On Apathy

One of the best-intentioned phrases that absolutely drives me up the wall, and one I hear all the time, is "I don't care if you're gay." I understand what you're trying to say. You're telling me that my sexual orientation does not change how you view me as a person*, and I love you for that. But here's the thing: I care that I'm gay, and I need you to, too.

Why? Because we don't live in a world that doesn't care that I'm gay. Quite the opposite, in fact. Heterosexual people make up the majority of the population of the world, of the United States, and most specifically of the governing bodies of my country and state. Many of them, in fact, care deeply that I am gay, and are doing their best to legislate away my rights because of it. In the face of discrimination, "not caring" is not the appropriate response.

I feel the same way about people who claim to be colorblind. Isn't it a lovely sentiment? I can't begin to count how many times I've heard "I don't see race; I only see people." I think this is actually one of the more insidious forms of white privilege (forgive me my gross generalization, but I mainly hear the "colorblind" statement from white people) -- because western culture designates white people as essentially "raceless" (everyone else being "ethnic"), we assume that's how it ought to be. By claiming colorblindness, we're ridding other people of that burden of race altogether. But hold up. Race (which, let's just go ahead and acknowledge, is a cultural construct) comes with a lot of positive associations and group identity wrapped up in it. We're not doing someone a favor by stripping them of their identity. Quite the opposite. We're ignoring an aspect of their personhood because it makes us uncomfortable to think about it too much.

Well, guess what. People of privilege (be that white, heterosexual, male, able-bodied, middle/upper class, etc.) don't get the luxury of ignoring others' less privileged identities. It may make us feel good to say "but we're just the same!" -- it's the exact opposite of othering, right? -- but it discounts the experience of not being just the same as you. Until full equality is a reality, race matters. Sexual orientation matters. Gender matters. Fill-in-the-blank identity matters. Your apathy is not enlightened; it is dangerous. We need you to care. We need you to see us as equal to you without being the same as you.

Diversity is a beautiful thing. Colorblindness is not a thing to strive for. The world is a colorful place, and that should be celebrated, not dismissed or ignored. So please, care that I'm gay; also that I'm white, female, cisgender, Christian, a teacher, a singer, a math lover... In short, care about all the things that make me me. And keep on caring about all the ingredients in the identity soup until everyone agrees that all soup is just soup, period.

*Alternatively, you're saying that what goes on in my bedroom is my own business, which means that you are conflating my sexual orientation with sex, full stop, and that's problematic. But that's another issue for another post.

Edit: As it so often turns out, someone else already said it better. Thanks for the heads-up, Aadil.


Update on SB 65-70

UPDATE: The bill has been vetoed by Student Body President John Claybrook. Thank you for doing the right thing. You can read his open letter in The Eagle article reporting on the decision.

Initial reactions to SB 65-70: The Religious Funding Exemption Bill here.

Local media has continued to cover the hubbub around the Texas A&M Student Senate bill that passed Wednesday night, and I am impressed with the quality of their research and reporting. Today's cover story in The Eagle clarifies a number of things about the bill, including the fact that the student senators who wrote it didn't do their homework:
The bill's authors argued before the senate Wednesday night that students could already opt out of paying fees based on religious reasons, a fact A&M officials were not prepared to answer late Wednesday night. The ambiguity was cleared up Thursday. 
"I've been here for 40 years and I've never seen anything that would permit a student to opt out of paying a fee," said Bob Piwonka, executive director of Student Business Services. "I'm not aware of anything like that that allows a student to opt out of paying a specific fee." 
The university has a process that allows students to opt out of paying the university in various ways, but payment of a specific fee is not open to appeal, Piwonka said. Furthermore, the exceptional circumstances laid out in the appeal process do not include religious exemptions, he said, adding that he had no idea where the student senators got the idea. [emphasis mine]
So not only was it a bigoted, discriminatory piece of legislation, it was a piece of legislation not even based on facts. Slow clap for the senate. On the one hand, it is clear that this bill is going nowhere, which is a relief. On the other hand, it throws the bad faith of the authors into even sharper focus. The emotional harm of these events has already been inflicted, and our work here is far from done. We must continue to support the campus LGBT community in any way possible.

On a related positive note, Zedler withdrew his amendment to defund campus LGBT resource centers. It's a bad day for the bigots.


Reflections on Student Government

Last night, SB 65-70: The Religious Funding Exemption Bill (formerly The GLBT Funding Opt-Out Bill) passed the Texas A&M Student Senate with a vote of 35-28 or 33-30, depending whom you ask (an official tally hasn't been released). The vote came after nearly three hours of testimonies from students and student organizations, followed by debate among the senators. The crowd of students, faculty and community members who came to witness the hearing packed the Governance room and overflowed into the hall, an empty meeting room, and eventually a restaurant in the student center, where live streams had been set up. For background on the bill and a recap of last night's events, I'm going to refer you to people who have already done the legwork and research:

KBTX News coverage, with good background and links to the bill and a video of last night's proceedings.
The Eagle article, which ran on the front page above the fold this morning.

Now that you're up to speed, you might be wondering: why do I care about what goes on in the student government of a university I didn't even attend? If you're not from around here, you might not know that Bryan-College Station is routinely referred to as "Aggieland." What goes on at the university level affects our entire community's image and morale, up to and including on the national stage. More basically, in the words of MLK Jr., "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." I was there last night to support the campus LGBT+ community. And in a very practical calculus, one has to realize that these student senators may well be actual senators one day, so we would do well to pay attention to their beginnings. The Aggie network is vast and powerful.

Now for my reactions. My initial feeling last night, upon driving onto campus and having to wait nearly 15 minutes to get into the parking garage next to the building where the hearing was being held, was hope. The place was packed with hundreds of people wearing LGBT-supportive buttons, t-shirts, etc. The energy in the space was incredible. While the livestream in the overflow space was choppy at best, we whooped and hollered for the articulate, powerful testimonies of student after student condemning the bill for its thinly veiled anti-LGBT motives. Only one student, a representative of Texas Aggie Conservatives, spoke in favor of the bill, to more muted applause. For a while there, I fully expected the bill not to pass.

Then the senators took the floor. Chris Woolsey, author of the bill and senator for the Northside caucus,  spoke about the need to protect the religious freedom of students and, in my opinion, did a lot of "mansplaining" about how this was actually really simple and everyone needed to just vote in favor of it and move on. The authors of the bill seemed confused about what the bill would actually accomplish -- they claimed that a process for opting out of student fees already existed, and their goal was simply to publicize it, but as one senator succinctly pointed out, "The bill doesn't, sort of, reflect the statements that you're saying." I wish I could have seen his name card over the poor quality live stream so I could high five him after. After a number of amendments, the text of the bill and the authors' words did eventually converge. There are still all kinds of problems with how this bill would be enacted: how exactly is it determined whether a student's wish to opt out constitutes a "serious moral objection"? Can atheists object on moral grounds even though it's the "Religious Funding Exemption Bill"? How would you ensure that students don't simply abuse the system to avoid paying fees?

Logistics aside, though, this bill does far more emotional harm than monetary damage to the LGBT community in particular. Several students and senators who spoke against the bill became emotional. When it was finally called to a vote, the girl calling the roll of senators had to choke out each name through tears. I can imagine how every "for" must have felt like a slap in the face. As the final tally was announced, many of those watching dissolved into tears.

During the debate, one senator asked, "Does this bill unite Texas A&M?" Unless you choose to ignore the evidence of your own eyes of the pain and rejection felt by so many members of the Aggie family, I don't see how you can in good conscience say "yes." The bill's authors were adamant that the new version did not specifically call out the GLBT community, but you can't walk back that first version -- we all saw it. We know what was in your hearts when you wrote it. We know why you couldn't name any other student fee that religious persons might wish to opt out of. We know that this bill is, at heart, about your need to publicly express, in a socially sanctioned way, your distaste for LGBT people. The GLBT Resource Center is not a lobby group. It is not evangelizing a cause. It provides support and resources (as the name implies) for a disenfranchised, marginalized group of students. The fact that they need services that you don't does not mean that you are in some way being discriminated against.

After the vote, a tearstained, dispirited group straggled over to Cain Hall, where we mingled on the patio out front, unsure of what to do and where to go. Then the lights came on and the director of the GLBT Resource Center unlocked the doors to let us in. That right there, in a nutshell, is what the center is for. To provide a safe space in times of distress. To be a place to go, to just be. And then we made a plan. The students are ready to speak out. In the words of one member of GLBT Aggies (which, for reference, is a student organization, unlike the GLBT Resource Center, which is not -- this has been a point of confusion for more than one reporter), "This was just a battle. We're going to win the war." We in the community will be here, cheering them on, helping as we can and reminding them that the Student Senate does not represent the attitude of everyone in this community.

Here are some ways you can help out:

  • If you live in the area or are a student at Texas A&M, write a Letter to the Editor of The Eagle explaining why you oppose the bill. Visible community support means everything to the students who are feeling so discouraged after last night's vote.
  • If you are a community member, join the email list for Pride Community Center, a local LGBT organization (of which I am a board member) working to support the Texas A&M LGBT community in this fight. We'll be sending out updates about what's going on in the student legislature and how you can help.
  • If you live anywhere in Texas, get informed about Texas Representative Zedler's amendment to SB1, which seeks to defund, among other things, campus GLBT Resource Centers because they "support, promote or encourage any behavior that would lead to high risk behavior for AIDS, HIV, Hepatitis B, or any sexually transmitted disease."
  • If you live anywhere at all, keep on keepin' on and fight for justice and equality everywhere!


Eagle Editorial Board opposes GLBT Opt-Out Bill

On the same note as my Letter to the Editor, published Friday, the Editorial Board of The Eagle published an opinion piece today opposing the GLBT Opt-Out Bill, entitled "Aggies must not exclude fellow students." I appreciate that they break down the bill's multiple issues: first, it clearly discriminates against LGBT people, which is wrong; second, "...the issue before the Student Senate is whether students can withhold a portion of their fee that funds a group they oppose. The answer clearly should be no."

I know that The Eagle doesn't speak for all, or possibly even the majority, of residents of Bryan-College Station, but this is still an editorial I couldn't have imagined reading in my hometown newspaper ten years ago. The times, they are a-changin', and it makes me proud and hopeful about settling down and building a life here. Are there places in the U.S. (and elsewhere) that I would have an easier time of it? Absolutely. But those places don't need me, which is one of the main reasons I'm sticking around.


Letter to the Editor

Appears in today's issue of The Eagle. Hyperlinks are my addition.

A&M Student Senate bill would exclude some Aggies

Here we are again. In 2011, the Texas A&M Student Senate passed a bill urging the creation of a "traditional family values center" in opposition to the GLBT Resource Center, stipulating that student fees would not be raised to compensate, implying funding cuts for the Center. The bill was vetoed by the student body president, but not before the campus and community were consumed by frequently vitriolic debate.

Now, the Senate is considering S.B. 65-70: The GLBT Funding Opt-Out Bill. It proposes that students who, for religious reasons, object to funding the GLBT Resource Center with their student fees can opt out of their share of the Center's funding.

Let's be clear: This is not about money. The amount per student can be measured in cents. This is about allowing some students specifically and publicly to express their disapproval of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people.

If the Student Senate were truly concerned with right of conscience, this bill would have broader terms. Perhaps vegetarian students could object to their fees purchasing meat for the dining halls. Atheist students might rather their fees didn't fund religious groups.

But Aggies are a family. Each student's fees pay into an array of services they might personally never use, but all are essential to some part of the population. By singling out the GLBT Resource Center, the Senate is giving tacit approval to students who essentially are saying they would rather not share a campus with gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender students.

This is important to our community image because A&M routinely ranks as the least GLBT-friendly campus in the U.S. The Aggie spirit is not one of exclusion or division, of giving some students a voice to make their fellow Aggies feel less-than.

For more about the bill and ways to support the campus GLBT community, visit bit.ly/GLBTOptOut.

Board of Directors
Pride Community Center