Considering that HuffPo has had some problems in the past with proper coverage of trans issues, I’m somewhat surprised that it appears to have taken the high road with the latest revelations regarding the Chris Lee scandal – namely the fact that said scandal may well not be over.
Gawker is adding another twist in the trials and tribulations of former Rep. Chris Lee (R-N.Y.) Friday, with a report that two D.C.-area transgender women have contacted the publication with stories about making connections with the lawmaker through Craigslist.
In the past 10 days, two D.C.-area transgender women contacted us, each with a separate story about exchanging emails with the ex-congressman. One sent us an ad that Lee allegedly posted on Craigslist in search of trans women; the other sent us a never-before-seen photo that she says Lee sent her after they started chatting by email. Taken together, they present a possible explanation to those who have wondered why such a tame “sex scandal” forced Lee’s hand so quickly.
In January, Lee sought to bring a conclusion to what was largely considered one of the shortest Capitol Hill scandals of all time when he abruptly resigned just hours after the release of a picture and email correspondence with a single Maryland mother.
Fairly straightforward – but what I’m shocked by is the post’s title:
For, you see, that also is fairly straightforward and not transphobic. On the other hand:
Of course, to be fair to Gawker, if they’re accurate about the actual text of the ad, then it is not out of line to have some form of the word “crossdress” in the title of the piece. Moreover, it seems as though two prostitutes have been linked to Lee:
The first woman who reached out to us was a pre-op transgender woman from Arlington, Virginia who we’ll call Fiona.
The other person who contacted us shortly after our story was published was a transvestite who lives and works in Washington, D.C. We’ll call her Holly.
I understand the need for catchy headlines, but why do one that’s going to subsume all trans women under the category “crossdresser”? (And crossdressers, please, don’t barrage me with nasty retorts; this isn’t about turf wars or who is at the top of the ‘T’ ladder; most of you want to be put in the proper category too whenever the subject appears in print and I’m guessing the transvestite doesn’t want to be labeled as a transsexual any more than the transsexual wants to be called a transvestite.)