Tedra Osell blogs at Bitch Ph.D., where she muses on feminism, motherhood, academia and more. In her contribution to the ACLU's online symposium in celebration of LGBT Pride, Tedra discusses how LGBT people and their relationships have strengthened her relationships, marriage and family.
I think I pretty much owe my straight-suburban-married-housewife-with-one kid-life to the gays.
Reason one: my husband and I met when I was 18. We went to different colleges. The only way I would agree to "date" him was if he would agree that we could date other people. The more so since he was uber Catholic (and you know what that means), and I was gonna be damned if I was gonna swear off sex for a long-distance relationship at the age of 18.
Not that non-exclusive l-d relationships are *entirely* the province of homos. But you have to admit that the idea of having a Serious Relationship with someone while being free to fuck around with other someone is a li'l more commonly associated with gay (men, especially) than it is with straight couples.
Reason two: when I graduated from college and moved in with my husband-to-be, he happened to be in Saudi Arabia fighting Gulf War I. His coworker who helped me move into his apartment? Gay. (Later he came out under "don't ask, don't tell," and lost his job, which sucked.)
Reason three: when we finally decided to get married (after years of back and forth asking-and-refusing, then the other person asking-and-being-refused), my agreement was conditional on the idea that, if either of us ever cheated, that would be a shitty reason to divorce. No way was I going to promise never to have sex with anyone else again. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that my being able to contemplate this sort of thing had a lot to do with the way that some aspects of GLBT culture helped all of us start rethinking what consitituted committment, what constituted marriage, what relationships were based on. And, as ambivalent as I was about marriage—just before the ceremony, both of us dressed in our wedding finery, I asked my soon-to-be husband, "I can still back out of this, right?" He knew that the right answer was "yes"—I would never have gotten into it if I hadn't felt like the rules weren't negotiable.
Reason four: after four years of separation, during which he worked in Omaha and I attended graduate school in Seattle, he was transferred to the Pac NW. When he left the military and we started thinking about maybe sort of having kids, again I looked around at the new ways that people were having kids—we lived on Capitol Hill, Seattle's Big Gay neighborhood—before taking a deep breath and saying, okay, yes, maybe we can do this.
Reason five: the best pregnancy book I read was Dan Savage's The Kid. I'm totally not kidding about this (and once, when I saw him having dinner in my favorite restaurant, I went over and told him that myself, and thanked him). He did the research for me on drinking and pregnancy (yes, you can drink without dooming your baby to brain damage). Given that pregnancy books these days are all about What You Mustn't Do (seriously, have a look at What to Expect When You're Expecting someday. And then burn it.), that one thing was huge, and helped buttress my general feeling that I wasn't gonna worry too damn much about anything.
Reason six: The OB/GYN who I picked (after searching around for quite some time to find someone who wasn't into lecturing me)? And who delivered my child? Is now, according to Wikipedia, the "rock star" of transgender surgery. I found out towards the end of my pregnancy, in fact, that she was herself a MTF transsexual, but I had no idea that she'd made sexual reassignment surgery her primary work until last week. While visiting my boyfriend of three years (and yes, I'm still married) I happened across , in which she points out that
One thing that still burns brighter than any other issue within the GLB community is marriage equality. What is important is that the trans phenomenon undoes any and all objections to marriage equality, no matter how the issue is argued.
What I know is that, before I found out that she'd had SRS, I'd noticed the pictures of her daughters on the wall of her office and complimented her on how much they resembled her (especially the youngest). And that when I found out my main thought was that she'd had an excellent surgeon. Now apparently she *is* an excellent surgeon.
Reason seven: when my husband and I moved to Canada to take my first teaching job, our best friends, with whom we swapped childcare once a week so that we and they could go out once in a while and try to stay sane? Were a lesbian couple. With two (now three) kids. Not only did they swap babysitting with us, but they parented like us, they were there for us, they were my best friends during what was (due to seasonal depression) the hardest, darkest time of my life. And, of course, they helped my son, by giving him other kids to play with, other adults who understood and accepted him.
They helped me explain to my son that some kids have one mama, some have two, some have a mama and a papa, etc. And that what matters is that every kid have a parent, or parents, who loves and takes care of them. On the night when they got pregnant with kid number three, we got a sudden call—can one of you come babysit immediately so that we can get pregnant? M's ovulating!—I got to explain to my son, who was four, Where Babies Come From, and artificial insemination, and sperm donors. In the course of the discussion, he pointed out that we use the words "parent," "mother," and "father" to mean both biological parents *and* the people who raise and take care of you. In short, he realized at four what I, at forty, still have trouble articulating: that the biology of reproduction is related to, but not the same as, the facts of human feeling.
My point? Is basically a simple one, so obvious that it shouldn't need saying. But since it does, here it is: gay relationships, gay marriages, the whole GLBT ball of wax have been nothing but good for this straight chick, her straight marriage, and her straight suburban family. The gays and trannies have helped me not be afraid of marriage or motherhood. They've helped me realize that I can have those things without losing myself. And they've been there at every goddamn step of the way, helping and supporting my straight marriage, my straight pregnancy, my straight mamahood.
Surely we straights can be as decent.
Learn More About the Issues on This Page
-
Press ReleaseDec 2024
LGBTQ Rights
President Biden Must Veto Defense Bill Attacking Military Families with Transgender YouthPresident Biden Must Veto Defense Bill Attacking Military Families with Transgender Youth
WASHINGTON — The U.S. Senate today passed a version of the National Defense Authorization Act that would ban coverage for gender-affirming care for transgender youth whose parents are active-duty military personnel. The American Civil Liberties Union is opposing final passage of the defense bill over the inclusion of this health care ban and calling on President Joe Biden to veto the bill. Section 708 of the NDAA would prohibit insurance coverage for “medical interventions for the treatment of gender dysphoria” such as hormone therapy and puberty-suppressant medications, which Speaker Mike Johnson says would “permanently ban transgender medical treatment for minors.” The same treatments would be covered by TRICARE for any medical purpose other than treating gender dysphoria, the clinical diagnosis for the psychological distress experienced by transgender people related to their gender identity. “By passing this bill, the House and Senate are forcing thousands of active-duty service members to choose between their careers in the military and the future of their transgender children,” said Mike Zamore, national director of policy & government affairs at the ACLU. “This unconscionable and unjustifiable attack on those families stands in direct contrast to President Joe Biden’s legacy of defending the civil rights of transgender Americans — including when few in his own party showed the courage to do so. President Biden should cement his legacy by vetoing this bill and sending it back to Congress to pass without Speaker Johnson’s last minute health care ban for servicemembers’ kids.” If signed by President Biden, this health care ban would be the first new anti-LGBTQ provision enacted by Congress and signed into law by the president since the enactment of the military’s since-repealed “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy for LGBTQ servicemembers and the since-repealed federal law barring recognition of same-sex marriages known as the Defense of Marriage Act. It is unknown how many transgender youth are currently enrolled in TRICARE or how many of those enrolled are currently receiving coverage for gender-affirming care. In one 2022 analysis, 2,500 minor patients sought care for gender dysphoria through TRICARE Prime insurance at military or civilian treatment facilities in 2017, and 900 received puberty suppressants or gender-affirming hormones. Earlier this month, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a landmark case brought by the ACLU, the ACLU of Tennessee, Lambda Legal, and Akin Gump on behalf of three families and a medical provider challenging a Tennessee ban on gender-affirming hormonal therapies for transgender youth on the grounds the ban violates the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution. -
Press ReleaseDec 2024
LGBTQ Rights
Montana Court Blocks State From Refusing to Correct Sex Markers on Transgender People's Birth Certificates and Driver's LicensesMontana Court Blocks State From Refusing to Correct Sex Markers on Transgender People's Birth Certificates and Driver's Licenses
HELENA, Mont. – A Montana court has granted a preliminary injunction preventing the state of Montana from enforcing policies that bar transgender people from obtaining accurate sex designations on their birth certificates and driver’s licenses. After a prior restriction on amendments of birth certificates was struck down by the courts, in early 2024 the state of Montana enacted a new rule that categorically bars transgender Montanans from correcting the sex designation on their birth certificates. Around the same time, the Montana Department of Justice adopted a policy similarly restricting amendment of driver’s licenses. The plaintiffs challenged these policies in state district court, arguing that they violate various constitutional provisions, including the right to equal protection of the law. In a recent Montana Supreme Court decision, two justices concluded that discrimination on the basis of transgender status – as the state is engaging in here – is a form of sex discrimination that violates the Montana Constitution’s equal protection clause. The plaintiffs, two transgender women, are represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Montana, and Nixon Peabody LLP. Plaintiff Jessica Kalarchik, a veteran who served in the United States Army for 31 years, said: “After finally being able to live my life openly as the woman I know myself to be, I am frustrated that my birth state, Montana, wants me to carry around a birth certificate that incorrectly lists my sex as male. I live my life openly as a woman, I am treated as a woman in my daily life, and there is no reason I should be forced to carry a birth certificate that incorrectly identifies me as male. Fortunately, the court agrees that this ridiculous policy should not be in effect.” “Once again the State of Montana chose to adopt a draconian policy that is clearly intended to marginalize transgender Montanans, only for that discriminatory action to be blocked by the courts,” said Akilah Deernose, executive director for the ACLU of Montana. “Here in Montana we treasure our right to privacy and to live our lives free from governmental intrusion. The State of Montana clearly has not learned any lessons from the past few years, where courts have repeatedly struck down unconstitutional laws targeting transgender Montanans.” “Forcing anyone to carry documents that contradict their identity unjustly violates their rights to privacy, equal treatment, and not being compelled to convey a government message about their sex that they disagree with,” said Malita Picasso, staff attorney for the ACLU’s LGBTQ & HIV Project. “Such a policy marks transgender people for further mistreatment and discrimination, essentially requiring them to carry papers that out them as transgender any time they need to provide identity documents. Fortunately, the court has refused to allow the state of Montana to subvert the freedom of transgender Montanans to control their own identity as this case goes forward.” In granting the plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction, the court held, “[i]f the challenged state actions discriminate against transgender individuals on the basis of their transgender status, they also necessarily discriminate the basis of sex.” The state has the option of appealing the district court’s ruling to the Montana Supreme Court, but the underlying case will proceed in district court. A trial has not yet been scheduled. -
FloridaDec 2024
LGBTQ Rights
Keohane v. DixonKeohane v. Dixon
On September 30, 2024, the Florida Department of Corrections rescinded its policy regarding treatment of gender dysphoria, which allowed for hormone therapy when deemed medically necessary, as well as access to clothing and grooming standards that accord with one’s gender identity. Under this new policy, grooming and clothing accommodations have been stripped away, and hormone therapy is not permitted unless an exception is deemed constitutionally required. The ACLU brought a class action challenging the policy. -
IdahoDec 2024
LGBTQ Rights
Robinson v. LabradorRobinson v. Labrador
Two incarcerated transgender women have sued the state of Idaho alleging that HB 688, a 2024 law barring state funding for gender-affirming medical care for transgender people, denies them access to the health care their doctors have prescribed for them and is a violation of their Eighth Amendment right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment. They represent a class of all incarcerated folks within the state of Idaho who face the loss of hormone therapy due to HB 668.