This is a short piece on some of the learning I did in my Feminist Cultural Studies around trans-feminism. Please enjoy!

When I was growing up, I learned from my peers that “white feminism” was the alternative to the norm, and I ultimately rejected feminism, because it felt fake, inauthentic and did not reflect my own experiences. For a time, I just went with what was “normal” which was conservative and heteronormative because “white feminism” was the only alternative I was given and I did not feel safe expressing myself. When I started college, I started to engage with a different type of feminism, a progressive intersectional feminism, as well as coming out as a queer person. Now, I am coming up on my own graduation and reflecting back on what I learned and what I still have to learn. The wide variety of readings we got in this class helped change the ways I engage in politics as well as my perspectives around sexual experience, abolition, the future and much more. For example, the text, “Thinking Sex: Notes for a Radical Theory of the Politics of Sexuality,” by Gayle S. Rubin was one that stood out to me because of its variety of focuses around sexual experience, oppression, erotic life and sexual theory. The other works I will be highlighting include, “Building an Abolitionist Trans and Queer Movement with Everything We’ve Got” and “Everything for Everyone: An Oral History of the New York Commune 2052–2072.” The abolitionist piece includes not only the issues around the queer community and arrest but also other aspects of legal rights queer people have struggled for. The commune piece on the other hand is a fictional piece that explores multiple aspects of a post-capitalist, post-modern society that highlights queer life alongside commune life, sex work and other aspects of life that can radically change for the better. Each is different in presentation, style, focus and even genre but all challenge the ways people view the world and what the world can be like.

Going back to “Thinking Sex: Notes for a Radical Theory of the Politics of Sexuality,” there is a lot about this piece that highlights feminism and transgender experience while challenging perspectives of the readers. When Rubin wrote, “Bisexuals, sadomasochists, individuals who prefer cross-generational encounters, transsexuals, and transvestites are all in various states of community formation and identity acquisition,” we can see now what he was talking about all the way back in 1984 (Rubin, 156). My own experiences with sex-negativity and sexual essentialism to learning how to resist conservative thought on “normal” sexuality was in large part to these works that informed my education. This paper understands the deeply rooted beliefs and hatred that need to be dismantled, the creation of sexual freedom and expression and the need for openness towards oppressed communities in order to prevent more harm from occurring. When Rubin predicted, “Whatever happens, AIDS will have far-reaching consequences on sex in general, and on homosexuality in particular,” we see what is at stake if we don’t take liberation seriously (Rubin, 164). There is so much in the piece that faces the uncomfortable nature around transgender, polyamorous, indigenous and sex worker experience (to name a few) that need not be controversial yet is. The piece is a call to act and resist oppression and even challenges views on groups such as boy-lovers to drive this fact home in a way that challenges my own perspective and understanding of why people find these topics controversial. This new perspective gives us a new way of both understanding the importance of each of the topics the writer highlights as well as what can be done to achieve sexual liberation for women, men, transgender folks, non-binary people and all others who find themselves facing societal oppression.

Another piece that works to understand and dismantle the systems of oppression is “Building an Abolitionist Trans and Queer Movement with Everything We’ve Got” by Morgan Bassichis, Alexander Lee and Dean Spade. This section of “Captive Genders” shows the many different areas of the current landscape around queer rights and how abolitionist work matters to these issues. It uses a variety of reasons as to why the topics it includes are important to the work that needs to be done when they state, “Oppressive dynamics in the United States are as old as the colonization of this land and the founding of a country based on slavery and genocide” (Bassichis, 20). This work really means that everyone needs to come together to meet the demands of queer folk such as legalization of marriage and ending targeting in immigration. The piece shows that feminist and queer folk work together along with other people such as in statements like, “Radical organizations, particularly feminist and women of color-led organizations, have often prioritized working collectively… (Bassichis, 29).” The most important part of what can be learned from this is not that people already do these things but what a more radical approach can be. The idea of being radical was a particular challenge for me as often radical is seen as negative by many. But this piece makes the case for taking our beliefs and being radical in our actions because the alternative is not worth fighting for. For feminist and for transgender people, the alternative is not an alternative where people can live freely as we see in the issues around the current, modern landscape of politics . If we want to see the end of patriarchy and transphobia, then, “Unless we address these exploitative power dynamics in our work, even our most “well-intentioned” strategies and movements will reproduce the prison industrial complex’s norms of transphobic, misogynist, and racist sexualized violence” (Bassichis, 35). For me, this piece is important to how I changed because it opened my mind to other perspectives I had not seen before and reinforced this idea of doing radical change with others as important to the political work I can do in the future.

Hope is also something that, while not necessarily a focus of the other pieces, is a focus of “Everything for Everyone: An Oral History of the New York Commune 2052–2072” by M. E. O’Brien and Eman Abdelhadi. This fiction piece highlights what life could be like in a fictional future where conflict breaks out, nation-states collapse, communes are formed and the people fight back. It gives a lot of hope to a variety of groups such as in the first chapter that is focused on the freedoms sex workers and queer people achieve in the formation of communes in New York. Other chapters cover topics present in the abolitionist piece including healthcare, militarization, collective action and much more. What I enjoyed about this piece was you can take what we learned from other readings we did and then apply them to a vision of what the future could be. We see this in the way the word commune is described as, “…multiple new social institutions across multiple levels of scale” (O’Brien, 15). All the little parts of this work present a change on the societal level, then takes that information and turns it into a historical fiction for the reader to envision a different future. The hope that a piece like this gives has made me recognize the work that I can do as well as what collective work with others can look like. The impact it has on the perspective of the reader is one that can transform perspective more than the other pieces because it uses a narrative that is easier to follow aka a story. If we look to see how this story relates to us, it uses both the experiences of people today as well as the real history of the world such as, “…extreme weather, warming temperatures, and rising water levels…” which are having an impact on our world today and make the narrative more realistic to what could potentially happen (O’Brien, 9). This is all to say that unlike our other readings, this one gives more application and vision than was not explored in other works as it has to do a lot more world-building for the reader.

These three pieces of literature make the argument that liberation is necessary for the end of oppression and that collective action can be taken to get to a society where liberation is the reality of life. Whether it’s sexual liberation, abolition or collective organizing, they all address the issues we face today and give us different perspectives on what actions the reader can take. This all has had an impact on the ways in which I see the world and my own actions while also having a wider impact on everyone who has a chance to read these works when thinking about what it means to be transgender and what it means to be a feminist today.

Work Cited

Iveković, Rada. Captive gender: Ethnic stereotypes & cultural boundaries. New Delhi: Women Unlimited, an Associate of Kali for Women, 2005.

O’Brien, M. E., and Eman Abdelhadi. Everything for everyone: An oral history of the New York Commune, 2052–2072. Brooklyn, NY: Common Notions, 2022.

Parker, Richard G., and Peter Aggleton. 2007. Culture, Society and Sexuality : A Reader. 2nd ed. London: Routledge.

Writing #1

The message of the documentary Blackfish prioritizes the realities of how inhumane it is to keep orcas in captivity for entertainment. The film shows us a large amount of evidence towards this conclusion that the nature of the aquatic animal entertainment industry is exploitative and harmful toward the animals, the environment and humans. It’s not beyond the scope of the film to also show us the anthropomorphic nature of these orcas’ lives in captivity. Similar to what we see demonstrated in Vale and McRae’s “Cutopia” article, the film goes to lengths to use anthropomorphic-empathetic techniques to guide viewers to come to the same conclusions. The issue with these techniques comes into why this film had controversy and why something like Ritts and Shiga does not. The use of marine life by humans demonstrated in Ritts and Shiga has risks for the marine ecosystem and marine mammals which can be plainly seen in the facts of the situation. However, we can also see how not using anthropomorphic-empathetic techniques both helps and hurts their arguments made by Ritts and Shiga. The point being that these techniques are harmful but the exclusion of all uses of pathos can keep an article from reaching more people.

There are many ways in which Blackfish shows the same techniques in “Cutopia” were used by SeaWorld and other parks such as with the merchandising of the show animals and the shows themselves. The naming of the animals adds the ability to give them personalities that the show audience can relate to and the stories the staff tell are similar to how Cobby was created and sold to audiences. Many of the particular empathetic techniques used by Blackfish which got it in controversy come from the beliefs of the people they interviewed and how they have placed anthropomorphic beliefs on the orcas they worked with. Many of them use this in their jobs and learn to think this way because of their work. The other issue was the anthropomorphic handling of wild orcas. The film frames the wild orcas similarly to the captive orcas with the only real difference being the lack of names and direct human interaction. Yet, the film does not try to address or correct these issues but rather uses it to draw empathy from the audience. It preferred to use this to draw people to a particular conclusion about orcas that was similar to the trainers they interviewed.

In comparison to animation techniques, there are some big differences. The main difference between the two is that the anthropomorphic nature is not just personality and belief but also the way animation changes the physical form of the animal to fit that personality. This can be little things like eye color, large features of facial expressions and unusual physical traits not seen in real life. There is not something easily done with live animals besides with clothes or methods of dyeing the fur of animals. There are natural variations of course, but largely inaccurate appearance and animation comes down to the ability of the animator coding an animal to represent something in particular.

When comparing Blackfish to the use of animals in the military, the distinction comes down mostly to the level of context, interaction and the publicity. While comparing the two by measures of something like suffering is not possible, one could make an argument that the visibility and witness to the issues in the entertainment industry versus the military industry leads to a higher number of individuals who believe that these interactions and relations are normal. The anthropomorphic framework used in entertainment convinces people that what they are told is the truth when that is not the case, even when they are seeing something very different. The issue of the entertainment industry comes down to the issues of misinforming the public and the film required to address it. This is not the same with Ritts and Shiga where interaction is largely scientific and anthropomorphic is unnecessary. The film uses these issues to its advantage in convincing the audience that the issues exposed are a real harm to protecting wildlife and the animals well-being. The ‘manipulative’ element of Blackfish comes in as the film does not address or criticize the anthropomorphic elements it itself is reproducing for its own gain. If the film did, it couldn’t use that to its advantage and likely would be a very different film. It may have also found itself in a situation like Ritts and Shiga.

Ritts and Shiga do a great job of explaining the issues around the use of marine life with military development and technology. The article doesn’t use anthropomorphic techniques at all and solely the facts around the industry. This means that the facts have to carry the arguments made and this is where the issues arrive. The facts and logos only do not have the emotional impact anthropomorphic techniques have and therefore can be much harder to prove the issues really matter to someone who would not be convinced by facts alone or to those who may find the article too dry to actually read. The reality and real issue is that there are those who do change their minds about something because of the anthropomorphic animals rather than the facts of the situation so being conceiving without that creates challenges. At the same time, we also see that not using anthropomorphic techniques keeps the arguments out of controversy like with Blackfish and keeps the real issues in focus.

Much of the ways all these things intersect is in the media where the influences of consumer culture and military-industrial national identity come to promote themselves and be criticized. There are tons of examples of American movies, television shows, advertisements, and more that are pro-military and pro-consumer culture and vice versa. With marine life, we can see how much of ecology is environmental as it is military with the use of both discovering and learning more about marine mammals. The conflict comes from the nature of competition and the use of the limited resources available and in this case, limited marine life. The use of the resource is often something of a conflict between conservation, innovation, and entertainment. This can lead to disagreement on the management and ‘protection’ of marine animals often debated between different groups of interest.

Writing #2

The discussion of animal rights is often one of debunking and analyzing the construction of animal identity from the human perspective and the stereotypical beliefs that we developed. The issues of these highlights the American beliefs of animals from American identities that tend to harm rather than help. The ideas of radical empathy and what that looks like for those who are not human then is the issue many seek to solve. In some comparison, the issues of civil rights and that language are often altered to fit the narratives of the rights of other species. However, American identity often does not easily change because of the fights over who has rights and what is the right way to treat someone. That is why it is important to understand the difference between our perspectives when it comes to our own species and others. They are all connected and they play a role in how things can change or how they will not change. Radical empathy may be the only path to this but there is just a lot to discuss when it comes to how that will look and present.

WALL-E is a film in which humans destroy the planet and have to leave because they have run out of natural resources to live off of. They end up dependent on technology and robots to live and survive. The film has a lot to say about human destruction of the environment and dependence on technology but also the idea of artificial life being its own independent species. Many of the main characters are robots, including WALL-E, who live their lives beyond the basis of their function. WALL-E demonstrates he is more than a trash compactor from very early on in the movie. The robots have ideas, hobbies, emotions, personalities and are basically humans with robot bodies. What we can get from this is not that robots in reality would be like this. Similar to the ways in which humans anthropomorphize animals, the same phenomenon is happening with robots. The question of if robots could be sentient is usually not connected with how robots would actually live as their own species. Instead, the robots have ideas, hobbies, emotions, personalities and are basically humans with robot bodies. What we can get from this is not that robots in reality would be like this. Similar to the ways in which humans anthropomorphize animals, the same phenomenon is happening with robots. The question of if robots could be sentient is usually not connected with how robots would actually live as their own species. Instead, the assumption of “man-made, man-like” is available for us to see in many types of media about robots.

Blackfish had the issue of using anthropomorphizing animals as a part of its design. Similarly, WALL-E has used it to get audiences to empathize with WALL-E, but not necessarily by the merits of the robots own actions. The method is reproduced because of it being a non-human species. The same happens with objects and aliens within science fiction. Schmetkamp and Heller both add a lot to this discussion. Heller discussed how, “Until we can pinpoint animals’ claims on us, we won’t be clear about what we owe robots — or what they owe us.” In a way, this can be true as if animals can have sovereignty, then why not robots as well. However, the conversation is then divided into how those are different and how it would be different if there was a case. Robots now are not capable of many things that an animal or human can do yet are in some ways more capable than both. The complex nature of robots and their own unpredictable evolution at the hands of humans leads to the unknown of what robots will become and how this can and can not be relevant to the future. So when thinking about Heller’s claims, the question of how this makes sense comes into question. Then again, what if this means the animal advocacy has it wrong. If an animal started to talk, would it tell us we made nonsense instead of doing something else.

Singer and Kim also touched on similar themes to Schmetkamp and Heller. Harambe is an important connection for the works of Kim and Heller. Harambe is a very known symbol of the issues around animal human relationships. Similar to what we saw in Blackfish, Harambe is used for entertainment. He is anthropomorphized by humans and was killed by humans because of humans. With so much out of his control, the human is responsible yet acts out irresponsible. Other connecting themes involve animal rights and radical empathy. Whether we can even empathize with A.I. is key to Schmetkamp article and is discussed for animals in Singer’s article. We know we can use methods to involve empathy in our media and entertainment to engage empathy but a radical empathy must be a genuine empathy. There is a question as to if it is possible for animals and if it is possible for A.I. For Singer, there was a belief that “Equality is a moral ideal, not a simple assertion of fact,” and that the radical outcome was the future for animals. For Schmetkamp, the statement of one having, “much to consider in terms of the epistemic, ethical, aesthetical, and political impacts of these new challenges.” The language is different but ultimately the conclusion is different. Animals have been around much longer than robots and are more connected to humans in particular aspects. While it is nice to think the conclusions will one day be similar for robots, there is still a lot of evolution and questions that are not even being asked just yet to go through before the consideration of artificial rights can be addressed.

Going back to Harambe, we can see how Singer can be applied to Kim and Heller. Heller used Harambe as an example of the discussion of animal rights to bring in those unfamiliar with them into a conversation about the possibility of artificial rights. Meanwhile, Kim’s focus on Harambe had a lot to do with race in America and the interconnections between animals, race and American beliefs. Kim discusses in detail, “the question of black–animal nearness” as it is something rooted in American history and belief. It is in the language in which racist white folk have used for generations and what has been difficult to separate. However, it also highlights the importance of how we treat others. Does the connection between mean we treat some humans like animals? What does that say about us? The radical empathy then must come from a place where that mistreatment ends. What Singer points out is how this is easier said than done, with philosophers and American ignoring these facts for the traditional perspective. Kim sees this as well and the discussion of the roots of discrimination in American history can not be ignored or underestimated in discussing radical empathy for animals. The idea of using animals to our benefit, for labor and entertainment and our ownership of them stem from the same mindset as those places onto other humans. The difference in them is the context of the situation and the differences at who is harmed. The animal does not have the voice of a human yet can still scream out in pain.

Then for Blackfish, the issue the film had was in reproducing the harm of anthropomorphic beliefs about animals. It did not believe in the radical empathy but believed that change for orcas could happen without it. It is the idea that we can do better without the effort of being better. It is the idea that we can see the harm entertainment animals face while not realizing our own participation in it. This can be demonstrated in how we also treat entertainers as something “not normal” and therefore not human. Could this one day be true for robots? We already use robots in “robot battles’’ and develop technology partly for our own entertainment. What about labor? Like animals, robots are used for all sorts of labor tasks, often to replace a human. This is a point that we can see above as the authors point out as areas where radical empathy must be considered. While we can not understand the lived experience of an animal or a robot, we can understand the issues of harm caused by our own influence and control over these groups. The Schmetkamp paper has one issue that needs to be focused on from here. That is that the belief was that we can empathize with robots if they are humanoid. While this may make sense that humans who reproduce themselves artificially can be empathized with, what about those that are not? We can see that radical empathy needs to be achieved for the animal yet what about the animal-like robot? Why would there not be non-humanoid robots in a world where we had robots? This means in many ways the article Schmetkamp does have a limit that we can see is just like the limited empathy many have for animals. There is the inability to see and understand the limit, yet even with exposing one to this limit, that does not mean it will change. We see then that the robot argument and the animal argument is tied with the limits of human empathy. The struggle for artificial rights will have history repeat itself.

Radical empathy for animals seems so possible in Singer’s article yet so missing for Schmetkamp’s work on A.I. We can see then what happens with the two in Heller’s article. Heller states, “As people, we realize our full selves through appropriation; like most animals and robots, we approach maturity by taking on the habits of the world around us, and by wielding tools.” Heller makes some claims about the posthumanist perspective in this article as it is the primary philosophical approach of the modern era. The statement above however shows us that there is a fulfillment of our own perspective onto other species that makes us anthropomorphize once again. The writer either does not see this or does not understand this when writing and publishing this statement. The idea of maturity being equal between species is false because of the difference in existence. Do all species wield tools? Do all species truly take on the habits of the world? No and no. Not all animals wield tools or may understand the activity they partake in as “using a tool.” The behavior can not be understood from the human perspective as we have no real insight as to what the animal thinks, feels and believes. The same goes for all behaviors of animals, beyond biological function. The same goes for the artificial life which is programmed by us but we do not experience being the robot itself. Heller lacks these insights and likely would repeat mistakes of Schmetkamp rather than finding understanding with Kim and Singer.

Above all else, the beliefs of Americans are rooted deeply in philosophy that does not consider the reality of other species. These mistakes are seen in some of the presented works and are analyzed in others. While the American identity remains fixed on this perspective, whether posthumanist or not, there are those who envision a different approach to other species. The current mindset is problematic for both animals, artificial and human, yet is not easily changed. The mindset follows the logic of other struggles of race and minority groups within human society and is deeply rooted in our shared history. Radical empathy is the idea of considering the other perspective and connecting on a deeper level with the other. While we can not be animals or robots, many of us always have no idea what it is like to be in particular minority groups. While some claim the limitations are due to the difference in species, some would argue that was considered the same logic for different groups of humans, even still believed by some people to this day. The realities do have their differences but the interconnections prove the similarities of the mindset that prevent progress and repeat history. Animals deserve our radical empathy so we may understand how to coexist as different species. Deserving of the rights of the sovereignty that already have from the fact they do indeed exist and live just as humans exist and life. Someday this may be true for the evolved artificial life we create. What can not happen though is the denial of these claims because of our own inability to overcome human logic and mindset.

Work Cited

Andrew, Stanton et al.. 2008. WALL-E. Burbank, Calif., Walt Disney Home Entertainment.

Cowperthwaite, Gabriela. 2013. Blackfish. United States: Magnolia Pictures.

Heller, Nathan. “If Animals Have Rights, Should Robots?” The New Yorker, November 21, 2016. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/11/28/if-animals-have-rights-should-robots.

Kim, Claire Jean. “Murder and Mattering in Harambe’s House: Politics and Animals.” Murder and Mattering in Harambe’s House | Politics and Animals. Accessed July 2023. https://journals.lub.lu.se/pa/article/view/16274/14916.

Max Ritts and John Shiga. Military Cetology. Environmental Humanities. 1 November 2016; 8 (2): 196–214. doi: https://doi.org/10.1215/22011919-3664220

Schmetkamp, S. Understanding A.I. — Can and Should we Empathize with Robots?. Rev.Phil.Psych. 11, 881–897 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13164-020-00473-x

Singer, Peter. All animals are equal. Routledge, 2017.

Vale, M, and Donna Mcrae. 2016. “The Cutopia Paradox: Anthropomorphism as Entertainment”. Deakin University. https://hdl.handle.net/10536/DRO/DU:30083343.

When shootings happen in the United States, there are two factors that the public and media focus on. The first is that guns are an issue and the second being the political activity of the individual which is typically reported as far-right. The current shooting that happened in Maine had both but also the media reported on the military background of the shooter. Many reports included data collected by The Violence Project that shows that, “…out of 195 mass shootings since 1966, 50 involved suspects who were veterans or people with military training.”(CBS News) While this isn’t the majority, it helps connect how some military individuals are becoming radicalized through the military and/or online as well as how the far-right extremism global rise is affecting even those who were involved in national security. Far-Right extremism is often not taken seriously by the United States of America but the issues around mass violence in the United States and globally are statistically linked to the far-right ideologies. While American policy often treats far-right extremism like it is not an issue, it is not just going away as we can verify that attacks by the far-right are increasing domestically and globally. Even when it is taken seriously, there are many efforts made to undermine those policies and measures. Events such as January 6th have also funneled fears globally of far-right politics spreading and increasing violence internationally with the concerns worrying foreign powers on what they would do in a world where the United States military can not be trusted. Much of what can be demonstrated is the fact that there is little to no policy focus on the topic and that much of what is available has disappeared because of Republican politicians such as Tuberville acting against programs like the Countering Extremism Activity Working Group (CEAWG). On top of that, radicalization online and in-person is a global issue which no one seems to have any ideas of how to handle and is comparable to misinformation and fake news. The rise and fall of the CEAWG highlights the issues addressing the extremists who work within the military, the department of defense and the Pentagon as well as veterans who become radicalized after serving in the military.

The United States military is the largest force in the world with bases in many other countries who depend on the United States military forces. Without the United States military, many countries would not have the backing or protection they once had from powers such as Russia and China. Military policy then has major effects on our foreign policy and is very much the guiding force of our foreign policy in a number of ways. When January 6th happened, many other countries and their leaders reacted in a mix of emotions and fears about what was happening domestically with the United States. If something did happen to the United States government, then it would change the relationships between the United States and those countries. What was most worrying was the fact that then President Trump was involved and if Trump was in office again, there really is no way to know what countries might do in response to some of the things Trump has claimed he wants to do with the United States military. He has made more recent claims that he would be, “using the military to quell violence in primarily Democratic cities and states.” (Gary Fields, 2023) The idea of deploying troops to handle domestic issues raises questions for many as Trump is a clear actor in the violence that has already occurred and does seem willing in committing to acts of violence and terror. His statements on how he could be, “including using the military at the border,” and, “against foreign drug cartels,” is extremely troubling as these interventions would directly violate the sovereignty of many countries and allies such as Mexico. (Gary Fields, 2023) With the wide support Trump has for veterans and military members and the rise of far-right extremism in the military, at least some of the United States military could be involved in following any orders by another Trump presidency without question. The foreign relationships the United States has can radically change if the United States can no longer be trusted to uphold basic rights for its own citizens or its allies as extremism in the military, “…is a serious impediment to the trust in authorities for many nations.” (Haugstvedt and Koehler, 2023) While America is a very powerful country, many countries will not hesitate to condemn its action and take historical actions if necessary to protect their own national security such as removing American military bases if they are seen as a threat. This would change the balance of power in the world and for now, foreign powers have not felt this way with the Biden administration and his victory in 2020.

Once the Biden administration came into power, there were moves for the military to deal with radicalization that had been prompted by the Jan 6th capital riot and insurrection. An NPR article points out that Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin was one of the people who has been behind the effort to rid of military extremism. He stated that, “More than 300 people at the Capitol that day have been arrested, and around 15% have former military ties, according to an NPR analysis. About 7% of U.S. adults are veterans, according to the Census Bureau.” (Padmananda Rama, 2013) The fact that the Biden administration wanted to root out extremists in the military is also factored into what led to the end of this policy by the pentagon. The Countering Extremism Working Group efforts ultimately led to not being able to accomplish much of its goals yet we can see much of what they wanted to accomplish and changed since it was all well documented. The primary action after the establish of CEAWG on April 9, 2021 was, “…directed to oversee implementation of the immediate actions, including reviewing and updating the definition of prohibited activities in DoD Instruction 1325.06.” (Department of Defense Releases Report, 2023) There were also actions which involved funding, training, studies and policy changes. We also see the other actions that as, “Concurrent with the CEAWG efforts, other parts of the federal government undertook similar efforts to improve their ability to prevent or respond to domestic extremism.” (Doxsee and Macander, 2023) All of these efforts can be examined in the “Report on Countering Extremist Activity Within the Department of Defense” which was released in the Department of Defense in December of 2021. This report finds that, “a range of extremist motivations and behaviors constituted a growing threat to the United States.” (Report on Countering Extremist Activity Within the Department of Defense) This report is just another piece of evidence of some of the work that had been done and the success in being able to address the issue was just the start of the process.

What can be seen as well though is that the group was not very successful overall with reports such as, “But in the just over two years since its creation, DOD has enacted just one of the group’s six recommendations.” (Andrew Clevenger, 2023) These articles and reports show that there was not a lot of progress made on these issues, even if there had not been other groups trying to interfere with the CEAWG. One of the most successful individuals in blocking any attempts to deal with radicalization of military members is Alabama Senator Tuberville. He is known for, “… holding up military nominees over abortion policy he disagrees with.” (Padmananda Rama, 2013) The NPR article collects his statements on his efforts to deal with the Biden administration’s “woke” agenda which he believes is hurting the military. When it comes to radicalization in the military, “he thinks efforts to root out extremism — and critical race theory, which he contends is being taught in the military — are causing the U.S. to lose service members.” (Padmananda Rama, 2013) He also believes that white nationalist are ok in the military as he stated, “I call them Americans,” which was also widely reported on at the time. And while there was a rebuttal from his office on what he meant, the idea was still put out there. Then there are those who seek to, “defund the Pentagon’s anti-extremism efforts,” such as Republican Rep. Mark Alford of Missouri. (Andrew Clevenger, 2023) The Roll Call article describes efforts where, “conservatives target what they call “woke” Pentagon policies,” by the three amendments Mark Alford wished to add to the annual defense policy bill. (Andrew Clevenger, 2023) These amendments, “…would bar DOD from using any fiscal 2024 dollars for its working group aiming to counter extremism or for the deputy inspector general post that lawmakers previously created seeking to root out extremism in the military.” (Andrew Clevenger, 2023) In a sense, Republican lawmakers are seeking to stop the CEAWG with the claim that they need to stop ‘wokeism’ and leftwing ideology in the United States military. These attempts seem to have been successful however as the group has now disappeared.

In an CNN article called, “How GOP Attacks on ‘wokeism’ Helped Lead the Pentagon to Abandon Its Effort to Combat Extremism in the Military” by Zachary Cohen, Oren Liebermann, and Haley Britzky, there is more than enough evidence to show how the program fell apart. The article claims that the efforts of the working group could have changed the ways we handle situations such as, “Jack Teixeira, the 21-year-old Air National Guardsman with a long-history of violent and racist behavior now accused of perpetrating one of the biggest leaks of classified documents in modern history.” (Cohen, Liebermann, and Britzky, 2023) The article makes clear that, “the working group’s stated objectives look eerily prescient, and, in some cases, tailor-made to zero-in on the sort of anti-government, White supremacist behavior and views espoused by Teixeira.” (Cohen, Liebermann, and Britzky, 2023) The article then deals with what they could find about the working group disappearing stating that, “senior officials folded under political pressure from Republicans who lashed out at the initiative as an example of so-called wokeism in the military.” (Cohen, Liebermann, and Britzky, 2023) While this news is both tragic and unsettling, one of the article’s links to another one which suggests these political pressures also happened internally. Other reasons include the, “long struggled with how not only to define extremist activity but also how to police it without violating the rights of troops” making it so, “its task was nearly impossible to implement.” (Cohen, Liebermann, and Britzky, 2023) This means that the efforts of Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin were indeed stopped by Republican lawmakers but also there are a number of internal issues that were never addressed. The fact that something as being able to define the issue is an issue only highlights the level of obstacles the CEAWG was facing. Red flags of extremism and threats to national security will continue to be overlooked and individuals such as Teixeria demonstrate the issues that could make for negative foreign policy overcomes in the future. The leaks are just one way national security and the security of other nations currently facing wars and conflicts can be disrupted by extremist military members.

The most unfortunate part of this series of events is the unmet need that has yet to be well documented as extremism in the general public is well-researched but not in those serving in the military. There is still some data and research that has been done such as in an article from CSIS where many of the facts are displayed such as, “Recent data compiled by CSIS indicate that the percentage of terrorist attacks and plots in the United States perpetrated by service members has increased in recent years.” (Doxsee and Macander, 2023) It’s this sort of data that brings into question the lack of an effort to address it and how could anyone still ignore it when presented the findings. There is also an historical root that shows, “the problem of extremism in the military and among veterans is not new, and includes multiple instances of the intentional targeting of government and military institutions.” (Doxsee and Macander, 2023) America is not a nation without its issues with white supremist such as with the Ku Klux Klan and the neo-Nazis movements. This issue then presents a much deeper issue of a cycle of recruitment from the military into militant and extremist groups here in the United States. The factors that continue to fuel this issue include the wars in Vietnam, in the Middle East and current conflicts such as Ukraine. Along with the data and historical research, Interest groups have also taken notice of far-right extremism such as RAND with them publishing their own articles such as “Support for Extremism Among U.S. Military Veterans Is Similar to Public at Large.” These groups tend to be able to do their own research and in the case of this publishcation, there is a survey that was conducted. In it, they say, “The survey found that veterans of the Marine Corps expressed the highest support for extremist groups and beliefs among the different branches of military.” (“Support for Extremism Among U.S. Military Veterans Is Similar to Public at Large”) This type of data can help us understand more about what is going on with radicalization of military members, but it still does not present a clear solution as to what to do about it. If that data then can represent the facts, it points to what the public opinion is about extremism in the military: something needs to be done.

The public very much wants extremism to be handled in the military as, “the public fears that national security might be compromised by potential terrorists using their training, equipment, and networks against the countries they swore to protect.” (Haugstvedt and Koehler, 2023) Papers such as, “Armed and Explosive? An Explorative Statistical Analysis of Extremist Radicalization Cases with Military Background,” by Håvard Haugstvedt, and Daniel Koehler demonstrates the public's concerns about extremism and the lack of action taken. There are a number of examples given about military members being radicalized to particular far-right and extremist ideologies in the paper but also gives us some more of the data that has been collected on the issue. The data from this particular paper included a variety of factors and looked at many of the risk factors associated with being radicalized which concluded that, “Our analysis reveals a cocktail of heightened odds for risk factors within the far-right military group.” (Haugstvedt and Koehler, 2023) The research makes it clear that military members are, “more likely to suffer from trauma, mental illness, a decrease of social standing, and exclusion from participation in social groups or organizations,” and, “more likely to be challenged with interpersonal problems, grievances, and anger toward society.” (Haugstvedt and Koehler, 2023) All this suggests that there is much more to be done for the psychological wellbeing of the U.S. military and that an increase of services provided could help to handle many of the factors listed above.

What is to happen in the future of extremism in the military is likely to continue to be an issue of division in the military, the Pentagon and Washington D.C. over the issue. Public opinion will continue to demand something be done and the media will continue to report any updates on the issues that the world is facing. The upcoming election is one of the most pressing matters when it comes to the future of the military and U.S. foreign policy as many candidates have expressed using the military in similar ways to Trump, particularly with the use of military at the border and foreign drug cartels. The question of just how far these candidates would go if they became president could completely reshape the balance of power in the world and is a great concern to allied nations and billions of people on the planet. The idea that the United States could fall into being an authoritarian state with little regard for the sovereignty of other nations is not to be taken lightly. Neither is the idea of U.S. military members compromising the national security of other countries by way of committing terrorist actions and leaking classified information. The potential is extreme and ways the far-right can interconnect globally is leading to a growing effort to handle the situation. Yet we see that many are attacking these efforts under the idea that the culture war has come to the U.S. military and that these measures only serve to hurt the military. There is also the potential for different methods to be tried such as, “Violent extremism and radicalization occurring in military members may be approached as a psychological issue similar to PTSD and substance abuse, which then would lead to promoting rehabilitation, rather than simply discharge, leading to grievance, and thus abate rather than enhance risk following discharge.” (Speckhard, Ellenberg and Garret, 2021) The evidence presented suggests that the psychological is a major factor at play in any radicalization of any person. The simple truth is that this is not going away and not dealing with this soon could lead to major issues in the domestic and foreign policy side of the issue. The data presented here and elsewhere suggests this is indeed the case and that action is required by the United States if it is to be resolved.

Work Cited

Andrew Clevenger. “DOD Anti-Extremism Efforts Draw Scrutiny in Ndaa Amendments.” Roll Call, June 20, 2023. https://rollcall.com/2023/06/16/dod-anti-extremism-efforts-draw-scrutiny-in-ndaa-amendments/.

Anne Speckhard, Molly Ellenberg, and T. M. Garret. “The challenge of extremism in the military is not going away without a new perspective.” International Center for the Study of Violent Extremism (2021).

Catrina Doxsee, and Michelle Macander. “Assessing the Pentagon’s Progress on Countering Extremism in the Military.” CSIS. Accessed November 28, 2023. https://www.csis.org/analysis/assessing-pentagons-progress-countering-extremism-military.

“Department of Defense Releases Report on Countering Extremist Activities and Outlines Next.” U.S. Department of Defense. Accessed November 28, 2023. https://www.defense.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/2879763/department-of-defense-releases-report-on-countering-extremist-activities-and-ou/.

Gary Fields. “Trump Hints at Expanded Role for the Military within the US. A Legacy Law Gives Him Few Guardrails.” AP News, November 28, 2023. https://apnews.com/article/trump-military-insurrection-act-2024-election-03858b6291e4721991b5a18c2dfb3c36.

Håvard Haugstvedt, and Daniel Koehler. “Armed and explosive? An explorative statistical analysis of extremist radicalization cases with military background.” Terrorism and political violence 35, no. 3 (2023): 518–532.

“Maine Gunman Is the Latest Mass Shooter with a Military Background. Experts Explain the Connection.” CBS News. Accessed November 14, 2023. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/maine-shooting-military-background-experts-explain-connection/.

Padmananda Rama. “Alabama Republican Blasts an Effort to Rid the Military of White Nationalists.” NPR, May 11, 2023. https://www.npr.org/2023/05/11/1175552028/tuberville-military-white-nationalists.

“Report on Countering Extremist Activity Within the Department of Defense.” Department of Defense , December 2021. https://media.defense.gov/2021/Dec/20/2002912573/-1/-1/0/REPORT-ON-COUNTERING-EXTREMIST-ACTIVITY-WITHIN-THE-DEPARTMENT-OF-DEFENSE.PDF

“Support for Extremism Among U.S. Military Veterans Is Similar to Public at Large.” RAND Corporation, May 23, 2023. https://www.rand.org/news/press/2023/05/23.html.

Zachary Cohen, Oren Liebermann, and Haley Britzky. “How GOP Attacks on ‘wokeism’ Helped Lead the Pentagon to Abandon Its Effort to Combat Extremism in the Military | CNN Politics.” CNN, May 20, 2023. https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/19/politics/pentagon-combat-extremism-military-republican-attacks-teixeira-leaks/index.html.

Abstract

Societal apathy is something that we all tend to adjust to in life but it is also something that can be an obstacle to our goals. Social justice tends to focus on community issues that require people’s understanding, empathy and support yet many disengaged individuals seem apathetic and can cause a lot of issues in the realm of advocating for one’s rights and struggles. Societal apathy is not just an issue to be solved though, as it is not as simple as one having apathy. Instead apathy is a symptom of larger phenomenons we all experience and disengagement is not limited to those apathetic towards social justice. Societal apathy is an issue for those looking to do advocacy work for political issues and social justice as well as many associated issues such as disengagement, fear, and limiting beliefs about social change in all forms of media. Overall, the solution to this issue likely goes into multiple solutions for different involved factors. There are likely so many of these factors that it can’t be covered in one paper but can be addressed for future research and exploration. This paper aims to introduce societal apathy so more exploration on the subject can be researched and that we can learn how this affects social justice advocacy work, organizations, and the realm of writing in these fields.We will examine the effects of apathy, disengagement, limited belief systems, dissociation and many other factors previous research has brought out so we can examine as many aspects of societal apathy as possible.

Key Terms: societal apathy, political disengagement, limited belief systems, social change

Introduction

An opinion piece in the New York Times highlights the possible positives of the Trump presidency in the way of creating positive change. Farhad Manjoo (2020) had much to say about Trump and gave many motivations for how the typically public opinions and complacency of politics and government in their daily lives has changed. Manjoo believes that his presidency has helped shape people to be aware of how fragile and failing our institutions are and how flawed the American democracy is. He implies that Americans can no longer be apathetic as one can not have, “the comfortable bliss of not having to pay attention.” He makes many good points on how public opinion has shifted to more progressive positions, how the impact of Trump has strengthened movements like #MeToo promotes political action with many minorities running for office and high voter turnout. However, apathy or political apathy is not the whole story. Political apathy was addressed here but that doesn’t mean that people are not still societal apathetic towards social justice movements. Many moved to more extreme right-wing positions but those who have moved more left are not necessarily less apathetic than before. An article on Vox in comparison highlights much of the work that needs to be done with apathy in both the political realm and the social justice world.

The Vox article by Brian Resnick (2017) is focused on the work of Paul Slovic who is a psychologist at the university of Oregon. What makes his work stand out is how he has done in the field of psychology and particularly in political psychology on topics such as psychic numbing, inefficiency and bias in decision making. He points out how our institutions are not leading morally and how we ourselves are not as moral as we would like to believe. Slovic’s overall message is one of raising awareness about these topics. For example, when asked about apathy, Slovic states that, “We shouldn’t be surprised. That doesn’t mean we should accept it.” His approach to these subjects gives depth to how this can impact social justice work and how apathy can appear in ways not expected. In terms of psychic numbing, Slovic says, “It means that there is no constant value for a human life, that the value of a single life diminishes against the backdrop of a larger tragedy.” He makes it clear to the reader that apathy can happen in a way that is unintentional and not complete within our control. He points out the opposite can happen to when he said, “the opposite side of that is something we call the singularity effect, which is an

individual life is very valued.” His studies have shown that there is a lot going on in a person’s mind when they engage with global conflicts. Another study Slovic was a part of showed that, “When people are making a decision between two courses of action … people often used a simple rule to choose.” He claims that, “There’s a bias in decision-making toward the intrinsically more defensible,” and “Even though you say it’s important to attend to the humanitarian catastrophes, when it comes down to choice, the choice to protect the homeland is more defensible.” All of these factors can lead to a variety of issues in addressing one’s apathetic position if the one who wishes to change their mind isn’t aware of these pheromones.

Both these articles prove that societal apathy within social justice work and writing involves many levels of complex understanding. As those within political science, it is important to investigate societal apathy due to its large effect on the realm of politics and political writing. There is a great bloom of research within recent years on the subject but it is important to understand the process behind how one may come to think about societal apathy to begin with. There are so many routes and references but not necessarily energy, effort or time for many within these fields to dive into the subject. This paper hopes to address both the definitions, research and the possible outcomes of this research to help bring some of these dimensions of thought together as there is a lot to explore for those who wish to continue research in this area. The research done for this paper makes it necessary to lay out definitions and differences as with subjects such as psychic numbing yet not laying the groundwork for a complete understanding would be a disservice to those looking to understand societal apathy. Writing in political science and social justice will benefit from practical applications as both fields require an understanding of human psychology to make valid claims about whatever viewpoint or position is being presented. We will be including a number of works including those with expansive data on the subject and those that have spaced this field of research. We hope to highlight the purpose of writing in the professions of political science and social justice work as a means to raising awareness, expressing issues and spreading ideas that could have an impact on the future of societal development and finding solutions to ongoing issues.

Methods and Rhetoric

This research was done primarily through secondary research I collected and focused on societal apathy, political dissociation, and limited belief systems as defined below. These three focuses overlay all the available research and demonstrate that writing in the fields of social justice and political science has both overlapping themes as well as flaws in the understanding of these terms. Therefore, the following classified these terms for better understanding and awareness of these subjects and the focus of my research. Classification gives us the ability to look at the rhetorical situation as well as how these terms can be better used in conversations about apathy. Without a clear term, those in political science and social justice can clearly express the more abstract issues around advocacy work, writing, and other aspects of both realms.

Defining Societal Apathy

Societal apathy may typically be described as those who live in the bliss of societal issues. Though the term political apathy is often used, societal apathy gives room to that which may fall beyond what is traditionally considered political. The issue of using political apathy rather than societal apathy is that politics is generally considered a social science. Social justice also does not need to be categorized as purely political either. There are times in which societal apathy will sound just like political apathy but if politics is social, then why not use the term that fits in all social justice issues rather than the sole focus of politics? Societal apathy is therefore being used to describe the primary issues of apathy and for this research, will include political apathy as well into itself. A paper called “White Apathy and Allyship in Uncivil Racial Social Media Comments,” by Jessica Roden and Muniba Saleem (2022) presents an interesting case of apathy around white individuals. They claim, “…only half of those who ever witnessed online harassment took any action…” and “White people, as those with the most control over American institutions, have the most opportunity and responsibility to enact racial equality.” However, their research does not look good as they state, “White people feel less compelled to help out a Black victim compared to a White one the majority of bystanders do not confront the individual who makes a racist comment, and while feeling strong negative emotions encourages confrontation, especially for women, it does not guarantee action.” This is an example of apathy that can be seen both in person and online.

There is a cause and clear reason for this apathy which will be discussed later but it’s important to show other works such as by Anna Zhelnina (2020) claims, “Apathy, as several studies suggest, is not “natural,” but results from collective and individual efforts on the microsocial level…” This is important to keep in mind what is a normal reaction and what could be more socially programmed apathy. The idea of nature versus nurture may be important to this research as well. Zhelnina (2020) states, “Apathy is produced in public situations as a response to feeling powerless in the face of political realities one cannot control; it is a collective, conversational process.” There is a lot of evidence of this being true within her research as well as the research of others. For our understanding, the thesis “Exploring Political Non-Participation; Conceptualising, Distinguishing and Explaining Political Apathy” written by Emma Thompson (2015) gives us a structure for understanding this definition of apathy and much more. It’s important to know that despite our defining of the terms, Thompson points out, “There are competing understandings within the field of research as to exactly what politics, participation, non-participation, disengagement and apathy even constitute.” (p.39)

Defining Political Disengagement

Political disengagement can be defined as one’s refusal to engage in the realm of politics. This does not mean they never think about or encounter political situations but prefer to deal with them in a way that is not political. This can be through non-attitudes about a subject or a refusal to form an opinion on a subject. This could be in the form of apolitical beliefs or value systems a person may hold. However, the reasons for political disengagement fall into a range of reasons. We can look at research done into depression and political participation to see how depression can play a role in this. “Adolescent depression has the potential to set individuals on a trajectory of political disengagement in adulthood. Results from the mediation analysis further indicate that the effect of adolescent depressed mood on political behavior operates by reducing educational attainment and partisan affiliation,” Christopher Ojeda (2015) says. Depression is defined by Ojeda as, “Individuals with depression tend to have a sad, anxious, or flat mood and often report feelings of emptiness, hopelessness, and apathy.” Obviously not all of these are experienced by everyone who ever has depression but it’s important to see where there may be some confusion on the topic of whether those with depression are apathetic or disengaged. In comparing adolescents to adults, Ojeda states, “Adolescent depressed mood negatively affects turnout and other forms of political participation. Adult depressed mood negatively affects turnout, but not other forms of political participation.”

Thompson (2015) includes a level of depth to political disengagement that can help us expand on this idea of disengagement coming from other conditions. She states,

“Where non-participation is not specifically developed it is often, and wrongly, assumed an expression of mere disengagement, whereby one is either turned off by politics or alternatively is seen as using their non-act as an act of protest, rather than as the result of a lack of political consciousness.” (p.69)

This is important to our understanding of disengagement is not apathy and that apathy is not automatically disengagement. As Thompson points out, political consciousness could be a factor. Other factors to consider can include political knowledge and expertise, past experiences, and limited belief systems. She calls that, “Political science and the many wonderful typologies of participation that have vastly improved our understandings of participatory behaviour have unfortunately left us with very little information about apathy, beyond just describing some likely characteristics.” (p. 79) This reminds us of the importance of fully exploring these concepts as a lack of understanding seems to be linked to issues of understanding in political science and within social justice.

Defining Limited Belief Systems

Limited belief systems are the values one holds that may limit themselves in some way or another. This can be seen in learned helplessness or negative self-beliefs about oneself. These can limit a person’s ability to believe in change. What may be a bit confusing is why limited belief systems are being separated from societal apathy and political disengagement as rhetoric may refer to what many may assume which is the idea that apathy and disengagement come from a place of limited beliefs. While one can have one or all of these, limited belief systems can also be a whole separate issue. There are those who feel as though change is impossible for a variety of reasons but their behavior may come off as apathy or disengagement. In reality, there are those who are not reached even though they are engaged and do actively care about social justice issues. These people who don’t also have apathy and political disengagement can not be treated the same as those with a limited belief system and apathy or disengagement as people with more than one have different reasons behind their actions and behaviors. Those with more than one may fall into political positions opposed to social justice as they may not have empathy towards such issues and the belief that the system can not be changed.

Those with limited belief systems and political disengagement may be more likely to be disengaged because of their beliefs and could be harder to reach out to as a result. Anna Zhelnina’s paper called “The Apathy Syndrome: How We Are Trained Not to Care about Politics” (2020) gives us a different perspective on how this can occur. Zhelnina writes,

“Optimistic accounts of political participation argue that instead of becoming totally apathetic, people switch to new forms of activism, not classified as “political” by participants (Bennett et al. 2013; Neveu 2015; Norris 2002). Political disavowal and recoiling from “dirty politics” can have notable effects, such as the recent successes of populist and right-wing candidates in Europe and America (Ignazi 2003; Mudde 2011; Wodak 2013).”

Zhelnina based this on a cultural norm of societal apathy as promoted by the Russian government. What makes this quote interesting is the fact that one can seem apathetic or disengaged but may have other reasons to seem so. There is a dynamic here of limited belief on the part of the outside observer that also needs to be addressed to really understand limited belief systems.

Research Results

My findings indicate that societal apathy is indeed having negative outcomes on social justice advocacy work, organizations and the realm of writing in these fields. For example, Ojeda’s research (2015) connects depression to, “… a low level of internal efficacy,” similar to how Slovic stated in his work. One of the outcomes of Ojeda’s work was, “The findings provide evidence of a depression-turnout linkage in a nationally representative sample that is of a magnitude that warrants further consideration.” Ojeda’s work isn’t focused on just the political aspect as he writes, “The evidence, both in this article and elsewhere, shows that depression has a disabling effect across life domains.” He also claims, “The social model would characterize depression as a result of systemic barriers to the well-being and functioning of individuals in society, which can only be remedied through social accommodations (Oliver, 1990). Because theorizing in the field of disability studies has tended to focus on physical disabilities and learning disorders, mood disorders, such depression, have been left unattended.” With all this in mind, it is reasonable to see how much psychology plays a role in societal apathy and how this can have an effect on social justice issues. This tendency leads one to think of the ways in which this knowledge can lead to better outcomes in the process of writing to raise awareness of such a concept or possibly the ability to confront these parts of human psychology more efficiently. Efficacy is then a primary example of an issue that may go unaddressed and not necessarily linked to apathy but may still play an important role in its development. Depression is yet another factor to be examined and looked at as a motivation to disengage and a reason for apathy among those individuals towards social justice issues.

The works of Roden and Saleem (2022) who researched into white apathy towards racial comments online shows us that there is much to be explored in real life examples of societal apathy. They state, “This is a pervasive problem; in fact, one in five online comments has been found to exhibit at least some attribute of uncivil speech…” and “…uncivil online comments from ordinary non-elites can actually have a mobilizing effect.” One of the key issues they highlight is this idea of uncivil speech. They show how their study can measure this level of uncivil commentary online and how their main goal of understanding white bystanders occurs. Roden and Saleem state,

“Online comments about the tragic extrajudicial killings of Black Americans, for example, contain more incivility than they do thoughtful deliberation on the subject (Masullo Chen et al., 2020). Witnessing these comments might just lead to apathy though, because maliciousness in online environments evokes less outrage than it does in face-to-face contexts incivility in personally relevant political contexts can trigger negative emotions or aggressive intentions which can lead to political mobilization.”

This raises the question of how this affects those who are in the in-group for those who make racist comments online. What happens to those who are in the in-group who are witnesses to these events? They found that,

“White participants viewing an uncivil conversation experienced more group-based anger and shame, but not guilt, than those viewing a neutral conversation. The White participants were more outraged and ashamed at this uncivil attack perpetrated by an ingroup member, likely due to a sense of shared social identity that the participants wanted to distance themselves from in order to avoid the repercussions of being associated with this ingroup member.”

This is concerning for many reasons but also shows us another factor in apathy can be a lack of guilt. Roden and Saleem explain this as, “…that most incidents of racism perpetrated by an ingroup member are unlikely to make White people feel group-based guilt, especially if they use the false good/bad dichotomy to separate out that racist user as a bad person and themselves as good non-racists.” The level of disconnect and dissociation can lead to what Slovic claims about people using psychic numbing. There is an ability for people to remove themselves from these situations and in this case, the reason seems to remove guilt. Roden and Saleem then said,

“Using this binary could comfort participants into thinking they are no longer members of the same salient social identity, thereby weakening perceptions of interdependence and limiting feelings of group-based guilt. The low levels of all three negative group-based emotions signal that even though incivility might influence some emotions, White participants on average are not moved enough by the racist incident they encountered to feel strong group-based anger, guilt, or shame.”

It seems to reinforce this idea of societal apathy and gives us an example of how social justice advocates may not have the knowledge or be equipped to handle these more deeply rooted issues within people’s psychology. Psychology is not the only dimension being analyzed here as a part of the rhetorical situation for the professions of social justice and political science. Rather, they involve many factors that we can find outside of the typical individual human psychology.

For environmental factors, Anna Zhelnina (2020) focused on this societal apathy norm as it is seen in Russia. She focused her paper on a theory about,

“…the apathy syndrome, a combination of emotional mechanisms that produces political apathy: the development of personal frustrating experiences into long-term cynicism and disbelief in collective action, the suppression of mobilizing emotions by cultural norms of appropriateness, and the transmission of cultural norms of social mistrust and the priority of private life within families and educational institutions.”

The idea speaks a lot to this idea of limited belief systems because the concept is itself a limited belief system. Those who have this “apathy syndrome” act directly in a way that is limited and holds no space for change. Zhelnina shows us how, “…apathy is embedded in cultural norms and values, but can also be strategic — people can control their expression and presentation of self by using a “cultural toolkit” (Swidler 1986) of denial and ignoring.” This then leads to the question of how an individual can advocate against social norms in order to combat societal apathy. If societal apathy does have roots in societal norms, it would explain some of the barriers we see in reaching those not only with apathy or disengagement but also limited belief systems. Another important note from Zhelnina is this idea,

“Cultural norms, along with state policies, dampen the potentially mobilizing emotions by reducing the belief in collective action, and solidarity with people who do not belong to one’s immediate social circle. The state acts through the educational institutions, but the inner circle, the families, also boost mistrust and disbelief.”

There are a lot of factors at play here to enforce a cultural norm that gives us clues into possible future research and knowledge to better understand societal apathy. In “Exploring Political Non-Participation; Conceptualising, Distinguishing and Explaining Political Apathy,” Emma Thompson (2015) explores this much deeper. Thompson’s main contribution to the subject is a concept called the Political Activity Spectrum. This is the idea that the levels of one’s engagement are measurable including if they fall into apathy or disengagement which is separated here as apathetic and latent.

Latent in this context means inactive in a way that can be perceived as disengagement. Though, it is to be noted that disengagement is also its own category under this spectrum. Thompson makes the claim that,

“What the existing literature does is to give a report of why participation has changed in the way that is has and why certain people participate more than others. What it fails to do, however, is to adequately consider the issue of apathy; it does not reflect on how or why it is possible that some people are completely unmotivated politically.” (p.39)

This is largely true if we consider the criticism that Thompson has of many in this field as,

“What they do not do is explicitly outline if and why there may be a group of people who were never engaged in the first place. They do not describe an apathetic citizen in any way that is different from the disengaged. They miss out therefore on knowing why some people do not care. Whilst some of the literature might claim apathy is no bad thing, for it would not be ideal if individuals who have no interest became involved in politics, it is not right that we should not try to understand it.” (p.66)

She draws on these as a part of her conclusion that, “The apathetic citizen did indeed fit the profile in the conceptualisation extremely well, with it being depicted as the least active in all the activities sampled.” (p.285) Her conceptualization included the ways in which she developed the Political Activity Spectrum and the levels at which one would participate in particular activities including non-political ones. Many of the measures included knowledge and interest as those who were measured as apathetic fell into the least likely to have either of these. They were also more likely to feel the most uncomfortable in having political discussions and least likely to be involved in community events which can mean a higher chance of apathy towards situations they are unaware of or do not engage with. This raises the question how other factors such as mental health or cultural norms could be playing a role in this particular group of individuals. Thompson describes this group as,

“…they don’t perceive politics at all — they do not think it interesting nor disinteresting because it is not something that even forms part of their consciousness. These are individuals for whom politics has never penetrated their conscious worlds; they are not disengaged because their level of awareness is not that acute. Apathy is not considered a derogatory term because it simply states here a position of being, nor would it be perceived as negative by those individuals, because they simply would not perceive it. As such, they are unlikely to express high levels of dissatisfaction, though admittedly not high levels of satisfaction either.” (p.89)

Much of her ideas of why this could include lower income and social class as those too are seen to be factors in this research. They can be described as having nonattitudes about politics and lacking in any real form of understanding why others do engage and participate in politics. This knowledge then proposes the idea that one can not rhetorically just believe that one’s environment, culture or other external factors are not a part of this phenomenon but rather that it must be included when we look at the bigger picture.

Discussion

The direction of this research was not what I expected as I believe that there are a lot of concepts and factors that I did not have an awareness of before writing this paper. My understanding of these concepts on social justice and political works has expanded greatly because of the research done here and is hopefully insightful for those looking for knowledge and understanding. There is an idea that runs throughout this paper that needs to be highlighted such as the idea of raising awareness that I now understand as raising awareness around topics of political psychology, myths we have of one’s own psychology, and our understanding of these may be more important than ever to social justice advocate work, organizations and those in overlapping writing spaces. There is a lot not stated in spaces where one is learning how to advocate for others and themselves around psychology for good reason. The reason is primarily because no one is aware of their importance. Many social justice organizations understand the need for self-care, mental health and general psychology but may be engaging in political and social psychology in ways that do not produce desired outcomes. A lack of understanding societal apathy could harm efforts to change minds, collaboration and reach goals set by social justice movements.

Works such as by Zhelnina (2020) show us that, “The normative and strategic mechanisms of political apathy work together to dampen the mobilizing emotions and to develop immediate frustrating political experiences into longer lasting political moods: skepticism, cynicism, and mistrust.” The idea of the external and internal factors helps us reach some of the conclusions of how societal apathy is created and kept within all levels of society. It is not an issue that can be faced on an internal level because the external pressure of social norms also can enforce internal beliefs and positions. Zhelnina also presents something very important to remember,

“Overcoming apathy does not necessarily lead to activism: other mechanisms, such as connections to and identification with a movement and involvement in politicized social networks are crucial in individuals’ decision to act; it is, however, one of the fundamental building blocks of political agency.”

If those within social justice advocacy and social justice organizations wish to overcome these obstacles, there must also be a method of understanding how this would not lead to the outcomes that may be desired. Rather, we have to accept that societal apathy is a roadblock to even beginning a dialogue with others and to start to build those connections. The focus on if one will turn to be more involved in social activism in general isn’t counterproductive as the journey to social change is not a one-step process. Societal apathy is not about the complete turnover of one’s beliefs but rather a start to challenging one to be more empathetic, engaged and to overcome limiting beliefs about themselves, others and the world around them. It’s the work of those like Resnick’s interview of Slovic (2017) and Thompson (2015) that can help us as Thompson wrote,

“… much of the explanation of participation and non-participation largely accounted for the presence of those who are indeed very active, those who are perhaps disengaged but critical and therefore still active and those who are disengaged and have turned off from politics entirely.” (p. 84)

Her work in particular allows for all these concepts to come together in our understanding of societal apathy. Thompson wrote in her conclusion that,

“I outline three key routes for such growth; to improve the conceptualisation of apathy further with more detailed study of these individuals, to look at the rise in populist movements rising to prominence in light of disengagement and apathy. I am particularly interested in their effective use of social media in shaping their agendas. Lastly, and perhaps most significantly, I demonstrate how I would like to approach the suggested endeavour of bringing together political science and educational research.” (p.272)

I largely agree with the idea that routes need to explore this beyond what has already been said. It is my belief that Manjoo (2020) from the New York Times was largely incorrect in his assumptions because he was describing a change in participation, not in levels of apathy. The cultural norms around apathy in the United States have shifted towards more empath and understanding such as with the acceptance of mental health, but there is a reality of work to be done. Social justice advocates facing an uphill battle with societal apathy that only multiplies with each level of mythology and misunderstanding around the subject. Rather than ignoring this issue for advocates, it’s important to examine all the ways in which this affects the efforts of organizations that struggle to make an impact. Thanks to those who have studied in this field, it is clear that more needs to be done for those who want change to learn more about the psychological obstacles they face and how a change in oneself is hard when there is a standard not to change. It’s about seeing the forest instead of the trees to fulfill an understanding of the different obstacles faced in societal apathy as a whole. Though societal apathy is ever present, there is a hope that if one can see and understand, then one can take action. As the Vox article (2017) about Slovic points out, raising awareness is indeed the first step as it proves to us that there is indeed an issue of apathy within society and our ability to resolve issues of social injustice. We have learned from this the importance of exploring these factors on the issues at hand and how they need to be addressed in the future if we are to create a world with social injustice.

References

Manjoo, F. (2020). The fury against Trump has begun a great Democratic awakening. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/30/opinion/trump-democracy-apathy.html?searchResultPosition=8 Farhad Manjoo

Ojeda, C. (2015). Depression and Political Participation. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/26612272

Resnick, B. (2017). A psychologist explains the limits of human compassion. Retrieved from https://www.vox.com/explainers/2017/7/19/15925506/psychic-numbing-paul-slovic-apathy

Roden, & Saleem, M. (2022). White Apathy and Allyship in Uncivil Racial Social Media Comments. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2021.1955933

Thompson, E. (2015). Exploring political non-participation; conceptualising, distinguishing and explaining political apathy. Retrieved from eprints.soton.ac.uk

Zhelnina, A. (2020). The apathy syndrome: how we are trained not to care about politics. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1093/socpro/spz019

Appendices

Appendix A: Figures from “Exploring Political Non-Participation; Conceptualising, Distinguishing and Explaining Political Apathy”

Figure One: Political Activity Spectrum on Page 280

I had the opportunity to visit my relatives which felt like a perfect time to cut back on the carbon footprint for this assignment. I figure that it would be a bit difficult, considering the score I got from Cool California. The global average from the United Nations made me a little more hopeful and then I found some more information online that really helped me reach this goal. Beyond what I read for the exercise, the Nature Conservancy and the Columbia articles really helped me think about what my carbon footprint is and what I can do to reduce my carbon footprint. Reducing carbon footprint comes in a variety of ways including many of the aspects and data that are different between groups and organizations. The Nature Conservancy also has its own calculator and I got the same results on their site. The Colombia article directly addresses what individuals can easily do to change their carbon footprint. Major sources for individuals include transportation, home electricity and ACs, dietary consumption, and shopping habits. Many of the pledges I made were around reducing my electricity consumption and getting more long-term solutions to reduce carbon emissions such as more efficient computer parts and replacing old household appliances with more efficient ones such as low-flow shower heads.

In my attempt to reduce my own emissions, I found myself at home with my family. I didn’t have my big monster of a computer or any of the devices I use as I didn’t need them or have the time for them. I was on a mission to help out with my family as they are moving soon. They were going around town in their electric vehicles to pick out old moving boxes from others so we could reuse them for the move. Being offline was a lot but the few things I did have such as my phone and laptop were easy to adjust to more eco-friendly settings. I didn’t need to use any electricity at the dorms which help as my parents have solar panels, a tankless water heater, and other more eco-friendly appliances than what’s provided at the dorms. I had all my devices at the dorms unplugged and the only traveling I did that weekend was in my mom’s car since I arrived on Friday and left Monday. I didn’t do any shopping either so I think I did a pretty good job at cutting back my emissions for a weekend. I know my family is very much into being as eco-friendly as possible but sometimes I forget that. My parents do what they can and tend to tell us about how much money they save doing it too. My hometown of Benicia started to have a town-wide compost system for all food waste as well so I hope that goes towards something other than a landfill.

It was easier than I thought it would be but it also had some costs. I missed my hobbies such as gaming and other comforts I usually have. I didn’t mind too much though because my favorite place to sleep is a used couch my parents got me and I need a break from my devices anyways. I haven’t thought about the overlap of healthy activities such as exercise or sleep as having a relationship with carbon footprint but it most definitely does. I’m sad that the only way for me to get around on campus is by bus but it’s still better than commuting in my car for my health and the environment. I think that I want to continue these changes or at least alter my lifestyle to be more considerate of my actions on my planet. It’s not necessarily a foreign subject for me but these last two assignments have given me the insight and inspiration to bring it back into focus for me. I think they would overall improve my life and though there are limits to some of these changes that could be challenging, I believe that I can overcome them and find new ways to do the same things while reducing my carbon emissions.

I know someday I’ll have my own place so I will want to make sure that my home is as eco-friendly as possible. There are so many products and technologies now that I think it wouldn’t be too hard to have many items become reusable. I have a set of reusable swabs that I got recently over the winter break and I know many products I come to use that have little carbon emissions. I think changing my electronic habits has the most potential in my current living conditions as there are many things I either don’t have control over or already do. I would encourage many people to do the same with their electronic consumption habits as many people overuse or inaccurately use their devices which leads to greater carbon emissions in a world that is becoming increasingly digital.

References

Calculator for Households & Individuals | Cool California. https://coolcalifornia.arb.ca.gov/calculator-households-individuals.

Cho, et al. “The 35 Easiest Ways to Reduce Your Carbon Footprint.” State of the Planet, 30 Dec. 2020, https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2018/12/27/35-ways-reduce-carbon-footprint/.

“Home Energy.” United Nations, United Nations, https://www.un.org/en/actnow/home-energy.

“What Is Your Carbon Footprint?” The Nature Conservancy, https://www.nature.org/en-us/get-involved/how-to-help/carbon-footprint-calculator/#:~:text=A%20carbon%20footprint%20is%20the,is%20closer%20to%204%20tons.

Hey Readers,

It’s been a minute since I published anything so enjoy my report on a deep-sea octopus. Please consider checking out this article for more about issues of deep-sea endangered species. Also, enjoy these cute videos I found!

My Report:

The roughy umbrella octopus (Opisthoteuthis Chathamensis) is a deep-sea umbrella octopus. Other opisthoteuthis or umbrella octopus species have been nicknamed “Dumbo” or flapjack because of the large ear-like fins on their heads. The roughy umbrella octopus is referred to as such because of its similarity to other roughy marine life with rough scales and laterally compressed bodies. The red list describes this species as a part of the marine deep benthic and has them as critically endangered with their population decreasing. Other sources are harder to find but some are publicly available including those with the only images I could find by O’Shea on the Tree of World archive in 1999. O’Shea was the original discovery of the species in 1999. The species was added to the red list in 2014 and an assessment was done in 2020. The reasons for the critically endangered status as listed by IUCN state, “it is estimated that this species has suffered an 80% decline in population size over three generations as a result of increased fishing activity (which is ongoing) in deeper waters. Urgent research is needed to assess the population size and harvest level.”

This species is found predominantly around New Zealand, “near the Chatham Islands, at depths of 900–1,438 m.” (O’Shea 1999) There are no numbers for the species' population but there is enough evidence for their decline. IUCN states, “the species has not been seen since 1999 and may be extinct despite previously being common on the Chatham Rise prior to this date.” This species was constantly fished by local fishermen and the decline increased by an estimated 70% to 80% based on available data. Because Opisthoteuthis Chathamensis is a cirrate octopod, there are many reasons scientists are concerned about the species and the possibilities for its recovery. This is primarily because as IUCN states, “several characteristics likely to make them rather slow to recover from population declines: longevity, slow growth, and low fecundity.” The process of development and reproduction for the species is extremely long and may not be quick enough to help the species recover on its own. There is also no estimate of a lifespan so it’s not possible to determine how long they live and how many years they have where they can reproduce. What is known is that the low metabolic rate they have in response to their environment means the lifecycles take many years.

Though the deep sea also faces its own issues because of climate change and other human activities, Opisthoteuthis Chathamensis is primarily threatened by deep sea fishing. Because of previously mentioned traits, this species is highly threatened by quick population decline by fishing practices, particularly by local deep-sea fisheries. Due to it being in the shallow end of the deep sea, they are much more vulnerable to practices such as trawling. Some of their characteristics relate more to benthos so they tend to also have other characteristics that make their vulnerability worse than other cirrate octopods. This species is not used in commercial industries so typically will be discarded by fishermen. Unfortunately, there are no current protections in place for the species as more research is needed according to the IUCN. It does indicate that land and conservation management would be the primary way to protect what is left of the species.

References

(SRLI), Gillian Lyons, and Louise Allcock (SRLI). “The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.” IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, 20 Aug. 2014, https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/163144/184253216.

“Animals.” National Geographic, https://www.nationalgeographic.com/animals/?source=NavAniHome.

Bloom, Arnold J (2010) Global Climate Change, Convergence of Disciplines, Sinauer

Associates, Inc, Sunderland, Massachusetts.

Collins, Martin; Villanueva, Roger (2006–06–13), “Taxonomy, Ecology And Behaviour Of The Cirrate Octopods”, Oceanography and Marine Biology, CRC Press, pp. 277–322, doi:10.1201/9781420006391.ch6, ISBN 9780849370441

DJ Freeman, BA Marshall, ST Ahyong, SR Wing & RA Hitchmough (2010) Conservation status of New Zealand marine invertebrates, 2009, New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research, 44:3, 129–148, DOI: 10.1080/00288330.2010.495373

“Endangered Species: U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service.” FWS.gov, https://www.fws.gov/program/endangered-species/species.

“Opisthoteuthis Chathamensis O’Shea 1999.” Opisthoteuthis Chathamensis, http://tolweb.org/Opisthoteuthis_chathamensis/20156.

Species, https://www.biologicaldiversity.org/species/.

Image Appendix

Image One: Collected Species Photography by O’Shea (1999).

Image Two: “Oral and Aboral” Photographs from O’Shea (1999).

The transgender community throughout history has fought for their right to exist, and not until very recent history has that been allowed to begin coming true. We explore the history of transgender people in America with a focus on trans people and their rights under the law. The transphobia that is deeply rooted in the American system leads the trans community to face many obstacles from stigma, discrimination in housing employment, healthcare, and violent crimes such as sexual assault and murder. The trans community has made progress in getting laws passed to protect their rights, but the last few years have seen a backlash under the Trump administration. There are many anti-trans state bills being introduced and some passed while Congress has bills like the Equality Act being debated which gives LGBTQIA+ people wide protections under the law. This essay breaks down this current situation and discusses the important aspects of progress on trans rights including laws and attitudes.

Introduction

In 2021, news articles are being published about the record number of anti-trans bills being passed at the state level. As of April 2021, Priya Krishnakumar from CNN cites that more than 117 bills have been introduced into state legislatures compared to 66 bills in the whole year of 2020. There are a number of reasons why these and other legislation are being passed on the state level to dismantle civil rights for the transgender community that is still fighting to be protected under the law. My question is not just focused on why anti-trans bills are being passed but instead questioning why so many Americans support anti-trans bills being passed in their states. It could just be that they are transphobic because transphobia is very much rooted in our culture. However, to understand the full depth of this issue and why people come to this realization, we need to look at the entire story and see where this new backlash is coming from within a small amount of time. Some of the laws being passed are now directly banning medical treatments for minors who need them. The sudden increase may be a result of the 2016 election as well as an increase in awareness among the population that trans people exist. The fear of young people having been targeted by “trans ideology” and being “converted” can also be seen as why many of these laws are presented and sometimes passed. There are plenty of anti-trans, and anti-LGBTQIA+ material being posted online, but is it just that, or is it more than that? I believe that anti-trans bills are being passed at record numbers because of the history of transphobia in America, an increase in discrimination and stigma because of the Trump administration, and because we are finally just beginning to accept young transgender people in mainstream society.

The History of the Hatred Towards Transgender People

Whether or not we know the history of the community, we have to start by understanding how we got into our current situation today. The history of violence, trauma and the fight for their rights is a very complex but important part of history that many people are unaware of. We will look at how transgender people have been treated within American society as well as the progress that has been made to pass and protest civil rights for this community. Much of this history involves the backlash of mainstream culture and how even other LGBTQIA+ people perceive trans people. In 2018, the Human Rights Campaign Foundation’s Dismantling a Culture of Violence by Mark Lee stated,

Often rooted in inaccurate beliefs and politically-motivated attacks on transgender identities, this stigma erects barriers in virtually every facet of life, denying transgender people the equal opportunity to succeed and be accepted for who they are. Moreover, anti-transgender stigma can have long-term impacts on mental health and economic and housing stability, especially if individuals experience familial rejection and isolation from social support systems. (1)

If we take a closer look at history and current issues, we can see the level of complex situations that trans people face daily. We can also look at how these issues may intersect with other identities such as race so we can see that, “…LGBT people experience forms of anti-queer violence in different ways depending on their social position..,” according to Doug Meyer. (2)

Brief History of Transgender People in America

Understanding the history of transgender people in America is to understand how, for a long time, trans people have been unacceptable to the general population including those who are gays, lesbians, and bisexuals, as transgender people and others with minority gender identities have been seen as mentally ill, prostitutes or possessed. The transgender community as a whole has seen a number of struggles no matter what time period we look at. For a very long time, being transgender or even cross-dressing was outlawed in the United States. It wasn’t until the 1950s that doctors started to talk about what was referred to then as the “transsexual” which was coined in 1949. Being transgender was not taken seriously, and the media created many of the stereotypes about transgender people we think of even to this day. Surgery and treatments were being performed but were not covered by insurance as they were not believed to actually help transgender people. And when it came to medical treatment, being transgender was considered a disorder in 1980 by the DSM, as Greenblatt cited, “In 2013, the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) was revised so that “gender dysphoria” replaced “gender identity disorder,” offering a less stigmatizing diagnosis.” (3) Beyond the medical, Greenblatt stated, “Outside the clinics, meanwhile, police routinely harassed and arrested transsexuals. Presaging the 1969 Stonewall riots — protests in New York City against police raids that sparked the modern gay rights movement — people now called transgender had participated in a series of similar, spontaneous protests.” (4) The Stonewall Riots are a very important event in LGBTQIA+ history, as they mark the beginning of the liberation movement and eventually turn into the equal rights movement we see today. However, looking at these events closely, transgender people were often not accepted by gay or lesbian women as Greenblatt said, “Seeking wider acceptance, some gays and lesbians looked down on masculine women and feminine men. Some lesbians, in particular, expressed hostility toward transgender women, whom they saw as appropriating women’s bodies and insisting on regressive and oppressive dress and stereotypes.” (5) It wasn’t until the 1990s that many authorities started to extend rights to transgender people.

Brief History of Transgender Rights in America

Now that we know the general history of the transgender community in America, we can now focus on the history of transgender rights in America. When it comes to laws passed, the 1990s marks the beginning of transgender people having more protection under the law. The first state to offer protection was Minnesota in 1993. Many of these protections were more recent and began to escalate once the 21st century began. San Francisco started to provide health benefits in 2001, and in 2007, a child has prescribed a hormone treatment at Boston’s Children’s Hospital for the first time in the United States. It wasn’t until the Obama administration, which advocated for protecting trans rights under the law, that things started to really change. There are laws like the Equality Act and many others that have still to be passed which would provide federal protections for trans individuals. Many state and local governments have not passed protections and in fact, doing the complete opposite which is very much why these laws are needed. Greenblatt stated, “The Equality Act, which would prohibit discrimination in employment, housing and public accommodations on the basis of gender identity or sexual orientation, remains stalled in Congress.” (6)

Transgender and Queer Legislators

In the 2020 election, we also saw a record number of transgender and nonbinary people who became members of Congress including Sarah McBride and Mauree Turner. However, it’s hard to tell whether or not they will have an impact on the views of voters or the way Congress votes on future bills in regards to queer protections and transgender rights. Greenblatt said, “Congress and most states have refused to mandate anti-discrimination protections for transgender individuals, in part because of a backlash over the issue of which public restrooms transgender people should use.” (7) There are many other examples of anti-trans backlash including the banning of medical treatment for minors, as these treatments are seen as part of “irreversible damage” by many transphobic individuals. Playing in sports and being in a locker room that correlates with the gender identity of trans people is also causing banning bills to be introduced and sometimes passed. On the flip side, the US House as of May 2021 has passed the Equality Act which protects against basic discrimination faced by people in the LGBTQIA+ community. The bill was introduced in 2015, and German Lopez stated, “The bill would address a remaining gap in civil rights laws: While there are already federal laws protecting people from discrimination based on race, religion, sex, and disability, there are no such federal laws explicitly protecting LGBTQ people from discrimination.”(8) There are plenty of representatives who are opposed to these bills, such as Marjorie Taylor Greene and others, who don’t believe in what they refer to as “trans ideology” which was talked about by Trump on a number of occasions. This bill will be going up to the Senate, and whether or not it will pass is widely unknown.

Anti-Trans Violence

For the transgender community, there are many areas of concern for transgender people as mentioned before including employment, housing, health care, and general discrimination. However, there is a big issue of trans individuals being murdered. On things to note, Mark Lee wrote, “Although each case is unique in its tragic circumstances, we know this epidemic disproportionately impacts trans women of color, who comprise approximately 4 in 5 of all anti-transgender homicides.”(9) It is important to note that many trans women of color face both racial discrimination and transphobia in many situations. The general factors that lead to this violence include anti-trans stigma, denial of opportunities, and increased risk factors. When we take a closer look at these murders, we can also see different types of violence within the different groups of the LGBTQIA+ community. Doug Meyer’s paper clearly shows that this happens as both an intersection of race and queerness as well as people having more violent responses to transgender people and lesbians rather than someone who is gay men, such as in sexual assault. Meyer stated, “This fear of sexual assault, not typically expressed by gay men, many lesbian and transgender women to emphasize the severity of physical violence.”(10)

Trauma in the Queer Community

There are many more ways in which transgender people experience a level of trauma that’s not common in the general population, including a high rate of suicide. As put by Priya Krishnakumar, “The majority of bills would affect transgender youth, a group that researchers and medical professionals warn is already susceptible to high rates of suicide and depression.”(11) Also, Alan Greenblatt stated, “One survey found that 17 percent had attempted suicide, compared with 3 percent of non-transgender students.”(12) Greenblatt also cited this study, “An Indiana University study found that transgender people who face discrimination are more likely than the public as a whole to attempt suicide, abuse drugs or engage in other destructive behavior.”(13) Mark Lee’s writing for the Dismantling a Culture of Violence report shows how many are without family support, get put into conversion therapy, feel unsafe in a political climate that can be hostile towards them, feel culturally marginalized & invisible to the society and culture at large. They are shown in this report to be denied opportunities including in education, employment, immigration, health care, and the justice system. They experience higher levels of intimate partner violence and sexual assault, engagement in sex work to survive, and many health disparities when compared to the general population.

Current Events and Current Solutions

According to Priya Krishnakumar on the recent increases, “On April 6, Arkansas became the first state to outlaw providing gender-affirming treatment to minors, a move that the American Civil Liberties Union said would “send a terrible and heartbreaking message” to transgender youth across the country.”(14) The article goes over the types of bills mentioned before but also curriculum bans and ID restrictions. These bills have always been around, but what to do about them is largely important. There are many current people, movements, and organizations, such as Alliance Defending Freedom, which recently posted a video titled, “How Modern “Equality” Comes at Women’s Expense,” which has gotten over 1 million views on YouTube. Their view is that passing protections for transgender people harms everything from religious institutions, women in sports, and freedom of speech. Of course, the reality is that these protection bills have nothing to do with many of these political topics or will in some way harm people. Instead, the anti-trans bills are harming the transgender community, and as Krishnakumar wrote, “In the meantime, Cathryn Oakley, state legislative director and senior counsel for the Human Rights Campaign, said she hoped that lawmakers realize the potential damage that passing these bills could create.”(15)

Anti-Trans Bills on The State Level

If we take a closer look at these bills and future bills, we can see a trend of types of discrimination that is passing. These include, as stated before, limiting or banning access to medical treatment, the ability to use bathrooms and locker rooms of the gender you identify as, and participating in sports. Many of these bills have been introduced but not passed. However, some bills have been passed. Arkansas is the state that many have focused on, as it has passed both bans in sports and gender-affirming care with more bills being introduced. Krishnakumar stated,

HB 1570, named the “The Arkansas Save Adolescents From Experimentation Act (SAFE),” was originally vetoed by Gov. Asa Hutchinson after passing both chambers of the legislature, but the veto was overridden days later. It’s the first bill in the US to become law that would prohibit health care professionals from administering gender-affirming care. (16)

This is important, as even the Governor did not agree that this was the right call. Arkansas is a good example of a state that doesn’t protect the rights of others. We can see this as well in their abortion laws and the overwhelming voter base in the state for Trump. States like these do not see their actions as in any way wrong and moving forward; representatives who liked Trump will most likely carry out his beliefs including his anti-trans rhetoric.

Challenges to Prohibited Civil Rights of Trans People

So far, we have looked at particular bills and examples of what is happening. Greenblatt wrote, “Over the past couple of years, the departments of Justice and Education have issued numerous opinions that transgender rights fall under the protection of Title IX, the sex discrimination section of the Civil Rights Act.”(17) Although there are some protections for transgender people, more is needed to prevent these bills from passing, but there are many ways now and, in the future, to go about this. Focusing on what can be done now, we have to look at the Equality Act. The Equality Act has also been in the news for many reasons, including when Marjorie Taylor Greene got upset and put out a big poster outside her office saying that there are only two genders. A Washington Post article discusses this new bill, and Samantha stated, “The Equality Act would amend existing civil rights laws, such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Fair Housing Act, to explicitly ban LGBTQ discrimination in the workforce, housing, education, credit, jury service and other areas of American life.”(18) There are a variety of reasons why this would have a huge impact but as Samantha stated next, “If passed, the legislation would provide the most comprehensive LGBTQ civil rights protections in U.S. history, advocates say, significantly altering the legal landscape in a country where more than half of states lack explicit legal protections on the basis of sexuality or gender identity.”(19) If this bill passes the House and Senate, it is likely to become law under the Biden administration. It would likely be used against these anti-trans bills at the state level which will change the lives of many. This law may be the most protective one available, but it is not the only way to protect trans people through the law.

Executive Order by President Biden

The Biden Administration has done much to support and advocate for transgender people, as he has picked the first transgender person for assistant secretary of health, reversed the military ban and the limits on protections in health care, and much more. In his “Proclamation on Transgender Day of Visibility,” Biden said, “Transgender Day of Visibility recognizes the generations of struggle, activism, and courage that have brought our country closer to full equality for transgender and gender non-binary people in the United States and around the world. Their trailblazing work has given countless transgender individuals the bravery to live openly and authentically.”(20) He then signed an executive order in January called “Preventing and Combating Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity or Sexual Orientation” which stated, “Children should be able to learn without worrying about whether they will be denied access to the restroom, the locker room, or school sports.”(21) He also said, “All persons should receive equal treatment under the law, no matter their gender identity or sexual orientation.” (22) Although this order may be ignored by state legislatures, it is important to note the progress that has been made and that if laws were passed to protect transgender people in Congress, the President would likely support and sign those laws including the possibility of the Equal Rights Amendment.

The Equal Rights Amendment

Most people remember the Equal Rights Amendment as the amendment that would make women and men equal under the law. The amendment was never ratified since it didn’t make its deadline with 38 states. However, as of now, there are 38 states that have signed on to this amendment, and there is a lot of discussion around whether or not it will ever become an amendment. What people do not know is that this amendment would also protect people who are trans and nonbinary. Robin Bleiwies explained,

But there is still work to do in order to ensure that women and people across the gender spectrum are treated equally and fairly and have the ability to live their lives as they want. The absence of an explicit prohibition against sex discrimination in the Constitution remains one key impediment undermining the fight for gender equality and women’s progress overall — and the ERA is an important tool to accomplish this progress.(23)

This brief describes not only the ways in which women and others face discrimination but also explains the term “sex discrimination” in the Equal Rights Amendment, which covers all discrimination based on sex and gender. This amendment is currently facing legal challenges, so even though its fate is unknown, there is the possibility for it to be passed.

Current Culture and Conversations around Anti-Trans Bills

At this very moment, there are many examples of how the current culture that is bigoted towards trans people is pushing many of these bills to pass. There are big influences from representatives like Greene as mentioned before or that video from Alliance Defending Freedom. Alliance Defending Freedom has been involved in a number of high-profile cases defending religious people and groups including cases about businesses refusing service based on their religion. According to a Guardian article by Jessica Glenza, the organization got “…more than $55m in contributions in 2018…” (24) Glenza also stated, “The group’s work against LGBTQ+ people has led experts on extremism at the Southern Poverty Law Center to label them a hate group.”(25) This organization is at the center of many anti-trans media sources online, such as with the “How Modern “Equality” Comes at Women’s Expense” video they released. Many of their arguments involve myths about transgender people, referring to trans women as men and talking about how these trans women should not be allowed in women’s spaces as they say. The video is also an attack on the Equality Act and the FairnessForAll Act, claiming that women, religious spaces, and other institutions will become victims. They concluded, “The Equality Act imposes a belief system about marriage and sexuality on everyone and treats reasonable people who disagree with the government’s views based on decent and honorable grounds as hostile and unfit to participate in the marketplace.”(26) This type of fearmongering about transgender people and laws protecting them has made many people upset, both because the video is clearly unable to understand its own bias, and it is subtly coded with language designed to make out like the government is protecting trans people with the Equality Act will somehow lead to taking away the rights of others, especially those who are religious.

Conclusion

From what we have seen, there are a variety of issues faced by the transgender community, and the level of acceptance for this community leaves much to be desired. We understand what they face and why they face it. There were many arguments made for solutions to these issues by passing laws to protect their community rather than passing discriminatory laws. Going forward, another possible solution is to change the minds of those who fear and hate trans people. They are the major group that has banned trans people from participating in society and are currently doing that with anti-trans bills like in Arkansas. Changing people’s minds through education, media and entertainment can all be important, but if we won't change now, we have to look at people like Marjorie Taylor Greene and others who frankly do not understand the realities of the queer community. Instead of seeing trans people just as “reasonable” as they are, they buy into the myths and the transphobia, they grow up in. The root of the issue is not that they are transphobic, but that they believe they are justified and have facts on their side. They are unwilling to accept that trans people are people and that trans women are women. If we are to make progress, we have to undo the damage that the right has done as well as reform or dismantle the system so that the trans community can begin to thrive. What solution will be the best for our future together is unknown, but there is hope for a future where anti-trans bills are not being passed at the Arkansas state legislature or anywhere else.

Endnotes

(1) Mark Lee, “Dismantling a Culture of Violence: Understanding Anti-Transgender Violence and Ending the Crisis,” Washington, D.C., Human Rights Campaign Foundation, 2018.

(2) Doug Meyer, “An Intersectional Analysis Of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, And Transgender (LGBT) People’s Evalutions Of Anti-Queer Violence,” Gender and Society 26, no. 6 (2012): 849–73, Accessed May 11, 2021. http://www.jstor.org.dvc.idm.oclc.org/stable/41705739.

(3) Alan Greenblatt, “Transgender Rights,” CQ Researcher 25, no. 44 (December 11, 2015): 1033–56, http://library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/cqresrre20151211

(4) Greenblatt, “Transgender Rights,” 1033–56.

(5) Greenblatt, “Transgender Rights,” 1033–56.

(6) Ibid., 1033–56.

(7) Greenblatt, “Transgender Rights,” 1033–56.

(8) German Lopez, “The House Just Passed a Sweeping LGBTQ Rights Bill,” Vox, May 17, 2019, https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/5/17/18627771/equality-act-house-congress-lgbtq-rights-discrimination.

(9) Mark Lee, “Dismantling a Culture of Violence: Understanding Anti-Transgender Violence and Ending the Crisis.”

(10) Doug Meyer, “An Intersectional Analysis Of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, And Transgender (LGBT) People’s Evalutions Of Anti-Queer Violence.”

(11) Priya Krishnakumar, “This Record-Breaking Year for Anti-Transgender Legislation Would Affect Minors the Most,” CNN, Cable News Network, April 15, 2021, https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/15/politics/anti-transgender-legislation-2021/index.html.

(12) Greenblatt, “Transgender Rights,” 1033–56.

(13) Greenblatt, “Transgender Rights,” 1033–56.

(14) Priya Krishnakumar, “This Record-Breaking Year for Anti-Transgender Legislation Would Affect Minors the Most.”

(15) Priya Krishnakumar, “This Record-Breaking Year for Anti-Transgender Legislation Would Affect Minors the Most.”

(16) Ibid.

(17) Greenblatt, “Transgender Rights,” 1033–56.

(18) Samantha Schmidt, “Equality Act Introduced in House to Provide Sweeping LGBTQ Protections,” The Washington Post, WP Company, February 18, 2021, https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2021/02/18/equality-act-introduced/.

(19) Ibid.

(20) “A Proclamation on Transgender Day Of Visibility, 2021.” The White House. The United States Government, March 31, 2021. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2021/03/31/a-proclamation-on-transgender-day-of-visibility-2021/.

(21) “Executive Order on Preventing and Combating Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity or Sexual Orientation,” The White House, The United States Government, January 21, 2021, https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2021/01/20/executive-order-preventing-and-combating-discrimination-on-basis-of-gender-identity-or-sexual-orientation/.

(22) Ibid.

(23) Robin Bleiweis, “The Equal Rights Amendment: What You Need To Know,” Center for American Progress, Center for American Progress, January 29, 2020, https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/women/reports/2020/01/29/479917/equal-rights-amendment-need-know/.

(24) Jessica Glenza, “The Multimillion-Dollar Christian Group Attacking LGBTQ+ Rights,” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, February 21, 2020, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/feb/20/alliance-defending-freedom-multimillion-dollar-conservative-christian-group-attacking-lgbtq-rights.

(25) Ibid.

(26) How Modern “Equality” Comes at Women’s Expense, Expense, YouTube, YouTube, 2021, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fkjBauQ25g.

Bibliography

“A Proclamation on Transgender Day Of Visibility, 2021.” The White House. The United States Government, March 31, 2021. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential -actions/2021/03/31/a-proclamation-on-transgender-day-of-visibility-2021/.

Bleiweis, Robin. “The Equal Rights Amendment: What You Need To Know.” Center for American Progress. Center for American Progress, January 29, 2020. https://www. americanprogress.org/issues/women/reports/2020/01/29/479917/equal-rights-amendment-need-know/.

“Executive Order on Preventing and Combating Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity or Sexual Orientation.” The White House. The United States Government, January 21, 2021. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions /2021/01/20/ executive-order-preventing-and-combating-discrimination-on-basis-of-gender-identity-or-sexual-orientation/.

Glenza, Jessica. “The Multimillion-Dollar Christian Group Attacking LGBTQ+ Rights.” The Guardian. Guardian News and Media, February 21, 2020. https://www.theguardian.com /world/2020/feb/20/alliance-defending-freedom-multimillion-dollar-conservative-christian-group-attacking-lgbtq-rights.

Greenblatt, Alan. “Transgender Rights.” CQ Researcher 25, no. 44 (December 11, 2015): 1033–56. http://library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/cqresrre2015121100.

How Modern “Equality” Comes at Women’s Expense. YouTube. YouTube, 2021. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fkjBauQ25g.

Krishnakumar, Priya. “This Record-Breaking Year for Anti-Transgender Legislation Would Affect Minors the Most.” CNN. Cable News Network, April 15, 2021. https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/15/politics/anti-transgender-legislation-2021/index.html.

Lee, Mark. “Dismantling a Culture of Violence: Understanding Anti-Transgender Violence and Ending the Crisis.” Washington, D.C.: Human Rights Campaign Foundation, 2018.

Lopez, German. “The House Just Passed a Sweeping LGBTQ Rights Bill.” Vox. Vox, May 17, 2019. https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/5/17/18627771 /equality-act-house-congress-lgbtq-rights-discrimination.

Meyer, Doug. “An Intersectional Analysis Of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, And Transgender (LGBT) People’s Evalutions Of Anti-Queer Violence.” Gender and Society 26, no. 6 (2012): 849–73. Accessed May 11, 2021. http://www.jstor.org.dvc.idm.oclc.org/stable/41705739.

Schmidt, Samantha. “Equality Act Introduced in House to Provide Sweeping LGBTQ Protections.” The Washington Post. WP Company, February 18, 2021. https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2021/02/18/equality-act-introduced/.

The UN is a complex organization with a lot of criticism for the way it handles international peace and security, human rights, environmental issues, and social cooperation. We examine the ways in which the UN is important to a growing global population, especially in solving global issues and how the ways the UN fails could become fatal under the right circumstances. We look at the past with the Rwandan genocide as well as more recent day issues like the Israel and Palestine conflict and the COVID-19 pandemic.

Introduction

The UN is an important global organization that has developed over time with the original goal of preventing wars and tackling many issues around the world. The book, The United Nations Organization:(in)Securing Global Peace and Security, states that “The primary role of international law in past centuries was to deal with issues of war and peace and, secondarily, commerce. But it has now expanded into issues concerning use of the oceans, the atmosphere, climate, space exploration, food production, property rights, taxation and many other aspects of modern life.”[1] It is clear to most that it is necessary for us to have an international body that can regulate and tackle international problems. However, currently, there is only one that exists yet doesn’t seem to be able to be effective with past issues, present ones, and future threats. We can see this in the failures to address violence such as in the Rwandan Genocide and the Israel and Palestine conflict. There are plenty of examples of how they fail in protecting human rights such as women’s rights and promoting democracy. We can see how the UN falls short on solutions for climate change, and the response to the pandemic. This is not to say that their achievements don’t mean anything but there are many areas in which the UN is failing and they need to be addressed. The biggest thing is looking at social cooperation and the ways in which many states and actors have gotten away with not following the law and working in their own interests rather than working toward peace. The UN stands for protecting human rights and creating global peace yet its effectiveness in this vision for the world has been unsuccessful when we look at the UN’s role in international conflict & peace, global economics, social cooperation, and environmental solutions. The UN has had some success which we will see but overall has fallen short of its goals for the future of the world.

[1] Tatah Mentan, The United Nations Organization:(in)Securing Global Peace and Security (Oxford: Langaa RPCIG, 2020) Accessed December 10, 2021. ProQuest Ebook Central, 107.

International Peace and Security

The first objective of the UN is international peace and security the world. There are many ways in which they try to keep peace such as with the security council. The main criticism as stated in United Nations Renaissance: What the UN Is, and What It Could Be is, “It is too fraught with complexity, contradictions, and anomalies to present purely reasonable conclusions. For instance, according to the UN Charter, all members are meant to be equal but the Permanent Five veto-holding members are evidently more equal than the others. While the Security Council is meant to uphold international peace and security, most of its energy is spent on interventionist peace operations within war-torn countries.”[2] It seems that the UN’s greatest failure in this is the fact that they aren’t doing a whole lot to prevent or protect which is counter to their mission. This can be seen in many of the major conflicts in recent history. It is also as the paper then says, “The UN is not meant to meddle in the sovereign affairs of independent countries and yet the Security Council regularly does so with impunity.”[3] This will be important to keep in mind as the lack of accountability is also a big issue.

[2] Trent, John E., and Laura Schnurr, United Nations Renaissance: What the UN Is, and What It Could Be (Leverkusen, Germany ;: Barbara Budrich Publisher, 2018.) 56.

[3] Ibid, 56.

The Rwandan Genocide

The tragic events of the Rwandan Genocide and the role of the UN are written about by many people. Michael N. Barnett writes, “The 24 hours after the death of President Habyarimana on April 6 produced the feared bloodshed. With only 5,000 lightly-armed peacekeepers scattered throughout Rwanda, UNAMIR was unprepared to confront the wave of terror unleashed by Hutu extremists against Tutsis and Hutu moderates. UN troops were instantly confronted by two increasingly untenable tasks: protecting lives of civilians and defending themselves.” [4] It’s clear that the situation was mishandled by the UN but then later as Barnett writes, “The Security Council, highly embarrassed that its only answer to the bloodshed was a reduction of UNAMIR, began to debate the possibility of an intervention force. But there were no volunteers for such a force. It seemed that the daily reports of carnage and brutality only contributed to the belief that it was highly improbable that a modest-sized outside force could halt the terror, and no member state was enthusiastic about sending its troops into such chaos.”[5] The issue with actual violence is that the UN may have peacekeepers but does not have an intervention force for moments of crisis like the Rwandan genocide. Despite the need for someone to intervene, inaction was the step they took in this event. Though the UN says it learned a lot from this experience, there are other times even today that they have failed to prevent violence.

[4] Michael N.Barnett, “The UN Security Council, Indifference, and Genocide in Rwanda.” (Cultural Anthropology 12, no. 4 (1997): 551–78.) http://www.jstor.org/stable/656636, 558.

[5] Ibid, 560.

Israel and Palestine

Though the situation in Israel and Palestine is highly illegal and full of tragic loss, many including the UN have not intervened in the occupation. Ardi Imseis summarizes the situation, “Occupation of enemy territory is meant to be temporary, and the occupying power may not rightfully claim sovereignty over such territory. Since 1967, Israel has systematically and forcibly altered the status of occupied Palestine, with the aim of annexing, de jure or de facto, most or all of it. While the UN has focused on the legality of Israel’s discrete violations of humanitarian and human rights law, it has paid scant attention to the legality of Israel’s occupation regime as a whole.”[6] The paper goes over all the major ways in which Israel has violated the law and how the UN has overlooked these despite them going against the rule of law internationally. The paper looks at everything including the history of aiming for decolonization during the UN’s development yet shows that the UN still has completely committed to that ideal.

[6] Ardi Imseis, “Negotiating the Illegal: On the United Nations and the Illegal Occupation of Palestine, 1967–2020.” (European Journal of International Law 31 (3): 1055–85. 2020.) doi:10.1093/ejil/chaa055, 1055.

Human Rights Internationally

Human rights on the international stage are extremely important as the UN has the ability to protect human rights yet there are many who still don’t have the basic rights necessary for survival and living a good quality of life. Seeing how the UN is not protecting human rights is important to understand as it’s a core principle of the UN. As stated in United Nations Renaissance: What the UN Is, and What It Could Be, “Attempts by the international community to intervene in a given country in order to protect the rights of individuals or groups are often met with accusations of interference with the principle of sovereignty and nonintervention. Indeed, the prevalence of state sovereignty as the guiding norm in international relations remains the greatest obstacle to realizing universal human rights.”[7] The problem is that the UN is trying to get the world to agree on the basics of human rights when the reality is that there is no consensus on the issue. If there was, it wouldn’t be an issue, to begin with. In The United Nations Organization: (in)Securing Global Peace and Security, they state the problem as, “Why has there been need for three decades of debate to affirm what must be regarded as the most fundamental and inalienable of all human rights? The long struggle to obtain final approval by the UNGA reflects the complexity of the legal implications of its adoption and the cumbersomeness of the procedures for international deliberation. But most of all, it reflects the difficulty in overcoming the reluctance of nation-states to recognize the sovereignty of the individual human being.”[8] The reluctance of nation-states seems to be at the center of why progress is so slow on this particular issue.

[7] Trent, John E., and Laura Schnurr, United Nations Renaissance: What the UN Is, and What It Could Be, 98.

[8] Tatah Mentan, The United Nations Organization:(in)Securing Global Peace and Security, xxii.

Promoting Democracy

Being a democratic institution is very important as the UN is essentially a role model for those who don’t live within a stable democracy just yet. There are some issues around how the UN is structured that are both undemocratic and an obstacle to protecting human rights. This is most well seen in the permanent five and the calls for reforming the security council. In “Why is change so slow? Assessing prospects for United Nations Security Council reform,” it states, “Reforming the institutional structure and core decision-making procedures of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) remains one of the most difficult challenges of UN reform. The UNSC is the world’s only global body that can authorize the use of force. Only 15 members, five of those being a member since 1945, decide on behalf of all other UN Member States.”[9] Addressing these issues around voting and representation could have helped in situations like the Rwandan genocide and the issues around permanent five have that much power has been illustrated to come at the expense of protecting human rights and ending conflicts. The paper states, “Often, the UNSC is deadlocked (such as in the case of Syria), essentially because a permanent member cast or threatened to cast a veto on the basis of its domestic interests.”[10] In the paper, they examine why reform is so hard and explain that “The empirical observations lead us to argue that the UNSC setup does not respond to changes in the power structure, largely due to a high decision-making threshold for Charter amendments coupled with a steep increase in UN membership that decreases the likelihood of finding a winning coalition.”[11] The lack of accountability and the fact that the security council’s permanent five focus on self-interest compromises the goals of the UN.

[9] Hosli, Madeleine O., and Thomas Dörfler, “Why Is Change so Slow? Assessing Prospects for United Nations Security Council Reform.”(Journal of Economic Policy Reform 22 (1): 35–50. 2019.) doi:10.1080/17487870.2017.1305903, 35.

[10] Ibid.

[11] Ibid, 36.

Addressing Women’s Rights

One of the biggest issues internationally is protecting women’s rights. Women historically have faced countless restrictions on their lives and unfortunately, that continues today. The UN is tasked with seeing women gain more freedom but has fallen short of this task as well. In “The United Nations and the Struggle for Gender Equality in Global Politics: Challenges and Prospect,” it makes the claim that, “the thrust of this paper is to identify challenges of UN in her struggle for gender equality in global politics, prospects and proffer policies for better inclusiveness of women in the member countries.”[12] Many of the points made involve a series of complex issues and the volume of those within each nation-state. The paper makes it clear that the UN is strongly committed to its promises of gender equality but has not done enough to actually reach that goal. The paper states, “A unit of the United Nations, UNICEF precisely has identified several challenges that have embodied gender equality. These challenges range from security problems and instability; high rate of human rights abuses emanating from gender-based violence and sexual violence; forced displacement; restricted access to populations; diminished national capacity; and so on United Nations Children’s Fund, (2011). Crises zones have really pose serious threat to gender equality in global politics which has been intensified through societal norms. Places like Afghanistan, Pakistan where gender disparities in education and other variables are worse in global politics. Humanitarian responses are limited in the course of addressing gender equality in crisis prone states.”[13] The UN seems to not only be committed but also very much understand the issues that need to be addressed and even where the crisis zones are. However, the limit on the actions they take is a big factor in why those gaps have not gone better.

[12] OBAH-AKPOWOGHAHA, Nelson Goldpin, and Victor OJAKOROTU,“The United Nations and the Struggle for Gender Equality in Global Politics: Challenges and Prospect.” (Gender & Behaviour 17 (3): 13595–609.2019) https://search-ebscohost-com.dvc.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip,shib,sso&db=a9h&AN=13975 3110&site=ehost-live.,13595.

[13] Ibid,13600.

Solutions for Climate Change

A big development project for the UN is protecting our planet and especially dealing with climate change and environmental issues. Though steps have been made, it’s important to look at how the UN falls short on this issue as well. ECOSOC or Economic and Social Council is very much focused on environmental issues as well as economic and social but is heavily criticized and in need of reforms. In United Nations Renaissance: What the UN Is, and What It Could Be, it stated that “ECOSOC has received more than its fair share of criticism. Prominent diplomats, politicians, policymakers and researchers alike have called it a weak and irrelevant institution. Various reasons for this have been put forth, including: an overly expansive agenda that overlaps with that of the General Assembly; a lack of authority or “teeth”; a disregard for results and outcomes; and an unrealistic workload with too many bodies reporting to it. Critics point to a need for ECOSOC to be less bureaucratic, more action oriented and policy relevant.”[14] Climate change very much is an issue that needs to be handled proactively if it’s to be addressed as it will cause mass problems in the near future but criticisms of ECOSOC make it clear that there are many obstacles to a proactive UN solution to this issue.

[14] Trent, John E., and Laura Schnurr, United Nations Renaissance: What the UN Is, and What It Could Be, 96.

COVID-19 and the Pandemic

Without the UN, a lot of the processes made on COVID would not have been possible. UN News in an article called “Current system will not protect us from the next pandemic, ‘which could happen at any time’” goes over the issues with the current system and how it responds to pandemics. It states, “Following the deep-dive into COVID-19 responses, immediate action was recommended for a package of international, interlinked reforms to stop a future outbreak.” [15] What details of how this would do and what reforms need to be made are within the article but they quote Co-chairs Helen Clark saying, “Given the scale of devastation from this pandemic and its continuing impact on people across the globe, the Panel resolved to document fully what happened and why, and to make bold recommendations for change.”[16] WHO or the world health organization was very good about providing information and was often seen within the news cycle. It’s clear that the efforts made by WHO were important but the underlying issues around reform in the UN and the UN not being known for being proactive and action-oriented seem to have made their efforts a lot less impactful than they could have been. The biggest issue which is addressed in the article is vaccine inequity and it states, “Unfortunately, vaccine inequity has changed very little. And in the poorest countries, less than one per cent of the population are fully vaccinated.”[17] This combined with all the other issues has seen a rise in new variants and no end to the current pandemic.

[15] “Current System Will Not Protect Us from the next Pandemic, ‘Which Could Happen at Any Time’ | Covid-19 |UN News,” United Nations, United Nations, November 22, 2021, https://news.un.org/en/story/2021/11/1106302.

[16] Ibid.

[17] Ibid.

Social Cooperation

There is one thing necessary for the UN to function and that is the social cooperation of all nation-states. For example, in The United Nations Organization: (in)Securing Global Peace and Security, it is explained that “Nations based on capitalism and its drive for profit are necessarily in conflict with themselves and nations that are founded on socialism in which the profit motive is replaced with the motive of achieving international cooperation to satisfy the need of the world’s peoples for economic, social and political well-being. The vast difference between the two motivations, created by the social relations within and between states, results, not only in conflict between classes and between nations but in opposing views of what a world order should be and how it can be achieved.”[18] The UN can be a place where these differences can be discussed and finding common ground can become possible. The way modern world requires this as we become more globally connected. The problem around social cooperation is states who don’t comply can completely stop any progress that is made.

[18] Tatah Mentan, The United Nations Organization:(in)Securing Global Peace and Security, 105.

Accountability for International Actors

Another issue is when you are not dealing with a state but rather an international actor or big international corporation. These corporations have a lot of influence due to their financial power and effect on the global economy. Holding these groups accountable for their actions is a challenge as there is no clear protection nation-states can get from their influence. Ardi Imseis says, “More deeply, even accounting for the achievement of Third World territorial sovereignty, certain structural inequities between the former imperial powers and their relatively newly independent colonies have remained, such that the full realization of Third World political, cultural and economic sovereignty seems to have been impaired from the start. One striking example is represented in the neo-liberal mechanisms of the Bretton Woods (BW) institutions (i.e. World Bank and International Monetary Fund). Replete with legal conditions that privilege market fundamentalism through the Washington Consensus, these institutions have resulted inconsiderable loss of Third World control over its economic sphere. The result has been the evolution of Third World sovereignty as unequal relative to that of its Western progenitors, and the political legitimation of this situation within the work of the UN.”[19] In these ways, the UN does nothing to help the sovereignty of developing nations and allows these actors to continue taking advantage of others. In United Nations Renaissance: What the UN Is, and What It Could Be, the book addresses the importance of the private sector and civil society to the goals of the UN but also states, “The UN development system risks being marginalized by other actors if it continues to put off much-needed reform.”[20]

19 Ardi Imseis, “Negotiating the Illegal: On the United Nations and the Illegal Occupation of Palestine, 1967–2020,”1058–1059.

20 Trent, John E., and Laura Schnurr, United Nations Renaissance: What the UN Is, and What It Could Be, 91.

Conclusion & Resolution

The UN is a very important global institution that could be successful in promoting change that maintains peace and protects human rights but currently falls short on these issues. As such, the UN is committed to trying to make changes but both nation-states and international actors present big obstacles to reforming the UN and making a better organization. The need for change is important and critical especially if the problems cited are to be corrected and worked on such as climate change. Without reform or some improvement, the next pandemic response could be similar to what we have been experiencing and could lead to us having to face no change in problems of war, conflict, and violence.

Bibliography

Barnett, Michael N. “The UN Security Council, Indifference, and Genocide in Rwanda.” Cultural Anthropology 12, no. 4 (1997): 551–78. http://www.jstor.org/stable/656636.

“Current System Will Not Protect Us from the next Pandemic, ‘Which Could Happen at Any Time’ | Covid-19 | UN News.” United Nations. United Nations, November 22, 2021. https://news.un.org/en/story/2021/11/1106302.

Hosli, Madeleine O., and Thomas Dörfler. 2019. “Why Is Change so Slow? Assessing Prospects for United Nations Security Council Reform.” Journal of Economic Policy Reform 22 (1): 35–50. doi:10.1080/17487870.2017.1305903.

Imseis, Ardi. 2020. “Negotiating the Illegal: On the United Nations and the Illegal Occupation of Palestine, 1967–2020.” European Journal of International Law 31 (3): 1055–85. doi:10.1093/ejil/chaa055

Mentan, Tatah. The United Nations Organization:(in)Securing Global Peace and Security. Oxford: Langaa RPCIG, 2020. Accessed December 10, 2021. ProQuest Ebook Central.

OBAH-AKPOWOGHAHA, Nelson Goldpin, and Victor OJAKOROTU. 2019. “The United Nations and the Struggle for Gender Equality in Global Politics: Challenges and Prospect.” Gender & Behaviour 17 (3): 13595–609. https://search-ebscohost-com.dvc.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip,shib,sso&db=a9h&AN=139753110&site=ehost-live.

Trent, John E., and Laura Schnurr. United Nations Renaissance : What the UN Is, and What It Could Be Leverkusen, Germany ;: Barbara Budrich Publisher, 2018.

My Response: What do you think is Cairo’s motivation in attacking feminism? Is it justified?

Looking into Betsy Cairo, I realized that her motivation comes from a place of good intentions. She is very aware of how the binary and inclusive language so she wants that to be reflected in modern-day movements instead of what she sees as a word, a label, and a movement that is harming those who are both in the binary and outside the binary. Her education and understanding of human sexuality an important parts of why she believes this because she knows how boxed-in people can feel or how being excluded can be harmful. Her feelings about this word seem to also be reflected in what many others seem to feel as well. However, I do not believe this is justified for a variety of reasons which I will explain.

Her criticism of feminism doesn’t really make sense if we consider that many modern feminists are either liberal feminists or intersectional feminists. The main difference is that liberal feminists aka the type you would see in 1st and 2nd wave feminists would not include many others such as lesbians or people of color. An example of a modern-day group like this would be TERFs or trans-exclusionary radical feminists who are not inclusive of trans and nonbinary people. Many people who are feminists called them intersectional feminists to show they not only fight for women but for many other people. They probably are also likely to call themselves any other progressive label you can think of.

If we think about those feminists that are inclusive, then why is the word an issue? Well according to Cairo, the word itself is making some “radical feminists” believe they can tell people what to do and that many women feel equal to men. It does really address the current issues for women, even if they do not consciously aware of it. I can think of at least 20 different reasons we need feminism in particular which include issues of trans women being targeted and even for men that can be addressed through feminism. There is also an issue with thinking that if women have it good, all women have it good. There are many places in the world where women have it a lot worse than in America that need feminism so they someday are free themselves. If true equality was achieved for everyone on the planet, then maybe I would agree with Cairo but that is not the case.

Many people do feel the language doesn’t include them. I will use cisgender men as an example here as just a few men call themselves feminists. Men usually feel that feminism is not about them for many reasons but mostly because they believe it’s about criticizing men so they simply can’t be a part of the conversation. The issue with this is that men do not see how women’s oppression is bad for them in some cases but also how issues they experience will get attention if society only focuses on women’s issues. This is a big reason why we see men’s rights groups attack feminists because they believe in many myths and stereotypes that just are not true. What they don’t realize is that for women, talking about feminism is about both men and women. Men who are willing to support feminists in a genuine would find that it may be uncomfortable for them but also open them up to understanding women better. In turn, any feminist who is really a feminist understands that men face many issues particular to them and that being about to have those open discussions with men would actually help them rather than put them down or hurt them.

Cairo seems to think that something like this can’t happen because of the language but the issue is not the language but the idea that feminists are these exclusive women who only want things that have nothing to do with real equality. People believe this stereotype out of a lack of understanding but also the fear of change. People get comfortable and feel things are good for them so why do we need this word or fight for these things when everything is fine? I think Cairo believes this deeply which is why she believes what she believes.

Egalitarianism really isn’t good for gender equality. I feel Cairo being who she is probably doesn’t understand intersectionality at all which leads her to this very black-and-white thinking about most of her arguments. I’m not sure it holds any water when compared to any real political writings by intersectional feminists of today. Women Against Feminism had a big impact on me when I was younger and actually hurt my ability to speak out about gender issues because of fears that I would be labeled a feminist and branded as a stereotypical feminist at school and in public. I don’t have those fears now but I know it hurts those who do have issues that need to be talked about. Completely removing language is unhelpful and Women Against Feminism completely misrepresents actually feminist talking points. Many who become anti-feminists also fall into more radical right-wing circles as well because they are “anti-SJW” or any number of other antis. It’s really a serious thing to want the word erased.

Anyone can be a feminist and that is their choice. Feminism has many definitions that are not just about women and many feminists understand solving women’s issues includes everyone, especially those who are not women.

There is both anecdotal and statistical evidence on the size of the double rainbow intersection through several research studies done over the years. In a study about averse sexual experiences experienced by autistic females, Laura A. Pecora states, “Autistic females were more likely to identify with a transgender gender identity (p < .05) and non-heterosexual sexual orientation (p < .007) compared to non-autistic females.”(4) She also said, “Within autism, there appears to be greater variability in gender identity than found in the wider population,”(5) and “Gender variance has been reported by 5.4 to 7.2% of autistic natal male and female youths, [1, 2] and 11.3% of autistic adults [3], yet between 0.7 [1] and 5% [3] in non-autistic or control samples.”(6) In a pdf from The Seattle Children’s Autism Center, Felice Orlich, and Rachel Earl state, “Compared to controls, children and teens with ASD are 7.59 times more likely to express gender variance.”(7) A study on gender dysphoria or GD in ASD by Gunter Heylens states, “This study reports on the co-occurrence between GD and autistic traits or ASD in adults. It clearly shows an overrepresentation of autistic traits and ASD in both MAB and FAB, compared to the general population.”(8) An article on Spectrum News by Laura Dattaro called “Gender and Sexuality in Autism, Explained” comes into more detail by expressing how “two spectrums overlap,”(9) and “Only 30 percent of autistic people in a 2018 study identified as heterosexual, compared with 70 percent of neurotypical participants. And although half of 247 autistic women in a 2020 study identified as cisgender, just 8 percent reported being exclusively heterosexual.”(10)

There are some theories as to why more autistic individuals are more likely to have minority sexualities and gender identities than the average population. A letter by Diane Ehrensaft, called “Double Helix Rainbow Kids,” explains one possibly to be that,

“With gender, the neurodiverse individual’s experience may be the most revolutionary of all in de-constructing a society’s fixed and unbending mores of gender. It is sometimes theorized that the reason so many people on the autism spectrum show up in gender clinics with either gender dysphoria or an asserted transgender identity is that they have failed to read the social cues that interpersonally guide and shape us in our understanding of our gender selves (Strang et al. 2018). If that is so, we might also say that the neurodiverse cohort is freed from the social constrictions and binding mores of “correct” gender roles and behavior, allowing them a far more creative gender journey, in line with the twenty-first century understanding of gender in its multiplicity and expansiveness, rather than its entrapment in two designated boxes.”(11)

Laura Dattaro believes, “Compared with neurotypical people, autistic people may be less influenced by social norms, and so may present their internal selves more authentically.”(12) In a study on the induced romantic relationships of double rainbow people, J. Dewinter states, “Possible bias related to differences in response style between autistic participants, compared to those in the general population group, cannot be excluded, e.g. autistic participants being less influenced by societal views or stereotypes on attraction and gender or people who do not recognise themselves in the response categories.”(13)

This community faces unique challenges based on discrimination against the queer community and with ableism focused on the stereotypes of the autistic community. Shannon Des Roches Rosa addressed this in their article, “For many decades the blame was on just about anything from poor parenting to vaccines. Homosexuals were subjected to behavioral conversion therapy, shock therapy, injections, beatings, removal from imaginary catalysts, and social shaming to drive the gay out of them. These very things currently happen in the autism world.”(14) The combined stigmas and discrimination from misinformation are well-documented and have caused a lot of pain and trauma. In the younger double-rainbow individuals, there are a variety of concerns. A SPARK article by Marina Sarris stated, “According to research, students with autism are at higher risk of being bullied. The same is true for LGBT youth. A 2017 survey of U.S. high school students found that those who are gay, lesbian, and bisexual are almost twice as likely to be bullied at school and online than heterosexual students are.”(15) The article includes quotes from double rainbow people who grew up having these issues, like Justin who said, “Autistic people and LGBTQ people often face negative stereotypes, discrimination, and pressure to conform or “pass for ‘normal.’” he says.” The intersection between being queer and being autistic is that we don’t want to be altered. We don’t want to be cured of who we are. Our worth doesn’t derive from seeming ‘normal.’”(16) Learning to communicate is also a concern, as autistic individuals perceive and socialize in a completely different way than neurotypicals, and neurotypicals may have trouble interpreting neurodiverse individuals. Marina Sarris says, “That’s because their social and communication differences may pose challenges for dating and relationships. And if they are LGBTQ, those differences may cause challenges with the process of coming out to family and friends.”(17) Many children within the double rainbow must figure out how to come out, and communicate pronouns with the addition of being unable to read social situations, and with a common misunderstanding of the neurotypical majority.

Today, the medical model of disabilities is an overwhelming shadow over the autistic community, and limitations on health providers and issues finding treatments can be extremely difficult for those who have both the need of their support and the need to be accepted by the people around them. This can be even more difficult when thinking about both LGBTQIA+ issues and autism issues. Diane Ehrensaft explains, “Both clinicians and parents have been known to interpret the insistence on a transgender or non-binary gender identity that shows up more prevalently in autistic children than in their non-autistic peers as just an obsessive phase, like so many other obsessions the autistic child passes through.”(18) A key symptom of ASD is special interests or intense focus on a particular topic. A special interest can last hours to a whole lifetime. Diane Ehrensaft follows up and says, “Rather than a passing phase, the gender declarations can become more insistent or urgent over time, especially if the request for acknowledgement is denied or overridden by the adults in the child’s life,”(19) and “What we know about gender expansive/transgender experience and the experience of autism is that they both may be accompanied by a strong dose of social anxiety.”(20) Services for the double rainbow for something like mental health can be limited due to a lack of awareness and understanding. Gunter Heylens states that if, “underestimation could lead to a lack of appropriate care for individuals with GD and comorbid ASD, the latter could unnecessarily prolong the course of assessment and treatment in individuals with gender dysphoria.”(21)

Another concern is sexual victimization, violence, and trauma within the double rainbow community. Laura A. Pecora states, “There is growing recognition that autistic females present with more diverse gender and sexual identities than their non-autistic counterparts. Likewise, autistic females are also at an increased risk of adverse sexual experiences. As higher rates of sexual victimisation are observed in individuals with diverse sexual identities in the broader population, rates of negative sexual experiences among autistic females remain unclear.”(22) She states later that, “Autistic homosexual females were more likely to have experienced a range of negative sexual experiences than autistic heterosexual females (OR ≥ 3.29; p < .01) and were more likely to have experienced unwanted sexual experiences than non-autistic females, regardless of sexual orientation (OR ≥ 2.38; p < .05).”(23) This study focused on the adverse sexual experiences of autistic females with the idea that autistic females are likely to have a lack of sexual education and difficulty navigating socially because neurotypical women are more likely than neurotypical men to face sexual violence. Laura Dattaro states, “For years, many parents and caregivers believed that autistic people, particularly those with an intellectual disability, shouldn’t be given information about sexuality and are less interested in relationships than neurotypical people are, Dewinter says.”(24) Much of these attitudes come from the stereotype that disabled individuals do not have sex and/or are not sexual by nature. Laura Dattaro believes in a solution,

“More comprehensive and inclusive sex education can help. In ongoing surveys, Eileen Crehan, assistant professor of child studies and human development at Tufts University in Medford, Massachusetts, has found that autistic people want information about sexual orientation and gender identity more than typical people do. Research has shown that lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer/questioning (LGBTQ+) adolescents who have more inclusive sex education in school have better mental health. However, only 19 percent of U.S. sex-education materials are LGBTQ+ inclusive, according to the advocacy group GLSEN, creating an extra barrier for autistic LGBTQ+ people. “You have two hoops to jump through to get the information that you need,” Crehan says.”(25)

There are many more examples of unique barriers the double rainbow faces, but a paper named “The Autistic Art of Failure? Unknowing Imperfect Systems of Sexuality and Gender,” written by David Jackson-Perry, addresses the deepest issues. David Jackson-Perry wrote, “Considering that the ‘over-representation’ of sexual and gender diversity amongst autistic people requires attention, research in the field largely emphasizes perceived autistic deficits to explain this phenomenon. In this way, the authenticity of autistic sexual and gender subjectivity is called into question, while both deficit readings of autism and assumptions of a stable, binary reading of sexuality and gender are left untroubled.”(26) This is where the stigma of queerness meets ableism toward autism. David Jackson-Perry continues, “Leaning on Halberstam’s use of failure, I challenge the grounding of autistic sexual and gender diversity in deficit, considering instead autistic experience of gender and sexual identity as valid and authentic.”(27) He talks about, “… the history of autism is the history of a group of people characterized in the majority of scientific literature as ‘the disordered and damaged other’ (Milton and Moon 2012: 5)”(28) to show where this stigma comes from. “Much of this research ‘assumes that the (autistic) respondents will be unable to provide adequate insight into their own behaviour’ (Mehzabin and Stokes 2011).”(29) “Gender diversity may, for example, be hypothesised as being the result of an imbalance of prenatal androgen in autistic people or of autistic ‘rigidity and repetitive and obsessive behaviors’ (van der Miesen et al. 2018: 8) or an expression of the ‘extreme male brain’ theory of autism (Baron-Cohen 2002).”(30) David Jackson-Perry shows the damage the medical community does to this. Beyond that, he talks about the “heterosexual strandards”(31) used in this research, how symptoms of autism are conflated with gender identity, labeling the double rainbow community as “failures of biology,”(32), etc. David Jackson-Perry believes, “…we are looking in a sense to autistic experience to also provide a ‘lesson’ about sexuality and gender more broadly, ”(33) and “Again echoing suggestions from critical autism studies that ‘the social worlds of autism are revealing of nonautistic worlds’ (Orsini and Davidson 2013: 6). This process turns the gaze away from assumed autistic deficit and re-directs critical discussion towards the imperfect systems of sexual and gender norms more broadly.”(34)

The common message found throughout my research is the idea that equal rights for the double rainbow community are vital for its survival. Acceptance and the social model of disability insert themselves into the conversation, as there is an issue with how the community is treated based on orientation, identity, and disability. To bring neurotypicals into this conversation, Diane Ehrensaft says, “To understand a person who is neurodiverse, a neurotypical person needs to leave the comfort of their own social position and view from the inside out, from the neurodiverse person’s perspective.”(35) In the current social justice movement, the LGBTQIA+ movement and disability justice both have their space in social justice where the issues are discussed, but the intersection of those two topics and neurodiversity discussions may be rarer. For the autistic community, I know that there is a sense of fighting for one thing and that doesn’t always include queer issues. The double rainbow may be unknown to most but is still ever-present. This intersection is something the social justice movement will have to address if neurodiverse queer individuals are to be included.

End Notes

1. Shannon Des Roches Rosa, “Under a Double Rainbow: Autism and LGBTQIA+”, last modified November 3, 2017, www.thinkingautismguide.com/2017/11/under-double-rainbow-autism-and-lgbtqia.html.

2. Jacquelyn Reinert, “Double Rainbow: The Intersectionality of Autism Spectrum Disorders and Gender Variance,” NESCA, last modified July 30, 2018, nesca-newton.com/doublerainbow/.

3. Jacquelyn Reinert, “Double Rainbow: The Intersectionality of Autism Spectrum Disorders and Gender Variance.”

4. Laura A. Pecora, et al., “Gender Identity, Sexual Orientation and Adverse Sexual Experiences in Autistic Females,” Molecular autism 11, no. 1 (July 11, 2020): 1–57.

5. Laura A. Pecora, et al., “Gender Identity, Sexual Orientation and Adverse Sexual Experiences in Autistic Females.”

6. Laura A. Pecora, et al., “Gender Identity, Sexual Orientation and Adverse Sexual Experiences in Autistic Females.”

7. Felice Orlich and Rachel Earl, “Gender Dysphoria and Autism Spectrum Disorder,” Seattle Children’s Autism Center, last modified May 16, 2019, https://www.seattlechildrens.org/globalassets/documents/health-and-safety/autism/autism-205-gender-diversity-and-autism-exploring-identity-healthcare-and-advocacy.pdf.

8. Gunter Heylens, et al., “The Co-Occurrence of Gender Dysphoria and Autism Spectrum Disorder in Adults: An Analysis of Cross-Sectional and Clinical Chart Data,” Journal of autism and developmental disorders 48, no. 6 (February 9, 2018): 2217–2223.

9. Laura Dattaro, “Gender and Sexuality in Autism, Explained: Spectrum: Autism Research News,” Spectrum, last modified September 17, 2020, www.spectrumnews.org/news/gender-and-sexuality-in-autism-explained/.

10. Laura Dattaro, “Gender and Sexuality in Autism, Explained: Spectrum: Autism Research News.”

11. Diane Ehrensaft, “Double Helix Rainbow Kids,” Journal of autism and developmental disorders 48, no. 12 (August 22, 2018): 4079–4081.

12. Laura Dattaro, “Gender and Sexuality in Autism, Explained: Spectrum: Autism Research News.”

13. J. Dewinter, et al., “Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity, and Romantic Relationships in Adolescents and Adults with Autism Spectrum Disorder.” Journal of autism and developmental disorders 47, no. 9 (June 9, 2017): 2927–2934.

14. Shannon Des Roches Rosa, “Under a Double Rainbow: Autism and LGBTQIA+.”

15. Marina Sarris, “Autistic People More Likely to Identify as LGBTQ,” SPARK for Autism, last modified September16, 2020, sparkforautism.org/discover_article/autism-lgbtq-identity/.

16. Marina Sarris, “Autistic People More Likely to Identify as LGBTQ.”

17. Marina Sarris, “Autistic People More Likely to Identify as LGBTQ.”

18. Diane Ehrensaft, “Double Helix Rainbow Kids.”

19. Diane Ehrensaft, “Double Helix Rainbow Kids.”

20. Diane Ehrensaft, “Double Helix Rainbow Kids.”

21. Gunter Heylens, et al., “The Co-Occurrence of Gender Dysphoria and Autism Spectrum Disorder in Adults: An Analysis of Cross-Sectional and Clinical Chart Data.”

22. Laura A. Pecora, et al., “Gender Identity, Sexual Orientation and Adverse Sexual Experiences in Autistic Females.”

23. Laura A. Pecora, et al., “Gender Identity, Sexual Orientation and Adverse Sexual Experiences in Autistic Females.”

24. Laura Dattaro, “Gender and Sexuality in Autism, Explained: Spectrum: Autism Research News.”

25. Laura Dattaro, “Gender and Sexuality in Autism, Explained: Spectrum: Autism Research News.”

26. David Jackson-Perry, “The Autistic Art of Failure? Unknowing Imperfect Systems of Sexuality and Gender,” Scandinavian journal of disability research: SJDR 22, no. 1 (2020): 221–229.

27. David Jackson-Perry, “The Autistic Art of Failure? Unknowing Imperfect Systems of Sexuality and Gender.”

28. David Jackson-Perry, “The Autistic Art of Failure? Unknowing Imperfect Systems of Sexuality and Gender.”

29. David Jackson-Perry, “The Autistic Art of Failure? Unknowing Imperfect Systems of Sexuality and Gender.”

30. David Jackson-Perry, “The Autistic Art of Failure? Unknowing Imperfect Systems of Sexuality and Gender.”

31. David Jackson-Perry, “The Autistic Art of Failure? Unknowing Imperfect Systems of Sexuality and Gender.”

32. David Jackson-Perry, “The Autistic Art of Failure? Unknowing Imperfect Systems of Sexuality and Gender.”

33. David Jackson-Perry, “The Autistic Art of Failure? Unknowing Imperfect Systems of Sexuality and Gender.”

34. David Jackson-Perry, “The Autistic Art of Failure? Unknowing Imperfect Systems of Sexuality and Gender.”

35. Diane Ehrensaft, “Double Helix Rainbow Kids.”

Bibliography

Dattaro, Laura. “Gender and Sexuality in Autism, Explained: Spectrum: Autism Research News.” Spectrum, September 17, 2020. http://www.spectrumnews.org/news/gender-and-sexuality-in-autism-explained/.

Dewinter, J, H De Graaf, and S Begeer. “Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity, and Romantic Relationships in Adolescents and Adults with Autism Spectrum Disorder.” Journal of autism and developmental disorders 47, no. 9 (June 9, 2017): 2927–2934.

Ehrensaft, Diane. “Double Helix Rainbow Kids.” Journal of autism and developmental disorders 48, no. 12 (August 22, 2018): 4079–4081.

Heylens, Gunter, Lore Aspeslagh, Jesper Dierickx, Kariann Baetens, Birgit Van Hoorde, Griet De Cuypere, and Els Elaut. “The Co-Occurrence of Gender Dysphoria and Autism Spectrum Disorder in Adults: An Analysis of Cross-Sectional and Clinical Chart Data.” Journal of autism and developmental disorders 48, no. 6 (February 9, 2018): 2217–2223.

Jackson-Perry, David. “The Autistic Art of Failure? Unknowing Imperfect Systems of Sexuality and Gender.” Scandinavian journal of disability research: SJDR 22, no. 1 (2020): 221–229.

Orlich, Felice, and Rachel Earl. “Gender Dysphoria and Autism Spectrum Disorder.” Seattle: Seattle Children’s Autism Center, May 16, 2019. https://www.seattlechildrens.org/globalassets/documents/health-and-safety/autism/autism-205-gender-diversity-and-autism-exploring-identity-healthcare-and-advocacy.pdf.

Pecora, Laura A, Grace I Hancock, Merrilyn Hooley, David H Demmer, Tony Attwood, Gary B Mesibov, and Mark A Stokes. “Gender Identity, Sexual Orientation and Adverse Sexual Experiences in Autistic Females.” Molecular autism 11, no. 1 (July 11, 2020): 1–57.

Reinert, Jacquelyn. “Double Rainbow: The Intersectionality of Autism Spectrum Disorders and Gender Variance.” NESCA, July 30, 2018. http://nesca-newton.com/doublerainbow/.

Rosa, Shannon Des Roches. “Under a Double Rainbow: Autism and LGBTQIA+.” Thinking Person’s Guide To Autism, November 3, 2017. www.thinkingautismguide.com/2017/11/under-double-rainbow-autism-and-lgbtqia.html.

Sarris, Marina. “Autistic People More Likely to Identify as LGBTQ.” SPARK for Autism, September 16, 2020. https://sparkforautism.org/discover_article/autism-lgbtq-identity/.