In a recent op-ed for The New York Times' opinion section, written by a non-NYT staffer who I won't name (because I don't want to give them any exposure), readers were treated to a generous serving of transphobia. Under the guise of exploring both sides, the writer of the op-ed discusses G.G. v. Gloucester School Board, a case which questions whether or not Gavin Grimm, a 16-year-old transgender boy, may use the men’s room at his school. The author explores what a Supreme Court ruling on this case could mean for the locker room and how unfortunate it could be for cisgender people to have to concede some space for non-binary people in the world.
It goes from bad to worse, with the writer using phrases like "girl-born-a-girl" instead of cisgender, employing sex segregation as an excuse for trans exclusion is acceptable, promoting modesty as the highest value, and insidiously agreeing and validating the ideologies that suggest that trans individuals are dangerous in bathroom and locker room environments. It's a trash fire that I'd encourage people to read only for the sake of understanding its rebuttal.
Chase Strangio, an attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union, powerfully responded to the NYT op-ed, in a Twitter thread that is pure, logical, gold. They take the subtle and outright bigotries of the piece and respond succinctly in each case. Here are some of the best moments:
The thread got the attention of the author, who unsurprisingly was unable to genuinely dispute anything that was said. Let this be a note to transphobic writers out there. We see you and we're not going to let you slide anymore. If you drag our trans community members and feed the ideologies that attack and kill them, we will drag you in return and shut you down.
I think we can all agree with Chase's conclusion.