Dusting off and fixing the damage

Who is 'us'?

"We also need to work closely with the organizations that represent us on the Hill, including HRC to ensure that the fiasco we just went through doesn't happen again."

But HRC has continually shown that it does NOT represent trans people; it MISrepresents us and MALrepresents us. 

Trans people have known this and shouted this for years - but only a handful of non-trans people have been willing to acknowledge what HRC was hiding in plain sight.

No one can now legitimately not acknowledge the reality of what HRC has done TO trans people.

The only way in which we need to work closely with HRC is to serve them with notice of being sued for fraud and breach of contract by everyone who donated even one penny to them based on their long-standing express representations that they would not support a non-inclusive ENDA.

Trusting to any degree HRC is more foolhearty than trusting the Bush Administration.

Kat

>^..^<

---

by: KatRose @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 09:38:44 AM CST

I didn't say Trust

I'm suggesting work closely and demand the transparency of and hold accountable the HRC.  We need to make, and I'm borrowing from someone, stone soup, that is to say we need to make calculating efforts to ensure that HRC has no choice but to represent the entire spectrum of LGBT. 

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." -- Thomas Jefferson

---

by: Daimeon @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 09:57:01 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Making soup..

isn't my first inclination when I have thoughts of hrc on my mind and a stone in my hand.

---

by: Kathleen @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 16:26:16 PM CST

[ Parent ]

LOL

Nor is it mine, but I must be careful of my glass house.  :)

The trollish sounding blogger formerly known as BURNSEY

---

by: R.K. Wright @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 16:40:08 PM CST

[ Parent ]

You want us now on educating each other?

Why don't you start by telling me why you don't support gay rights as a good thing in and of themselves?

---

by: adamblast @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 09:50:27 AM CST

That should read:

Headline should read: You want us now to focus on educating each other?

You're fighting for trans rights.  I'm fighting for gay rights.  Why should I let you hang around my neck like an albatross, trying to make sure I lose whenever you lose?

---

by: adamblast @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 09:59:13 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Please...

"Why should I let you hang around my neck like an albatross, trying to make sure I lose whenever you lose?"

Find a transsexual person who had any say in the matter about the wholescale prosecution of the gay marriage insanity - which has ALREADY cost us more than you can ever conceivably win from ENDA.

You owe us ENDA and then some.

Check mate.

Kat

>^..^<

---

by: KatRose @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 13:37:23 PM CST

[ Parent ]

That's a fascinating thesis.

Find a transsexual person who had any say in the matter about the wholescale prosecution of the gay marriage insanity - which has ALREADY cost us more than you can ever conceivably win from ENDA.

You owe us ENDA and then some.

I mean it. I know you've talked about it elsewhere, but if you gave that a book-length treatment, I would totally read it.

---

by: anomie @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 13:42:08 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I'm working on it

in the form of several law review articles (here's a link to one, already published, that lays a portion of the groundwork) and my Dissertation.

For some reason, I don't smell research funding coming from Rhode Island Ave or Aravosis-Land (oh wait...there's not much difference between the two, is there?).

Kat

>^..^<

---

by: KatRose @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 17:44:48 PM CST

[ Parent ]

We must be speaking...

past each other.  I don't yet understand what you're even referring to with "the wholesale prosecution of the gay marriage insanity" or why you would try to blame gays for it. I can say that gays are blameless in the right wing's using gay marriage as a wedge, or getting anti-gay legislation passed federally or in dozens of states that--horror--may have made it worse for transfolks as well.

---

by: adamblast @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 13:57:55 PM CST

[ Parent ]

You can say...

"I can say that gays are blameless in the right wing's using gay marriage as a wedge, or getting anti-gay legislation passed federally or in dozens of states that--horror--may have made it worse for transfolks as well."

You can say that you're the reincarnation of Liberace, too. 

That won't change the fact that the organized gay rights industry should be placed next to the word 'hypocrisy' in the dictionary over the 'incremental progress' double-standard.

Kat

>^..^<

---

by: KatRose @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 18:04:03 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Organized Gay Rights Industry?

You clearly don't support gay rights at all.  Are you anti-male or just anti-gay male?  Sad to think of someone so educated being such a dick, or a lawyer using all their brain power to foster hate.

---

by: adamblast @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 22:06:29 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Yawn

If you're going to be abusive and ignorant - could you at least add a dash of creativity?

---

by: Kathleen @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 22:34:52 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Hmmmmm....

"to foster hate"

Uhhh no - Methinks I am talking substantive history and policy....

something you're "clearly" not doing.

Kat

>^..^<

---

by: KatRose @ Fri Nov 09, 2007 at 09:30:46 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Equal Rights

There really is no magical "gay rights."  There are only equal rights.  They include everyone in the LGBT Spectrum.

Because it's absurd to leave a very important part of OUR community behind.  If the House voted to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell tomorrow, but only for lesbians because they don't mind how butch a woman looks in her uniform anyways wouldn't that be absurd?  Wouldn't it have also been absurd if the black civil rights movement left behind light skinned blacks like our Blogmistress because they're just not black enough?

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." -- Thomas Jefferson

---

by: Daimeon @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 10:02:43 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Stale and unconvincing

Sorry, I don't feel educated yet.  I *do* believe there's something called gay rights, and the fact you don't is problematic.  It suggests you devalue me.  It's like my saying there's no such thing as trans rights.  The two fights are related and have many of the same enemies.  They are not identical, and they are not always going to find social or political acceptance at the same time.  Again: why should I happily let you drag *me* down to political failure whever trans protections fail politically?

---

by: adamblast @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 10:14:01 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Here's the rub

There aren't black rights.  There aren't straight rights.  The second you separate and call it something different other than human or equal rights you elevate it to special rights.

Special rights are exactly what the "Right" fights against, and rightly so.  But you play into their hands when you separate out the the rights that we fight for as a community into separate categories and as a separate class.

We'll always remain second-class citizens if the rights we fight for are treated as second-class or third-class rights.

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." -- Thomas Jefferson

---

by: Daimeon @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 10:26:04 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Would you have told MLK etc

...that they weren't fighting for black rights if they happened to use that term?  What about Black Power?  Was that wrong? 

I used (and will continue to use) the term gay rights as casual shorthand for sexual orientation protections and equality based on sexual orientation.  It is primarily gays that are fighting that struggle, just as it was Blacks fighting the struggle for racial equality.  Gay rights means equal rights for gays, lesbians, bisexuals, straights, and the undeclared.  Everyone has an orientation.

That kind of equality is a noble goal, and I'll continue to focus on it.  You want it to fail because there are still other injustices in the world. 

---

by: adamblast @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 10:44:15 AM CST

[ Parent ]

MLK

If Coretta Scott King said MLK was for equal rights, then it was so. And, last time I checked, MLK didn't run the Black Power Movement.

Is our boat so damn small that we have to drop a letter? Are we really that narrow? We accuse straights that don't like us of being narrow. Do we have to be like them to have the same rights as they do? Is that what it is? Dump those that aren't EXACTLY like us so that we'll fit in better? Is that it?

I can't believe this is the "new" face of queer. It sure is ugly. I'll say it again...Harvey Milk is rolling in his grave. He'd HATE what we're doing to each other. HATE it.

Curses! My million dollar ideas foiled again: "God Bless Your Brand!" http://www.christvertising.com/

---

by: TJ McFisty @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 12:24:56 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Internal fights

Well, TJ, I never thought of the T's as an albatross around my neck until they started fighting against my rights.  However, I trust that they won't always do so, and I will certainly continue to support Ts to the best of my ability.  Then again, I also believe the HRC and Barney Frank are supporting Ts to their best of *their* ability, so it is very true that we don't have much common ground today.

---

by: adamblast @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 12:42:55 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Oh horseshit.

Ts have done absolutely zero to fight against YOUR rights. Barney Frank coulda just NOT written his own damn trans-exclusive bill or said a goddamn word about it. All it took was some fucking backbone to say "The T stays...period." AFAIK, it only became on issue when Barney opened his damn mouth and said "Oh, if we have T then we can't get it passed." THEN I hear all sorts of garbage on the talk radio and the teevee about BATHROOMS, WON'T SOMEONE THINK OF THE BATHROOMS!

Don't you remember it was not that long ago it was WON'T SOMEONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN directed against gay men and lesbians. Still is, but it's being drowned out by BATHROOMS! MY GOD! RAPE! BATHROOM!

What the fuck ever, Adam. The T wasn't an albatross until we unnecessarily turned it into one. 

Curses! My million dollar ideas foiled again: "God Bless Your Brand!" http://www.christvertising.com/

---

by: TJ McFisty @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 14:10:51 PM CST

[ Parent ]

When it became abundantly clear...

...that a bill protecting sexual orientation would pass while one protecting both sexual orientation and gender expression would fail, Barney made the right choice.  As for:

"Ts have done absolutely zero to fight against YOUR rights."

...I would say that's exactly what they did, and unfortunately they screamed loud enough that the majority of GLBT organizations reflexivly pulled support from the bill as well, contrary to the wishes of most gays and lesbians outside of the activist circle.

---

by: adamblast @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 14:40:23 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Contrary to a minority of them

Not a majority

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

---

by: dyssonance @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 14:51:08 PM CST

[ Parent ]

It was never clear

Barney said he had a Whip count done.  We NEVER saw that.  We never knew who would/wouldn't support it.

Again yesterday, the Baldwin Amendment was withdrawn BEFORE it could be voted on.  Why?  To protect the spineless Dems who wanted to throw T's under the bus?  Or more for the fact that someone was probably not as forthright with us as he should have been.

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." -- Thomas Jefferson

---

by: Daimeon @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 15:08:23 PM CST

[ Parent ]

...or because it would have failed.

Tammy withdrew her ammendment because she knew it could *only* fail.  And the failure would have bred more failure, just like the success can now breed more success.  Getting things on record is a huge part of the battle.  

The only difference between her and Barney is that she took longer to support HR3685 as is.  And my only criticism of the HRC is that they were spineless and flip-flopped twice, pissing off the trans political community even more, rather than being honest about their support for it throughout the process.

---

by: adamblast @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 15:23:14 PM CST

[ Parent ]

So it was protection then

If she knew it would fail then she didn't want to have to make the other Dems go on record to say why they opposed our T brothers and sisters inclusion.

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." -- Thomas Jefferson

---

by: Daimeon @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 15:27:54 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Yes, Daimeon

It was cowardice.

Prior to the splitting, they would have voted for it despite thier ickies.

With it split, it opened them up too much, put them at greater risk.

And Frank knew that.

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

---

by: dyssonance @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 15:31:56 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Trying and failing is better than not trying.

Not trying to do the right thing because you may fail is worse than trying to do the right thing and failing.  I'd rather fail at the right thing than not try at all as you suggest we do.

The trollish sounding blogger formerly known as BURNSEY

---

by: R.K. Wright @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 15:29:19 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Awesome

And very quotable :)

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." -- Thomas Jefferson

---

by: Daimeon @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 15:32:01 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I just wish they'd actually tried.

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

---

by: dyssonance @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 15:32:37 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I do not think

that that is true in all cases.

---

by: anomie @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 15:41:21 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Try the right thing FIRST...

And if it fails then you try the compromise to get what you can get.  That was my point.  Thy did not even try the right thing, but immediately went for the compromise.

The trollish sounding blogger formerly known as BURNSEY

---

by: R.K. Wright @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 15:47:40 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Really?

Are you so sure?

GO back and listen to the arguments from Souder, and tell me that again.

If Barney hadn't split the bill in the first place, it wouldn't have been an issue.

It had 175 co-sponsors, adam. 

Sorry -- that's the same bullshit story and repeating it is just going to piss us off more.

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

---

by: dyssonance @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 15:30:29 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Since when...

Do they not fall under sexual orientation?

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." -- Thomas Jefferson

---

by: Daimeon @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 12:46:53 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Most transsexual people are discriminated against due to....

Gender transition, or otherwise expressing their gender in an "unacceptable" manner.  Some of us (myself, for instance) identify as homosexual, but that's a different point.  To the extent that people recognize me as a lesbian, the new ENDA would cover me.  However, my choice in life partners hasn't really come up the last times I was denied employment in a suspicious way.  More to the point, plenty of Ts are heterosexual, so this ENDA does nothing for them. 

---

by: eastsidekate @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 13:11:14 PM CST

[ Parent ]

in agreement

but heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual are all sexual orientations.  Transgender people all fall in all of those areas, but sadly are not covered under this bill.  That's why I'm arguing we can't leave behind the T's in the LGBT spectrum.

Did this point not come clearly enough through the first time?  I think everyone is so damn focused on the "including HRC" part that they didn't even read the rest of the post, or any of my other comments.

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." -- Thomas Jefferson

---

by: Daimeon @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 13:40:38 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Becuase trans rights are gay rights

Trans is an inclusive term, hon.

IT includes gay bi, straight, and even asexual folks.  Because transfolks *are* all those things.

And if you can't see that, well, I feel mighty sorry for you, becuase without trans, you'll never get what you want. 

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

---

by: dyssonance @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 11:30:30 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Because history has shown...

The answer is simple: transpeople will never ever receive legal protection unless it is part of an overall inclusive bill.

This is not a case of there someday being a separate transgender rights bill or coming back next year. The history in every state has been that if a bill is not inclusive, transgender rights never appear. We in Massachusetts, with full gay rights including marriage, still don't have a statute protecting transgender people!

You're not asking us to wait. You're asking us to never ever have our rights.

---

by: kathygnome @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 10:19:55 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Now or never?

You're not asking us to wait. You're asking us to never ever have our rights. 

Well, I certainly don't want to do that.  Tho it may not sound like it now--I'm pretty furious with the trans poilitical community--I fully support trans rights.  I don't feel like I'm asking anyone to wait, however, by fighting for sexual orientation protections.  Nor do I buy the meme that gay rights don't exist without trans rights.  They are related causes, and both good and just. 

In some ways, the struggle for gay rights is more advanced, further along politically.  You think my acknowledging that fact is wrong.  I think a reality-based community should face the truth and help everyone it can whenever it can.

---

by: adamblast @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 10:34:19 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Adam, you are wrong

Gay rights are not further along.

They are simply more present in the media. Don't confuse being used as an excuse for ratings with actually achieving something.

A victory for gay rights is often a destruction of trans rights.  A victory for trans rights never harms gay rights.

And if we *are* behind, then its because we had the joy of having to spend 15 years fighting with you guys after the debacle of the late 1970's and early 1980's  -- a rift that was only healed 15 to 20 years ago and is still scabbed over.

Why did we have to fight?  Because we *are* gay and we *are* lesbian and we *are* straight and yeah: we are ALL queer. 

And just like now, people keep trying to say we'r "something else'.  That our goals aren't the same.

Challenge, then:

Name one goal that is strictly gay that isn't trans. 

THere's a reason for this.

We -- that is, the LGBT community -- can see the differences, which are, really, minor.

The rest of society can't.  TO them, you are us and we are you.  Only the sraight acting gays get a by here. 

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

---

by: dyssonance @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 11:39:12 AM CST

[ Parent ]

I said that gay rights are...

further along than trans rights in some ways, not across the board.  Politically in particular, in this instance.  I think it's a fair charactization of the American mindset to claim it is even more transphobic than it is homophobic.  That means we've got more work to do in bringing justice to transfolks.  It also means that justice does not arrive simultaneously for everyone.  We'd already be free if it did. 

---

by: adamblast @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 11:49:01 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Lessons of History

You're not asking us to wait. You're asking us to never ever have our rights. 

Well, I certainly don't want to do that.  Tho it may not sound like it now--I'm pretty furious with the trans poilitical community--I fully support trans rights.  I don't feel like I'm asking anyone to wait, however, by fighting for sexual orientation protections.

Adam, We've heard this excremental approach stuff over and over again.

Please read

http://gaycitynews.c...

Some goodies:

The Pride Agenda raised the issue of transgender inclusion at a meeting with Bruno this week, but were told it would not fly.

...

Senate Minority Leader David Paterson (D-Harlem), in a shift, said that despite his deep desire to include the category of “gender identity,” if the bill comes to the floor without that category, “I will vote for it as I would vote for any bill that extends protection.” He said that up until the vote, he will be talking to Bruno and his Senate colleagues about transgender inclusion.
“Once they realize it is a vote about rights and not about liking people or approving of the way people conduct their lives, perhaps we can get some people who are going to vote for SONDA to take the extra step to include transgender people,” Paterson said, but added, “I''m not feeling a very good spirit in the air about tolerance and sensitivity.”
Duane described Paterson’s commitment to inclusion as greater than “other elected officials and some in the gay community.”

...

Duane continued to fight for transgender inclusion and would not announce his position on a bill excluding gender identity.
“It’s not over ‘til it’s over,” Duane said. “If other people don’t approve of what I’m doing, then we’ll just have to disagree.”
Duane was attacked by Jonathan Capehart, the out gay deputy editorial page editor of the Daily News, this week for what he called Duane’s efforts to “kill” SONDA by raising the transgender issue.
Capehart wrote, “Let’s be honest: Transgender issues are difficult for most people to understand.”
The Lambda Independent Democrats of Brooklyn supported Duane’s efforts on Tuesday.
“We strongly urge the State Senate to add clear and explicit protections for transgendered persons in SONDA and then vote ‘yes’ on the entire bill,” wrote Dan Tietz, Lambda’s president.

...

Melissa Sklarz of the New York Transgender Coalition said, “If SONDA is not transgender inclusive, the coalition is against it.”
The group has been unsuccessful in getting a Republican sponsor for Duane’s version of the bill that includes “gender identity.” The New York Association for Gender Rights Advocacy continues not to support a non-inclusive SONDA, but not to oppose it either

... 

It has been a bruising campaign both within and outside the LGBT community on this bill.
“Emotions are running high,” said Foreman, “but at the end of the day, we’ll all be together and we’ll all be friends. I would hate for a victory for the LGB community to be seen as a defeat for the transgender community. If SONDA goes down, though, that would set our statewide movement back years.”

Sound Familiar? A real blast-from-the-past, 2002.
Same words, same arguments, same phrases.

Result, 5 years later:
"The Republican-led New York State Senate finally added sexual orientation to the state human rights law in 2002. But the Senate  remains resistant to protecting transgendered people. It will not take  up school anti-bullying legislation that includes sexual orientation and gender identity. Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno has said he is not interested in protecting, as he put it, "transvestites." *The Gender Expression Non-Discrimination Act has not so much as had a hearing in his house.

For its part, the Democrat-dominated Assembly voted to open up marriage
to same-sex couples earlier this year. However the Assembly, under
Speaker Sheldon Silver, has refused to take up amending the state human
rights law to add "gender identity and expression."

Matt Freeman, who was pivotal in getting SONDA passed, vehemently
opposed No-T ENDA because of what happened afterwards in NY in 2002
7 Democratic  NY Congressman voted against No-T ENDA because of what happened afterwards in NY in 2002

Throwing under the bus is forever. They know it. So does HRC.  I will repeat this is not the first time this has happened.

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

---

by: ZoeB @ Fri Nov 09, 2007 at 05:05:14 AM CST

[ Parent ]

To the point of the post...

No.

Not Now, not ever.

The HRC is trash, and barring their actually doing the things I asked for in 87 days, there's no way on God's green Earth that I will *ever* work with them again.

THey can come and work with me.

And that isn't going to change, either. They are damned. 

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

---

by: dyssonance @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 11:43:08 AM CST

They need to

Come work with us, not the other way around.  If they supposedly represent us, that's something they haven't done and that is work with us.

That was the point of my post.  HRC in general was not the point of my post.

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." -- Thomas Jefferson

---

by: Daimeon @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 13:55:54 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Trust?

They've proved their liars and they will do what they damn well want to at the last minute.

I'd rather be a lion for one day, than a sheep for my entire life.

---

by: PhyllisMs @ Sun Nov 11, 2007 at 22:33:10 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Why are we fighting with ourselves?

I don't quite understand why people who oppose HRC's actions in the past month in regards to ENDA have to assume that because you don't like what HRC did, then, therefore, HRC must be evil, liars, dishonest, back-stabbers, haters of the Transgendered community, and, as someone said "worse than the Bush Administration."  If we ourselves attack ourselves in this way, then we definitely don't need enemies.

 Isn't it just possible that you and HRC have a different view of strategy and tactics and that neither you nor HRC are evil?  While it's repugnant to see the less inclusive ENDA advance, if you take the assumption that passing this bill means that getting an all inclusive ENDA as legislation will happen more quickly, then supporting this ENDA version was necessarily the right thing to do.  It doesn't make those supporters evil though you can question the assumption and tactic all you want.  But let's not confuse anger and passion with analysis.

HRC has a long record of fighting for equality for all.  That is the end goal.  That is what HRC and its supporters - of which I am proudly one - all believe in, and it means all L, G, B, T, and all other people. 

 

---

by: DruidNY @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 12:39:58 PM CST

What you aren't getting

 Is that the HRC hasn't just done this once.

 

Tey've done it again, and again, and again, and Im sorry -- yeah, they *could* have been a great organization politically, and they are still a great non-political source.

But there's no trust there anymore.

THey did this *on purpose*. It was planned.

 

They *say* they are for T.

But, as Joe said the other day: judge our truth by our actions.

So we have.  And those actions have been dishonest, traitorous, and sacrifical. 

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

---

by: dyssonance @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 13:39:19 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Isn't it possible ???

There was a coalition, of some 3 hundred LGBT organizations in staunch support of the all inclusive enda. You can't see they they did just what the hell they wanted to do over the objections of all these other civil rights supporters? They not only betrayed T's, they in effect told the entire conglomerat of LGBT organizations, you don't know what your doing, we know what we're doing and we'll do whatever we want, if effect, "we don't need you".

I'd rather be a lion for one day, than a sheep for my entire life.

---

by: PhyllisMs @ Sun Nov 11, 2007 at 22:39:36 PM CST

[ Parent ]

a throught on strategy

i wasn't able to watch or listen to the proceedings yesterday, but i've read a few news reports.  what sticks out in my mind it the fact that twice (at least) the house was on its feet cheering.  once was in support of a speech barney frank gave, and the other was after the bill passed.

here is why i think this is extremely important:  some/many/most of we lgbts are focused on the division and all  the other negatives that surround this legislative episode.  however, our representatives were clearly focused very solidly one finally getting to do something positive under this administration.  and for civl rights, no less!  yes, we see this as a hollow victory.  but if we are to move forward effectively, we must understand that our representatives see this a true victory.  or at least, a first step towards true victory.  in a way i can't blame them - think of the conditions they've worked under for the past 7 years.

so, what this means going forward is this.  your rep is ecstatic right now for having had the opportunity to take an historic vote for the better.  what happens if you go into their office and pound them (figuratively) for that vote?  well, if were them, i'd be taught the lesson that lgbt will slap the hand that feeds it.  so i suggest we all show our reps strong and sincere appreciation for taking a first important step towards equality.  and then, without pause, explain in the most positive terms possible what the next step is (a re-do next year that includes us all).

hrc is a problem (don't get me started!), but if we keep the conversation on hrc, we forget that we should not let organizations do all of our advocacy for us.  we are ultimately responsible for advocating for ourselves.  if you can't stand the thought of hrc, walk away fromit in well-earned disgust, and find another org to support.  but please, don't burn too much precious energy in a negative frame of mind when that energy is needed to move forward.  vent for a while of course.  it is well deserved. but please, let's keep focused on a positive path forward.  our legislators are waiting to feel the love.

Click HERE and sign up: Campaign For Military Partners.

Lurleen on Twitter.

---

by: Lurleen @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 12:41:14 PM CST

THANK YOU!

That's exactly what I'm trying to say.

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." -- Thomas Jefferson

---

by: Daimeon @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 13:03:50 PM CST

[ Parent ]

HRC (and Gay people) Dumping Transpeople From Civil Rights Legislation

Is a consistent pattern.  As someone who has lobbied for transgender inclusion since 1998 in two states and on the national level, I have seen this behavior repeat itself too many times to count.

I personally experienced it in Texas in a situation eerily analagous to what just happened with ENDA.

In 1999 the James Byrd Hate Crimes bill was filed with language including transgender people.  The Lesbian Gay Rights Lobby head Dianne Hardy-Garcia (who was also an HRC board member)  manuevered behind the scenes to cut transpeople out of this hate crimes bill.

Bushie boy was governor at the time and stated 'If this bill hits my desk I'll sign it', but we all knew that it had to get through the Repugnican controlled Texas Senate to reach his desk.   The word was also out that since Junior was running for president next year he wanted NO controversial bills hitting his desk.

Despite TGAIN's impassioned pleas to get amended back into the bill, they were ignored and it passed the Texas House, but not after an attempt was made by conservative legislators to amend gay people out of the bill.  Renee Mullins, the daughter of James Byrd, let it be known that she would rather see the bill die than have someone cut out of it. (gee, she had more backbone and moral fiber than Dianne Hardy-Garcia and many of the GLB peeps singing the incrementalist hymnal. )

Long story shoret, the bill gets to the Texas Senate where it was killed in committee.

In the 2001 session, same verse.  Bill gets introdcued with transpeople in it, we get cut, it passed the House and Senate, and surprise, surprise Gov. Goodhair signs it.

One year later the Dems lose control of the Texas House thanks to Tom DeLay and transpeople in Texas are STILL waiting to be included in hate crimes.  In the interim there has been an increase in hate attacks on transgender peopel in the Lone Star State.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

---

by: MonicaR @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 15:08:41 PM CST

Ok, I'm out for the day.

Life intrudes -- and its going to be spent with my sisters, to whom my message of HRC and Frank's betrayal will be carried.

I leave with this last bit:

I don't think the HRC only lied to the T.

I think they lied to everyone. Multiple times, intentionally, and while maybe not malice aforethought, with the actions that speak of it.

Their little 70% survey is one of those lies, and another form of betrayl that they have become so good at.

ITs not the Dems, its not the GLB folk, its not the T folk, its not the incrementalists or the all or nothing crowd..

Its HRC and Barney Frank.

If there's a split, its on their heads, and no one else's.

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

---

by: dyssonance @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 15:38:29 PM CST

I'm sure that all of the...

...political savants around here will be able to explain why, if a T-inclusive ENDA was a slam-dunk, did Rep Baldwin withdraw here proposed amendment to HR3685.

It should be obvious that she withdrew her amendment was because it would likely have failed.  And if the amendment had passed, the amended  HR would likely have failed.

The T advocates need to do their groundwork, instead of trying to be a ball&chain for G&L rights.

---

by: raj @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 15:59:11 PM CST

Straw man.

 if a T-inclusive ENDA was a slam-dunk

Remind me, raj, who's been saying that? Names and dates, please.

---

by: anomie @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 16:08:46 PM CST

[ Parent ]

History didn't start t the ammendment

as you are well aware - there was a bill that was inclusive and that Rep. Baldwin did a vote count for which she said would pass. Looks like groundwork to me.

And of course you know that ammendments are always harder to pass - even Rep. Frank said that. And we all know that his sabotaging the inclusive bill sunk any chance of the ammendment passing.

So - don't talk to me about the groundwork  T's need to do when G's actively work against our rights. We had Barney Frank & HRC as a ball & chain. Not the other way around.

---

by: Kathleen @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 16:40:20 PM CST

[ Parent ]

How Dare You...

Even insinuate that transgender people haven't done their groundwork.   While I've only been involved on the national level since 1998, others were on the hill earlier than that.

I  have used my vacation time, taken days off work, spent my own money on  materials, put together Power Point presentations, and burned up hundreds of mna-hours traipsing back and forth through the House and Senate office buildings along with hundreds of  transpeople from around the country 'edjumacating'  staffers and congressmembers on transgender issues.

I have been part of panel discussions and strategy sessions with other GLB organizations which have done the same thing.

And who has been the biggest impediment to transgender rights inclusion?

The Homosexual Rights Corporation with a major assist from Barney Frank and his merry band of Mattachine gays.

 

 

---

by: MonicaR @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 17:37:05 PM CST

I will always consider the LGBT community united,

  Although there are some that GLB that do set me off, there are more that don't.  And that is why I could never vote for a Republican. I admit I have had my fits of rage over the ENDA mess, and I can completely connect the dots.

  A few bad apples don't ruin the whole basket. and to look at it in a positive way, the bad apples give us something to compare the good ones to. 

  As for HRC, they are a bunch of wormy apples, and the worms just got noticed, mean while some still want to eat the wormy apple, that is their choice. 

  The same goes for those that want to compare us Ts to the likes of Dobson and Falwell.  That is just plain crazy, but that is what they did.  I like keeping them on the edge of insanity.  The more they speak that we are just like Dobson, the less credible they become.

  Those that want to say that us Ts don't fight for the rest of the LGBT have been blind or don't want want to see the truth.

  The following is from my notice to relocate,

The specific reasons for the proposed relocation of the children are:  The hostile nature of the law in Florida toward transsexuals, a better educational opportunity and better job opportunities.

  Note, my case was a custody case, and Flor-DUH doesn't allow adoption to G&Ls, much less Ts. It was my lawyers plan to bring in this fact, as opposed to where I moved to, Colorado.  Job opportunities better here because Colorado just passed a trans-inclusive ENDA, and same sex partner adoption laws. (Note, my lawyer is a very nice gay open gay man) If my ex did fight against this, which she didn't on the advice of council, We were willing to make it a complete LGBT issue.  We had many supporters for this action.  You can guess why they decided not to fight us.

  Now I am a straight woman, attracted to men, so not much I could do on my side but lead her lawyer into the fact of LGBT here in Colorado can addopt kids and Flor-DUH LGBT can't as proof of the hostile laws they have in Flor-DUH.

  I will fight for all LGBT rights, and I understand that compromises happen, and inorder to get the New ENDA compromises when to far, If you look and read the new ENDA, it doesn't change much. unless you feel giving the religious nuts more than ever. it is a bad bill, one that needs to go bye bye quick, as it really wont do squat if Shrub signed it.

  I have $100.00 to donate to a LGBT group, I was thinking of Pflag unless someone has a better idea.

  But to my main point,

I am a woman that has always been a woman, with one defect, I had a penis.  what a bad joke for a woman to be born with a penis.  So call me a woman now, as the birth defect has been cured, it has become a healthy vagina, it gets wet like a vagina, allows a penis inside, and the owner of the penis couldn't tell. and we had an enjoyable orgasim together, so it functions well to.

  I am just a woman, plain and simple, just a woman that had a birth defect is all, nothing psychotic, just need them to sing a note so my body could be fixed is all.

  Daimean, Lurleen, Holly and Holly, Dyss, Pam, Blonde Pam and the rest including EE, Autumn, Kat, etc. thaks for you posts, and I hope I can call you all friends.  Thank you, The HappyCat

If I make sense? it was quite by accident.

---

by: HappyCat @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 23:45:10 PM CST

Always, HC

And gladly, sis. :D

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

---

by: dyssonance @ Thu Nov 08, 2007 at 23:57:42 PM CST

[ Parent ]