Wash. Times Posts Transphobic Editorial, Rails Against Transgender People’s “Radical Agenda”
April 05, 2011 1:15 pm ET by Equality Matters staff
The Washington Times published an editorial Monday questioning transgender people’s sanity, calling them “mixed-up patient[s]” and warning of their “radical agenda.” The editorial criticizes transgender plaintiffs suing the city of New York in order to change the gender listed on their birth certificates.
The piece frequently attempts to paint transgender people as being as crazy, suggesting that “perhaps these people are just messed up”:
Practically speaking, none of the scientific (or pseudo-scientific) mumbo-jumbo matters too much, however, because self-identified transgenders and their allies are finding success for their radical agenda by merely asserting that it’s a medical condition and going forward with counseling for “transition” (purportedly becoming the opposite gender) and radical surgery to “correct” their organs and sex characteristics. There is no more debate over the possibility that perhaps these people are just messed up. [emphasis added]
The editorial also refers to transgender people seeking gender reassignment surgery as “mixed up patient[s]” seeking to “surgically mutilate” their bodies:
Let’s leave alone, for the time being, the question of whether supporting and reinforcing a mixed-up patient’s desire to surgically mutilate his (or her) body to resemble a unique perception of “becoming” the opposite sex is “appropriate” treatment. No matter what, official government identification documents should not be changed to accommodate the feelings of any group. “I would just like my identification to reflect who I am,” “Patricia” Harrington, who was born a man, said at a press conference on the lawsuits.
It’s fair to ask where all of this is heading. Could Jocelyn Wildenstein - famously nicknamed “Catwoman” for the feline appearance she achieved through multiple plastic surgeries - decide after years of struggling with her identity that she is actually a cat? With the precedents set by these new policies, all she would need to do to secure her new cat identity is find a doctor to certify that she was undergoing “appropriate clinical treatment” to secure the right to demand that her official government documents be altered to reflect who she has become. She’s already had the surgeries.
The old saying about giving an inch and losing a mile comes to mind. As Sam Berkley, born Samantha, complained in a press conference about the lawsuit, “I don’t feel comfortable with the government deciding whether I’m a man or not.” Strike “man” and replace with “human” or “sane” and there’s not much of a difference. We must then accommodate all departures from cultural norms - which becomes easier as the groups in opposition to the norms successfully erode them to suit their own ideas of how the world should be. This becomes even more tragic - dangerous, even - if we’re accommodating mental illness in the name of misplaced sensitivity, inclusiveness or political correctness. [emphasis added]
The editorial closes by asking that transgender people be treated with “compassion more than complicity.” It’s hard to determine what exactly about the post even hints at compassion, but attempting to describe transgender people as “radical,” “mixed-up,” and “messed up” at least reveals The Washington Times’ complicity with the tremendous amount of discrimination faced by transgender people every day.