody “diversity” in a way that the NGM do not.  But there was something ironic about being categorized with them, since they embodied precisely the traits that seemed so apparently lacking in me: wealth, gender conformity, a lucrative career path.

I bring all of this up mostly to ask the following: when we say that we are striving for diversity, what is it we’re really striving for?  People whose experiences somehow bring different “perspectives?”  Maybe.  But how do we measure that on a form?  Do we want people who were statistically unlikely to end up in the application pool?  Do we prize phenotypical diversity?  Do we simply want the folks with the highest grades and test scores?  And in achieving any of these types of diversity, what role should (and does) queerness play?
7 Comments

Gender Nonconformity vs. Sexual Orientation

5/21/2013

37 Comments

 
Recently I was talking to someone I respect a great deal, and she said something I've often thought as well: many people are more uncomfortable with gender nonconformity than with homosexuality.  Of course, the two often go hand in hand.  But let's assume, for a moment, that we can disaggregate them.

In my work circles, which mostly comprise upper-middle-class NPR listeners, few people care if your partner is male or female.  Same-sex partnership is still noteworthy, interesting, and a titillating gossip source to some people, but for the most part, it's not a big issue.  Homos abound at high levels in my profession, and most are pretty open.  But I have trouble coming up with examples of high-powered women in my profession who wear mostly men's clothing.  If you're a woman giving a conference talk, it's not that big a deal to mention your same-sex partner.  It is a big deal to wear a necktie.  No one else does it, and you're likely to be seen as "making a statement."

For me, this begs two questions: (1) Why?; (2) What implications does this have for my own self-presentation?  Today, I'll write about the former.

Here's my guess: looking gender-conforming still adheres to people's ideas and assumptions about gender--the idea that men "are" and "look" a certain way, and that women "are" and "look" a different way.  If we define homosexuality narrowly (as I think most people do, particularly non-queers), it only challenges one aspect of gender typicality: whom you sleep with. 

It's as if are only two kinds of ice cream, and ice cream always comes in double scoops: one vanilla, one chocolate.  This is what most people always order,  then later they learn that some people order two scoops of vanilla or two scoops of chocolate.  "Fine," they think.  "Some people like two scoops of the same thing.  But there are still just two kinds of ice cream."

In contrast, if someone orders vanilla with chocolate swirls and says, "It's still vanilla--it just has chocolate swirls in it," (or if, God forbid, they order strawberry) this challenges people's fundamental ideas about the kinds of ice cream that exist.

In this way, gender nonconformists mess with people's categories.  A woman in a tie, when only men are wearing ties, is like chocolate chip ice cream.  "What IS that?" people think.  "No flavor I've ever seen."  This is probably why, as Kristen Schilt writes in One of the Guys, when people go from identifying as butch women to identifying as trans men, they become more accepted in the workplace.  As butch women, people viewed them as gender atypical.  When they become trans men, people can say, "Oh, I kind of understand--you were really chocolate all along!" 

As more states adopt legal protections based on sexual orientation, I think gender conformity will be one of the next frontiers.  This is closely tied--though not identical--to the fight for trans rights, providing another reason to help fight for the rights of all other queers, not just your personal subset.

For now, I'll leave the conversation there.  What do you think, dear readers?  In your everyday work lives, what's people's reaction to sexual orientation versus gender nonconformity?

37 Comments
<<Previous
    TWITTER
    FACEBOOK
    INSTAGRAM
    EMAIL ME
    Picture


    ​Blogs I Like

    A Butch in the Kitchen
    A Stranger in This Place
    Bookish Butch
    Butch on Tap
    Card Carrying Lesbian
    ​
    Chapstick Femme

    Effing Dykes
    Feral Librarian
    Lawyers, Dykes, and Money

    Mainely Butch
    Neutrois Nonsense
    Pretty Butch
       

    Categories (NOT up to date...  working on it)

    All
    Accessories
    Adventures
    Advice
    Bisexuality
    Blogging
    Books
    Butch Identity
    Cars
    Clothes
    Coming Out
    Community
    Dating
    Family
    Fashion
    Female Masculinity
    Fiction
    Friends
    Gaydar
    Gender
    Girlfriends
    Guest Posts
    Hair
    Health
    Humor
    Husbands
    Identity
    Interviews
    Intro
    Lgbt Community
    Lgbt Law
    Lgbt Relationships
    Lists
    Marriage
    Media
    Politics
    Polls
    Pride
    Pride Project
    Readers
    Relationships
    Religion
    Reviews
    Search Terms
    Shopping
    Silliness
    Social Change
    Ties
    Trans
    Work


    Archives

    May 2019
    February 2019
    September 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    March 2018
    November 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    April 2017
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    June 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    March 2013
    February 2013
    January 2013
    December 2012
    November 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    August 2012
    July 2012
    June 2012
    May 2012
    April 2012
    March 2012
    February 2012
    January 2012
    December 2011
    November 2011
    October 2011
    September 2011
    August 2011
    July 2011
    June 2011
    May 2011

    RSS Feed

 
  • Blog
  • Butch Store: Genderqueer Us
  • About
  • Contact