Breaking: MA Senate votes to repeal 1913 law

Great News!

---

by: Fiona @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 15:28:19 PM CDT

I can't help but feel disappointed

that my former home state votes to support the relationship rights of residents of other states before insuring the employment rights of the transgender people who actually live in Massachusetts.

This says volumes about MassEquality and their new legislative director. And about hiring a Republican for that position who used to work for HRC. If you're from Alaska & want to get married - we got your back. If you're unemployed in Massachusetts & transgender - eat shXX and die.

---

by: Kathleen @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 15:34:01 PM CDT

Yet more useless bitching and moaning

One potentially practical thing people might want to do is support the lead sponsor of trans non-discrimination legislation in the House.  He's in a very tough battle for re-election.

"Our Liberties We Prize and Our Rights We Will Maintain" -- Iowa state motto

---

by: Sportin' Life @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 15:42:38 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I already sent Carl money

and my ex (who lives in his district) volunteers for his campaign.

But thanks for assuming the worst.  

---

by: Kathleen @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 15:47:01 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Well, publicize his campaign...

...instead of filling up space with the same old "gay people hate us" ranting.

I didn't and don't assume anything at all about your participation in politics.  I was directing that part of my comment to readers who want to help but aren't sure how to do so.  It's the best idea I can come up with right at the moment.  If you have other suggestions, please share them.

"Our Liberties We Prize and Our Rights We Will Maintain" -- Iowa state motto

---

by: Sportin' Life @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 15:56:11 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Taxes & Tourism

This is passing on a fast track for one very good reason. It will bring millions in revenue into the state.

I'm disgusted with the tabling of the transgender rights bill as well, but that's hardly massequality's fault nor is it any reason not to celebrate this.

---

by: kathygnome @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 16:01:27 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I'm not saying it's not progress

And I'm happy for those people who live in other states and can marry. But I reserve the right to question the priorities of elected officials and civil rights organizations. And I stand by my conviction that one need was far greater than the other and directly effected the welfare of the citizens of that state.

====
Matt McTighe, was asked what he thought about widening Mass Equality's mission. He said:

"We feel like it would be unfair to raise the bar [this year] and say, thank you for your vote last year, but where do you stand on the transgender bill or MassHealth Equality. ... After November it's quite possible we will reassess and broaden our criteria." June 2008
==

Yes, I question their priorities. The health & basic civil rights of residents is something I rate higher than marriage rights of out of state folks. Especially when the right to marry may not provide any benefits in their home states.

Take care

---

by: Kathleen @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 16:20:09 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Did you get their survey?

After the state constitutional amendment was shot down for what will likely be the last time, MassEquality asked all of us who have supported their highly specific fight for marriage equality in MA for our opinions.

While it certainly wasn't an election, in which donors got to vote the future of the organization, they asked us what we wanted them to do with the money they raised.

They're now acting on that survey by pursuing the goals their past supporters preferred. I was the large majority that asked for continued efforts on marriage equality, to achieve national goals, before transferring the effort to other issues like school bullying, other education work, OR trans equality. You're not alone in having been left aside in favor of the stated purpose of the organization; many worthy and important pursuits were listed as options.

So you can be pissed at me for telling the organization I gave my hard-earned money to that I prefer they use that money for its intended purpose, and the purpose that was described to me when I donated.

But being pissy with them, when they have finally shown some sense of accountability to their base--unlike HRC, which just doesn't give a damn--is off base. Put the blame for their goals and actions where it belongs, on those of us who write them checks.

But wait, there's more!

---

by: PhoenixRising @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 21:23:35 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I don't disagree

but what is politically possible doesn't follow any particular person's agenda.  Still, there is a broad picture of womens' rights > gay rights > trans rights.

Trans rights do have some lag behind gay marriage.  Marriage is, however, a boat with a large wake in which much can and must follow.

---

by: amidthefallingsnow @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 23:02:40 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Getting Same-Sex Marriage is the Main Priority,

  And this is coming from a Transsexual.  Here are my reasons,

#1  The right has nothing to run on but the Gay Issue when the Economy is the big issue.

#2  Marriage Equality will put the Big Anti-LGBT organizations basically out of business. With the Economy in shambles who are they going to fleece.

#3 With Marriage Equality Winning, and inclusive ENDA would be a sure win. As in states like mine Colorado, we have LGBT enda, but that damn constitution ban.  I see all the LGBT working together to end the damn ban.  And this is where the unity will be repaired.  

If I make sense? it was quite by accident.

---

by: HappyCat @ Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 00:00:22 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

The difference is...

"Marriage Equality will put the Big Anti-LGBT organizations basically out of business."

Has it happened yet?

"As in states like mine Colorado, we have LGBT enda, but that damn constitution ban.  I see all the LGBT working together to end the damn ban."

Unlike in Colorado, in Massachusetts the T is legally unequal to the LGB.  Those LGBs whose main priority is marriage can legally have a second priority of discriminating against trans people in employment just as they do politically.

"The right has nothing to run on but the Gay Issue when the Economy is the big issue."

With the trans issue separated out - as it was and is in Massachusetts - they can and will run on that.

If we hadn't been in the Colorado ENDA to begin with, the 'next issue' would have been marriage - and Ts in Colorado would be waiting twenty years later just like Ts are in Massachusetts.

>^..^<

---

by: KatRose @ Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 06:37:39 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Untrue.

Still, there is a broad picture of womens' rights > gay rights > trans rights.

A much better description would be: womens' rights > gay rights >> trans rights ~ 0

Although this is changing, bit by bit. Also, open gay/lesbian on trans hate is on the (slow) decline. Mostly, the anti trans prejudice is maturing with open hate being replaced by more covert exclusion and marginalization.

That said, any gay rights action which does not actively benefit transfolk must be viewed with the utmost suspicion. Any pretense of "benefit of the doubt" has long been destroyed by the nontrans LGB movement.

LGBT is dead wrong. it is LGB C (LT)(GT)(BT)  C = "has as a subset" Only when every nontrans LGB gets this viscerally, will transfolk even have a shot at safety.

---

by: voz @ Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:28:51 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Oh?

"I'm disgusted with the tabling of the transgender rights bill as well, but that's hardly massequality's fault..."

Oh?

They were unable to say: 'Ya know, concentrating on gay marriage would be the easy thing to do - but what happened to trans people in Massachusetts in 1989 was bigoted and disgusting.  We're going to take a principled stand.  Goodridge be damned, trans people need to be able to work more than gays and lesbians need to be married.  Rectifying the 1989 gay-only rights law is our priority and, legislators, we want you to make that your priority'?

I s'pose that the current state of affairs regarding ENDA is "hardly" HRC's fault?

Kat

>^..^<

---

by: KatRose @ Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 06:27:33 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Now now now, Kat

Just because you want trans women to actually have a shot at survival doesn't mean Mr. and Mr Fufu should have to wait for that honeymoon on the Cape.

How dare you divide the movement by insisting that you have the right to survive when gay couples everywhere are deserving of straight male privilege. Don't you know your place?

MassEquality. Because some people are more equal than others.

{/snark}

---

by: voz @ Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:09:40 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Mittler..HA!

I still say MA was changing this to chase gay tourism dollars from CA, did they ever say this was a RACIST HATEFUL LAW put in place by a RACIST HATEFUL Governor?

"race, taste. and History finally overcome....and you ain't there"
by Tony Kushner

---

by: peteyPornpig @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 15:45:28 PM CDT

Impressive!

You must be an historian to know that much about Governor Eugene Foss (the governor in 1913 when the law was put in place).

---

by: oddjob @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 18:29:53 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I chose to leave transgender threads

Threads which haven't any transgender themes are still having trans-issue posts added.
You mention MA not having trans inclusive EDNA, but transgender people have had the right to marry, even out state transgender people could marry in MA. If they have transitioned to their goal gender, and marry someone of the opposite sex. Granted there are trans lesbians, and I assume trans gay men, (although the numbers must be infintisimal.)

"race, taste. and History finally overcome....and you ain't there"
by Tony Kushner

---

by: peteyPornpig @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 15:56:09 PM CDT

I enjoy reading and learn a lot from the threads...

...on transgender issues.  And I appreciate the diversity of perspectives within the various trans communities.  Hijacking other threads to reignite fights within the wider LGBT world is really tiresome, however.

"Our Liberties We Prize and Our Rights We Will Maintain" -- Iowa state motto

---

by: Sportin' Life @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 16:06:07 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I was willing to read tansgender themed threads until I was attacked by three posters

Now I could care less what their threads say or do. I tuned out, and turned OFF

"race, taste. and History finally overcome....and you ain't there"
by Tony Kushner

---

by: peteyPornpig @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 16:17:59 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Hmm why do you say that?

I have met a number of trans gay(or bi) men, so I can't think it's quite so rare.

---

by: onthesea @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 17:26:25 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I believe FTM are about 10% of transgenders

It's been a while since I heard there were 9 times more MTF as FTM, I think from a LOGO channel trans program.

So they are a fairly small portion of the transgender community, then using at MOST 10% of them being gay,(same as anyone else being gay.)That seems a pretty tiny pond to fish in.

"race, taste. and History finally overcome....and you ain't there"
by Tony Kushner

---

by: peteyPornpig @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 17:47:19 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

btw. after being in the gay bars for 35 years, I've never met a trans gay man

of course I've only met 2 bisexuals I didn't howl with laughter at their less than honest appraisal of who they REALLY date.

"race, taste. and History finally overcome....and you ain't there"
by Tony Kushner

---

by: peteyPornpig @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 17:52:09 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I believe

"I believe FTM are about 10% of transgenders"

Sounds like some lil' troll has been gorging at the Janice Raymond trough.

Kat

>^..^<

---

by: KatRose @ Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 06:41:25 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

No Transsexual Marriage is safe

From Kantaras vs Kantaras Appeal :

Courts in Ohio, Kansas, Texas, and New York have addressed issues involving the marriage of a postoperative transsexual person, and in all cases the courts have invalidated or refused to allow the marriage on the grounds that it violated state statutes or public policy. In the case of In re Ladrach, 32 Ohio Misc. 2d 6, 513 N.E.2d 828 (Ohio Probate 1987), the court found that a postoperative male-to-female transsexual was not permitted to marry a male. "There is no authority in Ohio for the issuance of a marriage license to consummate a marriage between a post-operative male to female transsexual person and a male person." Id. at 832.

Note that those who have have their Birth Certificates altered are unable to marry the same sex either.

There seems to be a perception amongst GLBs that transpeople have it well-off as regards marriage. Well they do, in some states, just as GLBs do, in some states. Unlike GLBs though, a malicious person cannot go venue-shopping, and have an out-of-state marriage voided, if they can come up with a cause of action.

More recently an Ohio appellate court agreed with the decision in Ladrach and affirmed a trial court's denial of a marriage license to a postoperative female-to- male transsexual and a female. See In re A Marriage License for Nash, Nos. 2002-T- 0149, 2002-T-0179, 2003 Ohio 7221, 2003 WL 23097095. Noting that "Ohio, like most states, has a clear public policy that authorizes and recognizes marriages only between members of the opposite sex," the court concluded that the term "male" as used in the marriage statute does not include a female-to-male postoperative transsexual. Id. at P32-33.
...
The Kansas Supreme Court declared a marriage void after it found that a postoperative male-to-female transsexual was not a woman. See In re Estate of Gardiner, 273 Kan. 191, 42 P.3d 120 (Kan.), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 825, 154 L. Ed. 2d 36 (2002).
...
In Littleton v. Prange, 9 S.W.3d 223 (Tex. App. 1999), the Texas court found a marriage between a man and a postoperative male-to-female transsexual void.

Shall I go on?

New York courts have also refused to recognize transsexual marriage. See Anonymous v. Anonymous, 67 Misc. 2d 982, 325 N.Y.S.2d 499 (N.Y. App. Div. 1971); Frances B. v. Mark B., 78 Misc. 2d 112, 355 N.Y.S.2d 712 (N.Y. App. Div. 1974).
...
There is one case in the United States that has permitted transsexual marriage. In M.T. v. J.T., 140 N.J. Super. 77, 355 A.2d 204 (N.J. 1976), the husband sought an annulment on the ground that his wife was a male-to-female transsexual. The New Jersey court rejected the husband's argument, upheld the validity of the marriage, and affirmed a judgment of [*16] the lower court obligating the husband to support the transsexual as his wife. 355 A.2d at 211. After considering the medical evidence, the court held that when a transsexual person has successfully undergone sex-reassignment and can fully function sexually in the reassigned sex, then the person could marry legally as a member of the sex finally indicated. Id. at 210-11.

That was in 1976. All cases since then have resulted in the marriage being anulled.

I notice exactly zero evidence of GLBT campaigns to "stop the rot" and retain what little we have.  

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

---

by: ZoeB @ Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 05:12:02 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

It should be pointed out

that the Massachusetts House of Representatives still has to vote on the repeal.  It's probably going to pass but that has been the more difficult chamber on gay rights issues.  That vote will probably take place later this week...and that's when to uncork the champagne  :-)

---

by: amidthefallingsnow @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 16:13:01 PM CDT

Assuming it passes both houses of the legislature...

Is it likely the governor will sign the repeal into law? That is when I would start celebrating.

Regardless, a strong first step is still a strong first step.

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même merde.

---

by: TechBear @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 18:28:56 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Not just likely,

that's about as close to guaranteed as can be.  He's already on the record stating that not only will he sign, but he'll do it with pride.  

Oh, and while the House has been the more difficult chamber, much of the reason for that was Speaker Finneran who has been gone for a while now (thank all that is holy).

---

by: oddjob @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 18:33:31 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Not only likely,

but pretty much guaranteed.  Patrick's already on the record stating that not only will he sign, but he'll do it with pride.  

Oh, and while the House has been the more difficult chamber much of the reason that was so was Speaker Finneran (a conservative Democrat), who has been gone for a while now (thank all that is holy).  Speaker DeMasi is in favor of the repeal.

---

by: oddjob @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 18:35:21 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

(Sorry about the double post! Feel free to delete the first one of the two.)

---

by: oddjob @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 18:36:07 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Liddy Dole proposed adding Jesse Helm's name to an AIDS funding bill

sorry for off topic post, but Pam usually covers Dole's outrageous behavior

"Sen. Elizabeth Dole (R-NC) yesterday introduced an amendment that would have added the name of Jesse Helms to the title of the HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria bill that is before the Senate. Helms, who died eleven days ago, was the nation's most vociferous foe of federal funding for HIV/AIDS programs from the epidemic's beginning until he left the Senate." [Atomic Gay Wonk]

  http://www.queerty.com/vile-ir...

Empty Wig covered with pie, and whiskers on kittens...
   http://www.backtothesugarcamp....
"these are a few of my favorite things"
   http://imeleon.com/photo/48/sl...

"race, taste. and History finally overcome....and you ain't there"
by Tony Kushner

---

by: peteyPornpig @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 17:33:11 PM CDT

Be fair

she's lost her mind in her grief over his death.

This is unbelieveable, even for the woman who IMO ruined the ARC, all to help her husband's presidential campaign.

Click HERE and sign up: Campaign For Military Partners

Click here for DADT photobook

---

by: Louise @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 17:48:59 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

good for a big laugh

insane with grief... yes, that must be it!

---

by: CathyG @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 18:57:16 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

She flipped her Liddy

Sorry... couldn't resist

---

by: voz @ Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 00:25:43 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Mass Equity

Hot diggity dog....This is good news.

Of course, as a NJ resident, I'm delighted with this change, because it raises the pressure on NJ political leaders to dispense with the current CU system and just go with marriage for all.

BTW: NJ has a funny tax rebate system called the NJ Homestead Rebate. It's supposedly to soften the blow of high property taxes, and covers both renteres (who pay these taxes indirectly) and home owners (who pay directly). THIS YEAR it includes CU as "married" in filing status, which is the equivanlent under NJ law. Last year, it did not.

So, inch by bureaucratic inch, there's progress.

---

by: brat @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 17:55:04 PM CDT

yeah, several thousand is infinitesimal

The majority of MtF are Lesbian or Bisexual with preference for women. By majority I mean in excess of 60%.

So they are excluded -- and that's not even counting the FtM population. 

So your comment is indeed off in numbers.

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

---

by: dyssonance @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 17:59:56 PM CDT

I only meant FTM gays would be a very small number

I didn't see you refute that statement about trans gay men.
MTF trans people aren't rare, even the subset who are lesbian are substantial.

"race, taste. and History finally overcome....and you ain't there"
by Tony Kushner

---

by: peteyPornpig @ Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 21:01:55 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

You are correct.

I did not refute that statistic.  But it was offered up as a question of why should we include them since they are so few in numbers?

The reason I pointed out the particulars of the MtF community was to demonstrate that when it comes to transwomen, the assumptions of percentage you relied on are way off base.

 The DSM lising for prevalence accounts for less than all the SRS surgies done in the united states at present by *the top three doctors alone*. So the prevalence estimte (number of them) is not going to be that low.

     A more accurate figure, based on the recent survey's I've done in a few cities over the last couple years is more like 30 to 40% of the total trans population.  However, that is puresly suggestive and I still have to conduct follow ups and widen it.

     In any case, the basic pint is that using statistics to determine who deserves inclusion is sorta like saying "well, there are more of us, so we matter more than you".

 And tha's not right to me, personally, no matter who its from.

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

---

by: dyssonance @ Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 02:33:07 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

This is embarrassing,

but I actually never met a straight FtM dude. All the ones I know are gay!

The company we keep...

---

by: voz @ Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:11:43 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Your figure of 30% FTM is backed up

The largest respondent group in our sample, 74% (646) identified as a male-tofemale
transvestite, transgender, transsexual or trans person, or woman with a
transsexual background and 22.6% (197) of respondents identified as a femaleto-
male transvestite, transgender, transsexual or trans person or man with
transsexual background. This gender ratio of 1:3.46 corresponds with surveys in
other European and North American states in the expected ratio of trans women
to trans men, between 1:4 (Pauly 1968) to 1:3 (Walinder 1968, 1971) (Gooren et
al. 1992) (Weitze and Osburg 1998).
  http://www.pfc.org.uk/files/En...

The show I watched on LOGO followed two UK transpeople one MTF the other FTM. perhaps the difference in statistics concern those individuals who have sexual reassignment surgery, as opposed to a broader definition of transgenders. I know they spoke of the FTM surgery as being much more difficult, and complicated.

"race, taste. and History finally overcome....and you ain't there"
by Tony Kushner

---

by: peteyPornpig @ Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:33:17 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

another source

How common is transsexualism?
The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV), Fourth edition, says the following (© 1994, American Psychiatric Assoc.):

Prevalence:
There are no recent epidemiological studies to provide data on prevalence of Gender Identity Disorder. Data from smaller countries in Europe with access to total population statistics and referrals suggest that roughly 1 per 30,000 adult males and 1 per 100,000 adult females seek sex-reassignment surgery.
Because these numbers reflect only people who have sought traditional medical treatment, they do not reflect the total numbers of people who have some experience of gender discontinuity
  http://www.tsfaq.info/tsfaqwho...

"race, taste. and History finally overcome....and you ain't there"
by Tony Kushner

---

by: peteyPornpig @ Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 10:53:27 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

That data from Scandinavia in the 60's is past it's use-by date

From Prevalence and demography of transsexualism in Belgium. (2007):

This prevalence and demographic study analyses data on all Belgian individuals who have undergone SRS since that year....
METHODS: All (188) plastic surgeons as well as all gender teams (Antwerp, Bruges, Ghent, and Liège) in Belgium were sent demographic questionnaires to be completed for each of their transsexual patients.
RESULTS: The results show an overall prevalence of 1:12,900 for male-to-female and 1:33,800 for female-to-male transsexuals in Belgium....
In the total Belgian population the male/female sex ratio is 2.43:1...

That's not transsexuality, that's people who have actually had surgery. So it's a lower bound.

From The prevalence of transsexualism in The Netherlands. (1993):

The prevalence of transsexualism in the Netherlands was estimated by counting all the subjects who were diagnosed as transsexuals by psychiatrists or psychologists and were subsequently hormonally treated and generally underwent sex-reassignment surgery. At the end of 1990, 713 Dutch-born transsexuals received treatment (507 men, 206 women). This amounts to a prevalence of 1:11,900 for male-to-female transsexualism and 1:30,400 for female-to-male transsexualism (population age 15 and above in both groups). The sex ratio was about 2.5 men to 1 woman.

From The prevalence of transsexualism in Singapore. (1988)

The prevalence of transsexualism in Singapore was estimated by counting all the patients who sought sex-reassignment surgery and were subsequently diagnosed as transsexuals by psychiatrists. Up to 1986, there were a total of 458 Singapore-born transsexuals, of which 343 were males and 115 were females. This was a prevalence of 35.2 per 100,000 population age 15 and above (or 1/2900) for male transsexualism, and 12.0 per 100,000 (or 1/8300) for female transsexualism. The sex ratio was about 3 males to 1 female.

The DSM numbers are not just bogus, they've been known to be bogus for decades.

From Transsexualism in Serbia: A Twenty-Year Follow-Up Study. (2008):

Although transsexualism is a universal phenomenon, the relatively young age of those applying for sex reassignment and the sex ratio of 1:1 distinguish the population in Serbia from others reported in the literature.

Serbia has some of the best FtoM surgeons in the world - for FtoMs it's the equivalent of Thailand for MtoFs.

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

---

by: ZoeB @ Thu Jul 17, 2008 at 00:21:42 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

And of course the point is...

that a high proportion of T folk are also LGB.

And that all too many of the lgb types forget this all too often. Usually when lgb folk who just happen to be T are around.

This shit really gets old some days.
Mass Equality has some serious issues at home, exacerbated by their fetish for ignoring the T.

---

by: voz @ Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 00:16:02 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

This shit really gets old some days.

"race, taste. and History finally overcome....and you ain't there"
by Tony Kushner

---

by: peteyPornpig @ Wed Jul 16, 2008 at 00:39:12 AM CDT

[ Parent ]