A response to Presiding Bishop Elizabeth Eaton's Equivocating Letter On Anti-Trans Legislation
The existence of trans people is needed and non-negotiable within the church
The line between denying something exists, and actively working to ensure it does not exist, is virtually nonexistent.
So, for example, when those of a certain ideology deny that transgender identity exists, that denial is itself part and parcel of the work of forcing it out of existence.
Sarah Huckabee Sanders designing a “real women” coozy is not just a crass and hateful assertion of a bigoted belief: it’s literally one exercise in part of a larger effort to erase trans women.
This is called dehumanization. It’s one of the steps down the road toward genocide.
This is why trans activists are not being alarmist but simply accurate when they state that the current cultural attacks on transgender identity are, literally, genocide.
Historically, this has been how all genocides work. Those who deny that certain groups of people (Romani, Jews, queer people, etc.) should or do exist then implement a wide variety of methods to ensure that what they deny is actually denied.
Of course, part of this work is also the work of establishing false equivalencies. So, those who deny the existence of transgender people talk about “transgenderism,” as if transgenderism were a belief comparable, but on the other side from, bigoted denial of the existence of transgender people.
But beliefs are not identities. Beliefs are beliefs. And on the topic of transgender identity, whether we look at it from the perspective of science, or personal testimony and experience, there’s simply no legitimate belief that transgender identity is “fake” or simply “transgenderism,” etc.
—
So now let’s take a look at a recent statement from the presiding bishop of my denomination on the topic of “anti-transgender legislation.”
Initially, the letter appears as somewhat supportive of transgender identity. She begins the letter by stating, “As bishop of this church, I am concerned that the rights of transgender and nonbinary Americans have been targeted all over this nation.” So far so good.
However, within just a few sentences, the bishop then opens up equivocations. First, she writes, “While members of our church hold various convictions regarding gender…” Later in the same short letters, she reiterates the point, “We may have differing opinions on "matters related to sexual orientation and gender identity…”
So, why do I find the insertion of these qualifiers alarming?
Let me offer multiple compelling reasons.
First, they are extraneous. They do not in any way strengthen the point made in the letter.
Since they are extraneous, we might wonder why they were included. On this point, I think we know the answer. In our denomination, we have (likely many) deniers of transgender identity. So, by including these clauses in the letter, I believe the bishop aims to soften the blow.
If a member of our denomination who is anti-trans reads the letter, they will feel “seen.” “See!” they might say, “The bishop acknowledges you can have a lot of different beliefs about whether transgenderism is real thing or fake.”
And if a pastor who pastors a congregation divided among those who believe transgender people when they state their identity, and members who do not, it gives the pastors political cover to attempt to make the broader point of the bishop’s letter, which is encapsulated in this sentence in the letter,
“Our church teaches that we affirm transgender and nonbinary siblings as God's children, who are loved unconditionally.”
See how this works? Within the false equivalency system as presented here, “we must always uphold the dignity and humanity of everyone.” Meaning: we must uphold the dignity of trans and nonbinary people but also the anti-trans members of the ELCA who are actively trying to pass anti-trans legislation.
But to the point, these are not at all the same things, and attempting to offer broad cover so everyone can remain within the church regardless of their gender identity denying beliefs simply doesn’t work. In fact, it undermines the whole point of the letter.
Honestly, how can you “advocate for the full dignity and humanity” of transgender and nonbinary people if you don’t even believe them when they tell you who they are?
Or try this parallel. Imagine if this letter included these clauses, ““While members of our church hold various convictions regarding human trafficking…” Or, “We may have differing opinions on "matters related to white supremacy and racism…”
I mean, is there room in our denomination for those who support human trafficking? Is there room in our denomination for those who actively promote white supremacy?
I’d answer, “No.” And just so, there’s no need in a letter from the bishop to equivocate and “see” anti-trans members of the church. They don’t need to be “seen.” What they need is a good dose of truth from the bishop, which is quite simply that transgender identity is a psychologically, medically, and therefore scientifically established reality, not a “fake belief.” They need to hear, “You can’t really stand with transgender and non-binary people in our church if you don’t believe them when they tell you who they are.”
They need to hear, “I better not see a hateful ‘real women’ coozy on your counter when I come over for BBQ tomorrow afternoon.”
They need to hear, “You may have some weird opinions about transgender identity, but there’s no place for your unfounded hateful ideologies in this church.”
I’m glad you are so privileged as to only have experienced this all as simply “spirited public debate.” That certainly is not what others are experiencing.
Ole do you know which populations of people were killed in the genocide of World War II?