Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1
    Rookie Poster
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    26

    Default LA Times opinion article today

    I thought that this article might be of interest. I had heard about this political issue but hadn't actually appreciated it fully until I read this today.


    Fox


    http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/...opinion-center

    Civil rights for LGB . . . and T

    Democrats tried to get away with a discrimination bill that left out transgender persons. Big mistake.

    By Christine Daniels
    October 10, 2007


    The basketball expression for it is "low-bridge." It is the dirtiest foul in the sport, the act of suddenly taking out a player's legs as he or she leaps for a rebound, pass or jump shot. It's a cheap and devious move, in that it may look spontaneous but is almost always premeditated -- and almost always a prelude to a fight.

    That's what happened to the transgender community on Sept. 26. We were low-bridged. By -- of all people -- Massachusetts Rep. Barney Frank and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

    But, in a shocking upset, the transgender community picked itself up, rubbed its newly scraped elbows and fought back. Frank, Pelosi & Co. didn't know what hit them.

    The impetus for this brawl was the struggle over the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, a bill that is the proud product of some hard battles won by a unified coalition of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender activists and advocates. ENDA seeks to protect civil rights so fundamental -- and so fundamentally American -- that it seems absurd we are still haggling over this in late 2007. ENDA would make it illegal to fire or refuse to hire or promote anyone based simply on the employee's sexual orientation or gender identity.

    On paper, Frank, an openly gay Democrat, seemed the right person to lead this game plan. But as September rolled on, surveys of House members showed that ENDA did not have the votes to pass if it protected transgender people, but it did if it just covered gays and lesbians. So Frank huddled with Pelosi and other Democratic leaders and decided to play Solomon with ENDA -- only with half the wisdom. On Sept. 26, Frank announced his plan to split ENDA into two bills -- one bill protecting sexual orientation, which would get introduced immediately to Congress, and another bill protecting gender identity, which Congress would get to somewhere down the line. Maybe in a year or two. Or six or seven.

    Ordinarily, self-interest dominates everything and everyone in Washington, and it often rolls right over decency and ethics. With ENDA, congressional thinking seemed to go: "This boat is listing. We better do something! But what? We really have no stomach for this sort of fight ... so let's throw the transfolk overboard! So what if they are the minority that needs ENDA's protection the most? Nobody knows a transgender person anyway; decades of intolerance and ignorance have kept them closeted. Who'll miss them in this bill?"

    Big miscalculation. The strategy did not yield the usual we-got-ours run for safety. Lesbian, gay and bisexual activists stood alongside their trans sisters and brothers, and together we raised the roof. It was a beautiful noise, let me tell you.

    It was so much noise -- about 140 gay and trans rights groups told Pelosi in no uncertain terms that protection for the transgendered needed to stay in the bill -- that she and Frank consented to delay a House vote until later this month. In these intervening weeks, Congress and America need to hear from the transgender people who live and walk and work among them -- you're reading one now -- and listen to what Barbara Sehr of the Ingersoll Gender Center told me last week.

    "Until now, the problem has been that nobody has ever seen a trans person," Sehr said. "Before, the thinking was, 'Oh, they're just men in dresses and girls with beards. They're not worth the effort.' In their minds, this was not a civil rights issue. People saw it as a totally sexual thing, when nothing could be further from the truth. Sexual orientation has nothing to do with gender identity."

    This generation, Sehr said, has more experience with the issue because more transgender people are being public about it.

    "The same thing happened with the gay community. Twenty or 30 years ago, not that many gays were out, and people didn't realize they might be living next door to a gay person. Once people realized that the gay agenda included doing their laundry and driving their kids to school and getting their hair done, the thinking changed to, 'Hey, they're normal! They deserve civil rights.' "

    You are reading this right now, in no small part, because in 2003 California passed a state version of ENDA, the Gender Non-Discrimination Act. In early March, I scheduled a meeting with a person in our human resources department to do some exploratory research about transitioning at The Times. I was told: "Well, The Times cannot discriminate against you because California has a law in place."

    Well. That was worded somewhat more bluntly than I wanted to hear. But it also was comforting. I had protection. I could be myself, and I could continue to draw a paycheck. From those crude beginnings, I was able to work with HR and my editors on a transition strategy that enabled me to keep my job, change my byline and, as it turns out, boost my career to a new level of personal fulfillment. I now write three or four columns a week for The Times' Sports section along with two blogs, including Woman in Progress, about the experience of transitioning from male to female.

    I realize I am lucky. California is one of nine states that currently bar discrimination against transgender employees. My friend Susan Stanton did not have that kind of protection in Florida. In February, she lost her job as city manager of Largo despite a long and outstanding record of public service.

    So I have a personal and professional stake in what's happening to ENDA right now. So do you, if you care about the most basic rights being extended to a neighbor, a co-worker, a friend who might be transgender but afraid to tell anybody because a national ENDA is still but a concept being picked apart by some shortsighted political opportunists.

    Christine Daniels is a Los Angeles Times sportswriter. christine.daniels@latimes.com



  2. #2
    5 Star Poster
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    nyc. dancing. living. smiling. laughing. again.
    Posts
    2,455

    Default

    That was a beautifully written and personal piece. Thanks for posting it.

    What's happening now is exactly what happened with the Lesbian and Gay communities years ago. Yes, there are more transwomen who are in the public eye now. But we need more. And the men? Forget about it. The secrecy, shame, and internal dishonesty that thrives in our community has to end. All it does is harm us all.

    *steps off soapbox*



  3. #3
    5 Star Poster
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    2,261

    Default

    Even though she may never read this - thank you Christine for that article. For being the voice that many of us can't exercise.

    Hugs,
    TS Jamie



  4. #4
    I've done my service Platinum Poster Willie Escalade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    10,186

    Default

    Damn good article.

    I have always felt that the best person for the job should get the job...regardless of creed, color, sexual preference, or gender identity. If I had a chance to vote on this bill, I'd definitely vote yes.


    William Escalade is no more. He's done his service to the site.

  5. #5
    Junior Poster
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Somewhere, bein' somebody.
    Posts
    476

    Default

    VERY good article. I just hope that it can stir up enough support for the bill to get passed. Somehow, I just don't see it passing easily--at least, if that article is to be believed.


    While if I could go back in time and change things, God knows I would, I also realize that such a thing is impossible. So I just have to move on with my life and make sure that I come out the other side a better person. That’s all there is too it.

  6. #6
    5 Star Poster
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    2,261

    Default

    http://www.nosubstitutes.org

    PEOPLE PLEASE GO TO THIS ADDRESS AND SIGN UP WITH THEIR PETITION - THIS IS SEPARATE FROM OTHER PETITIONS.

    people committed to passing a more effective, fully inclusive ENDA isn't enough. We now need to get at least 2,000 people more to send a strong signal to Congress that America supports the original ENDA. Email www.NoSubstitutes.org onto your family and friends to make a difference!

    Hugs,
    TS Jamie
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	enda_site1_02_140.png 
Views:	627 
Size:	20.9 KB 
ID:	132597  



  7. #7
    Junior Poster
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Somewhere, bein' somebody.
    Posts
    476

    Default

    I think this deserves a hearty bump to the main page. Does anyone know what happened to this bill? Or was it sent back to committee, never to see the light of day again?


    While if I could go back in time and change things, God knows I would, I also realize that such a thing is impossible. So I just have to move on with my life and make sure that I come out the other side a better person. That’s all there is too it.

  8. #8
    5 Star Poster
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    2,261

    Default

    I agree they don't pay much attention.

    What they might pay attention to is a big ad in the Washington Post asking them to pass a transgendered inclusive ENDA - so they don't consign yet another generation of transgendered women to sex work because of job discrimination.

    <<<<<<>>>>>>>>

    Why Gay People Oppose Ed. & Labor Consideration of H.R. 3685

    301 Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender organizations have united to oppose H.R. 3685 in the House Education and Labor Committee.

    On Friday evening, House leadership announced that despite enormous opposition from the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community, they would be moving forward with a version of ENDA that only includes employment protections based on sexual orientation. The LGBT community resoundingly rejected this approach two weeks ago and rejects it still.

    Why pass a civil rights bill no civil rights organization wants?

    It would be unprecedented for Congress to pass a civil rights bill that is solidly opposed by the community it is meant to protect. Would Congress really move forward with a bill that not a single organization in the entire LGBT community has endorsed? Over three-hundred organizations, in a coalition called United ENDA, have joined to ACTIVELY OPPOSE H.R. 3685.

    Most LGBT individuals are also opposed to H.R. 3685. A survey sponsored by the Human Rights Campaign showed that 70% of the gay, lesbian and bisexual public said gender identity protections were important to include in ENDA, even if it means taking longer to pass a bill.

    Legal analysis by every LGBT legal service organization, as well as the ACLU, shows that even gay people are not sufficiently protected without gender identity protections.

    The point of including both sexual orientation and gender identity in the bill is to be sure that the entire LGBT community is protected. Carving out sexual orientation creates an artificial line that leaves out anyone—gay, transgender or even straight—who is not sufficiently masculine or feminine to match cultural stereotypes.

    Why ask less-supportive Democrats from non-supportive districts to be out on a limb for a bill that LGBT people do not want and that cannot become law this year?

    Forcing a vote on a bill that the LGBT community opposes will not be considered “a historic victory.” LGBT-supportive members of Congress are being put in an untenable position of either voting against an LGBT civil rights bill or voting for it and alienating their LGBT supporters. Some who oppose the law will have done so in support of the LGBT community; others will have done so in opposition. The resulting confusion from a vote is sure to be a lingering political blemish for Democrats.

    The H.R. 3685 strategy is already hurting efforts to pass state and local laws.

    Over the last five years, states all across the country have passed non-discrimination bills that provide protections on the basis of both sexual orientation and gender identity – and no state in that time has chosen to leave transgender people behind. Just this year alone, states as diverse as Iowa, Colorado and Oregon have passed these protections. Unfortunately, in the last two weeks, the lead Republican sponsor in Florida has abandoned his plan to introduce a unified bill and has decided to move forward instead with two separate bills, citing the “Washington strategy.” Clearly, this is a dangerous precedent that will hurt efforts to pass protections in very demonstrable ways.

    Bottom Line

    Our coalition of over 300 organizations, and the vast majority of LGBT people, support only pursuing H.R. 2015 (the original ENDA that includes transgender protections) because it is morally right and strategically smarter than pursuing a sexual orientation only bill. We know that it is unlikely that any form of ENDA is likely to pass into law this congressional session. We know our efforts now are about laying the necessary groundwork for consideration again in 2009. Voting on a non-inclusive bill this Congress will make it more difficult to procure passage of a fully-inclusive bill later.

    United ENDA’s 301 organizations urge the Education and Labor Committee to either take up H.R. 2015 or consider no bill for now, and set aside H.R. 3685 immediately.

    For more information contact

    Becky Dansky

    bdansky@...

    202-639-6315 office

    202-288-5456 mobile



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •