NH Senate passes marriage equality bill, kills trans rights legislation

once again human shields?

I'm getting the feeling that once again we've been used as human shields to soak up all the anti-GLBT hate and get discarded as a tradeoff for glb rights.

---

by: kathygnome @ Wed Apr 29, 2009 at 21:18:06 PM CDT

Not a good thing but . . .

If at first you don't succeed, try again. Keep pushing until the bill is passed.

---

by: Alvin McEwen @ Wed Apr 29, 2009 at 21:29:08 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

We have no choice

Of course we will do. What other choice do we have? The problems we have aren't mere propaganda, they're real, and not going away. The figures for only 25% being in fulltime employment, that those getting any income only average $15000 a year, that we have an 17 times normal rate of being murdered, they're not exaggerations, they're genuine.

Next year will be harder, not easier, after a campaign of denigration like this. We've just lost the majority of support that we had from the GLB and sometimes T groups. Not that that was ever very much.

See Blue Hampshire for example.

Remember, 20 states protect GLBs, but only 13 protect GLBTs. 12 when it comes to employment.


There is no situation so complex it can't get even worse

---

by: ZoeB @ Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 00:00:28 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

You might be right...

and it's sad and makes any simultaneous victory for LGB not T rights that much less satisfactory.  But I, for one, will not rest until LGB and T are all covered.

---

by: Bruno @ Wed Apr 29, 2009 at 22:47:07 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Thanks.

And I for my part will try to remember that this day is a victory too.

I'm not lesbian, but Gay Marriage was never a Gay issue, it's a Human Rights issue. Even if transphobia was far more prevalent than it is in GLB circles, I'd still support Gay civil rights, because they're Human civil rights. Sometimes you have to stand on principle.

And before anyone accuses me of being terminally ideologically pure, remember that I'm a NeoCon. "Compassionate Conservatism" isn't an oxymoron, no matter how many people on the Right have  tried to make it one.

There is no situation so complex it can't get even worse

---

by: ZoeB @ Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 00:05:43 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I couldn't have said it better

we've been used as human shields to soak up all the anti-GLBT hate and get discarded as a tradeoff for glb rights

And we don't even get paid for it.

Is there an 'Involuntary Political Human Shield' Union?

>^..^<

---

by: KatRose @ Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 21:45:40 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Yet another example of 1 step forward 2 steps back....

I can only hope that the senate will repeat themselves and ignore the Senate Judiciary Committee on this issue as well. As far as JS's reaction... another good example why we are not renewing our HRC membership.

...... Next time someone gives you a hard time for being LGBT... just ask them if they are unenlightened...or closeted

---

by: lisabrealty @ Wed Apr 29, 2009 at 21:28:53 PM CDT

I see it as one step forward.

The marriage bill, if it really becomes law, will help trans people too.  Hopefully the real story will come out and we can address whatever the problem was next time around.  Thank god the US House passed the LGBT hate crimes bill today.  Maybe the NH Senate needs to get a clue that they're been foolish if even the US House can have the spine to pass a decent bill.

Lurleen on Twitter

---

by: Lurleen @ Wed Apr 29, 2009 at 23:53:52 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

There has to be a way

to counter that stupid "bathroom bill" crap. Hasn't anyone come up with an effective counter?

Cause any fool knows, a dog needs a home; a shelter from pigs on the wing

---

by: QueerInSoCal @ Wed Apr 29, 2009 at 21:35:43 PM CDT

an effective counter?

 Nope, there isn't one.  It has to do with who all is covered under the Big Umbrella.  The opponents came at that full steam with their claim A woman for a day  argument and nothing was offered to counter that claim.

The opponents were wide open about this approach to defeat Transgender Protection laws.  The answers that were given basically said to force businesses to install single use restrooms.  I was involved in many long threads here and got flamed for trying to say there needs to be a better answer.  

And no, I am not going to take part in another discussion on this issue here.  If people want to engage in an honest discussion, I would take Pam's suggestion, take it to the Pam's House Blend CHAT.

If I make sense? it was quite by accident.

---

by: HappyCat @ Wed Apr 29, 2009 at 21:56:44 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

An effective counter.

We jettison non-discrimination protections that cover bathrooms and showers. Where the bill says "public accommodations," add "except gender-divided public spaces such as restrooms, locker rooms, and showers."

I say this as someone who could, myself, be inconvenienced by this exception. But it seems to me that it's better to get some protections than none at all, and helping our people retain employment far outweighs the bathroom issue.

The restrooms involved in employment situations are significantly different from public restrooms in that our opponents can't use their favorite scare tactic; i.e. the male stranger seeking to molest women and little girls. One generally doesn't have strangers or children using the employee restrooms in the workplace situation.  

Tax the Christian Taliban!

---

by: Wolfgang @ Wed Apr 29, 2009 at 23:53:18 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

That was tried in Maryland

It had zero effect, other than to embolden the opposition and give them credibility - people believed there really had to be an issue after all, so gave more credence to their other arguments.

There is no situation so complex it can't get even worse

---

by: ZoeB @ Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 00:07:55 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

What you say makes perfect sense,

  But there are far to many in the T community that will disagree with you.  Even knowing that trans people use their correct bathroom many times per day, and there hasn't been one incident, except for the fraud that took place in Maryland.  

 As I stated, the target is The woman for a day, a man the next  The opponents put a huge spotlight on this.  It was on all the web sites like TVC, AFA, FRC etc.  and no action was taken by our side.

 It is very unfortunate that this vote had to happen the way it did, 24 - 0.  Because this will be used to split the LGB and T during the ENDA debates.  Those who support an inclusive ENDA, need to address this ASAP.  But lots of luck on that.  If you read above, HRC doesn't even mention this loss in their statement.  

If I make sense? it was quite by accident.

---

by: HappyCat @ Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 00:17:58 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

It won't work

As Zoe pointed out, that was already tried and the tactic backfired.

But the real reason it won't work is because the opposition isn't really about bathrooms. The opposition is about not wanting trans people to have any rights at all. Like my brother, they want to be free to evict, fire or refuse service to any trans (or gay) person. They want to shun these people and make their lives so difficult that they will go back in the closet.

Bathrooms just a scary red herring to whip people up. If it isn't bathrooms, they will just come up with some other outrageous lie.

---

by: Stephanie @ Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 02:13:15 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I can't agree with HappyCat

Caving in on bathrooms is not a good idea.

Perhaps something similar to (the "New Orleans" solution would work better with regard to bathroom/shower/locker room issues (but not the same as N.O. since they have a "once and only once" in terrorem clause) - if they are that worried about "flip-floppers" they could do the following, for bathroom/locker rooms and employee dress codes:

a. require a transitioning/transitioned person to make a
 i. "declaration of gender identity" and
 ii. provide either
   1. a "gatekeeper" letter (from a medical or mental health professional confirming the individual's "prevailing gender," or
   2. proof of completion of surgical procedure (not necessarily GRS but must be sufficient to indicate not reporductively capable in original assignment).

b. declaration plus either gatekeeper letter or surgery proof would entitle individual to:
   1. change all their ID documentation, and
   2. use the "gender appropriate" restroom/locker room (perhaps with a caveat for pre-op/non-op in places where nudity is required for "reasonable accommodation" involving privacy - curtains or stalls needed)

This would serve all who are full time.  

Consideration could also be given to the British statutory formula - we don't absolutely have to rely on the "Rhode Island language" approach.

---

by: Joann Prinzivalli @ Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 15:07:06 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I don't see what's so hard to combat it...

1. When it comes to bathrooms, this is only legalizing what's already happening on a mass scale.

2. It would be ridiculous to demand a testosterone-taking transgender male to go into a woman's restroom and vice versa. If bigoted fundies are worried about anything, that would be the far more awkward situation.  

---

by: RyansTake @ Wed Apr 29, 2009 at 23:15:19 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Maybe that's how you counter it

This is about appearances, so go with that. Show some ultra-butch FtM people, and have them say "Voting no means I'll be using the women's restroom." The whole thing is about men in the potty with women, maybe leverage that. Counter it with an ultra-femme MtF and show how ridiculous it is to have women in the men's restroom.

Cause any fool knows, a dog needs a home; a shelter from pigs on the wing

---

by: QueerInSoCal @ Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 07:45:30 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Perhaps the most effective counter

would be for a horde of trans men and trans women to go to the New Hampshire state capital and hang out (in groups) inside the bathrooms the legislators "expect" us to be using and would be using themselves - trans men in the ladies' and trans women in the men's - regardless of op status or ID documentation.

---

by: Joann Prinzivalli @ Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 14:35:06 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

24 - 0, that hurts big time.

  It shows two things, the first being the argument made by the opponents of transgender protections work and work well.  The second is the lack of a good argument put forth by our side.  

 I am not surprised though, The fighting with in the T community just adds fuel to the opponents fight.

If I make sense? it was quite by accident.

---

by: HappyCat @ Wed Apr 29, 2009 at 21:42:15 PM CDT

How nice...

I'm so glad to see that my safety is such a useful bargaining chip for the haters.

Hate stops a beating heart.

---

by: KarenS @ Wed Apr 29, 2009 at 22:22:30 PM CDT

The news is far worse than you said, Pam.

The vote was unanimous. A splendid example of bi-partisan opposition.

Transgender rights: No, 24-0

Concord - The New Hampshire Senate today unanimously rejected a bill that would have extended anti-discrimination laws to transgendered people.

House Bill 415 would have protected those with sexual identity issues in areas of housing and employment, much the way the state's laws protects others from discrimination on the basis of color, race, religion or sexual orientation.

Those who fought the bill said it would open women's bathrooms, changing rooms and locker rooms to sexual predators who could raise a defense in court that they were sexually confused.

The 24-0 vote to kill it came after Democrats blasted opponents of the bill for dubbing the measure the "bathroom bill," a move they said created misunderstanding and fear among the general population.

They also criticized the press and media for picking up on the nickname, saying they became an unwitting partner in the effort to continue denying a part of the population its civil rights.

"Shame on you," said Sen. Jacalyn Cilley, D-Barrington, as she accused opponents of "political posturing and gamesmanship."

Bill supporters said discrimination of any kind is wrong, and that state law should protect all citizens equally. They said there have been no bathroom incidents in the 13 states that have similar laws on the books.

Sen. Martha Fuller Clark, D-Portsmouth, a sponsor of the bill, said that those who campaigned against the bill "shamefuly sought to distract us from the real issue, literally bringing the debate to the toilets."

Passing the bill now would only worsen the situation for transsexuals because of the way the bill was portrayed, she said.

The campaign to defeat it "embodies at its very core the ugly and misplaced prejudice we had all hoped this bill would prevent," Clark said.

Sen. Bette Lasky, D-Nashua, said the bill had been "outrageously mischaracterized and, worse yet ridiculed."

No Republicans spoke during the brief debate.

Not a single Democrat, not even the bill's sponsors, voted for it. Not one.

In the Senate Committee hearing, the Democrat majority requested that evidence be cut short, and given in writing. They received it.. and then announced their pre-determined vote without even pretending to read the evidence before them.

If Passing the bill now would only worsen the situation for transsexuals because of the way the bill was portrayed then what about a vote of 24-0 against? That just confirms to the NH voters that what was said about TS people being paedophiles and rapists was true. There'll be more hate crimes in NH because of this, more suicides of people in NH who will just give up.

TS people will still have a 40% unemployment rate, with most living below the poverty line, and only 25% being in fulltime employment. Average income for those lucky enough to have a job, $15,000.

But we should celebrate this great GLBT victory, and no doubt we will receive the same "wonderful support" we've had in MA, where gay marriage was won long ago, but basic human rights for TS people are still in abeyance.

I really should be celebrating. This really is a victory. So why do I just feel like crying instead?

At least the Republicans stab you in the front.

There is no situation so complex it can't get even worse

---

by: ZoeB @ Wed Apr 29, 2009 at 22:25:54 PM CDT

It just makes absolutely no sense.

There must be something else going on that no one is fessing up to, because there is never a valid reason for sponsors to vote against their own bill no matter what nickname the opposition gave it.  It is shocking to think that so many legislators could be so absolutely cowardly.

Lurleen on Twitter

---

by: Lurleen @ Wed Apr 29, 2009 at 23:49:24 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Maybe

It could have been a quid pro quo - Gay Marriage for throwing Trans people to the wolves. That's ethically bankrupt, but at least it would be justifiable. A fair trade.

I don't think so though.

I guess I can explain by showing two typical Hate Crimes. One against two Gay men, one against two trans women:

...two young men were jumped by several others described as five white males between the ages 16 and 20. One of the victims, a student at UVa, was hit in the head and had his phone smashed when he tried to call police.

That's pretty bad, and typical of the violence that goes beyond verbal assault in the minority of cases. Here's the equivalent for Trans women:

The police spokesman said one of the victims was stabbed 40 times, severely beaten in the genitals, arms and face and her eyes were torn out.

The second victim was found bound, stuffed in a bag with her legs broken. She also was stabbed and burned, Cordero Paredes said.

Both "Hate Crimes", but you can see the difference. That's what is meant when Human Rights groups report that the Hate Crimes against Trans people involve the most extreme forms of violence.

The standards are different. The usual rules don't apply.

The fact is, that many Dems are not comfortable with Trans people existing. Many Gays are not comfortable with Trans people existing. They'd prefer not to think about them, and  wish they'd just go away somewhere.    

There is no situation so complex it can't get even worse

---

by: ZoeB @ Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 00:31:26 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I don't understand it

I really don't understand it, Zoe. I have tried and tried to understand, at least on a logical level, why people - straight or gay - have such issues with trans people. Why the irrational, all-consuming, murderous hate? The levels of violence you write about aren't just someone getting liquored up, finding a gay person to bash and "teach that dirty fag a lesson and put him back in the closet where his ass belongs." They're a level of rage that comes from wanting to wipe someone off the face of the planet. I cannot for the life of me understand it. It makes me so fucking sad and angry and I feel so powerless to help stop it. Yeah, I can speak out against "trannie" jokes and misogyny at the office and work to dispel myths and reinforce that transgender people are human beings. But it doesn't feel like enough. What can I do to help? What can I do to be a better ally?

God save ornery old queens! - kevinchi

---

by: Keori @ Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 01:01:23 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Spot on.

There has to be ways to counter this ... fear? Ignorance? Hate? I truly do not know what label applies.

But maybe that's the point- getting enough people to open their MINDS as well as their eyes and remove labels of gender expression and preconceived notion of humanity.

24-0 is a huge wakeup call to the need.

"It goes on one at a time, it starts when you care to act, it starts when you do it again after they said no, it starts when you say We and know who you mean, and each day you mean one more."

---

by: Louise @ Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 06:51:27 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

This L isn't celebrating

Beloved and I are mourning with you. It's not right that she and I should make gains, and you be left behind. I won't stand for it. This is wrong.

God save ornery old queens! - kevinchi

---

by: Keori @ Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 00:27:20 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Yup.

C & I as well.

Until we are ALL protected with equal rights, NONE of us truly are.

"It goes on one at a time, it starts when you care to act, it starts when you do it again after they said no, it starts when you say We and know who you mean, and each day you mean one more."

---

by: Louise @ Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 06:52:30 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Thanks

That means a lot to us. More than you know, in fact.

There is no situation so complex it can't get even worse

---

by: ZoeB @ Fri May 01, 2009 at 07:24:16 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

It is really disturbing that

Cilley, Fuller Clark, Lasky have the gall to attack opponents of the bill, and then, go and vote against it themselves.

Typical hypocritical politicians.

---

by: rfloh @ Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 01:54:19 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Blood in the water

In the Amazon they slit a cow's throat and throw her in the water. The piranha smell the blood in the water and attack the cow's carcass. Meanwhile, the rest of the herd can safely cross the river while the blood-crazed fish are distracted.

I think I know how the cow feels.

---

by: CarbonGirl @ Wed Apr 29, 2009 at 23:00:17 PM CDT

So I got mine...

...and now it's time for me to stand up and make sure that the trans* people in my state get theirs.

That's how it's supposed to work, right?  Unfortunately, I get the sneaking suspicion that too many cisgendered gay men will embarrass me by running away from this, both in NH and here in CA.

---

by: M @ Wed Apr 29, 2009 at 23:08:59 PM CDT

Let us not forget

That people like you exist.

Thanks. The fact that you commented gives us hope. Right now, we could use all of that we can get.

A unanimous decision to refuse to grant GLBTs the same rights GLBs(without the T) have had for some time now is a genuine kick in the teeth. It's more than just a defeat.

I suppose we should be used to it by now. Well blow that, I'm not going to accept the role of "victim", no matter who may assign that to me.

Some people are going to die because of this though. Every year of delay means more deaths. So many don't understand that, or don't want to believe it.

There is no situation so complex it can't get even worse

---

by: ZoeB @ Wed Apr 29, 2009 at 23:31:08 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Glaring difference between NGLTF and HRC

is that the trans issue is completely missing from HRC's response.

I'm not shocked.

I'm not even disappointed.

I've merely had my low expectations confirmed.

---

Claim to fame: Posted first PHB diary to be demoted

---

by: cindik @ Wed Apr 29, 2009 at 23:12:18 PM CDT

Blue Hampshire's response is similar

Today is a day of celebration.

We're not on their radar. What a surprise.

There is no situation so complex it can't get even worse

---

by: ZoeB @ Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 00:13:24 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

How HRC sees transpeople

---

Claim to fame: Posted first PHB diary to be demoted

---

by: cindik @ Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 09:55:09 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Woman for a day?

Happens all the time.

Any idea how many men dress up and go driving off somewhere, on trips, to restaurants, etc? They are already using the restrooms, and yet no problems. Hmmmm how about that. Gender variant folks of all sorts are already using them with no problems.

Whether it's legal or not, non-ops and those medically ineligible for surgery still use the bathrooms of their choice. And still no problems.

Where we run into problems is with people who clearly don't pass, who might "scare the customers" the claim has been. The irony is that typically it's the gender variant person who is singled-out, harassed, or assaulted when there are "bathroom incidents," yet the "normal" cisgender folks are the ones expressing discomfort?

This "woman for a day" idea is really about enforcing cissexual standards of male and female looks, comportment, dress, and behavior in public spaces, especially bathrooms. It's a "passability" test. Because if you can pass, nobody will know; no harm, no foul.

But it's for the people who can't easily pass, who are in transition, or for whatever reason can't meet accepted standards - those are the people pay the price from a lack of protections.

And if those people aren't protected, and everyone knows they're not protected, then I'll predict that NH has a sudden increase in the number of incidents in bathrooms, where one person alleges another is in the wrong bathroom. Most will be proven wrong.  Probably worse will happen, but let us hope not.

To lose all the other rights that would have come with the anti-discrimination and hate-crimes bill is a sad commentary when it boiled down to who is sitting in the stall next to you in a public toilet.  

---

by: Christine Johnson @ Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 00:22:55 AM CDT

Just a reminder

that the major "bathroom incident" in the NYC area involved a butch Lesbian who was accused of being male and ejected from a restaurant.

Lack of protection for trans people means lack of protection for many if not a majority of Lesbians.

I tell you Chica that no greater abomination exists than women denying their spirit of sisterhood and instead becoming the oppressor. -Rebeca, Universidad Complutense de Madrid

---

by: MauraHennessey @ Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 06:58:40 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Yea, gotta love those gender police

I heard about the case. Yea. Lame.

You know, the last thing we need on this planet is self-appointed gender police.  

---

by: Christine Johnson @ Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 22:59:53 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

SO tired of being the sacrificial lamb

...the clause that's included in every negotiation because you know you'll need  to give up something to get what's really important, and basic human rights for transfolk apparently fill that need just fine.  
So glad we could help folks win the right to register at Pottery Barn, though.
Seriously: screw everyone who throws one group of people to the wolves in the name of another's political expediency. Screw everyone who buys into the paradigm that insists that that needs to be done in order to advance our overall agenda. Screw everyone who thinks this was a fair exchange. And most especially in this case, screw the unanimous vote to jettison the trans rights from the bill, which indicates to me that the only reason trans coverage was included in the first place was to be sacrificed.
I am SO tired of this crap.

---

by: hardcorps80204 @ Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 08:07:30 AM CDT

The Dilima

"The bill adds the term "gender identity or expression" to state anti-discrimination and hate crimes laws."

"...because they are either transsexuals or men with female "gender identity."

It has been said that it is not gender identity but gender expression that is the issue.  Gender expression, which covers virtually every imaginable gender presentation calculus, is not going to cover every issue those under the transgender umbrellas (that same umbrella that indeed covers every imaginable gender presentation calculus) seek.  Though the term "gender expression" may sneak by at times, for the most part it is a hard sell bordering on doomed failure.    

---

by: EnoughNonSense @ Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 10:49:41 AM CDT

I know how you feel, and a reason to keep hope

What you are feeling right now is exactly how I was feeling two years ago.  In 2007 we introduced a marriage equality bill in NH for the first time.  In talking to the legislators it seemed like we might have a good chance of passing it.  

What actually happened is that the leadership decided to oppose it HARD.  Our own sponsors voted against it.  An openly lesbian legislator who was one of our sponsors was the very first legislator to cast a vote against it.  On top of that, once the Civil Unions law was created some openly GLBT legislators and political leaders pronounced in the press that marriage equality was not going to happen for "50 years" or "not in my lifetime".

We felt like marriage equality had been sacrificed for the sake of passing separate-and-unequal Civil Unions and many of us took that VERY personally.

Marriage equality seemed just as dead to me then as transgender non-discrimination must feel like to you right now.

That was two years ago.  This time, leadership decided to support marriage equality and has done so whole heartedly (in the House perhaps more so than in the Senate).

Some of those same senators who voted against transgender equality also stood up on the Senate floor and gave passionate speeches about how this bill was the right thing to do even though they were failing to do the right thing today.  Two years ago, we didn't even get sympathetic speeches.  Even Senators who had publicly supported marriage equality didn't want to talk about it publicly anymore.

The Transgender non-discrimination bill passed in the House the first time that it was introduced.  That by itself makes this inevitable.  It took us 3 tries to get sexual orientation added to the non-discrimination laws.

I know what it feels like when your friends abandon you.  Just remember that guilt is a powerful motivator.

---

by: brianrater @ Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 11:06:57 AM CDT

We have to keep in mind...

that these situations are fluid.  What once may seem insurmountable can become easily so quickly.  However, I do think civil unions generally only tend to delay full marriage rights.  New Hampshire has been a shocker.

---

by: Bruno @ Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 15:00:36 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Senate speech in favor of transgender bill

Here is one of the speeches made on the Senate floor in favor of the transgender bill.  It was posted on Blue Hampshire by the state Democratic Party Chairman with the following intro.

(Senator Cilley asked me to post her floor remarks on Blue Hampshire. Senator Cilley, along with Senator Lasky and bill sponsor Senator Fuller Clark were representative of the strong sentiments of the entire Senate Democratic Caucus)

http://www.bluehampshire.com/s...

I can't and won't defend their decision to kill this bill without allowing it a fair up/down vote, but don't think for a second that the next time that this bill is introduced that it will be given the same treatment.  We are sadly behind in our treatment of transgendered people, but we can catch up.

---

by: brianrater @ Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 11:26:23 AM CDT

The bottom line...

We have to fight, regardless of the odds.

There is no situation so complex it can't get even worse

---

by: ZoeB @ Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 21:39:45 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

This tripe got defeated in Gainseville

So before I get bus tire marks over the back of my head how about someone work out how we won that one and build on it?

---

by: battybattybats @ Fri May 01, 2009 at 01:09:28 AM CDT

Gainesville affected Gays too

That's the difference. At Gainesville, it wasn't just about opposition to granting the same rights to Trans people as had long existed for gays, it was about removing the existing rights from gays too.

There is no situation so complex it can't get even worse

---

by: ZoeB @ Fri May 01, 2009 at 07:22:48 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

HRC question

I have been on other boards where people are actively accusing the HRC of backroom deals to kill this bill to increase the chances of gay marriage to pass in NH.  Is there any evidence of this?  I just don't know what to believe.

Also, what kinds of actions could people take to make sure that the HRC doesn't push Trans issues to the side in the future, like if ENDA comes back up again?  Perhaps a protest aimed at fundraising time?

I'm sure there are some HRC employees and donors who check out this space.  Do you have any reassurances that you haven't forgotten the Trans community?

---

by: TrumpetDC @ Fri May 01, 2009 at 19:42:50 PM CDT