More on the Link between Autism and Violence

I’ve blogged on this in the past, so I won’t go into too many details now. There is a link.

I’ve also recently put up a survey about intimacy that included some questions about abuse. The numbers show how often we face this type of mistreatment (yes, I’m aware of the limitations in my methodology; that said, the results match remarkably well with “real” research) – 80% of autistic respondents indicated that they have been abused.  FOUR OUT OF FIVE.

We die in bad confrontations with police (particularly if we don’t or can’t speak), where we did nothing wrong other than being unable to communicate with police.

Too often, we are murdered by caregivers, parents, and family (you know, the people who are supposed to have our best interests in mind) – but it doesn’t stop there. When it happens, juries and judges say they can understand why we were murdered and give a light (if any) sentence to the murderer. You see, it’s so horrible to raise us, that of course people would murder us. Or something like that. Other times, we’re told that murder of autistic people is a “mercy killing” because nobody would want to be like us. Of course we’re not asked. It would be wrong to try to link being a parent or family member to being a killer.

And there are plenty of us who kill ourselves. My first serious attempt was in 3rd grade. If every day of your life was filled with the abuse from schoolmates (I could say, “neurotypical school mates” but I don’t believe neurotypicals are a slave to neurology when it comes to violence, despite the fact that it was typically neurotypical students doing the abuse).

Like other minorities, when we’re killed, it’s often preceded by torture. Remember Steven Simpson, who was murdered by being doused in oil and set on fire during his own 18th birthday party. They changed the title of this article, but you can still see it in the URL: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2166327/Autistic-teenager-Steven-Simpson-dies-burn-injuries-tanning-oil-prank-went-wrong.html – “Dies from burn injuries during a tanning oil prank that went wrong.” Uh, no. Having anti-gay obscenities written on your body and then being doused in oil and then having your genitals set on fire is not a prank. Being doused in oil and set on fire is a torture. This is the very definition of a hate crime. What’s the punishment for lighting someone on fire, leaving the scene without calling emergency services, not trying to put the fire out? What is the punishment for hearing someone scream in total agony? In the first-world country where this happened, the penalty is nothing for most of the accomplices and 3 1/2 years for the worst of the accomplices. Yet, it is reported as a “prank” and this light sentence is handed out. Yes, there’s a link to autism and violence: you will walk free after just a bit more then 3 years in jail if you light us on fire in England (the USA is no better when it comes to sentences handed down). Lest you think that the UK is just light on sentencing, check out this robber, sentenced to 13 life sentences. Now, this robber is obviously a bad man who needs to go to jail, who did incredible harm to his victims. But it should be noted that he didn’t kill anyone.

Yet autistic people are the ones who are need to be prevented from owning guns, who are a risk to society, who are supposedly (without any evidence whatsoever backing this up) likely to kill you. Uh, no.

Misogynistic Murder

As most people know, a misogynistic racist in California murdered six people and wounded many more.

When I saw the news, there were two thoughts that went through my head. The first was sadness for what the victims and their families must be feeling. Families and friends of some victims will never be able to share another day with their loved one. That’s horribly sad. Others will have a far different life than they should have had, due to the lifelong physical and mental injuries. This is incredibly sad.

The second thought that went through my head was, “the guy is going to be (rightly or wrongly) portrayed as autistic in the media.”

Let me make one thing clear here: Autistic people are not dangerous, are not a threat, and will not hurt you. Seriously. However, autistic people are far more likely than a non-autistic person to be a victim. Sadly, this will be lost on many, and will continue to leave autistic people in the closet, afraid that people will think they are a threat if they disclose their diagnosis (or, worse, will lead to segregation and further community resistance to autistic people living in their neighborhoods).

Now, this said, I can say I’ve seen things expressed from other autistic guys that are a bit too similar to the views expressed by this murderer for my liking. And this murder shows, yet again, why hate towards women and others (he was also quite hateful of non-whites) must not be tolerated in our community. I know plenty of us are decent people. But we can and should call out people who feel entitled to their anti-woman views. Whether you are autistic or not, here’s a few things you should know if you, in any way, understand or justify murder because you aren’t having sex:

First, there is an idea that by a certain age, we should have had sex. No, that’s not how it works. Some people have consensual sex young, while others have it for the first time when they are old, and yet others never have it. That’s okay – and it is possible to live a full life with or without sex.  If you have a hard time believing that, you probably should seek out what is needed to be able to enjoy the here-and-now. For some people, the right therapist can help (the wrong one will be useless – so if the first or second therapist you try doesn’t work, keep looking). For others, other methods might work – but it is important to know that someone obsessed with the emptiness they have without another person (either longing for emotional intimacy or longing for sex) will probably not find intimacy or sex. It’s a bit of a paradox, but it’s hard to find when you’re looking.

Second, there is this idea that sex is this magical, life-transforming thing. I blame TV and media for this. Sure, sex, particularly in an emotionally intimate relationship (hint: if you’re thinking “hot girl” you probably are not yet focusing on an emotionally intimate relationship) can be special, wonderful, and extremely joyful. But so can tons of other things in life. Sex – despite what guys might say to each other – is not the end-all of experiences. It’s good, but there’s lots of good things in life if you look for them. Ironically, finding some of those things makes you more sexually attractive to someone else. Someone who loves life will be attractive to people, regardless of their body type.

Third, I see a lot of people searching out supermodel-type women – and then wondering why they can’t seem to end up in bed with them. I’ll give you a hint: even the people who have the most beautiful bodies (according to social biases, anyhow) are almost certainly looking for someone who wants more than blond hair, perfect boobs, and shapely legs (or whatever else it is you’re looking for). Maybe there’s someone that isn’t looking for someone who cares about those things – but I’ll warn you: it’s hard to be judged by your own standards sometimes. I’ll also say this: if the only person you would be willing to sleep with is someone that could professionally model in a biased society (like our own), you are treating people like shit, which isn’t a good thing. Just as being a sincere racist doesn’t make racism less repugnant, being a sincere shallow asshole doesn’t make that less repugnant – and expecting women to fall all over you is probably not going to happen. Ironically, almost everyone I see on the internet whining about being a virgin at age 20-something is looking for supermodels. Uh, no wonder you’ve never found someone (that said, if you are in your 20s and are a virgin, there is nothing wrong or even unusual about that).

Some people think, “Good guys finish last.” For men, too often this belief is used to justify acting like a testosterone-crazed abusive asshole. That’s not cool, that’s not manly, and it’s not sexy. Plenty of abusive men find victims to have sex with. But that doesn’t make it a valid path to a relationship, and certainly not a formula for success in seducing people. Good guys do find relationships. Maybe they won’t attract a shallow woman looking for a testosterone-crazed monster, but I’m willing to guess that most women are not looking to be treated bad. If you think what I’m saying isn’t true, I’m going to suggest to you that you are probably in an echo chamber looking only at shallow examples of relationships, and not real life. And, related to this, if a woman turns down your advances, it’s not because she thinks you are a good guy. She might not be interested in you for any number of reasons (some are good reasons, others may be shallow and not-so-noble), but it’s not because you weren’t enough of an asshole. This false-victimhood, incidentally, is not sexy or attractive to other women when they see it in you. So deal with rejection gracefully – not in a judgmental way. Just as society lets a men decide who to approach, we (as men) should understand that not every woman will find me to be a someone they want to date (indeed, most won’t – and that’s even true if I’m the star quarterback and neurotypical).

There’s also this idea that other people have it easy. For instance, “Women can have anyone.” The idea is that if a woman is horny and wants sex, all she has to do is go to the bar, loudly announce, “I WANT SEX!” and ten men will be willing to have sex on the spot. But a man that did the same thing would probably be kicked out of the bar, and certainly wouldn’t get any sex. Just as the person whining about not getting sex probably wants only to sleep with certain people (albeit too often a very shallow set of criteria is used to determine the ‘right’ people), few women want to sleep with every man. Maybe the woman is shallow and doesn’t want to sleep with a 350 pound guy. Or maybe she’s not shallow and can see a 350 pound guy as sexy, but wants to know someone first. Maybe she is concerned about safety. Maybe she really likes a guy, but not sexually, and is in the really uncomfortable position of trying to nicely turn down a request for a date with someone she likes – but doesn’t seem to be getting the point that she’s not interested in that type of relationship. I’ll add that plenty of women haven’t found their Prince Charming yet, but desperately want him. Just because things are different doesn’t mean they are easier.

So here’s my advice: are you a horny guy that wants sex? I’m going to be a bit blunt in the next sentence:

You probably have a hand (if not, you can probably find a way). Deal with it. I don’t know why society has decided that somehow solo-sex isn’t wonderful, but that’s B.S. You can have a mind-blowing orgasm by yourself. And that’s okay, and should not have shame attached. If you feel dirty or like you’re missing something because you masturbate, that’s a problem. Most humans do this, including most people who say they are having sex with others. You shouldn’t feel shame for something that the very people projecting that shame upon you do themselves.

Now, I’m not saying that it’s wrong to want someone else in your life (although if you just want them for feelings you can give yourself, I’d say to save yourself – and the other person – a lot of hurt and difficulty, and deal with it yourself).

What you are not entitled to do is try to pity someone else into sleeping with you. If you feel that you are entitled to sex, I’ll give you a really big hint: you probably won’t get much sex.

Now, again, I don’t think this is a problem confined to autistics, anymore than racism is an autistic-only problem. It’s a society problem. But I do hope that we call out this type of behavior when we see it. And I hope that if some of the above applies to someone reading this, that they’ll reflect upon what kind of person they are being – and if that’s really the kind of person they want to be.

Coy Matthis – and Excuses to Exclude

I wanted to write a bit about a big local news story. But I also wanted to write about how different populations (in this case, trans people and autistic people) face too many of the same stigmas and excuses when we’re excluded.

As an autistic person, I’ve seen plenty of excuses to exclude. Of course we’re not the only group of people excluded from places and activities, as a long history of exclusion in the USA demonstrates. Today, one group that frequently loses their rights is transgender people. As autistic people, we should be concerned anytime anyone’s rights are infringed – we know what it is like.

Coy Matthis is a (now) second grader. She successfully brought a complaint against the Fountain-Ft. Carson School District (Fountain is a town directly south of Colorado Springs, home of Focus on the Family and several other right-leaning political-religious organizations). Her complaint was that the school district prohibited her, a transgender girl, from using the girl’s bathroom, and suggested (initially) that she used the boy’s bathroom, or, (later) a staff restroom.

Predictably, the Division of Civil Right’s decision (pdf) angered a lot of people, with predictable complaints, as it affirmed Coy’s right to use the girl’s bathroom. As you read through some of the complaints I’ve seen below, as I paraphrase them below, think about what other populations you’ve seen these complaints used against. This is one reason it’s important to ally ourselves with other communities – their struggle is remarkably similar to our struggle, so it’s useful to learn from each other. Of course Coy and others like her have plenty of different struggles than autistic people generally have, but there are some commonalities even where the specifics are different.

I don’t believe she’s really trans, her parents are using her

This argument comes down to “I don’t believe her.” How many times have we heard that about autistic people in the autism community? The minute an autistic speaks out against something someone is saying or doing to autistic people, we learn that we aren’t really autistic. Denial of our identity is a pretty basic way of trying to silence an opponent. And plenty of autistics are told that they are only pretending to be autistic.

But, that aside, I’ll make one suggestion: if you know a 6 year old boy (Coy was 6 at time of the bathroom ban), see if you can get him to wear girl’s clothes to school, tell people he’s a girl, and otherwise do “girl things.” I’ll be mightily impressed if you can do this. After all, society strongly encourages gender stereotype conformity.

How can a 6 year old know she’s trans?

Likewise, we’re (autistics) are too often dismissed when we relate our experiences interacting with the world. “How can you be bothered by a fluorescent light?” It’s basically, “My experience was nothing like yours. I never went through being trans at 6, so I can’t see how that’s possible. I never was bothered to the point of pain by a fluorescent light, so you’re making it up.”

The answer to this question turns out to be pretty easy. From a recent American Academy of Pediatrics (not to be confused with the American Academy of Pediatricians!) policy technical report (pdf) on treating LGBT children:

Awareness of gender identity happens very early in life. Between ages 1 and 2 years, children become conscious of physical differences between the 2 sexes. By age 3, children can identify themselves as a boy or a girl, and, by age 4, gender identity is stable. In middle childhood, gender identification continues to become more firmly established, reflected in children’s interests in playing more exclusively with youngsters of their own gender and also in their interest in acting like, looking like, and having things like their same-sex peers.

Clearly, children know they are boys or girls at a young age. When that knowledge is significantly different than the apparent sex of the body, to the point where the person can’t accept living according to the stereotypes of their body, it’s a serious – potentially life threatening – problem (it can create such unhappiness that people feel suicide is their only way of dealing with this). The solution to this problem is to live as you are, not as people might want you to be. This, in Coy’s case, was confirmed medically through her doctors and therapists. I imagine the “Is she really?” question crossed these experts’ minds. I also imagine they investigated that and got a good answer. Probably a better one than someone without knowledge about gender identity can come up with, particularly without knowing Coy!

Finally, again, ask a random six year old if he’s a boy or girl. Hopefully you’re not surprised that the child provides an answer quickly (well, unless the child may be questioning, in which case it’s very healthy). Children generally know what they are. Really!

Boys have Penises, Girls have Vaginas

We have expectations about “obvious” things. Lots of people have expectations about autistic people – “They don’t talk” or “they couldn’t live without 24×7 help” are two obvious ones (I’ll note that the 24×7 help isn’t something people get even in institutions, but that’s not the point of today’s post, so I’ll move on). It’s another way to say, “NO, you aren’t. You’re what I think you are.”

I’m not sure where Arnold’s kindergartener learned about penises and vaginas, but as the decision by the Division of Civil Rights states, it’s a bit more complex than that. The decision cites the presence of intersexed people as examples of people that don’t conform to the overly simplistic “boys have penises, girls have vaginas.” Enforcing some sort of uniform standard is yet another way of dismissing someone’s identity. “You’re what I think you are. I know better than you. Or your parents. Or your doctors. Or the State of Colorado. Or the US Department of State” (all of the above recognize Coy as a girl). I’m going to pick the sex trait *I* think is important to determine your gender (note that gender and sex are different – I’ll mention that later).

It’s a way of saying, “There can’t possibly be any girl who has a penis, because, well, I say so, that’s how I’m defining girl. No penis.” (Ironically these same people probably would pick a different trait if Coy was ever to have genital reassignment surgery – part of the proof that they aren’t really concerned about genitals nearly as much as making sure they voice their disagreement with the person’s identity) That simplistic, genital-based thinking not aligned with most current research or thinking on gender. Just as someone can believe man-made pollution has no or extremely little impact on climate, you can believe whatever you want about gender. But that doesn’t make you right. With the vast degree of diversity in the human condition, it’s pretty hard to say anything with absolutes, particularly with something as complex as gender. We might all like absolutes (penis = boy, XY = boy, or whatever else), but absolutes just don’t fit the realities of humans. We’re complicated. And trying to make it simple might make you seem smart to yourself, but really exposes your ignorance.

Ah, we’re not discriminating on the basis of gender, we’re discriminating on the basis of sex

Again, autistic people see this type of hair-splitting. We’re told, “We’re not refusing to hire autistic people, we’re refusing to hire people with (insert some autistic trait).”

Likewise, trans people face this as a result of sloppy language used by politicians, lawyers, and the general public.

Quick, if you’re asked if you’re “male or female”, should that question be entitled “sex?” or “gender?” If you said gender, you’re wrong. Gender is identity and/or expression (depending on context). Man, woman, girl, boy are words to describe gender. It’s how you interact with society, which generally doesn’t involve genitals or chromosomes (I don’t ask someone for a genetic test before calling her “Ms” or ask someone to drop their pants before I call them “Sir”). Sex, on the other hand, is biological (and complex!). It’s the combination of traits, such as brain structure, gonads, genitals, secondary sex traits (height, bone structure, muscle structure, fat distribution, breasts, baldness, voice pitch, etc), hormones, and chromosomes – any one of which can point towards a different sex than the others (hence why it is complicated!). So, if you’re interested in a person medically, you may want to know their sex, but if you’re interested in whether you call the person “sir” or “ma’am,” you’re interested in gender (and then you should ask “man or woman” generally, not “male or female”, or better yet, allow the person to fill in the blank in case they don’t identify either way).

Unfortunately for Coy, Colorado, in addition to making transgender a sexual orientation (huh? Trans people are straight, gay, bi, and otherwise – it’s like making transgender a skin color, it makes no sense), confuses sex and gender throughout its laws, to the point where the Civil Rights Division concluded they are synonyms and the meaning has to be discerned through context. Both parties (the school district and Coy’s lawyers) agreed that sex and gender are distinct. But of course our laws are muddy, because legislatures are not quite so clear. Other examples are the Colorado “Change of Sex” form which is used to record a change on Colorado ID cards and driver’s licenses. The State form titled “Change of Sex” doesn’t, outside of the title, ask about the person’s sex. It asks for the person’s gender! Or, the famous, “One man, one woman” standard for marriage. They don’t really mean man or woman (gender), they mean one male, one female (sex). Courts have all agreed that they mean sex, even when they said man and woman (and didn’t define what makes someone a man or a woman) – it was a ban on same-sex, not same-gender marriage.

This is unfortunate because you have statements in law that allow creation of some single-sex (or single-gender, depending on the regulation or law – both terms are used) facilities. For instance, having a “men’s bathroom” is not illegal in Colorado, but the legislature absolutely intended to make it illegal to prohibit trans men from using it (even female men). So, is it sex or gender discrimination to ban a man from the men’s room, when single-sex (or is it single-gender) facilities are allowed?

It turns out that the saving grace for trans people is that the law is otherwise clear – the law was clearly intended to allow trans people to use a bathroom that matches their identity. But there’s going to be a lot of pointless debate in the future due to imprecise language. While advocates might agree that women need to be treated like women on paperwork and in laws, we probably should ensure we don’t muddy the waters by letting laws pass using the word “sex” when “gender” is meant, or vise-versa. The argument could have been avoided with precise language.

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few…

Okay, it makes for a good movie. But it makes garbage public policy. This argument was essentially the argument used in every single case of widespread discrimination in the USA. Why were Americans that had Japanese ancestry locked away in interment camps? Because trampling on their rights was seen as an acceptable price to pay for the illusion of security it gave the majority of citizens. It’s today used against autistic people to argue for segregation in school or institutionalization.

This argument used towards trans people implies that use of a bathroom by a trans person (or whatever other right they might have) is somehow interfering with the rights to another. There’s this idea that just being in a bathroom or other place with someone with different genitals is somehow hurting the other person – that it’s an infringement on rights. This is probably only true if you value a “right to discriminate”, which sadly some do value. The only right violated is your right to violate someone else’s right.

Now, I don’t know about you, but I would hope the school would do something about two male boys showing each other their penises in the boy’s room rather than using the room for it’s intended purpose. You go in there to do your business. And by all accounts, that’s exactly what Coy did – her business and nothing more. Now if someone was showing their genitals, you deal with that. It is inappropriate behavior to do that in public restrooms, but it’s equally inappropriate if it is two boys (with penises) doing it. Or two female girls.

And there is a solution for the person who really does feel uncomfortable (no students reported feeling uncomfortable with Coy, it should be noted; it was a couple of school administrators that felt uncomfortable with the idea of Coy using the girl’s room). You let them use a more private facility. Problem solved – now both kids can pee in peace.

She can use the boy’s room…or the staff bathroom, so she can pee

Again, this is used in other areas of discrimination. With autistic people, we’re told that there are other places we can, other activities we can sign up for, etc. We can be somewhere else, just not here. So it’s all cool, right? Of course not.

There’s more to bathrooms than just peeing. While it’s not a place to wave your genitals around in front of others, it has a social component – actually several of them. People do socialize in bathrooms (particularly, from what I hear, women). And, more importantly, bathrooms have a gender confirmation purpose. Some people are violently attacked simply for not following society’s expectations for their presumed sex. Sometimes someone will watch someone use the bathroom, just to determine, “Is that person a man or a woman?” The door they use tells them. If they use a third door, or a door not in conformance with their expression, that confirms, “This person really isn’t a woman, ‘he’ is a man” rather than, “Oh, this person might just be a tall woman.” Someone that already drew a conclusion may not be swayed by this, but for people that were unsure, this can confirm or exclude that a person is dressing and acting appropriately. Equally bad, if people thought the person was a woman, and had no doubt about her being a woman, but she uses the men’s room (or a third bathroom), now she’s obviously and visibly different – and very likely the conclusion will be, “She’s not a real woman.” That’s a risk to her. (it can work the same way for trans men) It’s a risk she should evaluate, not someone else.

Finally, asking any student to do something different just because of who they are (rather than a choice they make), such as using a third bathroom, will say to other students, “This person is different.” Now, difference isn’t bad in itself, but too often that message is communicated too. In this case, the message is, “This person isn’t a real girl.” That contradicts the message the school was properly trying to send when it used feminine pronouns and otherwise treated the girl as a girl.

I don’t think I could ever understand what it is like for someone who has went through pain of being trans, and having a body that didn’t match their being. But I imagine it’s incredibly humiliating and triggering to be told, “No, I think you’re really something else.” A life of people not accepting who you are probably becomes very painful to many. It implies that the trans person is a liar, cheat, fake, evil, sinner, and whatever else. Imagine the pain that it must feel like to have people constantly remind you that they don’t see who you are. Imagine that someone has chosen to live who they really are, not the lie that was killing them, only to be told they are wrong for choosing life over death.

What about safety?

Again, this happens for autistic people. People have stereotypes about what is safe and what isn’t. Someone screaming in a meltdown is “unsafe”, whether or not they intend to do violence. As is someone saying things that an autistic person might to an authority, like, “What you’re doing isn’t safe, it could get you hurt if someone didn’t like what you were doing” (something an autistic person I know did to someone without authority or training who was trying to enforce zoning codes). It feels like a threat, either the meltdown or the concern about a person’s safety. So it must be. Even when it’s not.

Likewise, discussion about bathrooms always comes around to safety. There is an idea that a rapist or molester would never rape or molest someone with the same body parts as themself, and would never enter a place where he or she shouldn’t be – but once you let them in, they’ll now rape or molest. This is problematic for a bunch of reasons, such as assuming that people who have the “wrong” parts would only be in some places to cause problems. But it’s also wrong – we still have extremely strong laws to protect people against rape and molestation. They aren’t always applied or used, but the laws themselves are generally pretty strong and carry severe penalties. If that’s not going to keep someone from doing wrong, no sign on the door will.

Even more significant, however, is who’s safety is seen as important to protect. The idea is that this hypothetical wrong-bathroom-rapist (I know of no case where this has actually happened – where someone raped someone after entering a bathroom and claimed he or she had the right to be in a bathroom because he or she was trans) is a bigger concern than the safety of trans people (who are raped, molested, beat, and killed for using the “wrong” bathroom). The concern wasn’t about making Coy comfortable and safe (part of that is showing that she’s normal and a real girl, not a fake or liar in need of correction). It wasn’t empowering (by letting Coy and her parents make decisions about what is safest for her). No, it was treating people like Coy as the threat – if she uses the bathroom, then people are unsafe because hypothetically someone else might. So the threat needed to be removed.

Likewise, forcing Coy to use a different bathroom doesn’t make her safe either. While a private bathroom may be more safe than a shared bathroom, it can also be less safe. It’s more safe when it’s a non-stigmatizing option that everyone might (and do) use, but it’s less safe when it serves to “out” someone or communicate she isn’t a “real” girl.

If you’re really worried about everyone’s safety, then worry about it (start by giving people privacy in anyplace where they may be partially or fully undressed, privacy even from people with the same sex parts). It means also worrying about rapists that have the same genitals as their victims. Otherwise, it’s just an excuse.

Other Excuses

I’m sure there are other excuses. All of the above were excuses I recall hearing, either in the formal determination by the Civil Rights division, or by commentators about this. The reality is that none of them get to the root of the problem: they are justifications, not the real problem. The real problem is dislike for how someone else lives their life. The excuses are simply attempts to justify bad behavior on the part of the person making them.

ASAN Calls for Federal Hate Crime Prosecution for the Murder of Alex Spourdalakis

See the whole announcement at ASAN’s site.

But, all I can say: FUCK YES. This was clearly a murder committed simply because the victim was autistic.

It was an attack not just against Alex, the ultimate victim in this, but also against the autistic community as a whole. There were two crimes committed here. A murder, which should see the full impact of the law; and a reminder to the entire autistic community that we’re safe so long as our caregivers aren’t stressed out.

Alex, RIP. We’ll see justice is serviced.

Transgender Day of Remembrance

Sometimes, as a member of one minority group (in my case, autistics), it’s easy to forget about others.  It’s easy to think that your own group faces the worst suffering or abuse.  Suffering and abuse isn’t like that – there’s a lot of horror in the world.

I believe in justice for all, not just my people (autistics).  So I want to highlight something that is happening this week.

It is not possible to be in favor of justice for some people and not be in favor of justice for all people.
– Martin Luther King, Jr.

Tuesday, Nov 20th, is Transgender Day of Remembrance.  It’s an annual event where people take a few minutes out of their day and remember that people have been killed for living authentic lives as the gender that they are rather than the gender that some would have them live.

One way you can show support for people is to attend a public remembrance event.  See http://www.transgenderdor.org/ to find one near you.  I’ll warn you that it’s very difficult to listen to the names of the dead without realizing that someone’s brother, sister, dad, mom, son, daughter, friend, wife, or husband is forever gone.  You can help those who know someone who died, and those who have been hurt by others, by showing your support for them.  You don’t need to know a trans person or be a trans person.  Just being there will show love and support.

Trans people don’t just face the threat of death (at a far higher rate than others in the LGBT community), but also face injustice in many other areas.  A heartbreaking read is Injustice at Every Turn, a report on the state of discrimination against trans people in the US.  There are a bunch of horrible statistics there.  For instance, nearly 1 in 5 (19%) of trans people say they were denied medical care because they were transgender.  Imagine for a minute having your doctor say “I can’t treat people like you,” simply because of a medically irrelevant characteristic and a wrongheaded view of morals (hint: medical needs should take priority over your religious hangups; if you can’t do that, the medical field is the wrong field for you).

I’m praying for a day when people are allowed to be who they are without fear of attack or discrimination.  Until then, I’ll speak out when I see injustice.  I hope you will too.  The worst thing we can do as allies, short of actually attacking another person, is to enable that attack by remaining silent.

As Martin Luther King, Jr. also said:

History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people.