I often think about the veracity of the idea that movements for equal rights often fail due to dividing and subdividing. Or that the movement really only brings about the rights for a select few, in the end. That someone is always going to draw the short straw. Is it possible to be really all inclusive? Should we be? Where do we draw the boundaries of our community? Do we say, this is US and that is THEM? We wish to maintain the semblance of an organized, united community, but do we allow bleeding borders? What visa do you need to enter the GLBTQA soup? Do we become like a colonized country - divided up by the conquerors without rhyme or reason to simply lead us into destroying ourselves (so they don’t have to)?

An example of this division to gain rights for some and not others occurred around the ERA. Some LGB folks were willing to sacrifice their trans brothers and sisters in order to gain rights for themselves. As many know the Equal Rights Amendment was initially trans-inclusive, but then big money LGB rights groups (mostly the Human Rights Campaign) pushed under the table for the trans section to be removed - thus in theory making the bill more likely to pass. In the end it still didn’t pass, and the HRC’s image was badly tainted. But then, on the other side of this sword, is the idea that the trans-rights movement should be driven from the gender-rights/feminist movement - not really in the GLB movement.

As a community we frequently argue about who is “allowed” to be in the community. Who is “gay enough”? What words to we use to define ourselves? There is even a divide between younger and older generations - those who welcome the all-encompassing language of “queer” and those who still remember how frequently it was shouted at them as a slur from car windows. The poster men and women for the gay community are typically white, urban, middle to upper class - this is clearly problematic. We still argue over allowing bisexuals “in” when they are with someone of the opposite sex. And don’t even get me started on the arguments over the “bisexual trend.” Do we consider the fetishists, the polyamorists, the asexual persons to be a part of the queer community? A part of the gay community?

So I open the question to the floor. Who is a part of the GLBTQ alphabet? What words do we use? Who is in the queer or gay communities? If we fight for the right for same-sex marriage, can we also fight for poly marriage? Do we say, this is us and that is them?

-butch