Ann Rostow: Somewhere Over the Rainbow

By Ann Rostow –

Somewhere Over the Rainbow

I think we can agree, dear Readers, that we are disgusted and angered by the continuing assault on efforts to promote equality and diversity in our social, political, and business institutions. Equality and diversity are good things. 

But the backlash against the progressive left came from somewhere, didn’t it? I’ve mentioned my favorite pet peeve— the call for tampon machines in the men’s rooms at a women’s college. And although I understand where the notion of micro-aggression arose and why it can be a useful idea, I’ve always thought we should focus more on big giant horrible aggressions first. If not, we look like idiots. 

With that in mind, here’s a combination of what I consider a misplaced focus on GLBT identities, combined with the worst in academic argle-bargle: 

“We are calling for papers that will link queer lives and queer theory to corporate law and governance, with the goal of publishing an edited collection or special issue publication,” writes a trio of international thinkers. “‘Queer’ can mean different things to different people,” they explain. “For some, it is part of a personal identity. Here, connecting the queer to corporate governance involves providing spaces for queer people within corporate life. For others, it is an approach to thinking about social institutions. Here, connecting the queer to corporate governance involves questioning concepts and practices underlying corporate life, which may include interrogating the very concepts of identity which shape the focus on creating queer spaces. There can also be a playfulness to queer, to challenge preconceptions by subverting the established.”

You know what? You can parse brilliant ideas down to meaningless pablum, just as you can dump a gourmet French dish into a blender and hit liquify. It’s worth repeating this phrase: “connecting the queer to corporate governance involves questioning concepts and practices underlying corporate life, which may include interrogating the very concepts of identity which shape the focus on creating queer spaces.” Ladies and gentlemen, these are English words strung together into a senseless pretense of erudition. 

Think about this. Over the last week, the Florida Department of Transportation removed the rainbow colors that memorialized the Pulse shootings on an intersection in Orlando. Local people repainted the intersection, but the authorities removed the rainbow a second time, replacing it with crosswalk markings. This despite the fact that the Department itself approved the rainbow colors years ago as a testament to the 49 people who were killed in the antigay mass shooting back in 2016. 

Florida governor Ron DeSantis insisted that Florida “will not allow our state roads to be commandeered for political purposes.” This is the type of assault we are facing today. Not bruised feelings or contrived psychic injuries. But gut punches from the bullies on the right and indifference from the cowards who watch them from the sidelines. 

Oh, and you can’t say: “to challenge preconceptions by subverting the established.” I suppose the author means, “by subverting the established preconceptions,” but that’s not clear. It just reads as though the writer forgot to finish the sentence. 

Appellate Courts Rule, for the Moment

Do you remember the case of Gavin Grimm, the transgender student who won the right to use the boys facilities at his Virginia high school? It was a complicated case that went to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, went up to the Supreme Court, came back to the Fourth Circuit, and back to the Supreme Court where the justices declined to review the transgender victory, letting the Fourth Circuit ruling in Grimm’s favor stand as binding precedent throughout the region. 

Let me digress to point out that the Fourth Circuit initially deferred to the Education Department’s Office of Civil Rights policy, which interpreted Title IX’s ban on sex discrimination in public education to cover transgender bias. The High Court questioned whether or not that political deference (“Auer deference”) was appropriate, and sure enough, the justices later ruled that deferring to agency interpretations of law (under a similar legal standard “Chevron deference”) was not necessary. At any rate, the Court sent the Grimm case back to the Fourth Circuit, which issued another transgender victory on different grounds. In 2021, the High Court effectively upheld that ruling by declining to hear an appeal. 

Got that?

Also keep in mind that this was not too long after the Supreme Court ruled that sex discrimination by definition encompassed sexual orientation and gender discrimination. That 2020 opinion would have been upended if the Court suddenly were to rule that Title IX did not reach transgender students, so the Court just sidestepped the whole issue!

Fast forward back to today, when the Trump Education Department’s Office of Civil Rights decided on its own that the Fourth Circuit decision in Grimm should no longer protect the public school students of Virginia or elsewhere in the region. The Fourth Circuit covers Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia, North Carolina, and South Carolina. Courts (and school districts) in these states have no choice but to follow Fourth Circuit rulings.

Fighting back, the authorities in five northern Virginia school districts have replied to the Trump administration by pointing out that they are required by law to protect transgender students under Title IX. Of course, now the Office of Civil Rights has a completely new interpretation of the 1972 statute, one that excludes transgender kids from civil rights protections, but ironically, agency interpretations no longer carry the weight they once did, thanks to … the Supreme Court. 

I can see you all shaking your heads. Ann, you ask, was it really necessary to delve into ancient history and refer to arcane rules about federal agency legal standards in order to give us the lowdown here? Um, maybe not. And why haven’t you explained how the Trump administration has managed to simply ignore the Fourth Circuit here! I mean, that’s crazy, right?

Right! I was just coming to that! Apparently, the Trump legal eagles are claiming that the High Court’s decision in Skrrmetti v U.S. has some implications for transgender bathroom use. That’s interesting given that Skrmetti concerned whether or not Tennessee and other states had the power to limit health services to transgender youth. Not only was the case about a completely different area of law, but John Roberts made (absurdly) clear in his majority ruling that Tennessee was not discriminating against transgender citizens, but merely making a distinction based on age. In short, there’s no legal connection between Skrmetti and Title IX except for the fact that both involve transgender people. 

Apparently, that’s enough for the Trumpies, and we’ll see what happens next. 

Speaking of Skrmetti, we’ve just seen the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit give Arkansas the right to ban gender-based health care for trans kids four years after putting the Hog State’s law on hold. The 8–2 decision was based on the High Court’s ruling and covers Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota in addition to Arkansas. Well, since Skrmetti, basically all states are free to remove health care options from transgender kids and their parents.    

Grandchildren 101

Did you read that Snoop Dogg took his grandson to see the 2022 Disney movie Lightyear, only to get bent out of shape by the animated film version of a lesbian couple with a baby. According to the press, Snoop’s grandson “kept asking” about the situation, pestering granddad over how and why two women could become parents. “Oh, s–t, I didn’t come for this s–t,” Snoop remarked. “I just came to watch the (another expletive) movie.” 

Earth to Snoop Dogg: your grandson refused to drop the lesbian baby issue because you were clearly uncomfortable with the discussion, which is catnip for small children who can sense when an adult has encountered a sore subject and will pursue it relentlessly. Had you just said that the situation was no big deal, the child would have moved on. And while you’re at it, watch your language if you really care what your grandkids might be picking up from the media. Jeeze Louise.

I just took a break and found Mel watching a British cop show, one of our favorite activities. I stayed long enough to see something that always bothers me, a common trope in all sorts of detective programs from all countries—it’s the chase scene with the car. 

You know what I’m talking about. One cop is chasing the bad guy over hill and dale, while the other cop inexplicably gets in the car even though the foot race is all over the map. The chase goes through alleyways, onto rooftops, into people’s backyards, through their houses, over the river and through the woods until finally the car drives up and cuts the bad guy off. It’s infuriating. There’s no way the cop in the car can track the situation and miraculously wind up at the exact point where the chase will come to an end. And not only does this happen once or twice in a show, it happens regularly in show after show! C’mon, people. The whole premise is bad enough, but then half the time the driver knocks the bad guy unconscious by opening the car door at the precise moment he comes racing around a corner at full speed or by flat out hitting him with the car. 

Oh, and another thing. I think I’ve complained about this before, but why don’t the cops ever finish their drinks, their meals, or their cigarettes? One puff and they’ve got to go. One sip, a phone call, and off they rush without even taking a last slug. They order food and then jump up and dash out without paying or canceling. It’s one thing if a new body has been discovered. But most of the time it’s nothing.

“What a day! Hey, Tony, I’ll have a French 75 …” [ding ding ding] 

“Boss?”

“We got the PM. It looks like blunt force trauma.”

“I’ll be right there.”

Why leave the bar? You already saw that it was likely blunt force trauma at the scene of the crime. You’ve been working nonstop for days. Finish your drink!

The Good Old Days Are Over

Moving on, I noticed that James Dobson died the other day. I hadn’t thought of him in years. Dobson was the founder of Focus on the Family as well as the Family Research Council and one of the leading antigay voices in the chorus of late 20th Century far-right Christian conservatives. After marriage equality triumphed at the Supreme Court in 2015, Dobson told one of his buddies in an interview: “We lost the entire culture war with that one decision.”

I remember feeling as if we’d all turned a corner at that point, before we lost the Supreme Court. Before we lost the 2016 election. Before Covid, before inflation, before the backlash, before the astonishing reversals of American values and the chaos of lawless executive antics we’ve seen out of Trump Two. How quickly things can change. 

Speaking of change, I was just reading an Advocate article described as “an exploration of how gentrification of New York City’s West Village has affected its queer community, especially its queer elders.” The magazine quoted one long-time resident, Donna Aceto, who bemoaned all the straight people who have moved in over recent years. “I miss the old places. I miss the things that used to be here,” Aceto says. “There were a lot more gay bars and lesbian bars.”

As an official “elder” and also someone who lived in the West Village for several years, can I point out that neighborhoods change, cities change, people change, and the days when we all needed gay and lesbian bars as a safe retreat from a hostile society are thankfully over. Yes, you younger generations missed out on some of our wilder nightclubs and parties. You also missed out on being fired for being gay, hiding in the proverbial closet and listening to gay bashing jokes without saying anything. And guys? You missed out on dying in your twenties.

I remember one joke from those days. “What’s the worst thing about having AIDS?” (And yes, I got this one from my guy friends.)

“Trying to convince your mother you’re Haitian.” 

Ah, the good old days.

arostow@aol.com

GLBT Fortnight in Review
Published on August 28, 2025