jreilly4261 | Rights Granted v. Rights Recognized; Some v. All

Sometimes I get all huffed up and idealistic. While I look back moments later with a slight grimace, I like making grandiose statements I believe in. I also like being challenged. How else would I learn? I replied to a post on The Bilerco Project discussing how we define and who we include in the alphabet soup that are the queer communities (I like a point someone made in the thread that we are a collection of communities somewhat united, rather than a singularly definable community.). The discussion naturally led to how we relate those definitions of community to the struggle for equality. Cindi Knox illustrated the dysfunction of the manner in which we have endeavored to attain equality:

One thousand starving people will band together to demand food.

One thousand starving people will fight with each other over one hundred meals.

The best way to get one thousand people to stop begging for food is to give them one hundred meals and let them fight over them.

My reply:

Thank you Cindi, for pointing out the manner in which the extreme right and the mainstream repeatedly lure us into defeating ourselves. Whether the issue of the day is bi invisibility, transphobia, ftm invisibility, mtf marginalization, sexism, anti-feminism, or just plain "I'm-not-that-kind-of-queer", we stomp all over each other when a law is proposed, funding is at stake, services are offered, or a pool table opens up at the local bar. While laws, funding, services, and even pool tables are limited resources, the recognition of equality and the rights inherent under such equality are limitless. When we confuse breadcrumbs for equality, we defeat ourselves.

And I can't blame anyone, except everyone. Who knows whether Ghandi or Martin Luther King would take up our cause? Where is "our" hero who will say that it is not enough to accept straight-acting "gays", who will say it is not enough to "give" us job protections, who will say it is not enough for some of us to be more equal than the rest?

Who will say to society that our rights are not granted by the people or the government, that they are inherent, and must be recognized in law and in practice if we are to consider our country to be free?

If we think we are entitled to the rights we fight for, do we fight out of selfishness and personal need, or on principle to ensure that those who come after us don't have to rehash the same fights. If we fight on principle, why does it matter who is in our community? If we fight on principle, is it the principle of equality or the principle of some equality some of the time for some people?

Who decided it was a great idea to concede that people could violate our rights as long as they were a small business owner or a small business landlord? We only let some people violate the rights of people with disabilities or people with non-conforming sexual/affectional or gender identities. Sexual identity and expression are different from sexual orientation and different from ability and creed and skin tone and spiritual faith. Is that reason enough to separate any one from the others as something that can wait behind the rest?

If we act on principle, how can we, in good conscience, have a priority list of whose rights should be recognized first, a so-called incremental strategy. An incremental strategy for rights recognition which prioritizes those groups for whom recognition is most easily attained is the least principled and most hypocritical strategy we could consider. It is partially achievable. It is not a strategy that can provide the recognition of our equality. It is a strategy which embodies inequality, cowardice, and selfishness.

Is this struggle for the recognition of rights, or is it for getting "our" rights while we can get them? Are we for equal rights, or, in our hearts, are we just desperate to be included among those with specially recognized rights, equal with some, unequal with others? If the latter is the outcome, has anything of substance actually changed? Or, has the principle of equality been used to promote inequality and beat down those who weren't privileged enough to ride in the front of the bus this time around?