Picture This!

By Diane Frank

One of the areas where Alpha Omega stands apart from the majority of crossdressing support organizations is our avoidance of pictures on our website, in our newsletter and even in the conduct of our meetings. During the last month our website was bombarded by people seeking information about a "Samantha Walls", a former Tri-Ess national officer whose name had appeared in several AO newsletters in the routine course of business. Later, pictures alleged to be the same person emerged as during the primary campaign of Sam Walls. Mr. Walls, a political candidate in an ultra-ultra-conservative region of the ultra-conservative state of Texas was alleged to be this former Tri-Ess officer.

There are several instructive aspects to this farce. Here is evidence yet again that newspaper reporters can be trusted to get parts of a story wrong. In the early reports the person in question was said to be an officer of AO, despite the clearly written statements that referred to Tri-Ess. Did the reporters contact AO for information? No! Did the reporters respond on a timely basis to email with the correct information? No. Was a correction printed? No. The only redemption here is that later stories did place the connection properly with Tri-Ess.

The second part of this is a lead article in which a Houston transgender activist chooses to confirm (truthfully or not) all elements of the story when asked by a reporter. One of the supposed rules of Tri-Ess meetings, gender conventions, etc., and a real rule within Alpha Omega is the one about confidentiality. We don’t "out" people. If we make friends and come to know personal information, we do not share it. But this particular transgender activist did. What does this tell us about trusting people in meetings or conventions? What does this suggest about the agendas and trustworthiness of activists? I’m sure we all know that there are activists who believe everyone should be out. Can you trust them not to "out" you when it gets their name in the paper?

The third part of this is, of course, about the pictures. If you’re going to leave "incriminating" pictures lying around in your rented trailer, for heaven’s sakes clean them out before someone forecloses on it. Or keep up the payments. And if you’re going to keep pictures, let them be good ones! Smile! The alleged "pictures of the candidate" they ran down in Texas would have been vastly improved by a smile. All those sober pictures only send a message to people that you’ve been caught doing something "wrong."

Okay, seriously, what is it with this picture mania anyhow? And why-oh-why do people post them on the internet, where they can be passed around like trading cards? Unless you’re out, or willing to be out, all you do with these collections of pictures is leave a trail for the bigots or opportunists. Nice friendly people who would prevent you from running for public office, holding a job or even keeping the respect of friends and family until you "come out" at a time of your own choosing.

Then there’s this little tidbit

In the newest aftershock, we learn that Walls not only has worn a dress but has also appeared as "Samantha Walls" with a Houston-based club of other men who like to dress up. This was three years ago, not 15 or 20, and Samantha has publicly posted Web messages as recently as May 15.

In this quote from the Dallas-Fort Worth Star-Telegram’s columnist Bud Kennedy are revealed a number of things that are not fun. I’ll bet that the person in question didn’t think that the web messages were public at all. But, after all, what is private on the web? Your every e-mail can be tracked back to you with a routine subpoena. So-called ‘private’ chat groups or list-serves can have moles in them. Anyone can record a chat session, and unlike recording a phone conversation, they have no legal obligation to inform you that it’s being recorded.

One thing you can’t do anything about is someone else using your email address. For example, in many guestbooks, you can leave an email address. I did a Google search on my email address. Back in 2001, one Daniel Frank left a message in the Pyramid Lake Paiute Guestbook, and left my email address, probably just a few keystrokes away from his. I guess this is why, while the papers reported that Samantha Walls email address had been used, they didn’t report where. Let’s just say the site wasn’t a crossdressing site, but it also wasn’t consistent with the claims of conservative family values that Mr. Walls was running under. Whether Mr. Walls actually posted a private message that only showed the email address can’t readily be determined.

This brings me to my next point: Web correspondence brings out the worst in us. I’ve flamed people and I’ve been flamed. I’ve written some things that I’m embarrassed about now. Slowly over the decades (yes it’s been that long), I learned better (still don’t claim to be perfect!), but the supposed anonymity of the web is an incitement and enticement to forgo the norms of civil conversation.

But it’s not only the flames that can be a problem, even the cordial content can be problematic. Consider that many CD messages are written in a syrupy sweet, faux-femme style that would make the hardiest romance writer collapse in a diabetic coma. Suppose the candidate signed some of those missives with "hugggs", "Hun", "Huggerz", or "XXXX", or talked about getting together with the "girlz", or an increasingly dangerous and risque list of other things I’m sure we’ve all seen.

Over the past few presidential administrations we’ve watched a game of people leaving the White House and turning out kiss and tell memoirs. While some of this is whistle-blowing and all to the good, if the President of the US can’t have some room for privacy what makes any of us think that we can expect it? I’ve believed for a long time that the only reason that there is the semblance of privacy on the net is that it has become so large as to create substantial barriers to snooping… but substantial isn’t perfect.

As a last point, there are our old friends at Tri-Ess. They’re in a pretty pickle over this. What you might expect them to do...to say is, "Hey, look here, Sam(antha) Walls was our treasurer and brought the same unquestionable integrity to that job that you can expect from him as a legislator. We know better than anyone else that his wearing skirts from time to time did not impair his judgment, honesty and leadership. We’re glad he was a member, we’re sorry to see him go, and if the good voters of Swampwater Texas don’t vote him into office it’s their loss."

On the other hand, they might all be quaking in their six-inch heels that this will "out" more of them, expose the whole Texas cross-dressed heterosexual conservative "normal" good ol’boys club to public scrutiny. They might figure that they’ll do Sam more harm than good speaking up as an organization. They could figure that they really can’t do anything because of confidentiality rules. They could have issued a statement saying that due to confidentiality rules they can’t comment about people’s identities, and then use the attention to educate. No evidence of that. Better just keep quiet, the way they always do. No right answers for that group here, only a succession of bad choices or worse ones. g