Ter Apel, a small, unassuming Dutch town near the German border, is a place tourists rarely have on their itinerary. There are no lovely old windmills, no cannabis-filled coffee shops and on a recent visit it was far too early for tulip season.
When foreigners end up there, it is for one reason: to claim asylum at the Netherlands’ biggest refugee camp, home to 2,000 desperate people from all around the world.
Many of the American refugees, like Jane-Michelle Arc, a 47-year-old software engineer from San Francisco, are transgender. In April last year she flew into Schiphol airport in Amsterdam and, sobbing, asked a customs officer how to claim asylum. “And they laughed because: what’s this big dumb American doing here asking about asylum? And then they realised I was serious.”
Arc said the US had become such a hostile environment for trans people that she had stopped leaving the house “unless there was an Uber waiting outside”. She said she had been abused on the street and using the ladies’ toilets, and resolved to leave the country after a frightening incident when she feared a woman was going to run her over with her truck.



I know it’s a tough time but I have trouble imagining it being that bad in SF. I know the situation isn’t ideal but there are only so many places available for refugees each year and some people applying are actually expecting death or worse if they go back.
Seems to be a bit tone deaf imo, we aren’t at that point yet, at least not in San Fransisco. I would be livid if I was from somewhere with an actual civil war, where whole villages are getting wiped, and see my spot get taken by someone from Cali.
I want to be clear I think there is a problem with how transgender folk are being treated, but I think the asylum system has a lot of bigger ones to deal with and its already struggling with those. I wish other countries stepped up and offered easier immigration if you’re transgender or something. This just feels like the wrong way to do it.
I think the tone deaf thing here is you telling trans people, who are being actively targeted by an increasingly fascist goverment and conservative media, that it’s not bad enough yet for them to leave.
Any person who wants to leave and has the means to leave should absolutely leave by whatever means, and your judgment of them is of no value.
If you have a problem with worldwide asylum quotas, maybe take that up with a foreign government or something. People who are just trying to survive and make the best decisions they can in an increasingly high-stakes situation should disregard everything you’ve said and continue doing whatever they want, and you should support their ability to do so.
Well I do have a problem with worldwide quotas and immigration in general, I wish our borders were much more open. Look, I’m just saying that someone from San Fransisco probably has other options available and shouldn’t lean on a system that’s already strained. There’s genocides and civil wars going on. Being gay is a death sentence in 8 countries. A lot of displaced women and girls have asylum or sex trade as a choice, they simply don’t have options.
I don’t think it’s wrong to say we need to triage and prioritize certain problems because of lack of resources. It doesn’t mean the ones not chosen don’t exist or that the whole system shouldn’t have more resources.
We agree that the problem is that countries would deny asylum to those in need, but sounds like your solution that those in need should preemptively disqualify themselves based vibes or something.
I think anyone who wants to should apply for asylum. If they are rejected and choose to migrate anyway, more power to them.