Gunner Scott at HuffPo:
Massachusetts cannot afford to discriminate against its transgender residents, morally or financially, and it doesn’t need to.
While I understand and even support the basic purpose of Gunner’s post – rallying support for the Massachusetts trans bill – I think that the above-quoted sentence extinguishes the post’s credibility.
Massachusetts cannot afford to discriminate against its transgender residents…
Massachusetts seems to have been able to afford to do just that since 1989 – and, ultimately, who has had any real problem with it?
I mean, other than trans people; we, of course, have long since learned that we don’t count.
The people who, back in 1989, engineered for themselves the special right to not be discriminated against while having the ability to discriminate against trans people haven’t simply blown by trans lives on the way to gay marriage; the’ve blown by eight years after getting gay marriage – and many of them subsequently began worrying about other New England states’ gays’ wants instead of Massachusetts’ trans people’s needs.
But I’m sure that everyone will get all orgasmic when New York’s Marriage Derangement Syndrome-sufferers manage to ramrod gay marriage through that state’s legislature this year…
but I’m sure the smoky soup of the afterglow cigs will prevent the next cases of trans people being exluded from the legitimate economy of New York – in say, Gansevoort or Watertown or Horseheads – from appearing on anyone’s political gaydar.
New York as been able to afford to discriminate against trans people for a good while now as well.