• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

A Look at African-American Trans Trailblazers

Status
Not open for further replies.

Gaborn

Member
Monica_Johnson_topic_article-small_4613.jpg


Though February has passed, there is never a bad time to get reacquainted with African American history makers- the events that shaped our lives, our heroes and “sheroes.” Over the last few years we've been paying closer attention to the accomplishments of Black gay and lesbian people such as Bayard Rustin. But there is another group of African Americans who have shaped our people's history: transgender people.

Transgender African Americans have been active contributors to history, even though they have often been overlooked. Their presence and contributions are not a recent development, but can be traced back through the centuries. Consider the story of Lucy Hicks Anderson, who was born in 1886 in Waddy, KY. She made it quite clear that she was a girl and insisted on wearing dresses to school. The term “transgender” didn't exist at that time, but the doctor who examined her advised Lucy's mother to raise her as a girl.

As an adult, Lucy eventually got married and divorced twice while en route to Ventura, CA via Pecos, TX. Her second marriage-to soldier Reuben Anderson in 1944-introduced legal complications that led the Ventura County district attorney to prosecute her for perjury after it was discovered that she was born biologically male. He asserted that Anderson committed perjury when she signed the marriage license application and swore that there were 'no legal objections' to the marriage. Lucy expressed her conviction in her gender identity to reporters during the trial. "I defy any doctor in the world to prove that I am not a woman,” Anderson said. “I have lived, dressed, acted just what I am, a woman.” The jury convicted her of the perjury charge, but the judge sentenced her to ten years’ probation rather than send her to prison.

In 1953, while much of America focused on the story of Christine Jorgensen (a White woman who was the first person widely known to have undergone sex reassignment surgery) JET Magazine readers learned about Carlett Brown's attempt to become the "First Negro Sex Change." Transgender African Americans actively participated in the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s, incorporating tactics from those efforts into their own work toward liberation. The gender non-conforming African American youth in Philadelphia, PA who kick-started the Dewey's Lunch Counter Sit In and Protest in April and May of 1965 were a prime example of such involvement. It was the first protest specifically organized around and concerning trans issues, and preceded both the 1966 Compton's Cafeteria Riots and the better known 1969 Stonewall Riots in which African American transgender advocates such as Miss Major and Marsha P. Johnson (pictured) were involved.

In 1967, civil rights and transgender advocate Lady Java stood up against discrimination and struck the blows that eventually brought down the odious codes used by the LAPD to harass her and other LGBT people in Los Angeles. Meanwhile, the Johns Hopkins Gender Program in Baltimore opened its doors and welcomed one of its first patients, an African-American transwoman named Avon Wilson. In the 70s, 80s and 90s, Black transpeople played key roles in the emerging trans advocacy movement. A. Dionne Stallworth helped organize and sign the incorporation papers of GenderPac. The late Alexander John Goodrum was not only a founder of TGNet Arizona, but sat on the City of Tucson's LGBT commission. Lorrainne Sade Baskerville became an award winning leader in Chicago, a role which was eventually picked up by the late Lois Bates.

Dawn Wilson and I were part of a team that founded the National Transgender Advocacy Coalition (NTAC) in 1999, a multicultural trans advocacy organization. Zion Johnson became the first African-American chair of FTMInternational, while Trans People of Color Coalition (TPOCC) founder Kylar Broadus became the board chair of the National Black Justice Coalition. We also can't forget the people like Justina Williams, Patricia Underwood, KK Logan, Diamond Stylz, Patti Shaw, Diana Taylor, and countless others who stood up for their human rights when they were trampled on by others. They have advanced the movement toward equality for transgender people.

On a sadder note, we can never forget our fallen transpeople. Rita Hester's 1998 murder was the impetus to organize the now worldwide memorial service we call the Transgender Day of Remembrance. And yes, Black transpeople were (and still are) making breakthroughs inside and outside the LGBT community. Currently four of us, Dawn Wilson (2000) Dr. Marisa Richmond (2002), myself (2006) and Rev. Earline Budd (2010) have won the IFGE Trinity Award, the trans community's highest award for outstanding service in advocacy. We IFGE Trinity winners, along with countless other heroes and sheroes organizing locally, continue to serve the trans community in various ways and make trans history in the process.

The breakthroughs continue. Kye Allums last year became the first openly trans NCAA Division One athlete. Tona Brown became the first transperson of any ethnicity to perform for a sitting U.S. president. Isis King, Laverne Cox and Janet Mock continue to shine in various fields. Jordana LeSesne, Foxxjazzell, Alyras DeCygne and Katey Red join Tona Brown as trailblazers in various music genres. As for the future, we can hope to see even more Black trans history be made in the second decade of the 21st century and beyond.

Story Here
 
....and an entire board collectively held it's breath and decided whether to post or not.

Congratulations to these brave and unsung people.
 
....and an entire board collectively held it's breath and decided whether to post or not.

Congratulations to these brave and unsung people.

I think your last line is very well said. It's frustrating that a thread like this has to be controversial though. Every movement has it's heroes and I think most of GAF at the LEAST believes trans people deserve dignity and respect. I think Lucy's story also is a good reminder that trans people like every other group have been around for a long time (and I have no doubt they predate even her by a good margin in reality). It's a neat look at history and as you said, brave and unsung people.
 
I think your last line is very well said. It's frustrating that a thread like this has to be controversial though. Every movement has it's heroes and I think most of GAF at the LEAST believes trans people deserve dignity and respect. I think Lucy's story also is a good reminder that trans people like every other group have been around for a long time (and I have no doubt they predate even her by a good margin in reality). It's a neat look at history and as you said, brave and unsung people.

Indeed.

Though it's often hard to find time to recognize everyone who has made their impact and sacrifices, it's nice to see something like this being laid out for all to see.
 
I think your last line is very well said. It's frustrating that a thread like this has to be controversial though. Every movement has it's heroes and I think most of GAF at the LEAST believes trans people deserve dignity and respect. I think Lucy's story also is a good reminder that trans people like every other group have been around for a long time (and I have no doubt they predate even her by a good margin in reality). It's a neat look at history and as you said, brave and unsung people.

It's Lucy that I found fascinating. I know it's naive, but the idea that there were transgender African-Americans fighting for their rights 150 years ago blows my mind. It feels like something that has only really been in the spotlight since the late 60's / early 70's.

Unfortunately, finding more information on Lucy doesn't seem to be that easy. I did find a little more (+ a photo) here though.

Interesting stuff.
 
It's Lucy that I found fascinating. I know it's naive, but the idea that there were transgender African-Americans fighting for their rights 150 years ago blows my mind. It feels like something that has only really been in the spotlight since the late 60's / early 70's.

Unfortunately, finding more information on Lucy doesn't seem to be that easy. I did find a little more (+ a photo) here though.

Interesting stuff.

My sentiments exactly. Wow.
 
I know where you're trying to go but this really isn't helping.
 
Interesting that Kye Allums can't have surgery if he wants to stay on the women's team. I could see hormones as a PED but what's the issue with surgery?
 
You don't know because I'm not trying to go anywhere. I thought the story was interesting, that's it.
Right.

Either way, this story was important for a lot more reasons than just her struggle. Despite what many want to believe, the civil rights movement wasn't past exploitation and attention grabs in some spots. I never read her full story before, but I've brought this event up in the past here. Its never been clear, but its hardly been a case of straight forward 'unity'.
 
You don't know because I'm not trying to go anywhere. I thought the story was interesting, that's it.

It undoubtedly is a good story, it's just that the timing could've been better. It's been a long and fraught February and we've got another 'hot-button' topic culling people as we speak.

Still, none of that is the fault of the people in the OP.
 
It undoubtedly is a good story, it's just that the timing could've been better. It's been a long and fraught February and we've got another 'hot-button' topic culling people as we speak.

Still, none of that is the fault of the people in the OP.

Exactly. And in truth, because I worried how some people would take it I almost didn't post it right now. Still, I think it is ultimately an important story and it's one that even people that have issues with the other topic don't really have a reason to object to. I mean, I assume in the other topic most of the problem is with the idea of being with someone who is trans, not with trans people themselves so I think it's a different issue. Therefore, I basically decided the reactions in the other topic shouldn't affect this topic which I would have posted even if the other topic didn't happen.
 
I hear you, but what am I supposed to discuss or say? "Oh wow, look at how things are exactly the same! This changes everything!" They're not the same. This doesn't change the issues that many have, and its a bit offputting that we need to throw out yet another hotbutton thread where people are dead afraid of posting in because they're made too uncomfortable to discuss a topic that is extremely foreign to begin with.
Exactly. And in truth, because I worried how some people would take it I almost didn't post it right now. Still, I think it is ultimately an important story and it's one that even people that have issues with the other topic don't really have a reason to object to. I mean, I assume in the other topic most of the problem is with the idea of being with someone who is trans, not with trans people themselves so I think it's a different issue. Therefore, I basically decided the reactions in the other topic shouldn't affect this topic which I would have posted even if the other topic didn't happen.
This doesn't help that in the slightest.

Like I said before, I've always discussed her situation and other similar ones as a part of exploitation within the black community during the civil rights movement. Though intentions were good, people were taken advantage of and used. This is my first time hearing the story from this angle though, and I do appreciate the added perspective. But again, the timing on this isn't going to make me do too much else other than roll my eyes.

The issue stated is one of the same issues I presented in the other thread last night - I, and many others apparently, have an issue seeing a person the same as they see a transperson. It is not a belittling, at least not for me, but it is a marker not easily ignored.
 
I hear you, but what am I supposed to discuss or say? "Oh wow, look at how things are exactly the same! This changes everything!" They're not the same. This doesn't change the issues that many have, and its a bit offputting that we need to throw out yet another hotbutton thread where people are dead afraid of posting in because they're made too uncomfortable to discuss a topic that is extremely foreign to begin with.

What are you even talking about? This is an article from Ebony magazine about trans people. I'm sure there have been other articles about trans people in other magazines that never even mentioned a black person but this happened to focus on that subset of the community. This has nothing to do with anything you seem to be implying. Stop looking for what is not there. I'm not posting it with an ulterior motive and I'm not trying to convince people that have a problem with trans people of anything. For people that don't? Maybe it's just an interesting read. Personally I've always found people's stories of heroism in the face of bigotry to be fascinating regardless of race, religion, ethnicity, whatever. I've always identified with people that stand up and are true to themselves even in the face of social pressure.

This doesn't help that in the slightest.

Ok...

Like I said before, I've always discussed her situation and other similar ones as a part of exploitation within the black community during the civil rights movement. Though intentions were good, people were taken advantage of and used. This is my first time hearing the story from this angle though, and I do appreciate the added perspective. But again, the timing on this isn't going to make me do too much else other than roll my eyes.

I guess from my perspective I see her as a person being told by the state she is not who she is and cannot live as she wishes. She was black, which obviously considering the era we're talking about added an extra bit to the story, but I saw her as a person first.

The issue stated is one of the same issues I presented in the other thread last night - I, and many others apparently, have an issue seeing a person the same as they see a transperson. It is not a belittling, at least not for me, but it is a marker not easily ignored.

This story really has nothing to do with the other thread though. You don't need to jump on a story like this and try to read some agenda into it. I honestly had none when I posted it except I found the story interesting. I WAS conscious of the possibility some people would see it as you do but I did not intend it that way.

In any case it would be nice if you kept your concerns about the other thread... IN that other thread. No need to bring that into this one.
 
Gaborn, weren't you against the passing of the Civil Rights Act? Last I checked, you believed it was unnecessary.
 
Lucy's story is incredibly inspiring to me. I can't even begin to imagine living with the amount of prejudice she must have faced. It really does show that the best way to live one's life is with honesty and pride in one's identity, no matter what.
 
Gaborn, weren't you against the passing of the Civil Rights Act? Last I checked, you believed it was unnecessary.

Yes and no. What I said was that I think you could make an argument for the CR64 in the short term of the era. I analogized it to training wheels. My ideal society the government would NEVER be allowed to discriminate (thus in this case the government discriminating against a tg woman in marriage) but that I don't have a big problem with private business discriminating. I COULD however see a short term need for the CR64 in full to sort of shake loose some of the institutional prejudices. I don't believe it's necessary today in the same way.

Keep in mind in that era the Jim Crow south had many states and city level ordinances not merely ALLOWING segregation but REQUIRING. So that itself justifies to some extent the federal government stepping in at the time. But just as the Supreme Court has said Affirmative Action cannot last forever...
 
What are you even talking about? This is an article from Ebony magazine about trans people. I'm sure there have been other articles about trans people in other magazines that never even mentioned a black person but this happened to focus on that subset of the community. This has nothing to do with anything you seem to be implying. Stop looking for what is not there. I'm not posting it with an ulterior motive and I'm not trying to convince people that have a problem with trans people of anything. For people that don't? Maybe it's just an interesting read. Personally I've always found people's stories of heroism in the face of bigotry to be fascinating regardless of race, religion, ethnicity, whatever. I've always identified with people that stand up and are true to themselves even in the face of social pressure.
How can I, and other members of the blackgaf, think that this is anything BUT when your timing is just so perfect? I try to bridge a little gap and stick my neck out for other people lurking to get a better sense of the issue in the other thread then you open up another topic that doesn't do anything but play connect the dots.
I guess from my perspective I see her as a person being told by the state she is not who she is and cannot live as she wishes. She was black, which obviously considering the era we're talking about added an extra bit to the story, but I saw her as a person first.
Even in the article, its plain to see the far reaching effects of this story. However, each of those institutions listed is... 'lacking an impact' on anything other than their own circles and small pockets of persons here and there. But again, why? When you know that this is seen by 99% of people as "oh fuck, I don't want to get banned - better not even touch it" topic. You want to help spread the word, educate, enlighten, make things easier and bridge the gap - this isn't the way.



This story really has nothing to do with the other thread though.
So you just cruise through Ebony.com in your free time? Word.
You don't need to jump on a story like this and try to read some agenda into it. I honestly had none when I posted it except I found the story interesting. I WAS conscious of the possibility some people would see it as you do but I did not intend it that way.

In any case it would be nice if you kept your concerns about the other thread... IN that other thread. No need to bring that into this one.
No one would even touch this thread. The LBGT community here is always looking for ways to get people to do more than tolerate but posting stories like this, creating the climate that is here now where people would rather run and hide than be honest and try to discuss (however wrong they may be and abrasive as they come across) is not helping. And I find it very hard to believe that this isn't following your history in the past of only emphasizing your own side of the debate. Others do as well.
 
How can I, and other members of the blackgaf, think that this is anything BUT when your timing is just so perfect? I try to bridge a little gap and stick my neck out for other people lurking to get a better sense of the issue in the other thread then you open up another topic that doesn't do anything but play connect the dots.

Maybe the story isn't all about you?

Even in the article, its plain to see the far reaching effects of this story. However, each of those institutions listed is... 'lacking an impact' on anything other than their own circles and small pockets of persons here and there. But again, why? When you know that this is seen by 99% of people as "oh fuck, I don't want to get banned - better not even touch it" topic. You want to help spread the word, educate, enlighten, make things easier and bridge the gap - this isn't the way.

Honestly I don't see why. I mean, intellectually I know it's VIEWED that way. I just don't see a rational reason for it to be so. Let's say this was a story about trans heros that happened to include for example Lucy's story. Same reaction? I mean, when am I allowed to post this story without being accused of possessing an agenda? Or AM I allowed to post it?

So you just cruise through Ebony.com in your free time? Word.

Or I saw it on HuffPo.

Again, stop assuming an agenda.

No one would even touch this thread. The LBGT community here is always looking for ways to get people to do more than tolerate but posting stories like this, creating the climate that is here now where people would rather run and hide than be honest and try to discuss (however wrong they may be and abrasive as they come across) is not helping. And I find it very hard to believe that this isn't following your history in the past of only emphasizing your own side of the debate. Others do as well.

You know, the victimology there is really annoying. Please stop trying to shit up this thread, you're not helping.

Also, what is "the other side of the debate" as it pertains to this particular story?
 
Helping what? I was just helping you guys in the other thread by laying my honest opinion out there as plainly and eloquently as I could when a LOT of people wouldn't dare to. Then you throw out this and what the hell am I supposed to think? No one was touching this thing at all. The first post nailed it.

And that's not victimology. Its a fact isn't it? The vibe I've always gathered from the LBGT is that they've to be more than simply tolerated, but to be accepted. Don't try and flip that victim card dude.
 
Helping what? I was just helping you guys in the other thread by laying my honest opinion out there as plainly and eloquently as I could when a LOT of people wouldn't dare to.

And I appreciated that. That's why I threw out those other scenarios to see if they would jar out something and help you over the mental block you seemed to have there, see it from another perspective.

Then you throw out this and what the hell am I supposed to think? No one was touching this thing at all. The first post nailed it.

Look at the story on it's face. What agenda do you feel it is pushing? Ignore me, ignore every other poster. What is the story about? Even if you BELIEVE I have an agenda I clearly didn't write the story, so what was the author's point? Why can't people celebrate some interesting stories?

And that's not victimology. Its a fact isn't it? The vibe I've always gathered from the LBGT is that they've to be more than simply tolerated, but to be accepted. Don't try and flip that victim card dude.

You know, the vibe I get is that tolerance generally is the mod's job, that is, they allow us to post different topics on a variety of subjects and you react to them or not. No one is saying you have to LIKE people or "accept" a trans person. Look at McLaren, he's expressed pretty clearly where he stands on gay rights and related issues but no one thinks he should be banned for his opinion because he doesn't go out of his way to call out individual people.

Beyond that it sounds like your objection is more with the mods than with me and if that is the case take it up with them.
 
I'm not even going to go back and forth on this shit anymore. Just know, that, and others, are a little put off by this. Just a little.
You know, the vibe I get is that tolerance generally is the mod's job, that is, they allow us to post different topics on a variety of subjects and you react to them or not. No one is saying you have to LIKE people or "accept" a trans person. Look at McLaren, he's expressed pretty clearly where he stands on gay rights and related issues but no one thinks he should be banned for his opinion because he doesn't go out of his way to call out individual people.

Beyond that it sounds like your objection is more with the mods than with me and if that is the case take it up with them.
That's not it at all.

I'm talking about the general climate. I'm not talking about a mod looming overhead waiting for me to directly insult you or lay out a rant then permaban me. I'm talking about what you all want from the community as a whole. You're way off base here. When you guys post about a thread do you want 95% of people to feel like they can't even ask a question (and you're going to get some ignorant, borderline offensive ones. Its going to happen)? I'm pretty sure you don't. I'm pretty sure you want people to drop whatever misconceptions they have and discuss those topics openly so that everyone can get on the same page. That's what you want right? Not just a killing field every time the topic pops up.
 
I know not everyone who reads a thread posts in it, nor should they if they've nothing to add, but if we're just going by the posts in this thread it looks like you and...you.

Point me to a thread that has a 1:1 posts/views ratio.
 
I'm not even going to go back and forth on this shit anymore. Just know, that, and others, are a little put off by this. Just a little.

That's not it at all.

I'm talking about the general climate. I'm not talking about a mod looming overhead waiting for me to directly insult you or lay out a rant then permaban me. I'm talking about what you all want from the community as a whole. You're way off base here. When you guys post about a thread do you want 95% of people to feel like they can't even ask a question (and you're going to get some ignorant, borderline offensive ones. Its going to happen)? I'm pretty sure you don't. I'm pretty sure you want people to drop whatever misconceptions they have and discuss those topics openly so that everyone can get on the same page. That's what you want right? Not just a killing field every time the topic pops up.

You know, it really is annoying that you're telling ME what MY thought process is in posting a thread. Anything I say in response is going to be perceived in the lens of your belief and if I ignore you well that will just "prove" to you you're right.

Would I like someone who did have a problem with transphobia to read a story like this and magically change their mind? Sure. Guilty as charged. Just like I would like racists to change their opinions, or homophobes, or people that have any sort of bigotry. But that's STILL not why I post these stories. I don't have any illusions about changing ANYONE'S mind. My only agenda is posting interesting and informative stories, period.
 
^The fact is, this is another of what many people think of as a graveyard waiting to happen. Also, lurking and discussing a thread outside of the thread in question isn't beyond the realm of imagination is it? Sometimes people feel that they discuss certain interesting yet sensitive topics more openly away from GAF because they're not sure how'd they come across and they don't want to get hammered for a misconception or poorly wording something and having their thoughts taken out of context and thrown back at them. Whether it be aim, text, irc, another thread, or a PM box - people will discuss topics outside of JUST that thread. The more you know.
You know, it really is annoying that you're telling ME what MY thought process is in posting a thread. Anything I say in response is going to be perceived in the lens of your belief and if I ignore you well that will just "prove" you you're right.

Would I like someone who did have a problem with transphobia to read a story like this and magically change their mind? Sure. Guilty as charged. Just like I would like racists to change their opinions, or homophobes, or people that have any sort of bigotry. But that's STILL not why I post these stories. I don't have any illusions about changing ANYONE'S mind. My only agenda is posting interesting and informative stories, period.

And I've made my thoughts clear on some your threads in the past too, as have others... At the same time, I've defended you as well. But whatever. I'm done derailing this thread any further.
 
Yes and no. What I said was that I think you could make an argument for the CR64 in the short term of the era. I analogized it to training wheels. My ideal society the government would NEVER be allowed to discriminate (thus in this case the government discriminating against a tg woman in marriage) but that I don't have a big problem with private business discriminating. I COULD however see a short term need for the CR64 in full to sort of shake loose some of the institutional prejudices. I don't believe it's necessary today in the same way.

Keep in mind in that era the Jim Crow south had many states and city level ordinances not merely ALLOWING segregation but REQUIRING. So that itself justifies to some extent the federal government stepping in at the time. But just as the Supreme Court has said Affirmative Action cannot last forever...


Your ideal society will NEVER ever take place. That is why bills like the Civil Rights Act are needed. Because there racist, homophobes, bigots of all shapes and sizes that hold power and would love nothing more than to restrict the rights of others. It's the equivalent of saying that in a perfect society we will all love one another and hold hands so defense budgets, military's, courts are not needed.
 
Your ideal society will NEVER ever take place. That is why bills like the Civil Rights Act are needed. Because there racist, homophobes, bigots of all shapes and sizes that hold power and would love nothing more than to restrict the rights of others. It's the equivalent of saying that in a perfect society we will all love one another and hold hands so defense budgets, military's, courts are not needed.

In any case, I answered his question, articulated my view, and I really don't want to take this thread down THAT tangent either. I'm still not sure what any of that (or most of what's been going on in this thread) has to do with the article I posted.
 
How can I, and other members of the blackgaf, think that this is anything BUT when your timing is just so perfect? I try to bridge a little gap and stick my neck out for other people lurking to get a better sense of the issue in the other thread then you open up another topic that doesn't do anything but play connect the dots.
Even in the article, its plain to see the far reaching effects of this story. However, each of those institutions listed is... 'lacking an impact' on anything other than their own circles and small pockets of persons here and there. But again, why? When you know that this is seen by 99% of people as "oh fuck, I don't want to get banned - better not even touch it" topic. You want to help spread the word, educate, enlighten, make things easier and bridge the gap - this isn't the way.



So you just cruise through Ebony.com in your free time? Word. No one would even touch this thread. The LBGT community here is always looking for ways to get people to do more than tolerate but posting stories like this, creating the climate that is here now where people would rather run and hide than be honest and try to discuss (however wrong they may be and abrasive as they come across) is not helping. And I find it very hard to believe that this isn't following your history in the past of only emphasizing your own side of the debate. Others do as well.

Damn, you are one defensive motherfucker, aren't you. You've stuck your neck out? By being a patronising pain in the arse? Every time there is any thread that maybe involves race, you come out swinging for everyone who thinks there may be some discussion to be had,m then you refuse to contribute yourself, saying everybody else should eductate themsleves. After that you then claim YOU can't have the conversation you want because people are being too sensitive. It is old, and it is boring.
 
Helping what? I was just helping you guys in the other thread by laying my honest opinion out there as plainly and eloquently as I could when a LOT of people wouldn't dare to. Then you throw out this and what the hell am I supposed to think? No one was touching this thing at all. The first post nailed it.

And that's not victimology. Its a fact isn't it? The vibe I've always gathered from the LBGT is that they've to be more than simply tolerated, but to be accepted. Don't try and flip that victim card dude.

This post is odd and cryptic. If you have a problem with this thread, you should just state it. And LGBT people should be accepted, whether that's an achievable goal or not.
 
This post is odd and cryptic. If you have a problem with this thread, you should just state it. And LGBT people should be accepted, whether that's an achievable goal or not.

Indeed, like it is some crazy idea. Rubbish.

Anyway, interesting read. Must have been massively hard for them, it's always good to read about people making their voice heard though.
 
^The fact is, this is another of what many people think of as a graveyard waiting to happen. Also, lurking and discussing a thread outside of the thread in question isn't beyond the realm of imagination is it? Sometimes people feel that they discuss certain interesting yet sensitive topics more openly away from GAF because they're not sure how'd they come across and they don't want to get hammered for a misconception or poorly wording something and having their thoughts taken out of context and thrown back at them. Whether it be aim, text, irc, another thread, or a PM box - people will discuss topics outside of JUST that thread. The more you know.

This has more to do with the moderation team/GAF's policies than it does with the people and the topic at hand, doesn't it?

Since this thread has been completely derailed and is tumbling down the canyon, let's go with your quote above.

There's a difference between discourse and "TEH GHEYS R TEH DEVILZ AND SINFULS!" that some people (notable: Juniors) pull. There's been kneejerk responses in similar threads and thus the bans. This "culture of fear" is because people 1) do not read the OP and 2) read the title only and then knee jerk response instead of reading the OP (which is... you know... a RULE on GAF to do) and then get banned for it.

Then they whine because they didn't properly give their reasons why they think "teh gheys" are the "evil and shouldn't be tolerated."

McLaren is one that's notable to me that thinks gays are sinful and attempted (no matter how poorly and misguided) to defend his views. He didn't get banned for these, but he stopped posting them because people jumped on him and had a discussion on why he's wrong.

I don't think Gaborn posted this thread as a honeypot thread intention.
 
Yes and no. What I said was that I think you could make an argument for the CR64 in the short term of the era. I analogized it to training wheels. My ideal society the government would NEVER be allowed to discriminate (thus in this case the government discriminating against a tg woman in marriage) but that I don't have a big problem with private business discriminating. I COULD however see a short term need for the CR64 in full to sort of shake loose some of the institutional prejudices. I don't believe it's necessary today in the same way.

Keep in mind in that era the Jim Crow south had many states and city level ordinances not merely ALLOWING segregation but REQUIRING. So that itself justifies to some extent the federal government stepping in at the time. But just as the Supreme Court has said Affirmative Action cannot last forever...

And this is why I can't take you seriously on any issue relating to civil rights

On another note, I find the never ending attempt to define all discussion or debate over gay rights as "political" or confrontational to be annoying; this is not a trap thread, it's a thread about civil rights pioneers. It's a struggle for civil rights, end of story. These threads constantly reveal a bunch of posters who clearly don't view gay rights as a worthy cause or one of interest. The response is always "oh here we go again, more gay shit." We're better than that. And while I'm friends with you guys and love you all (in a hetero way of course), I'm especially tired of Black GAF being guilty of this.

As long as gays have to struggle for civil rights, they can and should compare it to other struggles for civil rights - including the black Civil Rights movement.
 
Damn, you are one defensive motherfucker, aren't you. You've stuck your neck out? By being a patronising pain in the arse? Every time there is any thread that maybe involves race, you come out swinging for everyone who thinks there may be some discussion to be had,m then you refuse to contribute yourself, saying everybody else should eductate themsleves. After that you then claim YOU can't have the conversation you want because people are being too sensitive. It is old, and it is boring.
How do I refuse to contribute? If anything I'm the last person willing to give racial discussions the time of day. The entire subject is just so filled with ignorance that a back and forth can't even be reached. For example, the majority of people think and act as if the similarities revolve around equality when that isnt the case at all. And when people want to base their entire argument on something incorrect then what else can I say other than "get your facts straight then come back"?

I already explained in my second post in this thread how this particular event is just a new ( and small ) portion of a bigger issue that I've talked about in the past as well. But the real problem I have is that you guys KNOW that threads like these are seen as landmines. I try and promote a real discussion in an established killzone then not even a day later I see something that isn't even fully thought out and admittedly probably off-setting.
 
How do I refuse to contribute? If anything I'm the last person willing to give racial discussions the time of day. The entire subject is just so filled with ignorance that a back and forth can't even be reached. For example, the majority of people think and act as if the similarities revolve around equality when that isnt the case at all. And when people want to base their entire argument on something incorrect then what else can I say other than "get your facts straight then come back"?
I already explained in my second post in this thread how this particular event is just a new ( and small ) portion of a bigger issue that I've talked about in the past as well. But the real problem I have is that you guys KNOW that threads like these are seen as landmines. I try and promote a real discussion in an established killzone then not even a day later I see something that isn't even fully thought out and admittedly probably off-setting.

This post is gibberish. Get your facts straight and try again. Really. Do you not see how the bolded are exactly you not contributing? And the last person willing to give them the time of day? Unless you have gotten confused that is exactly not contributing.

If you were trying to discuss... model airplanes.. with someone, and you said the F15 was a great navy plane and they just told you to bugger off and get your facts traight, would that be very useful? No. They would have been better served by shutting up. And when a better course of option is to not help, you know your actual course is pretty fucked up.

Edit: Look, you want to be angry at people for not understanding, that's fine, but you have to engage with them and try to explain, otherwise you are just a bag of hot air, farting into the wind. It's what every group that is not well understood has to do. You are not special.
 
This post is odd and cryptic. If you have a problem with this thread, you should just state it. And LGBT people should be accepted, whether that's an achievable goal or not.
When did I say that they shouldn't be?

But maybe if people could post without having loaded questions lobbed at them right off the bat by community members then you wouldn't have people looking to run before reading. I'm not blaming the mods at all.

But shit, lets not pretend that this thread was almost avoided entirely until I started this derailing.
 
What the fuck is happening in this thread?

I fail to understand why a story about a hero is a "ban minefield."

This woman is a hero whose story SHOULD be told.
 
I fail to understand why a story about a hero is a "ban minefield."

Probably because someone will say something stupid with the word "tranny" and HeathLedgerCallsAThreadDerailment.gif happens.

I can understand his point, but most of the bans I've seen in these threads are from people that deserve to be banned (IE: drive-by knee-jerk posting with offensive/bannable words and not fully explaining their point). Shit, I've been banned for less at times.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom