Seen recently in the Privilegemeisters’ Spin Section beneath a story at Buzzfeed about Out’s list of gay powermongers, a list that is as trans-free as HRC’s and NGLTF’s employment rolls (and, given that one of the four people of color is RuPaul, I think that even attempting to address the overall clorox hue of the list is even more futile than pointing out the latest bout of gay transphobia; countdown, however, to some Gay, Inc., apologist claiming that RuPaul’s presence means that the list is not trans free in 3…2…1….):
the absence of people of color and trans people is a broader reflection of their exclusion in prominent positions of influence in mainstream society.
Actually…
it might just be a reflection of the extent to which both are excluded from prominent positions of influence – or, when it comes to trans women, legitimate positions of any kind by and large – within the LGB( )* rights movement.
* At this point, I think its inappropriate to even insert the tiny ‘t’; the fact is that we are, in all substantive ways, excluded, and exclusion is absence and absence is emptiness.
3 Comments
Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI
ENDABlog 2.0 
Guess Out magazine figured they didn’t need to add any trans people since the Trans 100 handled that
I know you were on that list and, if there is going to be such a list, you certainly deserve to be on it – but you’re dead on the money with your comment.
We’re not part of the club.
We’re not even the help (the last thing they want from us is help; that might prove we’re worthwhile.)
We’re their pet rocks.
Trans”gender,” Trans”sexual,” Trans”phobic”… Out Magazine could have been easily confused.