News Tips?
-- tips@phblend.com

PHB Mobile

Access 11/5 Senate ENDA Hearing Live Blog

Access Tuesday's Election Live Blog

33|175:175
About
-- The Blog
-- Pam | My home page
-- Autumn
-- Daimeon
-- Julien
-- "Radical" Russ
-- Terrance

Contact the Baristas

The Blend Blogrolls

Activism

Best of the Blend
Blog Posts

Special Events and Interviews

Blend-o-licious endorsements...


The Christian Civic League of Maine's Mike Hein calls Pam's House Blend:
"a leading source of radical homosexual propaganda, anti-Christian bigotry, and radical transgender advocacy."

He is "praying that Pam Spaulding will "turn away from her wicked and sinful promotion of homosexual behavior." (CCLM's web site, 10/15/07)

Ex-gay "Christian" activist James Hartline on Pam:
"I have been mocked over and over again by ungodly and unprincipled anti-christian lesbians."
(from "Six Years In Sodom: From The Journal Of James Hartline," 9/4/2006, written from the "homosexual stronghold" of Hillcrest in San Diego).

"Pam is a 'twisted lesbian sister' and an 'embittered lesbian' of the 'self-imposed gutteral experiences of the gay ghetto.'" -- 9/5/2008


Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth Against Homosexuality heartily endorses the Blend, calling Pam:

A "vicious anti-Christian lesbian activist."
(Concerned Women for America's radio show [9:15], 1/25/07)

"A nutty lesbian blogger."
(MassResistance radio show [16:25], 2/3/07)

Pam's House Blend always seems to find these sick f*cks. The area of the country she is in? The home state of her wife? I know, they are everywhere. Pam just does such a great job of bringing them out into the light.
--Impeach Bush


who monitors yours Bevis ?? Just thought I would drop you a line,so the rest of your life is not wasted.
--"Joe"
Content © 2004-2008
Pam Spaulding

House Blend logo © 2005
Melissa McEwan

Photo of Pam Spaulding
© Judy G. Rolfe
All Rights Reserved.

SITE TERMS AND CONDITIONS
Support the Blend

An Online Magazine in the Reality-Based Community.

Delaware: anti-discrimination bill passes after more than 10-year battle

by: Pam Spaulding

Thu Jun 25, 2009 at 06:38:08 AM EDT


A partial equality win at the state level -- Delaware's Senate Bill 121 cleared its General Assembly and it will be signed by the governor into law. It adds sexual orientation (but not gender identity) to the list of protections under the state's anti-discrimination law.  
Gays and lesbians in Delaware will have legal protection from discrimination under a bill that passed the General Assembly late Wednesday night, more than a decade after supporters started fighting for it.

The House chamber erupted in applause, cheers and hugs when representatives passed the measure shortly after 8:30 p.m. An hour earlier, the Senate -- where previous versions of the legislation always were killed -- passed the same bill after a three-hour debate.

The bill now goes to Gov. Jack Markell for his signature. Rep. Pete Schwartzkopf, who helped push the bill through the House, said Markell has expressed support for it.

"We made a big step forward tonight," said Drewry Fennell, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union in Delaware, which supported the bill.

"It protects the most basic activities of human life -- moving about the world, earning a living, keeping a roof over your head," Fennell said. "Now the state has said you can't be discriminated against because of sexual orientation."

Now the issue is when will advocacy for the law to be expanded for trans-inclusion begin -- it's unfortunate that the effort here went on for so long for it to not be an inclusive victory. The language of the bill:

145th General Assembly
Senate Bill # 121

AN ACT TO AMEND TITLES 6, 9, 18, 19, 25, AND 29 OF THE DELAWARE CODE RELATING TO DISCRIMINATION IN EMPLOYMENT, PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACTING, HOUSING, EQUAL ACCOMMODATIONS AND THE INSURANCE BUSINESS

This Act adds the term "sexual orientation" to the already-existing list of prohibited practices of discrimination. As such, this Act would forbid discrimination against a person on the basis of sexual orientation in housing, employment, public works contracting, public accommodations, and insurance. In addition, this Act would establish that the Superior Court, in the first instance, would hear and adjudicate alleged criminal violations under the Act of equal accommodations, fair housing and employment discrimination.
Pam Spaulding :: Delaware: anti-discrimination bill passes after more than 10-year battle
Tags: , , (All Tags)
Bookmark and Share
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Delaware: anti-discrimination bill passes after more than 10-year battle | 132 comments
Anyone with better knowledge of Delaware state code?
Since the bill does a lot of dropping words into the law, rather than rewriting of chapters of law, could this possibly be interpreted to be trans-inclusive?  I usually look for "actual or perceived" language to broaden the scope of coverage, but I don't see it (yet).

The is a sample of the existing Delaware state code language I found:

This chapter shall be liberally construed to the end that the rights herein provided for all people, without regard to race, age, marital status, creed, color, sex, handicap or national origin, may be effectively safeguarded.

§ 4503. Persons entitled to protection.

All persons within the jurisdiction of this State are entitled to the full and equal accommodations, facilities, advantages and privileges of any place of public accommodation regardless of the race, age, marital status, creed, color, sex, handicap or national origin of such persons.

The bill does a lot of dropping words into existing lists and reads like this:

Section 2.  Amend § 4502, Title 6, Delaware Code, by re-designating current subsections "(13)" and "(14)" as subsections "(14)" and "(15)" and adding a new subsection, designated as § 4502(13), to read as follows:
"(13)  'Sexual orientation' exclusively means heterosexuality, homosexuality, or bisexuality.".
Section 3.  Amend § 4503, Title 6, Delaware Code, by inserting the words ", sexual orientation" after the word "handicap".
Section 4.  Amend § 4504, Title 6, Delaware Code, by inserting the words ", sexual orientation" after the word "disability" wherever it appears in this Section.
Section 5.  Amend § 4601, Title 6, Delaware Code, by inserting the words ", sexual orientation" after the word "age".

I would prefer to snatch victory and force some bigot to prove it doesn't apply to trans folks, rather than assume this addition (and hopefully other laws written like it) can't be trans-inclusive.

It's pretty clear
'Sexual orientation' exclusively means heterosexuality, homosexuality, or bisexuality.".

So a straight trans person is going to have some difficulty with this one. It's quite clear that they'll be fired or whatever not for being straight, but being trans.

In a court case, a bigot doesn't have to prove that the law doesn't apply, the trrans person has to prove that it does. Similar wording in other states has been interpreted to mean that it doesn't. Only when "sexual orientation" has been left undefined, or defined to include "gender identity" have trans people been covered. This definition is pretty tight, though it arguably applies to people who only appear gay.

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

[ Parent ]
Weak protections
Actually, they could say you were fired for non-conformance with gender stereotypes (man has feminine mannerisms or female seems butch). Bills protecting people from discrimination based solely upon sexual orientation are weak and offer little protection for anyone. Gender identity also broadens the protections for GLB's, not just the T's.
[ Parent ]
No they couldn't
That would violate federal sex discrimination law and probably Delaware sex discrimination law. CarbonGirl's theory is a myth cooked up by Lambda Legal in the midst of the 2007 ENDA fight, but it has been thoroughly debunked because it simply ignores Supreme Court and lower federal court decisions on gender-nonconformity. The meme that gay-only laws "are weak and offer little protection for anyone" is simply a lie.
[ Parent ]
It won't cover Butch Lesbians
and the spotty trial record on gender expression supports my conclusion.

Lambda Legal did not cook up a false argument, elitist gays like Mr Dale Carpenter tarred them with that allegation and his history of disdain towards the entire trans-community and over half of the Lesbian community is well documented.

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

[ Parent ]
Carpenter's thorough critism
has never been rebutted, not even by Lambda. And name-calling doesn't do it.

Yes, I'm sure that his "disdain" is "well-documented," as "disdain" means disagreeing with any self-serving demand of any trans activist, no matter how overreaching.

[ Parent ]
That tripe has been thoroughly disproven
by numerous attorneys, including myself.

Carpenter, leaning forever to the right, denounced the entire LGBT movement a few months ago as too liberal,.

Get over your Mattachinist "Old Gay Boy network" pretensions, Uh--huh

The rest of us have to live or die with these protecions or the lack thereof.

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

[ Parent ]
Contest time
I think we should have a contest: Take a guess as to which of the usual elitist suspects uh_huhh is.  

>^..^<
[ Parent ]
My guesses:
Avarosis or Carpenter; possibly Sullivan

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
[ Parent ]
I'll go off the board...
and take former editors of the Washington Blade for $500.

>^..^<
[ Parent ]
most definitely Carpenter
since he's so insistent on repeating "it's a myth! it's a myth!"
[ Parent ]
LOL
No, Carpenter wouldn't waste his time here.

But it's funny that you all spend so much time on hilarious pseudo-slurs and name-that-commenter instead of educating yourself on the actual legal issues or even the text of the bill you support.

Go read the ENDA bill and notice how it says that employers do NOT engage in unlawful discrimination if they enforce gendered dress and grooming codes against non-transitioning employees. Funny, amid all the funny name-calling and identity-guessing, no one's bothered to address that little inconvenient detail.

[ Parent ]
LOL!!!
I've never heard this Mattachine slur before. It's hilarious!!!!!

No one has "disproved" anything in Carpenter's analysis. The only thing anyone has done is repeat Lambda's disingenuous interpretations of existing law.

[ Parent ]
its unsubstantiated claims
And, as such, are meritless.

Probably because it reeks of cis-privilege (that is, the writer has ZERO concept of what it means to be trans).

I sat on a bench. And I'll tell you it would fail.

http://www.dyssonance.com  Breaking all the rules...

[ Parent ]
Um... YMMV on that one.
A federal appellate court recently rejected a female employee's claim that her employer violated federal law prohibiting sex discrimination by firing her for refusing to comply with a grooming policy that imposed different appearance standards on women vs. men.

In Jesperson v. Harrah's Operating Company, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals threw out a female bartender's Title VII sex discrimination claim regarding her termination for refusing to wear makeup.
...
Harrah's Casino adopted a personal appearance and grooming policy that required female bartenders to wear makeup, stockings and colored nail polish and to wear their hair down and "teased, curled or styled every day you work." The grooming code was specific about the "cocktail" of cosmetics that female bartenders had to put on - face powder, blush, mascara and lip color at all times. Male servers, on the other hand, were required to keep their hair short and were not allowed to wear makeup or nail polish.

Harrah's fired Darlene Jespersen, who had worked for the Casino as a bartender for more than twenty years, because she refused to wear makeup.
...
   * The Court also found that Jespersen's claim for discrimination based on gender stereotyping failed because she did not present any objective evidence that the policy was adopted to make women bartenders conform to a "commonly accepted stereotypical image of what women should wear."
...
   * The Court also distinguished Harrah's policy from cases in which the appearance standard was intended to be provocative or to stereotype women as "sex objects."

Jespersen presented ample evidence that she had been an "exemplary" employee and that wearing makeup was degrading and demeaning to her. However, the Court found Jespersen's personal objection to wearing makeup was not enough to support a claim for gender stereotyping, holding that doing so would come "perilously close" to a determination that every grooming and appearance policy that an employee finds objectionable can create a claim for sex discrimination.

There have been a number of cases where trans women have been fired (despite legal protections for trans people), for not adhering to male dress codes.

Price-Waterhouse has been white-anted so much that it may be considered a dead issue now. The standard is set impossibly high, that any dress code short of a topless swimsuit is acceptable.  

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

[ Parent ]
Dress Codes and Grooming Standards
are judicially created exceptions to nondiscrimination laws, and the trans-inclusive ENDA would codify those exceptions--except for trans people. So the claim that this is all about helping butch lesbians is a big lie.
[ Parent ]
And...
because I think ZoeB and Maura are smart enough to be fully aware that dress and grooming codes have always been treated as separate issues from the Price Waterhouse/gender-nonconformity line of cases, I'll go a step further and accuse you both of deliberate misrepresentation and manipulation--just like in 2007.
[ Parent ]
You might want to read through Schroer
the history of that case sorta guts price waterhouse

and destroys your argument.

weak.

http://www.dyssonance.com  Breaking all the rules...

[ Parent ]
Your comment makes no sense
Schroer adopted a liberal interpretation of current law and protected transgender workers. With Schroer, trans workers don't need any new legislation at all. (Unfortunately, other courts haven't agreed with Schroer's approach.)

And Schroer, like Winn-Dixie, did not involve a butch lesbian. It involved a transsexual. Therefore, it doesn't tell us anything about the protection or lack of protection of butch lesbians.

[ Parent ]
Unfamiliar with it, I see.
Perhaps you should read through the history, like I noted, instead of looking at the popularized verdict (which you really should read as well).

It would help you to understand a bit more.

http://www.dyssonance.com  Breaking all the rules...

[ Parent ]
I have read, commented on, and taught this case
Perhaps you should lose the holier-than-thou attitude.
[ Parent ]
Ooh, Louise, two more ZEROs on a substantive post
Where's your ranting about the "rules"???
[ Parent ]
Yawn.
Oh goody, troll masturbation.

[ Parent ]
Yikes!
troll masturbation
I think I saw that in the uncut version of Lord of the Rings.

>^..^<
[ Parent ]
Don't forget
Oiler v. Winn-Dixie. His "transgender behavior" was done exclusively off-duty, and it still didn't save him.

The courts here made clear that they're going to do three things:

  1. They're going to adopt a very narrow definition of sex discrimination.
  2. They'll view sexual orientation the same way. Mostly by pretending that that has nothing at all to do with discrimination based on sexual orientation.
  3. They're going to view gender identity and expression the same way. Mostly by pretending that neither of those two have anything at all to do with discrimination based on gender identity and expression.

Hell, chances are that if we pass laws that protect gender identity and not gender expression, they're going to interpret it as applying exclusively to transsexuals (who conform to the norms of their "new" gender).

[ Parent ]
Winn-Dixie is not about a butch lesbian
The claim is that gender discrimination law does not protect butch lesbians from gender discrimination. Citing a case about a transgender person does not support the claim that gender discrimination does not protect butch lesbians from gender discrimination.
[ Parent ]
As I understand it,
your claim is that butch lesbians don't need protection based on gender id/expression because they'll already be "covered" by the new discrimination laws on sexual orientation and the old laws on sex. Do I understand you correctly?

Oiler v. Winn-Dixie may not contain butch lesbians, but it applies perfectly to this situation. The court's ruling completely refutes your argument. They state outright that they intend to view sexual orientation separately from gender identity and expression when it comes to discrimination. They state outright that they view sex as separate from either of those.

That's why sex and sexual orientation alone are not good enough to protect butch lesbians. Chances are, not even the femmes would be safe around a clever enough bigot.

[ Parent ]
The case wasn't about butch lesbians
So the court said nothing about butch lesbians and could not say anything about butch lesbians. It was not exploring your broad conception of gender identity; it was adjudicating a case about a transgender person. Period.

At any rate, the trans-inclusive version of ENDA would codify the exclusion of dress and grooming issues for everyone but transitioning transsexuals. So it would make things WORSE for butch lesbians in that respect, not better.

[ Parent ]
Hey, look Louise, another ZERO for me!!
Gee, discussing a provision of the ENDA bill is "trolling." Well, who knew?

So much for Louise's big bad enforcement of "the rules." LOL.

[ Parent ]
Well I can't say
I'd be surprised I've been saying it here forever..... Society is not going to conform to women with penis....no matter how those individuals see themselves...... and those that refuse to conform to socieatal standard or complete transition are Awlayts going to have a difficult time in life both with documentation and in general.....I'm not trying to be the bad girl ...just being a realist...They are not going to create a third gender and change every document in every court house and office office in this country to satisfy the transgender community..........only those transexuals who comeplte transition and conform to tyipcal gender stereo types are going to be accepted or be able to blend back in....not my rule just the way it is in my opinion.

Brandi Parker  

[ Parent ]
Yep

[ Parent ]
That worked so well for Karen Ulane, didn't it?


>^..^<
[ Parent ]
Lol. Thanks.
You said in one sentence more than I did in 7 paragraphs.
[ Parent ]
Your "passing-er-than-thou" tropes
have been dealt with elsewhere.

Assuming you practiced what you preach, I just have one question: Just how did you complete transition? I suppose you'll tell me you got SRS.

Now, how did you get SRS without completing Real Life Experience?

How did you complete the Real Life Experience without living as a "woman with a penis"?

How can you do any of the above without money?

How can you earn money without a job?

How can you get a job when you were fired by your last employer for coming out, and no one will hire a "woman with a penis" with ID that looks nothing like her and has a male name?

Catch-22s like that are exactly why thousands of transwomen are trapped in sex work. I'm starting to understand exactly what Mara Keisling meant.

[ Parent ]
Tough sh*t!
As someone who will never be able to afford transition (thanks to bigots and elitists like Brandi!), you think I shouldn't have any rights for employment protection?

How did you pay for your transition, Brandi darling -- on your back as a street whore, or did you hide in the f*ing closet for 20+ years?

I'm sorry I didn't hide in the closet and languish in a loveless marriage and work like a dog for 20+ years until I either got tenure or a cushy early retirement package.

I'm sorry we offend your delicate sensibilities beacuse the majority of us refuse to return to your old school, blend into the background, don't bring attention to yourself, get a boyfriend rules!

Listen to "TransTalk" every Thursday at 4-5pm ET on http://www.falconradio.org

[ Parent ]
Now now, Brandi
I'm sill cuter than you are, and I'm putting the lie to everything you just said, simply by existing.

Care to explain that one?

http://www.dyssonance.com  Breaking all the rules...

[ Parent ]
"exclusively"
That's a nice little gem that worked its way into the LGB bag of tricks in Texas - when we were sold out to pass a hate crimes law in 2001.

I expect it to worm its way into ENDA during the inevitible conference committee.

>^..^<

[ Parent ]
"Heterosexuality, homosexuality, and bisexuality"?
I'm not the most well read on law, but isn't this definition kind of problematic?

This law doesn't seem to mention that it covers discrimination over real or perceived attributes. I wonder if this means it's still okay to discriminate against asexuals and those just questioning their orientation. After all, they haven't picked a "real" sexual orientation...

[ Parent ]
The legislative intent of the act is clear
and that is the granting of rights to a narrowly defined group.

Butches remain vulnerable, which as a Lesbian activist I object hugely to.

Trans-people are pointedly excluded, which as a human being I find appalling.

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

[ Parent ]
Yeah, I know that too well.
I know anybody who falls afoul of the gender gestapo is screwed (again...).

I'm just wondering if, even in a mythical world where people like uh_huhh are right and bigots compartmentalize their hatred, if this bill lives up to the hype? Strictly speaking of sexual orientation, can't you still be discriminated against by any bigot who can "prove" that you're neither heterosexual, homosexual, nor bisexual?

Sure, in the case of asexuals, it'd be a bitterly ironic way of being recognized, but still.

[ Parent ]
Compartmentalization of bigotry isn't the point
I do not believe that bigots compartmentalize.

They discriminate against butch lesbians both on gender and sexual orientation grounds.

My point is that it is the absence of sexual orientation protection that leaves butch lesbians vulnerable. Gender nondiscrimination law has already covered the gender half of the equation. It's sexual orientation that provides the legal loophole.

And for all the sanctimonious concern about butch lesbians, the trans community doesn't seem to mind that the inclusive version of ENDA--for the first time ever--codifies the dress and grooming code exception to gender discrimination law--ensuring that butch lesbians won't be protected in one respect: straying from dress and grooming rules. The inclusive bill protects the ability to stray from those only if one is a formally transitioning transsexual. Sorry, butch lesbians, ZoeB, Maura, and raya don't actually care about your gender nonconformity. Rather, they are playing you for fools.

[ Parent ]
Trust the priviledged gay men, LBT's
Zoe and I do not have your interests at heart

The neo-mattachines do; the men always know what is best becasue they have that extra brain that they think with.

And Dale Carpenter, he always knows more than 200 other odd attorneys, follow his lead

And trans rights, well, they will be back for you, though you do not deserve it since it was always the gay rights movement and transsexuals and Lesbians just tagged along and hijacked it.

The lot of you, best of luck.
I've some court events coming due in Europe, it's been a pleasure but I don't want to be around when the conservaqueers derail the movement again, and I can do more effective work prosecuting crimes rather than fighting with Quislings and Kapos

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

[ Parent ]
Next time, try making a substantive point
As for Mattachines, that's funny! I don't think an openly gay man who writes about gay legal issues has anything in common with closet cases from the 1960s, but don't let me disrupt your little bile-fest.
[ Parent ]
of course you don't think that.
Hell, you can't even see it.

Privilege reeks from you,

MAttachine's weren't just about the closet.

Try to increase your knowledge a little, will ya? This dumbing down of our arguments to fit your limited information set is tiring.

http://www.dyssonance.com  Breaking all the rules...

[ Parent ]
LOL
It's hilarious that you never offer a single substantive argument but just spew insults--or what you think are insults. As for Mattachine, I'm sorry, that has no impact on me. You might as well "slur" me with "honkey." It has no force either.
[ Parent ]
well, as soon as you offer something substantive...
...then I'll be able to do so.

I always give back exactly what I get.

http://www.dyssonance.com  Breaking all the rules...

[ Parent ]
Don't worry
They'll come back for us. Someday. Just like they did in New Hampshire, or are doing in New York. After Gay Marriage.

Breath-holding is contra-indicated though.

This makes 21 states with GLB rights, vs 13 with GLBT. So let's celebrate this great victory. Huzzah.

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

Help?
ZoeB, do you know of a link that has the 13 and 21 state breakdowns, hopefully with ongoing status changes? I'd love to read one as well as link to my own site... thx!  
[ Parent ]
Best sources I have
http://www.transgenderlaw.org/...
That has the T-inclusive ones, but only to 2007. A PDF available there has a list showing the language used.

A complete rundown, though not in a convenient list form, is at http://www.hrc.org/laws_and_el... See the category %statename% Non-Discrimination Law.

Hope this helps.



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

[ Parent ]
Thanks
HRC link is broken, but it gives me a starting point. Appreciate the info!
[ Parent ]
If the LGB community of Delaware has any integrity
they'll call the governor and tell him to veto this monstrosity with a message to the legislature to pass a legitimate bill.

>^..^<
No

[ Parent ]
Uh
I'm sorry but this is the kind of rhetoric I don't appreciate, does no one any good, and frankly, I don't think helps your push nor the ability to be at peace mentally if you can't celebrate the incremental steps along the way.

A trans-inclusive ENDA was just introduced in the House and will probably surely pass.

Perhaps in this state, a Gender Identity provision would have meant it wouldn't have passed. I have no clue.

Instead of balking at the passage of a bill that helps to protect people, people should be doing everything in their power to make sure they are not forgotten for pushing to add a trans-inclusive protection bill.

[ Parent ]
and...
I'm sorry but this is the kind of rhetoric I don't appreciate, does no one any good

Tell it to John Aravosis.

The Delaware law is one that trans people don't appreciate and, in reality, will do next to no one any good.

>^..^<

[ Parent ]
In reality, not Lambda's manipulative lie ...
The law will greated help GLBs and maybe even marginally help Ts.

Repeating Lambda's thoroughly debunked lie doesn't make it true.

[ Parent ]
The only manipulating
has been done by greedy neo-Mattachine-oids who would be fine with all things as they were in 1789 as long as there were exceptions for straight-acting gays.

Repeating Lambda's thoroughly debunked lie doesn't make it true.
Continually letting the word 'debunked' slither off of your tongue actually debunks nothing and deosn't change the reality that it hasn't been debunked.

The law will greated help GLBs and maybe even marginally help Ts.
Any proof as to that last part?

Me thinks I hear a bunch of crickets.

The only scenario in which any self-identified or identifiable trans person might possibly be helepd by the definition:

"'Sexual orientation' exclusively means heterosexuality, homosexuality, or bisexuality."

would be as against a gender identity clinic that might discriminate against transsexuals who express a desire to be in post-transition same-sex relationships (a 'creating heteros' mentality which, sadly, is still occasionally known to materialize.)

>^..^<

[ Parent ]
Believe what you want
Go search Dale Carpenter's posts at Volokh.com. I'm not doing the work for you.
[ Parent ]
Well...
I'm not doing the work for you.
But you're spending so much time doing so.

How can we miss you if you won't go away?

>^..^<

[ Parent ]
Another substance-free reply

[ Parent ]
Do your math
0 is greater than -1.

>^..^<
[ Parent ]
Do you actually have anything to back yourself up
other than crying "It's a lie! Lambda Legal made it all up!" over and over again? I think it's pretty clear from all the examples given by other commenters that explicit protections above and beyond sexual orientation only are needed, and that trans people aren't the only ones being hurt by the lack of these protections.
[ Parent ]
Carpenter at volokh.com
I'm not doing the work for you.
[ Parent ]
Um, bigotry does not make something a valid argument.


http://www.dyssonance.com  Breaking all the rules...
[ Parent ]
Another substance-free reply
Keep preaching to the bile-filled choir
[ Parent ]
Well, if we're gonna go there, then
I accuse you of thoroughly lying about it being a lie.

And about how its a fair bill.

And about how you have "been supportive of trans inclusion".

Because you never were.

http://www.dyssonance.com  Breaking all the rules...

[ Parent ]
You're wrong
But I'm sick of having people like you spew bile in my face, so I've stopped every bothering. Congratulations.
[ Parent ]
That's been said for 40 years
We're still waiting.

We aren't accepting that any longer.

http://www.dyssonance.com  Breaking all the rules...

[ Parent ]
Under The Bus
Again ....why does it come as no surprise.......as more and more state pass gay laws which protect gays and Lesbians and leaving trans behind it brings a question to mind ....

How many Gays and Lesbians do you think will be still sticking around after they've gotten their rights to help protest and write congressman and make niose about trans right ? Do You truely think they will be here to push to help bring about change once they gotten their ?

how many ? ........ not many I suspect... and once the pressure falls off in Washington or in other places like state Gov....back into the closet will go the trans community.

Brandi Parker  

I'm our for life.

Our next generations of transyouth deserve examples of trans people who function in broader society, and care what these youths' futures look like.

So, expect to see me out speaking for trans community in general, and transyouth in particular, until I either become too sick from my disabilities to speak anymore, or until I die.

Looking forward, there will never be a closet for me -- no not now, no not ever for closeted living. I hope some of our current transyouth can live lives of quiet, near invisible lives of acceptance in broader society because some older trans people stayed out to fight for their futures.

-----
~~Autumn~~

As if there were safety in stupidity alone.
--Henry David Thoreau

[ Parent ]
It's been said before, but worth repeating
Thank you for your service, Autumn... as well as being one of the best educators from which I have had the pleasure to learn.
[ Parent ]
Autumn...
I believe you.
[ Parent ]
I'm with you, Autumn!
No closet for me, ever!  In fact, as part of a presentation on LGBT legal issues at the State Bar Convention, yesterday, I outed myself to the President of the Arizona State Bar Association, several judges and a room full of attorneys.  In response, I got nothing but support and encouragement.  And not a one gave a rat's ass whether I was post op or not.  Sorry,  Brandi, but I'm one of those who operates very well in society and am accepted everywhere I go as the woman I am (I'm even secretary of the women's group at the church I attend in the small town I live in), despite not having "completed transition" by your standards.  
[ Parent ]
Correction

"We made a big step forward tonight," said Drewry Fennell

I'd say you made 1 step forward, but shoved a bunch of folks out of the way to do it.

How you see that as something to be pleased about baffles me.  

Because he isn't a single-issue activist
who is willing to kill a good bill because it isn't perfect
[ Parent ]
Trans activists aren't single issue, either
Indeed, they are much broader activists who realize that we have to get GLB since we are GLB and S and god knows what else.

We started stonewall -- we do not forget.

It wasn't a good bill.  It was a piss poor one.

http://www.dyssonance.com  Breaking all the rules...

[ Parent ]
You have no idea
All you know is that it didn't have "gender identity" in it because, in fact, you are just a single-issue activist.
[ Parent ]
Oh come on
Surely you can be more creative than that.

Why, let's see -- I fight for immigration reform  -- seems that doesn't strike me as a particularly " trans " issue.

I've long fought for civil rights for Native Americans. Why, I've even fought for the right not to be forced to pray in schools.

I fight against religious bigotry -- both of the religious and against them.

Why, indeed, I'm a 3 issue activist: Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.

Guess that sorta makes you, um, wrong.

Not a surprise, though, huh?

You old Mattachine.


http://www.dyssonance.com  Breaking all the rules...

[ Parent ]
LOL!!!
Oh, I'm going to curl up and die from the power of the Mattachine "slur." LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!!!!!!!!
[ Parent ]
You keep assuming its a slur.
And then laughing about how it has no impact on you.

2 points: 1, it is not a slur. 2, if it was, you'd be offended, wouldn't you?

http://www.dyssonance.com  Breaking all the rules...

[ Parent ]
Wow.
I'm now, according to uh_huhh, a troll on the same site I am a contributing editor/ barista.

Odd... but good to know, I guess.

FWIW, "unproductive" comments are a 1, not 0 on the rating system. And if you feel that to be the case, uh_huhh, you are certainly free to express that opinion, same as I am free to call your action out.  

[ Parent ]
Check the zero's on my posts on other threads
Or is your concern only one-sided?
[ Parent ]
ITs a silencing tactic, hon
We are speaking truth.

We are calling him out.

We are showing that what we went through two years ago is not going to fly anymore.

Although he is sorta ruining my perfect record for 4's, lol

http://www.dyssonance.com  Breaking all the rules...

[ Parent ]
There you go, hon! :)

[ Parent ]
All you're doing
is spewing ill-informed bile, just like two years ago.
[ Parent ]
Care to prove that?
I still stand by what I wrote then.

Because that rage hasn't died out, and mattachines like you still piss me right the f off.

You think its ill-informed, go ahead and establish such.

I'll wait.


http://www.dyssonance.com  Breaking all the rules...

[ Parent ]
Rage and "slur"
That's all any of your comments ever contain.
[ Parent ]
Pot, meet kettle
Funny. I haven't seen much of anything else in your comments, either.
[ Parent ]
Reassurring
Look at the breakdown of the vote by party. It's excellent:

Senate (14-5, 1 absent)

FOR:

Patricia Blevins, D-Elsmere

George Bunting, D-Bethany Beach

Brian Bushweller, D-Dover North

Bethany Hall-Long, D-Glasgow

Margaret Rose Henry, D-Wilmington East

Michael Katz, D-Centreville

Robert Marshall, D-Wilmington West

David McBride, D-Hawk's Nest

Harris B. McDowell, D-Wilmington North

Karen Peterson, D-Stanton

David Sokola, D-Newark

Catherine Cloutier, R-Heatherbrooke

Dori Connor, R-Penn Acres

Liane Sorenson, R-Hockessin

AGAINST:

Nancy Cook, D-Kenton

Anthony DeLuca, D-Varlano

Robert Venables, D-Laurel

Colin Bonini, R-Dover South

Gary Simpson, R-Milford

ABSENT:

Bruce Ennis, D-Clayton

House (26-14, 1 absent)

FOR:

Michael Barbieri, D-Newark

Gerald Brady, D-Wilmington West

Robert Gilligan, D-Sherwood Park

Earl Jaques, D-Glasgow

James Johnson, D-Jefferson Farms

S. Quinton Johnson, D-Middletown

Helene Keeley, D-Wilmington South

John Kowalko, D-Newark

Valerie Longhurst, D-Bear

Melanie George-Marshall, D-Bear/Newark

John Mitchell, D-Elsmere

Michael Mulrooney, D-Pennwood

Hazel Plant, D-Wilmington Central

Terri Schooley, D-Newark

Peter Schwartzkopf, D-Rehoboth

Darryl Scott, D-Dover

Byron Short, D-Highland Woods

John Viola, D-Newark

Dennis E. Williams, D-Talleyville

Richard Cathcart, R-Middletown

Deborah Hudson, R-Fairthorne

Thomas Kovach, R-Brandywine Hundred South

Nick Manolakos, R-Limestone Hills

Joe Miro, R-Pike Creek Valley

Bill Oberle, R-Beechers Lot

Michael Ramone, R-Middle Run Valley

AGAINST:

John C. Atkins, D-Millsboro

E. Bradford Bennett, D-Dover

William Carson, D-Smyrna

Robert Walls, D-Milford

Donald Blakey, R-Woodside

Joe Booth, R-Georgetown

George Carey, R-Milford

Gerald Hocker, R-Ocean View

Greg Lavelle, R-Sharpley

Clifford "Biff" Lee, R-Laurel

Bobby Outten, R-Harrington

Daniel Short, R-Seaford

David L. Wilson, R-Lincoln

Pam Thornburg N

ABSENT:

Dennis P. Williams, D-Wilmington North

A lot of Hate on this tread
LGB vs. LGBT. I can understand the frustration having pushed for and waited for G rights in MY state for 40 years. i don't understand the hate expressed here.
Some L activists have issues with this
since Butch Lesbians are not adequately covered, a phenomena that activists in New York are all too familiar with.

Even Matt Foreman, who led the fight to exclude gender expression in New York "to get a bill through" now regrets that as no one is ever coming back for the Butches and the trans-people.

That is simply the political reality.

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

[ Parent ]
Yeah.
While I was mad at Barney Frank et al. for gelding ENDA in 2007, I was kind of sad that it didn't pass, but no more. Now, I think I appreciate just how disastrous it would have been had that bill passed.
[ Parent ]
Yeah.
While I used to help push for trans-inclusion and used to be disappointed when politics just wouldn't allow it, now I just don't really care anymore.
[ Parent ]
Tant pis.
As any movement learns, some "friendships" are just not worth keeping.
[ Parent ]
That's what a lot of former allies are saying about marriage


http://www.dyssonance.com  Breaking all the rules...
[ Parent ]
To what effect?
Let me know when trans opposition succeeds in killing a marriage bill.
[ Parent ]
As soon as transfolk doesn't need one (thanks in part to you)
they will.

However, we don't kick our fellows to the curb in legislation.


http://www.dyssonance.com  Breaking all the rules...

[ Parent ]
Hey, loook at that!
Two Troll votes. Hurray! Now we know Louise doesn't actually care about rules, just scoring points for her side. Hypocrite.
[ Parent ]
But you have your rights
And have had for ages. Everyone's treated the same, all Americans.

Oh, except for Gays, but they shouldn't complain, everyone important is covered. They'll come back for you later, there's more urgent things to do first.

That's the message trans people have received repeatedly from a community that calls itself GLBT, but somehow seems to forget that last letter. We'll get rights for all GLBTs, apart from the Ts. But they shouldn't complain, everyone important is covered. They'll come back for us later, there's more urgent things to do first.

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

[ Parent ]
Funny
I always thought defamation, personal attack, and name-calling usually had the effect of endearing one to his or her colleagues. I wonder why it didn't work here?
[ Parent ]
Perhaps because none of that was done.


http://www.dyssonance.com  Breaking all the rules...
[ Parent ]
Riiiiiiiiiight

[ Parent ]
erp, I'm sorry, you are correct.
You just called transfolk weird. Too weird to be worhtwhile providing the ame protections to.

of course, that's you doing it.

So I was right -- the post to which you said that didn't have any of it.


http://www.dyssonance.com  Breaking all the rules...

[ Parent ]
Wrong
I never once called transfolk weird or unworthy of protections, nor would I because I don't believe any such thing.

I will say, though, that you--singular, you, specifically--are sad. You've allowed your rage to totally consume you. If anyone disagrees with anything you say, you put them in the same category as a trans killer.

[ Parent ]
Nice try, but you *did* do so.
You don't realize that saying we are "15 to 20 years behind", that we are too difficult to get through is saying something defaming becuase you aren't looking past your own prejudice.

My rage is based in those who happen to decide to take theirs and leave the rest. It's right there.

If you genuinely think that your position in that is justified, then please -- answer the questions I asked about why.

Because I have indeed heard them all.  And none of them works, since all of them are based in transphobic positions -- just as they were when they were said about the LGB.

Because, simply enough, this isn't about if you believe they are unworthy or deserving, its about you believing they aren't as worthy or as deserving, because if you truly felt that way, you would be just as pissed off by your own words as I am.

http://www.dyssonance.com  Breaking all the rules...

[ Parent ]
Yes you can.
You hear it all the time when the mention of Prop 8 is brought up, or someone speaks about Mormons or Catholics.

But you especially hear it when someone like, say, Marion Barry -- who championed everything LGBT related until the marriage vote happened -- is the subject of discussion.

If you don't understand it, then think about it for a while.


http://www.dyssonance.com  Breaking all the rules...

[ Parent ]
I refuse
to do this again today.
Sorry, ggw59
It's obviously just become one of the costs of doing anything on gay rights. A marriage bill is about nothing but trans exclusion. DADT protests are about nothing but trans exclusion. Etc. Etc. Etc. It's just becoming white noise.
[ Parent ]
Here wa go, the prelim to gutting ENDA,
The "A-Gay" campaign of demonising the legitimate concerns of other parts of the G(LBT) community...this is how it started two years ago.

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
[ Parent ]
Demoni[z]ing?
Yeah, this is how it started two years ago: utterly over-the-top rhetoric from trans ideologues, who, frankly, don't give a damn about any GLB issue that doesn't affect them, despite their empty rhetoric about solidarity.
[ Parent ]
And which GLBT issue
that doesn't affect you (at least according to you), you know, like including gender identity in ENDA, do you care about?  You complain that those concerned with trans inclusion are single issue advocates, and then turn around do the exact same thing for yourself.  Way to build coalitions and strengthen our community for the benefit of all (yes, even you).  Not!

Instead of pushing the trans community under the bus, so you can climb on top and get what you want, how about if you help us, just like we've been helping the GLB community for decades?  No, instead, it's "once we get what we need, we're taking our ball and going home and to hell with the rest of you!"

[ Parent ]
Well then, let's put that to the test.
Name three things that doesn't affect us.

I'll show you how they do.

http://www.dyssonance.com  Breaking all the rules...

[ Parent ]
I am a Lesbian without the addiction to the letter zed
that Americans have,

Your continuous citing of Carpenter's analysis, despite the large number of LGBT lawyers, attorneys, barristers, whatever who disagree with that analysis suggests that you've simply latched on to a position paper that supports your own priviledge within the movement and your own innate prejudices.

Your statement that you teach law is simply frightening.

I was blessed with far more insightful professors y professoras.

Too ealy in the morning for this and I am suffering the pains of the damned in terms of severe jet lag.

In the end, history will prove one or the other of our positions correct.

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

[ Parent ]
Probably just as well
Because I refuse to put up with incrementalist bullshit yesterday, today, and going forward when it comes to my rights.

http://www.dyssonance.com  Breaking all the rules...
[ Parent ]
Delaware is strange
I am a dual resident of Delaware and NJ.  I have a beach home in Rehoboth Beach, which has a very large gay community.  Delaware is an odd bird... heavily democratic due to the African American population in Wilmington.  The lower county, where Rehoboth Beach lies, is very conservative and backward.  Delaware is cutting edge on many issues, but the Democraticly controlled legislature threw the GLBT community under the bus for years.  For the record, both Governor Markell and the former governor, Ruthann Minner, both are big supporters of GLBT rights.
So ya know, this does mean it is all of us, or none of us.
That's not the happiest thought to many.

So I will ask you, all of you, and especially the one giving me troll listings, (LOL)..

Why should we have to wait?

WHy is it easier to pass an SO bill than a GI/GE bill?

Why is it than when a house is on fire you will only go in for some of the people inside?

Come on, answer the questions.

The answers are probably going to involve either transphobic thoughts, or some variation of the Matachine way of thinking.

I have heard them all.  And I'm tired of them, but not so tired that I'm not going to call you out on your prejudice and your hidden bigotry.

http://www.dyssonance.com  Breaking all the rules...

Where are the Dallas Principles now?
It's time for LGBT activists to start acting like those Dallas Principles actually mean something, or else they will mean nothing.

1.Full civil rights for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender individuals must be enacted now.  Delay and excuses are no longer acceptable.

2.We will not leave any part of our community behind.

3.Separate is never equal.

4.Religious beliefs are not a basis upon which to affirm or deny civil rights.

5.The establishment and guardianship of full civil rights is a non-partisan issue.

6.Individual involvement and grassroots action are paramount to success and must be encouraged.

7.Success is measured by the civil rights we all achieve, not by words, access or money raised.

8.Those who seek our support are expected to commit to these principles.

Right now, 1, 2 and 3 are being conveniently forgotten in the rush to, frankly, demonize trans people who are JUSTLY angry at being left out in the cold yet again.

[ Parent ]
FOr some of them
The Dallas Principles are more like "guidelines".

Which is why I won't let them of the hook.

http://www.dyssonance.com  Breaking all the rules...

[ Parent ]
Having never signed onto these "principles"
I feel no obligation to respect them.

They were politically naive from the start.

[ Parent ]
In what way were they politically naive?
Seriously.

Given your earlier post, I can't wait to read this one.

http://www.dyssonance.com  Breaking all the rules...

[ Parent ]
Why is it easier?
Because public opinion on trans issues is, unfortunately, lagging about 15 years behind public opinion on gay issues, just as pu7blic opinion on gay issues is, unfortunately, a couple of decades behind public opinion on women's issues. (Which is why the women's movement excluded gay people from the Equal Rights Amendment in the 1970s.)

Enactment of state and local gay rights ordinances surged in the 1980s and early 1990s. Enactment of trans equivalents did not surge until the 2000s.  

[ Parent ]
Just in time for the anniversary of Disco Demolition Night: Not an act of God, but an act of Bill Veeck
Because public opinion on trans issues is, unfortunately, lagging about 15 years behind public opinion on gay issues
You don't get to make that argument as justification when you're the cause of the problem.

And, in case you decide to 'go there.'  I don't care if you personally were around 30 years ago or not; the people you're shilling for (and/or their predecessors-in-interest) were.  The then-fledgling gay rights industry and the most radical of the man-hating lesbian feminists together played the largest role in de-legitimizing trans non-discrimination just as 'gay rights laws' became viable.  No gay or lesbian has any standing to say 'that's just how things are.'  

They are how they are because YOU manufactured them that way.  You cannot rely on the historical effect of what YOU have done to justify not doing what is necessary to rectify the problem.

It was not an 'act of god,' but a collective act of NGTF, HRCF, GRNL, David Goodstein, Janice Raymond, Mary Daly, etc.

>^..^<

[ Parent ]
Rage against the Mattachine
Like I said, I've heard them all.

In the 1970's, transfolk made changes to the laws regarding ID's and marriage so that by 1994, we could be married in every state in th union without an issue.

Not too weird, apparently.

Indeed, it wasn't until our rights movement was co-opted by the assimilationist cretins of your ilk, that we began to have problems -- because that was how we were presented by the assimilationsit gay people of the time.

Let's look at that first ordinance.  IT included transfolk at first, you know.

Then we were dropped because it was "easier" to pass the bill?  hardly.  IT was offered as a compromise  -- you can discriminate against this group if you will let this one go through.

Person who did that went on to form the HRC. Which continued the tactic.

Funny, that.

Public opinion on trans issues is identical to that on gay issues because, funny thing, public opinion is that gay is the same thing as trans. Except we are more sex worker oriented.

So to justify your statements you use myth, lies, and assimilationist hogwash.

Need to work on that.  COme on -- give a real reason. Go ahead and say it.

Try and avoid being transphobic next time (after all, saying "gays are too weird" is homophobic, and the taunt of the opposition).  Your bigotry is unbecoming.

Let's see what other lies you've stated so far, shall we?

http://www.dyssonance.com  Breaking all the rules...

[ Parent ]
Yeah, Trumpet, I know.
I'm just another annoying girl to you.

Get used to it.

http://www.dyssonance.com  Breaking all the rules...

[ Parent ]
Honestly,
It's just the pissing match you're getting in with that troll.
[ Parent ]