I find great fault in Salama's article, primarily I am frustrated by her ignorance. The way I read it, she is saying that people who elect to be transgender should have no rights regarding their freedom to announce what they identify as without discrimination. Basically, that they should take what comes with the territory and deal with it, or else simply not be transgender at all. People do not become transgender on a whim for fun. This is a decision that people make for themselves in order to have a happier and more complete life. This quote, “Perhaps it’s not the state’s place to tell employers, teachers and other people in society they must be blind to an individual’s personal decision” is basically saying that it should be up to an employer that they have every right to discriminate.
In the article, I find the author contradicting herself in an attempt to maintain a balance in what she’s saying, but the effect is actually making her appear more confused and uninformed on the issue she chose to take a stance on. She says that the two laws passed weren’t something to celebrate, but then backtracks by saying that everybody deserves equal rights. She flip-flops a couple more times, and this sends the audience a mixed message. She is trying to state her stance, which I see as being that she thinks rights for transgendered people aren’t as important as other social and political issues, but it shines through more as a transphobia. Her argument is very single-minded and does not take into account the possible other situations that could have the same argument against them, as is mentioned in a comment such as African Americans or Muslims. It is true that nobody is going to be liked 100% of the time, but this is why laws are passed in order to work towards equality.
-Bella Narvaez
No comments:
Post a Comment