News Tips?
-- tips@phblend.com

PHB Mobile

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.

HRC statement on Donna Rose's resignation from board

by: Pam Spaulding

Thu Oct 04, 2007 at 12:15:00 PM EDT


[NOTE: HRC's Joe Solmonese will be on the Mike Signorile show at 2:15.] 

Just in my inbox:Human Rights Campaign's release on Donna Rose, the transgender member of the HRC board who stepped down yesterday:

Statement from HRC Board of Director Co-Chairs:  Lawrie Demorest and Henry Robin

The entire HRC family is deeply saddened by Donna’s decision to leave the board of directors.   Donna has given a tremendous amount of time, energy and passion to this organization, and we are forever in her debt.

On Monday, the HRC Board of Directors voted to affirm its 2004 decision not to support a version of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act that does not explicitly include protections based on gender identity.  We do not support the current version of ENDA that is being considered by the House, and are not advocating for it on the Hill.

Donna maintains that HRC should have gone further in its opposition to the legislation and the strategy put forth by Speaker Pelosi and Rep. Frank.

We respect Donna’s decision, and wish her only the very best.  We hope to find a way to work together in the future, to pass a complete ENDA that provides employment protections to all members of the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community.

HRC is heartened that Donna will continue her work as a member of HRC’s Business Council, and we look forward to working together to pass a complete ENDA and continue to make corporate America more fair and equal for GLBT employees.
Pam Spaulding :: HRC statement on Donna Rose's resignation from board
Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Bookmark and Share
Print Friendly View Send As Email
HRC statement on Donna Rose's resignation from board | 89 comments
HRC's dysfunctional family

Dear Lawrie Demorest and Henry Robin:

"The entire HRC family is deeply saddened by Donna’s decision to leave the board of directors."

===================================

If HRC is a family - transgender people are your bastard step-children. You wouldn't treat your real family this way.


Some things do indeed never change.

We're not part of their family - and we're not part of their team.

Never have been.

As I said to Candace Gingrich 3 1/2 years ago:

Don't preach to us about teamwork.  You people don't know the meaning of the word.

For a person to participate in 'teamwork,' that person has to be on the team.

You people have yet to even let us into the parking lot of the stadium to allow us to walk up to the gate to purchase an over-priced ticket to watch your gay-only team throw the game that you've bet our transgendered lives on.

Until you're willing to put us on the team, stop calling yourselves a transgender-inclusive organization, stop feigning surprise when we protest your discrimination against us....

Some things do indeed never change.

HRC is one of them.

Kat



>^..^<
[ Parent ]
This is a truly unfortunate development.

HRC, over the years, has taken a lot of flack, most of it well deserved, from the transgender community for either ignoring them completely or doing what amounts to window dressing in lame attempts to make a PR outreach.  Supposedly, around a year ago, they were going to get serious about the T in LGBT, looks like old habits die hard. 

Yes, I know HRC came around on this, but it looks like it was too little, too late.  Heck, the bill was already in play.  

 

I think this may have very serious repercussions for HRC, may LBGs know and love Ts and also know what it feels like to quit a job in abject frustration over very simular issues.

 

No, I don't think HRC is evil, but they do have a long way to go. 

 

 


HRC's response to Donna's resignation

I've been working with Donna over the past week and know that she has been extremely hurt by HRC's actions, as have I. We have tried very hard to make the "T" in HRC's mission statement real, which was hard enough to do when Donna was the only one on the board and I am the only current board nominee. Two people is not a tangible indication of a commitment to inclusion and unity. Right now there is no one, and I don't know how long I will be able to remain.

There is a serious policy issue here, one that has riven our community. But I'd like to respond to a separate issue, which is a matter of process and which is making HRC a laughingstock in the LGBT community. This pains me deeply, was completely avoidable, and keeps getting worse as the Orwellian language keeps coming from HRC and its board members and leadership.

Anyone not intimately involved in the battle this week must be very confused. If HRC is 100% for inclusion and will not support the stripped-down bill, then why all the fuss? Why has Donna resigned? Why is there a group of 150+ LGBT organizations working together in a group called UnitedENDA?

Because regardless of strategy or tactics, HRC's board and leadership has not been able to stake out a clear and convincing position on this issue. After three years of affirmative and forceful action on inclusion, in the past week HRC has backtracked on its commitment to inclusion, even as it has obfuscated in its public pronouncements.

Those of us who work in politics know how the sauage is made, and can usually manage things much better than this bungling. Legislation is a serious and difficult process, and legislating about sex and gender, issues around which most people, let alone Congresspersons, are squeamish, is even more so. All the more reason to be clear, concise and precise. HRC has been anything but, and it has cleaved the community.



Dr. Dana
HRC is our most politically effective lobbying group...

for all the good *and bad* that this implies.

They have a greater sense of pragmatism and political savvy than activist/idealist groups.  They are less open to the approach of purists, and deaf to philosophical arguments with little political impact. 

It is (to me) typical of trans activists to pick up their toys and run home.  To browbeat groups for only aligning with 95% of their agenda and differing on strategy.  Trans politics are not ready for prime time. 

To sum up the past week: Our activists have just snatched victory AWAY from our politicians.  I don't expect this chance will come around again soon.

Now for the backlash:  Get ready for more gay men to turn Log-Cabin-ish over this.  I myself will not be referring to LGB*T* as my community anymore.  My struggle is for gay rights, and if trans rights are in conflict with that, then I will not be part of their struggle.  I wish them well. 


please explain
why standing against a discriminatory ENDA would extrapolate to gay men becoming or resembling Log Cabin Republicans.

Electricity's for light bulbs!
[ Parent ]
Well...

It might not be automatic now, but - at least back in Texas when I was the 'screaming tranny'/'liberal voice' of a GLBT paper - the two pretty much went hand-in-hand.  Several of my columns slammed both - because the two were intertwined.

Kat



>^..^<
[ Parent ]
Yeah Kat
I guess it's just an ugly thing I just hate to see happen.  It's been a disappointing and revealing week. Now, I'm really interested in the why of it. I'm also interested in the numbers.  A poll on this would be a piece of information I'd like - not for divisiveness, but for understanding.

It's not that I didn't know about my fellow GM's past transphobia (I've witnessed how horrible GM's can be to transfolk - I was particularly shocked by attitudes when I first moved to Philly), it's that I, I guess naively, thought that's where it primarily was, in the past.

I'm sitting here thinking about the set of people around me as I came out, in Albany. There were some strong proponents of a fully inclusive environment around me. I'm very grateful for those people.

Electricity's for light bulbs!

[ Parent ]
My point was not that more...

...gay men will now become Republicans.  Rather that gay identification with trans issues has taken a real hit due to this--contrary to our activists' claims that we've all shown incredible solidarity this week. 

 I, for one, am *not* fighting so that men can wear dresses and still get a job at McDonalds.  I'm not sure that's even reasonable, much less winnable.


[ Parent ]
wtf?

 I, for one, am *not* fighting so that men can wear dresses and still get a job at McDonalds.  I'm not sure that's even reasonable, much less winnable.

============================

And I am *not* fighting so that men can marry dogs.


[ Parent ]
Bow-wow.
Well, good, because that would be silly.  Also silly is the notion that employers have no valid stake in regulating the gender-appropriateness of their workers.  I refuse to hitch gay rights to trans rights not only because I think they'll be harder to achieve, but because I find much of the trans agenda ill-concieved. 
[ Parent ]
adamblast, if you're going to join any fight, you had better do your homework.

You missed Kathleen's reference, which is that decent people can't let gay people marry because if they do, then the next thing you know, men will be marrying dogs.  She's comparing your thinking to such a comparison.  As far as a "valid stake" in "gender-appropriateness," until you start sleeping with women, you're horribly gender inappropriate for the majority of the people in the world.  So, get a girlfriend, bub, if you want to support gender appropriateness, and quit sleeping with boys, for girls sleep with boys. 

Don' cha know?


[ Parent ]
...and you could be less condescending.

I caught her reference fully and even understand its Santorum roots/overtones.  I simply responded with deadpan humor. 

And my "men in dresses" extrapolation has direct bearing on "gender expression", unlike her dogs/homosex comparison. 

And no, I am fully gender-appropriate in public appearance and behavior despite reserving the right to sleep with other men.  Not that I don't have every right to be otherwise, of course, as you do.  But the "farther out" your appearance and behavior gets from the norm, the less black & white are the issues of professionalism and demeaner in a job setting.


[ Parent ]
Ok...
But the "farther out" your appearance and behavior gets from the norm, the less black & white are the issues of professionalism and demeaner in a job setting.
Which concerns are utterly arbitrary and can in no way form the foundation of a sound consequentialist argument for tacitly denying people treatment without which they will suffer extreme and unrelenting psychic distress. Ok?
[ Parent ]
So, you're a gender rebel under the covers.

Otherwise, you conform.

And for this, you deserve federal protection and trans people don't?  What of a transwoman or a transman who meet all of your gender expectations?  Who look and walk and talk like Mr. and Mrs. Middle America and who marry folks of the opposite gender?  Who blend, blend, blend?  What of that degree of gender conformity?  Does that merit federal protection?


[ Parent ]
Assimilation and blending are unimportant to me.
I am a traditional male because it's what I am naturally.  If I were nelly as all hell, or transitioning and biologically halfway between the sexes, I would no doubt have a very different view of society.  I doubt, however, that I would expect everyone in the world to drop their expectations and conform to mine.
[ Parent ]
so
other folks' "worldviews" are invalid?  I'm not following your logic. Why would you knowingly only value your own views?

"Nelly as hell" is pretty offensive too.  Did you come here to engage in dialog or be abusive?  I've found people here to be really open to differing opinions when everyone's respectful.

You can't possibly be a traditional male if you have sex with men.  It's simply out of the question.

Electricity's for light bulbs!

[ Parent ]
I understand this is prickly for you.
Sorry if I'm not being PC enough.  "Nelly as all hell" was an affectionate phrase.
[ Parent ]
you use PC
to frame being respectful of other as what?  Weak?  Why not shoot for discourse without derision.

Prickly for me? Why?

Electricity's for light bulbs!

[ Parent ]
Why not let his argument stand - or not - on its merits?

[ Parent ]
because how
a point is argued is important.

Electricity's for light bulbs!
[ Parent ]
I seriously doubt I was was being
disrespectful to anyone here or elsewhere by referring to the possibility of myself being "nelly as all hell."  I referred to *you* as prickly for clutching at straws to be offended about.
[ Parent ]
adam, here's my guess from the morsel of data I've gathered about you.

You're nelly as hell, but dadgummit, you've conformed to gender expectations for so long that you've convinced yourself you're naturally masculine.  And if you can conform, dadburnit, then others can conform too.

Note: as I admitted earlier, I'm a 50-gallon drum of steaming shit.


[ Parent ]
And you're very funny.

Naw, I've done drag, and played nelly, but wasn't too good at it, and none too pretty.  Basically I'm a computer/scifi nerd, trained as an actor, who spends his nights as a bigfish-tinypond US version of Ian McKellan.  Openly gay, mostly specializing in Shakespeare leads & heavy drama.


[ Parent ]
I'm a nerd too, but I know nothing about computers, which might be akin to...

...asserting that I'm a shepherd, but have no herd.

If you're even 1/100th of the actor that Ian McKellan is, you're a demi-God.  Mr. McKellan is the greatest living actor.


[ Parent ]
McKellen, etc.

I am the greatest living actor in my town of 25,000, and I have the reviews to prove it!!!  lol


[ Parent ]
Then you're a demi-God in your town, which is more of a demi-God than...
...most folks get to be. 
[ Parent ]
adam, here's my guess from the morsel of data I've gathered about you.

You're nelly as hell, but dadgummit, you've conformed to gender expectations for so long that you've convinced yourself you're naturally masculine.  And if you can conform, dadburnit, then others can conform too.

Note: as I admitted earlier, I'm a 50-gallon drum of steaming shit.


[ Parent ]
there was
an if before "nelly as hell."  I stand by saying that it's not wrong to expect people to be decent to each other.

Electricity's for light bulbs!
[ Parent ]
Conforming
I don't expect anyone to "conform" to me, just to treat me with repect and dignity.

Dr. Dana
[ Parent ]
You have my respect, Doc.
I Googled you.  Ver-r-dy impressive!
[ Parent ]
I'll second
that.  It's been great reading your perspective.

Electricity's for light bulbs!
[ Parent ]
It's also

It's also silly to say the only jobs we're considered for - but not even fit for - is working in Mickey-D's

If the Santorum camparison fits - wear it.


[ Parent ]
He didn't say that.

[ Parent ]
Ill-conceived
What in the world do you mean by "ill-conceived"?

Dr. Dana
[ Parent ]
I don't find very compelling...

..., for example, the notion that society should abandon gender and sex roles altogether, or that biological genitalia should have no bearing on legal gender or access to public facilities.  Or that professional appearance in a business setting doesn't rightly have a component of gender coherance.  And I find it ludicrous that people transitioning from one traditional sex role to the opposite traditional sex role are considered inspiring examples of gender freedom.  You've got every right to do it... and I've got every right to consider it sad. 


[ Parent ]
Well, then, you stand shoulder to shoulder with...

...Peter LaBarbera and Fred Phelps.

I don't consider that sad.

I consider that tragic.


[ Parent ]
This here's the problem.

Trans activists try to tell gays what they should think about gender, about masculine/feminine behavior, about public acceptibility, and being an outcast, you name it.  And you're Fred Phelps if you only agree with some of their goals.  Kinda reaffirms my rueful opinions of how little we have in common.


[ Parent ]
A transactivist?

Nah.  My concern is equity for all.

And who are the "we" in this sentence?: "Kinda reaffirms my rueful opinions of how little we have in common."


[ Parent ]
I was comparing the political goals of
gays and transfolk.  If strategic differences pull us apart this easily, I wonder if we belong together.
[ Parent ]
Not all transpeople favor the all-or-nothing approach.
Case in point.
[ Parent ]
Actually
And I find it ludicrous that people transitioning from one traditional sex role to the opposite traditional sex role are considered inspiring examples of gender freedom.
I completely agree with this, although in my experience that's not usually how it happens.
[ Parent ]
What ignorance

I find this conversation quite appalling, actually. You have no sense of the reality for any of us, and certainly no idea of the science or the law.

No one is asking that gender and sex roles be abandoned, except for a few radicals. That's a red herring.

Genitalia shouldn't have any bearing on the law or access. They are a useful tool for sex assignment at birth because they work 99% of the time. But that is not 100%, and sometimes the assignment even when apparently self-evident is wrong. If you for a moment think your sense of maleness derives from your penis then you are one of those remaining Freudians. What your genitals are in the bathroom stall is completely unknowable and irrelevant.

As for professional appearnace, that is never an issue and dress codes are always allowed when appropriate. The canard of "men in dresses" is just that. Men who wear dresses (cross-dressers) do so after hours. Trans women are not and never have been men, whether you like it or not.

I don't consider gender transition to be an example of what you call "gender freedom," whatever that is. I consider it my freedom to right a legal wrong and a medical condition.



Dr. Dana
[ Parent ]
Best not to toss around that term -

- "Freudians," that is. There are plenty of people with odd ideas about human psychology and behavior who aren't Freudians.

And, for the record, I think it's be pretty cool if "gender and sex roles" were abandoned.


[ Parent ]
Ah, pardon my mistake.
I thought you were asking because you wanted a discussion.  I wouldn't have bothered otherwise.
[ Parent ]
again, I'd love numbers
on this. I've only seen real vitriol against supporting a fully inclusive ENDA at a select few places.  The multitude of orgs that came together to support the original ENDA and condemned the discriminatory version can't all be ignoring their contributors (presumably gay men are some of their contributors).

The people I've talked to aren't for pushing a stripped down ENDA to a veto.  They'd rather see the original move forward (be that to veto or non-passage). 

Again, I'd love to see numbers.  I'm feeling like the argument that, after last week, gay men are going to dig in their heels and reject transpeople forever is a bit of a red herring.  It's not what I've been hearing. If anything, this is an opportunity for people to connect and awareness to be raised.

Electricity's for light bulbs!

[ Parent ]
Not to belabor an obvious point,

but I saw no vitriol ANYWHERE about supporting the fully inclusive ENDA. 

Everyone I saw who *also* supported the inferior version agreed that transfolk deserved the protections. 


[ Parent ]
and again, I really
would love numbers.  I saw some pretty transphobic stuff in the ABlog and JMG thread (less so there).

Electricity's for light bulbs!
[ Parent ]
Umm. less winnable?
  It is very winnable, that is why many companies have "gender identity" in their non-discrimination policies.

  The fight that us Ts have had is showing the differences between gay guys in drag and we in transition are.

If I make sense? it was quite by accident.

[ Parent ]
If the past week is any indication
HRC has a long way to go to achieve 'effective' and we're all just screwed.

HRC and the staffers who planned this coughed up the ball. Period.

I'm not a proponent of holding back ENDA until it meets anyone's purity test, because I'm a pragmatist--and pragmatically speaking, HRC stepped in it.

It's wrong to blame trans activists for this mess. Ethically and politically. They're committed to getting as much as they can for themselves, just as you and I are. It's not the job of trans people, who were told that they were to be included in this bill, to predict the consequences of exclusion at the last moment.

It's the lobbyists' job, and I'm firing them. Not another dime to HRC until they clean house. This has been a political disaster and it's squarely the responsibility of the people who are paid to solve political problems.

But wait, there's more!

[ Parent ]
You said it. The word is 'bungled'.
Those of us who work in politics know how the sauage is made, and can usually manage things much better than this bungling.

The word 'bungled' has not been used nearly enough in the past week.

For gosh sakes, last week at this time we were hoping that our votes on the hate crimes bill would hold up. And HRC, in its mission to lobby the Hill for our community, has been in damage control mode over the predictable issues with marking up ENDA ever since.

This goes to competence, regardless of the political and philosophical gaps in our community's committment to honoring the T as a part of the coalition.

Dana, you're a brave soul.

But wait, there's more!

HRC is our most politically effective lobbying group...?

HRC is our most politically effective lobbying group?

---------------------------------

OK - I'll listen to you. Tell me the three federal laws they've passed for gay men that you're most proud of. 


passing laws
of course, it is legislators who pass laws. but i get your drift.  i don't know what hrc's sucesses have been with federal legislation, but i do know that they are often quite helpful at the state level.  this is both with legislation and employer policies.  unless you can point to an org who has done better in federal legislation for gay men (i guess you don't care about Ls & Bs?) i think your bar is rediculously high and shortsighted.  and i should say, i am not an hrc cheerleader.  they make mistakes.  but they're also not the enemy.  bush and the professional bigots in the republican party are.

Click HERE and sign up: Campaign For Military Partners.

Lurleen on Twitter.
[ Parent ]
No

(i guess you don't care about Ls & Bs?) Of course I do - I are one.

Most of the heavy lifting on local laws has always been done by the local groups. If HRC says it's the premier national political group - it's not unfair to ask what the results are in legislation. If they want to be the political insiders - it's not unfair to judge them in part by those standards. I assure you - the telco lobbyists can point out plenty of legislation they've gotten through.

 


[ Parent ]
So is Wal-Mart - if you believe Wal-Mart

"they are often quite helpful at the state level."

Wal-Mart helps local communities - if you believe Wal-Mart.  However, I believe what my eyes see when I drive through the decimated downtowns of America.

Kat



>^..^<
[ Parent ]
please don't make apples - oranges comments
next someone will be comparing solomonese to hitler.  can we argue within the reasonable realm please?  i accept that you have a different take on this than i do.  and who knows, maybe yours is more correct than mine.  but that kind of exaggeration just turns off the dialogue and convinces no one.

Click HERE and sign up: Campaign For Military Partners.

Lurleen on Twitter.
[ Parent ]
The analogy is legit

I was making allusions to the observation by Ethan St. Pierre, of Trans FM, that HRC has rapidly become the Wal-Mart of gay rights organizations: moving in on the local realms previously occupied by local groups and putting itself in the position to suck up the funding that those organizations have depended on.

And, if there are any call for Nazi comparisons to be made here, the one who should be the Comparee is Goebbels, not Hitler; the propaganda that's been tossed at us over the years could fertilize the Moon.

Kat



>^..^<
[ Parent ]
Pedantry -
Maybe. What effect HRC has had on local groups is a completely separate question from that of whether they've effectively represented GLB interests at the state or local level. Is it your position that they have not?
[ Parent ]
ok,
if you were building a comment from something someone else said, please let us all in on it next time, ok?  link to it or something.

Click HERE and sign up: Campaign For Military Partners.

Lurleen on Twitter.
[ Parent ]
HRC and the states

Lurleen,

HRC is a national organization, and its primary work is on the Hill. Local steering committees do great work on the local (city) level, but there is very little state work being done (yet).

HRC has done some great work, which is why I joined the board. The corporate and new health equity indicies are marvelous, and provide important data on just how much progress we're making on the GLB and T ends of the spectrum. Also the work with historically black colleges.

But this week has been not only bungled but mangled.



Dr. Dana
[ Parent ]
HRC & Lobbying

If more lobbying was needed for this bill, why wasn't an action alert put out? If the issue was specifically transgendered people, why weren't we concentrating on that? If, as we have been told, the Congress wasn't getting letters about the transgendered inclusion in the bill, why wasn't something said to us about stepping up the pressure? If there are members who are comfortable with a GLB but not T bill, why haven't we been given information about who those people are, so we could lobby them?

They STILL aren't doing this. Instead, if we are to believe several people's reports, they're instead trying to lineup someone trans to act as a Quisling spokesperson for exclusion.

One other thing about this entire process, for the last six months, it hasn't been the GLB getting socked by the fundies over ENDA, it's been the T. We have endured a huge storm of hate speech from the religious extremists--some of in the form of quotes from Mr. Frank. It's morally abhorrent to have put us in the forefront in this way and then to have tossed us away like a used condom.

This process has been a disgrace on behalf of HRC. They need to take a lesson from, well, every other GLBT organization in the country that has so effectively lobbied over the last week for transinclusion. This is how you organize people. This is how you effectively lobby.


HRC & Lobbying
You seem to be confusing knee-jerk reactionary advocacy with effective lobbying.  Effective lobbying requires years of building relationships with lawmakers, a certain amount of credibility among those you wish to lobby, and an actual political strategy.  Its impossible that "every other GLBT organization" has "effectively lobbied" when HRC was the only organization left in the room. 
[ Parent ]
Effective lobbying

You're right -- effective lobbying takes years, which I why I defend HRC from the likes of my friend, Andrew Sullivan, who brags about how little they have managed to do under reactionary Republicans. Still, other organizations, especially NCTE and the task Force as well as all the state organizations that have successfully lobbied 13 states for trans-inlcuisve legislation ove the past seven years, ahve been doing the work down at the state level. Why else would 37% of the US population be covered under inclusive laws while only another 15% are cover under s.o only laws? That's actually a pretty pathetic comparison to make.

Something else for our Congress -- no Democrat who supported the trans-inclusive Hate Crimes bill in 2005 was defeated in 2006. Nor has any Democrat in any state legislature lost her seat because of a pro-trans vote. So, why, oh why, the panic this past week?



Dr. Dana
[ Parent ]
If we are to believe HRC...

If we are to believe HRC the panic was caused by large volumes of grass roots (with the religious right it's really astroturf) people calling against the bill and very little grass roots support for transinclusion. Hence my comments about grass roots organizing and HRC.

I've certainly supported the bill, but it never occurred to me given HRC and Frank's supposed positions that the trans-inclusion part needed to be the focus. I approached it as an employment rights bill. If attention was needed to the trans part, people needed to know that.


[ Parent ]
There are only two explanations

Either some subset of the Frank/Pelosi/HRC bunch knew that this was going to happen and possibly even planned it, in which case those involved are duplicitous and untrustworthy, or they were totally caught by surprise, in which case they are incompetent and ineffective.

Either way, that leadership clique is fundamentally flawed. 


[ Parent ]
Eek! We broke the comments forum!

:)  Did we do too much nesting? 


People who support excluding Gays are George Bush in1999

Keep in mind what happen in Texas when Bush was Governor. In 1999 there was a hate crime bill and Bush wanted to strip gays out of it just like the gays want to do to us now. Yet someone stood up and said no they should include gay right protection in it. A Reminder of history. 

http://dir.salon.com...

 

May 1999 to try to persuade Bush to support the James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Act, which would have increased punishment for criminals motivated by hatred of a victim's gender, religion, ethnic background or sexual orientation. "So I'm sure with that lack of interest, he didn't ask to see what was going on."

Then below

Bush's opposition to the bill reportedly revolved around the fact that it would cover gays and lesbians. The governor's office "contacted the family and asked if we would consider taking sexual orientation out of the bill," Harris says. "And our answer was no, because the bill is for everybody. Everybody should be protected by the law."

 

But in 1994, Bush pledged to veto any effort to repeal an anti-sodomy law, calling it "a symbolic gesture of traditional values." Protecting gays under a hate crimes law presumably wouldn't even be a thought he would entertain.

 


adamblast

The problem with so many of your posts on this subject, adamblast, is that your arguments are based on fallacies instead of facts.  You have not demonstrated any real understanding of what it means to be transgender or what the transgender community is all about.  Instead, you keep arguing based on some sort of preceonceived notion - or perhaps just a deeply misinformed "understanding" - and saying things that are completely irrelevant because they don't address the facts.

 If you expect your stand on transgender-related issues to be taken seriously, you should probably educate yourself about the subject instead of assuming that you already know enough.


Indeed, I have no understanding of...

...trans issues, nor any great affinity for them or interest in them.  As I've said all day, my struggle is for gay rights, and I am increasingly of the opinion that we share little common ground.  

What I've been writing today is more confessional than most of the defensive folks here have been understanding--I'm explaining what my biases are, less than trying to defend them.  I do not fully support trans equality because, among other things, I'm conflicted whether or not trans issues are correctly framed.  And I'm finding out that dialog is not this forum's strength.


[ Parent ]
Dialog, you have a closed mind to trans issues,
  How do you expect dialog when you have a closed mind?

  Your words, not mine or anyone elses

trans issues, nor any great affinity for them or interest in them

 

If I make sense? it was quite by accident.

[ Parent ]
When someone asks me

...an opinion on something, I try to answer without hedging to improve my popularity or likeability.  And when I say I have no great affinity or interest in trans issues, I am merely being blunt about myself.  I feel about transfolk as I feel about the suffering in, say, Darfur.  It is remote, and not one of the battles that stirs my heart. 

I'm feeling increased tension between gays and transfolk over all this, not just politically but philosophically.  As Sportin' Life wrote in the ENDA thread just prior to this one:

I think a lot of gay and lesbian people have grown up experiencing at least some gender dissonance, and it's very important to our view of ourselves to see that dissonance as a problem not intrinsic to ourselves, but one imposed on us by the society in which we live.  And we want to change society accordingly.  Transgender people seem to have come to an opposite conclusion, and to have determined that their experience of gender dissonance represents an intrinsic condition.  And some of them decide to change themselves.

That's oversimplified, but I think it does represent one of the submerged tensions exploding to the surface because of this conflict.

It is not at all easy for me to relate to transfolk philosophically.  To oversimplify, I have trouble agreeing that the problem is with them rather than society.


[ Parent ]
Interesting concept, that

As a lesbian trans woman, it is not easy for me to relate to being attracted to male bodies.  But I understand that my lack of experience with that does not make it untrue or invalid... only foreign to me.

I think that the quote you provided, contrasting the GLB and T conclusions about source of dissonance, is really comparing apples and oranges.

The socially created dissonance that GLB individuals feel is presumably discomfort with ourselves and our orientation due to societal opprobrium.  T people feel exactly the same way.  Some GLB people positively act upon who they are - in spite of that socially induced dissonance - by pursuing relationships with same sex people.  Some T people positively act upon who they are - in spite of socially induced dissonance - by transitioning.

BUT... the fundamental motivations behind those are totally different.  Gender identity is all about who you are.  It has no bearing on orientation, and it would exist even in a social vacuum.  Orientation is all about who you are attracted to.  It has no bearing on gender identity, and it too would exist even in a social vacuum (although it might be harder to recognize subjectively without somebody to be attracted to).  Totally different traits.

 However, we have many of the same social troubles and many of the same enemies, because both gender identity and sexual orientation are facets of human sexuality, and a lot of people aggressively lash out when they are confronted by manifestations of human sexuality that they don't understand.

Of course being gay is totally different from being trans.  But in terms of social and political change, we're fighting the same battles, and we have more power if we fight them together... which has happened a LOT in GLBT history.

 


[ Parent ]
Clarification
I meant to add that, while orientation and gender identity are different critters, they often do overlap.  There are a lot of people who experience a mixture of both, or who explore one facet before concluding that they really need to figure out the other.  So in addition to fighting the same battles, there is a good deal of overlap in the membership of the two camps... which is all the more reason to work together.

[ Parent ]
I'll ask again
Are you really interested in having those biases without, by your own admission, understanding transgender issues?  It seems like you're thinking about things before you write them, so it's hard for me to understand if that's truly the case.  You said when you came here this morning that you were angry.  Do you primarily come here to vent your bias?

This is a great place to dialog and learn.  There is a big difference between people countering transphobic talking points and being defensive.

Electricity's for light bulbs!

[ Parent ]
Like most folks, I suspect, I come here

hoping both to understand and be understood.  If I wanted agreement I would have stuck with AmericaBlog, Chris Crain, etc.  I love that there are at least a handful of transfolk here who are articulate and thoughtful. 

I started off the day saying I was too mad to even dialog.  Talk to me when you *haven't* killed my legislation, I wrote.  So yes, I came to vent to some extent.  I believe that a gay-only ENDA still deserves passage, that HRC has walked this tightrope skillfully, and that Donna Rose's resignation represents political immaturity.

When people have asked *why* I feel little emotional connection to trans politics, I have answered candidly.  As I've never had any trans friends or acquaintences, I am unsurprised to hear my opinions characterized as ignorance, and have not tried to defend myself against the claim.  To the extent you consider them "transphobic talking points" that speaks to your political weariness more than my intent. 


[ Parent ]
I promise
no weariness here.  Not sure what you mean by that shot.

I'm still wondering why you would want to hold onto opinions about issues you've claimed ignorance on.  Why not try to learn instead?


Electricity's for light bulbs!

[ Parent ]
I meant that "transphobic talking points" implies

you've heard these things over and over again and are sick of them.  I've never said any of these things before.  I gather that the phrase "men in dresses" is radioactive around transfolk politically, and find that amusing.  I'm defintely here to learn. 


[ Parent ]
amusing?
Calling trans women "men in dresses" (and don't forget that there are trans men too, something that people ignorant about transgender issues tend to overlook) is roughly analogous to calling gay men "pansies who aren't real men" or lesbians "women who have never met the right man."  It is, fundamentally, an intentional invalidation of the targeted individual's being.  And that amuses you?
[ Parent ]
well
one thing I'm seeing, and I'm not sure why if you're here to learn, is something that happens often in the on line format.  It's the practice of distraction via accusing someone of being angry or overly sensitive when asked questions and encouraged to learn more about a topic, a topic you've professed ignorance on.  I really do hope you are hear to learn and hope that also includes a willingness to look at things like why your past interactions with transgender people have left you feeling icky or amused. 

If you are really here to learn, there are some great diaries you can read, some from just this past week.  They succinctly debunk many of the fears and myths about trans-inclusiveness, especially with respect to ENDA. Best of luck with learning (that's not snark).


Electricity's for light bulbs!

[ Parent ]
Honestly

Honestly, your comments have about as much resonance for me as a lesbian woman who was once male as the commentary of the fundamentalists. Part of why you're not finding dialog is that your basic premises are so far out in left field.

Trans and gay have always had a weird relationship because of misunderstandings between sexual orientation, gender preference, and gender expression. I guess about all I can say is that my mom used to think that the correct option for gay men was to "give them an operation" so they could become women. After all, that's what they wanted--to be women.

And yah, as a matter of fact, your comments about men wearing dresses and such DO sound pretty much that ignorant.

That's why there's not too much dialog here. You are starting from a point of view so far out in fundie-land that there's not really a lot we can say. Most of the time I hear things like what you're saying, they're being expressed as a parody.


[ Parent ]
Wait a sec...

So you acknowledge that you don't understand trans issues, but you still think you are capable if forming an opinion about whether those issues are related to gay issues or whether trans issues are correctly framed?

 That's just silly.

You can't have an intelligent, informed opinion about something you don't understand in the slightest.

"I really don't understand your issues in any meaningful way, but I'm pretty sure they aren't anything like mine."

 Really... just plain silly.


[ Parent ]
<out for now>
No more tonight for me; off to rehearsal.  I didn't start the day trying to be a gadfly.  Or a jerk.  And I think I've been less of the latter than many of my responders.
It's not a contest
Regardless of anyone's position, it's generally bad form to justify your tone by comparing yourself to others.  In other words, I don't care if you think other people are being jerks-- that really has no bearing on your character.
[ Parent ]
Awesome post, Kate. Thank you.

I left in a hurry and was snippy. 

 As for:

"I really don't understand your issues in any meaningful way, but I'm pretty sure they aren't anything like mine."

Yeah, that does sound silly, and it's a good parody of what I did say.  I'm finding the "we have the same enemies" speech unconvincing, and not seeing much connection between sexual orientation and gender expression.  And I'm at mad at those who would condemn GLB legislation and try to deny its passage.


[ Parent ]
Okay, but why?

"I'm finding the 'we have the same enemies' speech unconvincing."

 May I ask why?  My assertions are:

  • sexual orientation and gender identity, while different attributes, are both facets of human sexuality
  • any deviation from what many people consider "normal" human sexuality - whether is is a matter of orientation or identity - arouses the same anger and the same attacks from people who fear things they don't understand 

What exactly is it that you disagree with in that?  And what is your well-considered alternate perspective on the situation?  (It's hard to have a dialog when all you're saying is that you disagree without any explanation of why or what you believe.) 


[ Parent ]
I'll just sound dumb:

As a gay man, I consider my main enemy to be traditional Christian doctrine.  I think our struggles have very different characters. 

And I don't judge how much I have in common with somebody based on enemies or fools, or the threat of violence.  There are plenty of foes to Chrisianity with whom I would never throw my hat into the ring.  Common enemies are not always suffient for joined causes. 

I don't find much to disagree with in either of your bullet points, aside from noting that fearing things one doesn't understand is so universal as to be a useless charge to lay against someone. 

I part company with those T's who say I will always be abnormal or considered abnormal for being gay.  I don't feel so at all.  My current sense, or considered opinion--or bias, some would say--it's all subject to change--is that our struggles are losing common ground. 

I do not believe it's wise for someone to try to change their sexual orientation.  I think they need to come to terms with who they really are.  Of course, I think they have a perfect right to try to make themselves straight.  I would support them politically.  It wouldn't be a big priority for me, or a cause I felt much affinity for.

Is it wise for someone to change their gender?  I just hope they're carefully screened.  Self-delusion can be a huge part of the initial gay self-discovery, in fact I'd say it's a big part of the gay experience, and it's hard for me not to imagine it here.  I take it transfolk feel they have no choice, much like I feel my orientation is not really a choice, though my behavior certainly is.  I support trans rights.  I find it very different in character and much more complex. 

Damn, I stayed up too late writing this.  Off to bed.


[ Parent ]
Thank you for sharing your thoughts

As a lesbian trans woman, traditional Christian doctrine is one of my main enemies as well.

And it isn't just that we have the same enemies... we have the same enemies for the same reasons.  Yes, you're gay and I'm transgender (and lesbian), but their issue with us comes from the same problem - the fact that our manifestation of sexuality makes them uncomfortable and feels "gross" to them - and results in the same attacks.  As far as many of them are concerned, we are the same group, and in an odd way, that gives some degree of support to the idea that we should tackle the problem together.

 Your next few comments hint at a very flawed understanding of being transgender, and maybe we can build some common understanding here.  I don't know what your experience with specific trans people has been like, but I don't know anybody in the trans community who thinks that GLB people "will always be abnormal or considered abnormal."  I'm not sure what that is based on, so it's difficult to comment well.  I do know that some people have said that there will always some people outside of the LGBT community who will consider any and all members of the community to be abnormal, but I haven't heard anyone espouse the view that LGB individuals are, in fact, abnormal.  If you have heard that from people, I propose that those people were very much NOT representative of the trans community as a whole.

And now the big one: "try[ing] to change their sexual orientation."  That concept has absolutely NOTHING to do with being transgender, and I think your belief that it does is the root of a lot of our disagreement.  I have always been attracted to women.  I always will be, and I have absolutely no problem with it.  What I had a problem with (prior to transitioning) was being male-bodied, because my mind tells me in every waking moment that I am female.  The body I had before I started transition felt completely foreign, a betrayal of my very identity.  That has nothing whatsoever to do with my orientation, or with any sort of social influence.  It is the natural result of putting a female identified consciousness into a male body (or vice versa).

(Actually, I'm starting to wonder if you were actually proposing that people who transition are trying to change their orientation, or if perhaps it was just an unclear (to me) example of something outside of our discussion that might be analogous in some ways.)

For the final bit...  Who carefully screened you for being gay?  With the self-delusion you refer to in "the initial gay self-discovery", why weren't you examined to make sure you weren't making a mistake?  Do you honestly believe that I am less capable of being certain about my gender than you are about your orientation?  Well, as it turns out, there is an international organization that creates policy for treating transsexuals going through the transition process.  People who don't circumvent that health care protocol are required to go through a considerable amount of therapy and get approval from two different therapists before having genital surgery.  They are also required to spend a substantial amount of time living in their identified gender before having surgery to make sure it really is what they want.  So if you're holding trans people to a higher standard of self-knowledge than gays and lesbians, does that satisfy your concern that we aren't all just self-deluded? 

 

And some food for thought: I would find it just as soul-crushing, invalidating, odious and unpalatable to spend my life trapped in a male body as most gay men would find it having sex only with women for their whole lives.  I am no more in need of "being made to feel comfortable with the way my body was" than a gay man is in need of "being made to feel comfortable having sex with women". It would be hypocritical to reject "reparative therapy" for GLB individuals and then propose that trans people just need to accept the way they were born.  And would you make somebody born with a cleft palate or a disfigured limb "just live with it" if it was possible to fix the problem?"  (I am not saying you believe or said any of those things... I'm just offering additional points to ponder.) 


[ Parent ]
So how do we interest you in reading why they are related?

I've been passing around a link out by historian Susan Stryker on the history and linkages of gay and transgender issues.

If you don't read that history lesson because your not interested, then I don't know what to say about your ignorance other than it's willful.  I you never read any posts on PHB regarding examples of a common enemies -- for example, the example of the Traditional Values Center (TVC) in how they refer to LGBT lobbiests  -- then please don't say you don't find arguments of why transgender and gay people have the same enemies  uncompelling. 

Say instead you don't care to understand why gay and transgender people have the same enemies.  Say  instead that you desire to be willfully ignorant on anything that may link gay transgender issues and/or people.

-----
~~Autumn~~

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

[ Parent ]
Unity
We have to stick together or they will pick us off one by one.
HRC statement on Donna Rose's resignation from board | 89 comments
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Join the Blend Chat Room


Report TOS Violations

Premium Sponsors


BlogAds





Search the Blend
Current site


PHB 2.0 Web
Search Blend 1.0 Archives
Ad Networks


BlogSheroes BlogAds

Miscellany

RSS Feeds

Subscribe with Bloglines

Visit NCBlogs

frontpage hit counter

Stats

Powered by: SoapBlox