viz.

The Human Rights Campaign's Daily Newsletter recently spotlighted an article in The New York Times about Michelle Bruce, a 46 year old politician in Riverdale, GA.

As the paper reports, "Bruce is battling a lawsuit by an unsuccessful opponent who claims she misled voters by running as a woman." Of the four candidates that ran for a City Council seat, Bruce received the most votes. The third place finisher, Georgia Fuller, followed with her lawsuit. In explanation, she claims that "voters in Riverdale tended to favor female candidates, particularly if they were incumbents" and her lawyer claims that it gives Bruce an "unfair advantage."

This lawsuit not only reeks of sore loser-ness, but also flagrantly dismisses Bruce's choice of gender. Fuller's claim also ignores the ways in which Bruce chooses to present and label her body and instead imposes her own biologically-based label. I find it ironic, however, that Fuller argues that Bruce gains an advantage by her adopted gender. I would argue that Fuller's ability to file the lawsuit in the first place challenging Bruce's chosen gender indicates that she holds her own kind of advantage.