It's All Good, But We Need More!

Over the past few days, I’ve written about the most transgender-inclusive companies and the events that seem to be leading toward ending the ban on transgenders serving in the US Armed Forces.

While those are welcome developments, they also indicate how much more needs to be done to approach equality.

For one thing, not everyone—trans or cis, straight or gay, male or female—is suited (pardon the pun) to work in a large corporation or to be in the military.  Even those who have the skills, education, talents and temperament to work in such environments may not want to do so.  I think that anyone who has something to contribute should find the best avenue for it.  And I think that many of understand that not all necessary change comes from working within established institutions or power structures.

Perhaps more to the point, though, it seems to me that the changes corporations are making, and the ones the Armed Forces seem to be in the process of making, will benefit those who are already in those organizations and are embarking upon a gender transition.  I’m not sure that much will change for those who have lost jobs, or never had jobs in the first place, because of gender identity or expression.  How does the new protocol at Company X or in the Army help young trans women or men who are homeless or doing sex work because their family disowned them or bullies drove them out of school?

Also, I can’t help but to think that most trans people who will benefit from the latest developments are white and come from at least middle-class backgrounds.  To be fair, this is probably more true for the corporate world than for the military.  But even in the uniformed services, most who would be in a position—that is, those who have attained enough seniority and rank—to serve openly without reprisal are white college graduates.     

So, while I am glad that corporations and the Armed Forces are trying to be more open to diversity, I don’t think those who are making the decisions realize how their efforts are skewed—and how much more needs to be done.  For that matter, I don’t think most of the public does, either.

By The Numbers, Again

This is for anyone who thinks that our pleas for equality are demands for "special treatment":

Title VII Includes Us Now--For Now

The US Department of Justice will now interpret Federal law to explicitly prohibit workplace discrimination against transgender people.

Yes, you read that right.  It was announced in a memo just released by Attorney General Eric Holder. 

Holder's memo means that the Justice Department now can bring legal claims on behalf of people who say state and local employers have discriminated against them based on their gender identity. 

It also means that the Justice Department is reversing its 2006 statement that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which bars sex discrimination, does not cover discrimination based on gender identity.

While I welcome this change, I wish that Title VII could be amended or otherwise changed--or another law written altogether--with language that specifically protects gender identity and gender-variant people.  After all, a DoJ led by an Attorney General appointed by a future President more conservative than Obama could reverse today's ruling just as it reversed its 2006 ruling.

Their Education, And Mine

These days, I rarely talk about my gender identity or transition.  After all, my goal in transitioning was to live as a woman, and for my gender identity to be a non-issue.

But last week, a young woman in one of my classes mentioned a male-to-female relative who lost her job and was, in essence, hounded out of her profession, of which she was a part for many years.  She had to go into another and start at the bottom, along with recent graduates.

“As terrible as that story is, she’s lucky,” I responded.  “At least she was able to go into something else.  Other people in her situation end up with minimum-wage jobs, or no jobs at all.  Or they end up doing illegal things to support themselves.”

By that time, the whole class was rapt.  For at least some of the students, it was the first time they heard anyone talk as I, or the student with the trans relative, did.  Some of them think I’m pretty smart, if I do say so myself.  But I think they were surprised to hear someone talk as if she knew about such things viscerally—I could tell they sensed it—rather than merely learned about them in a theoretical or even vicarious way.  

Perhaps they could see I was on the verge of tears.  Actually, at that moment, it would have been easier to talk than to hold back the flow.  So I took the easy way out.  “Her story is mine,” I intoned.  “It’s one of the reasons why I’m here, standing in front of you now.”

There wasn’t even a moment of silence. “Thank God!” another student shot back.  “I’m glad you’re here,” another said.  “Whoever got rid of you, whoever got rid of you, it’s their loss,” another pronounced.

Before that day, I enjoyed teaching that class:  Those students seemed to have a good rapport and chemistry with each other, and with me.  And I feel present for them in a way that I never realized I could be for any students.  

I don’t know whether this means my experience will play a greater role, or at least a more direct, role in my teaching and other work.  Could it mean that I’ll end up as a gender educator, a role I’ve been resisting?  Or could it mean that I’ll do other kinds of writing from what I’ve been doing or—Dare I say this?—that I’ll have another role in education or in my church?

I’m not even sure that this story is instructive in any way.  But at least I feel good about the way it’s unfolding, so far.

What We Fear

From UNAIDS

Why The Fact That An Adjunct Teaches Your Class Is A Feminist Issue

Someone passed this very interesting article from the Feminist Daily News  to me:

April-02-14

Adjunct Faculty Demand Fair Pay and Benefits

Prompted by a homeless adjunct professor's one-woman protest outside the New York State Department of Education in Albany, adjunct professors across the nation took to Twitter over the weekend to call attention to the low-wages and exploitation of adjuncts working in higher education.

Mary-Faith Cerasoli went to Albany during Spring Break to protest working conditions for adjunct college professors. Cerasoli is an adjunct at Mercy College in New York where she teaches a full courseload, but makes only $22,000 per year before taxes. Ineligible for public assistance, Cerasoli relies on friends for shelter but is sometimes forced to live out of her car - a gift from a used-car dealer in Westchester, NY. Cerasoli has no office, no health benefits, and a sizeable debt-load thanks to unpaid student loans and medical bills. "They call us professors, but they're paying us at poverty levels," she said. "I just want to make a living from a skill I've spent 30 years developing."

Cerasoli is not alone. Adjunct professors - the majority of whom are women - are contract employees usually paid per course taught, and the pay is low. The average adjunct is paid less than $3,000 for a typical three-credit course, but one study found that adjuncts at several colleges reported earning less than $1,000. The vast majority of adjuncts do not receive health insurance, retirement benefits, or sick leave, and many must cobble together a living, often by traveling miles to teach at multiple campuses. In terms of annual compensation, then, adjuncts earn between $18,000 and $30,000, without any benefits, for the equivalent of full-time work, compared to "tenure-track" professors who earn between $68,000 to $116,000 plus benefits.

Some adjuncts have joined labor unions at their institutions in order to organize for better pay and working conditions, but the average adjunct professor is still a source of cheap labor for many colleges. And the use of adjuncts is more widespread than ever. Adjunct professors now make up approximately half of all college faculty.

"I had this idea that I could get a job so that I could have a good income to support my son, and it didn't work out that way," explained Nicole Beth Wallenbrock, an adjunct professor featured on PBS NewsHour. "I'm a precarious worker. I have no job security."

Media Resources: Minneapolis Star Tribune 3/31/14; PBS NewsHour 3/31/14, 2/6/14; New York Times, 3/27/14; The Nation 7/11/13; The Chronicle of Higher Education 1/4/13

The issue of adjunct (i.e., paid as part-time) instructors in colleges and universities has been getting some attention in the media lately.  But this article is the first I've seen that framed the adjunctification of higher education as a feminist (i.e., women's; a.k.a., gender) issue.

And it is exactly such an issue--unless, of course, you believe that the fact that faculties have gone from having almost no adjuncts thirty years ago to having adjunct majorities today and the fact that women constitute the majorities of many departments is purely coincidental.  Or that the fact that every trade and profession that has ever gone from being mainly male to mainly female has lost respect, let alone prestige, not to mention pay relative to the consumer price index.  Or that the least-respected professions--and the ones avaricious managers try to bully--are the ones that employ mainly women.