The Hearing

June 28, 2008

I haven’t written anything about ‘the hearing’ because I was on the road when it happened (not that I was contacted about testifying, of course; I guess those who know what’s best for us because they say they know what’s best for us don’t want someone testifying that trans people need protection from discrimination by those who know what’s best for us because they say they know what’s best for us even more than we need protection from discrimination by heterosexuals.)

Monica Roberts points out that there is apparently something else that those who know what’s best for us because they say they know what’s best for us had no interest in being visible at the hearing.

As usual, Monica’s dead on.


The World According to ENDA 3685

June 18, 2008

Pam is one of the best friends that trans people have right now, so I’m linking to the Pam’s House Blend posting about this. 

Our trans brothers and sisters are human beings. How difficult is this concept to grasp for the bigots out there? I’m sick and angered by story after story about grown adults — in this case a law enforcement officer sworn to serve and protect everyone — acting like violent brutes out of fear and ignorance. And all the while they are enabled by others who look on and do nothing. Memphis station WMC-TV has the video. You must watch it.

She’s not exaggerating. From WMC:

The video, recorded February 12th, shows Duanna Johnson in the booking area at the Shelby County Criminal Justice Center after an arrest for prostitution.   The tape clearly shows a Memphis police officer walk over to Johnson - a transsexual - and hit her in the face several times.

Now, here is a comment I added over at PHB in response to someone putting out a call to contact the Rhode Island Avenue Cesspool of Transphobia about this.

Make it clear that, if ENDA 3685 becomes law, Duanna Johnson would still be eligible to be relegated to prostitution.

Yes, under the verson of ENDA that St. Barney, Lame Crain and The John have wet dreams about, people like St. Barney, Lame Crain and The John who live in Memphis would still be free to hang signs in their windows proclaiming that transsexuals need not apply.

That means Duana Johnson - and everyone like her.

Including me.

That means that, in order to eat, Duana Johnson - ane veryone like her - could still be relegated with impunity by six-figure-salary-addled gay men to what she was alleged to have been doing on the night of February 12.

Here is another comment I made over at PHB:

From the WMC story:

 

Meanwhile, the Memphis Police Department confirmed to Action News 5 that the officer holding Johnson was on probation, and has been fired.  The officer who threw the punches is currently on non-enforcement status pending an administrative hearing.

Why should these thugs act any differently if they know that the worst that will happen to them is losing their jobs?  If Duanna Johson had fought back and killed (or, for that matter, even seriously injured) one of these wothless pieces of garbage, she’d already be convicted of capital murder and on her way to the death chamber.  Criminals with badges know that - ultimately - no civilian has any power to stop them from beating the shit out of anyone they want to any time they want to.

 

A copy of the tape was reviewed by both the FBI and the District Attorney’s office, the latter of which dropped all charges against Johnson.  An FBI investigation into possible civil rights violations is still underway.

The Bush junta’s FBI doing anything about this?  That’s as funny as the video is sad.

That is a serious aspect of this story as well.

However, when I look at that video, in addition to seeing Duanna Johnson being mercilessly beaten by criminals with badges, I see all trans people being mercilessly beaten by criminals with copies of ENDA 3685 and purple-n-yellow equal signs.


Oh No It Is Not

June 16, 2008

Even when it looks as though Queer Channel Media is critically analyzing the Rhode Island Avenue Cesspool of Transphobia, it still shills.

Kevin Naff whineth:

HRC certainly shoulders some of the blame for the painstakingly slow progress on federal gay rights legislation — a frustration I share with Sullivan — but it is overly simplistic and unfair to blame HRC alone.

No it isn’t.

Everything comes back to the Scampaign - because the Scampaign-oids have made sure that it does. They seemingly try to take credit for everything (just wait; when the cure for AIDS finally materializes, a press release will emerge from Rhode Island Avenue that will at least imply that the Scampaign had something - perhaps everything - to do with it) and they are as incapable of accepting responsibility for fuck-ups as the coke-snorting, draft-dodging treason-mongering rich brat who hangs out over on Pennsylvania Avenue.

Lets face reality: Not only are trans people worse off in 2008 than we would be had HRC never come into being, but so are the vast majority of non-trans gays, lesbians and bisexuals.  The only people who are better off are those who personally benefit financially from the Scampaign’s continued existence.

BTW - Naff was playing Alice Dreger to HRCs J. Michael Bailey over an anti-HRC piece by Andrew Sullivan, in which the ordinarily-worthless defender of rich gay male elitism reiterates his view of the Scampaign as being

a tool of the Hillary Clinton campaign. But the scale of the group’s enmeshment with the Clintons is revealed by Michael Petrelis’s research into the campaign contributions of all its major figures. The final tally? Drum roll:

Hillary Clinton:      $4,300
Chris Dodd:           $3,000
John Edwards:          $  750
Bill Richardson:      $ 500
Barack Obama:         $  0

In the end, they couldn’t even fake it. When Obama got the nomination, the news of HRC’s endorsement was made on the HRC website by a college intern! The trouble, of course, is that the fusion of gay rights with the Clinton machine - fatal to gay equality in the 1990s - has not exactly given the lobbying group much cachet with the next potential Democratic president.

Meanwhile, Solmonese’s record on Capitol Hill is, despite his breathless promises a while back, non-existent.

Naff…

It is also inaccurate to say that Solmonese’s record on the Hill is “non-existent.” In fact, the House of Representatives in November passed ENDA, marking the first time either chamber of Congress has approved a gay employment rights bill since it was first introduced 33 years ago.

And the number of statutes enacted?

Zilch.

Try again, Gnaff:

And then Sullivan pokes fun at HRC for recruiting Christian Siriano to design a T-shirt for the group, a silly gripe that undermines the seriousness of Sullivan’s concerns.

No it doesn’t. 

It highlights what the Scampaign’s real priorities are: insular acts of substanceless self-aggrandisement which ensure that money travels in every direction except those which stand any chance of benefiting any real gay, lesbian bisexual or trans person.


How Much Did It Spend to Support Trans-Inclusion in New York and Maryland?

May 22, 2008

From Out in Stockton:

The Human Rights Campaign, the nation’s largest gay, lesbian, bisexual, and [Kat's comment here: cough, cough] transgender civil rights organization, today pledged an initial contribution of $500,000 to Equality for All to protect marriage equality in California by defeating a proposed constitutional amendment that could possibly be on the November general election ballot in California.

And how much did the Rhode Island Avenue Cesspool of Transphobia spend to ‘educate’ about trans-inclusion in ENDA?

Five….what?

Cents?

I’d be surprised it it was that much.


In Anticipation of Matthew Shepard + 10

May 14, 2008

[Cross-posted at Pam's House Blend]

I know there are a lot of hate-crime-statute addicts out there and my opinion of the usefulness of such statutes doesn’t exactly endear me to them.

OKay - lets stick to something we do have in common: hatred of laws (and those who create such laws) that allow gays and lesbians to discriminate against trans people.

Its still a few months off, but in October we’ll all be inundated (and not unjustifiably so) with ten-year remembrances of the disgusting murder of Matthew Shepard.

For some reason, I’m guessing that the following won’t be amonst the officially-consecrated corporate gay remembrances:

18-year-old Transvestite Stabbed, Beaten

 

An 18-year-old male, dressed as a woman, was stabbed late October 13 on South Park Street, just hours after a rally/vigil was held on the Capitol steps at State Street in memory of the murdered college student in Laramie, Wyoming. Madison officials originally considered adding Wisconsin’s Hate Crime enhancement charge onto the charge against the perpetrator, but backed off after carefully studying the law, and realizing “it didn’t cover cross-dressing.”

Johnny Louis Ellis, 43, was tentatively charged with aggravated battery while armed with a dangerous weapon. He was also accused of bail jumping because he was out of jail on bail on a domestic battery case. Ellis said to the victim, “I know what you are - you’re a man.”

Police say Ellis’ comments don’t show he “picked his victim because he thought he was Gay.” Police Office Dave Gouran was quoted in the Wisconsin State Journal saying, “You can be a cross-dresser without being Gay and the (hate crime) statute doesn’t speci fy cross-dressers.”

That was from a news item in the October 22, 1998 issue of WI Light.

Wisconsin law did not (and still does not) cover trans people - even though it does cover gays and lesbians.

I usually point this out in the context of general anti-discrimination laws (i.e., in a jurisdiction such as Wisconsin, the person doing the discriminating against the trans person easily could be GLB - after all, why should we trust those who will pass laws excluding us not to take advantage of that exclusion to avoid having to work with us), but it works here as well.

How do we know that Ellis - the assaulter - was not gay?

Does it matter?

Well, as a legal matter…NO!

With no trans-inclusion in the law, there’s no hate-crime enhancement standing, allegedly, as a disincentive to such assaults.  Translation: its open season against trans people by everyone else, GLBs as well as straights (genuine as well as those who claim to be so.)

But, think about what the situation would have been if the 18-year-old had been accused of assaulting Ellis - with the accusation specifying that the assault was because of Ellis’ sexual orientation - whatever that may happen to be, though, for purposes of this example, let’s assume its not hetero.

The 18-year-old gets tagged with not only the assault charge but also a hate-crime enhancement.

I know, with this I’m making the religionists’ case against hate crime laws.

So be it.

But I also just made the case for trans-inclusion in employment anti-discrimination laws - such as Wisconsin’s, which, in 1998 had been gay only for 16 years and, in 2008, has been gay-only for 26 years.  After all, some people do their discriminatin’ with their fists (or beer bottles, etc.) and some people do it with their power to exclude certain other people from being able to participate in the United States economy.

I don’t trust either group of people.

That means you, christianists.

And that means you too, HRC-oids.


OK, If Barney Equals Bullshit, Then HRC Equals………?

May 10, 2008

From Queer Channel Media, some analysis of Verizon’s BOD’d decision to be not-so-equality-minded in the area of trans folk:

Verizon’s gay resource group, GLOBE, supports the board’s decision

However, on the Human Rights Campaign’s blog (remember, the organization has come under a lot of criticism and protest for support a non-inclusive ENDA), they have a different take on the ruling, which a headline that says: “Despite setback, Verizon shareholders begin process of adding transgender employment protections.”

A proposed measure that maybe had enough support to get a vote next year is NOT progress, HRC!

Ya think?

Of course, seeing something in QCM acknowledging gay hypocrisy is a bit o’ progress - more than the Rhode Island Avenue Cesspool of Transphobia has ever even attempted.


If Its Barney, Its Bullshit

May 9, 2008

From an interview with St. Barney in the May 2, 2008 edition of Just Out:

SMB: You took a lot of heat for your work on ENDA.

 

BF: Not much. The overwhelming majority of opinion in the gay and lesbian community was supportive of what we did.

Is it mandadory for politicians to lie with every breath?  Or does St. Barney really believe this?

Now, if his answer to that question makes you want to sell the Fourth District of Massachusetts to Uruguay just to take it (and its rep) out of the congressional mix, I don’t want to speculate about what  the next question’s answer will inspire you to want to do:

SMB: If you had to go through the process again, would you change anything in your approach?

 

BF: No. I  understand the problem of having [transgender protections] put in the bill and taking it out. It would have been better not to have put it in the bill in the first place and to have two separate bills in the beginning…. Unfortunately, people in the trans community and their allies didn’t want to accept reality. 

And by the way, in terms of accepting reality, there are now three states which have nondiscrimination laws without trans coverage, where the issue has come up, and in none of them has the effort been successful to include it: Massachusetts, New York and Maryland. So we say to people if we can’t win on an issue in Massachusetts, New York and Maryland, why do you think [you’ll win] once you bring in Nebraska, Mississippi and Utah?

Barney, did you always lack the ability to consruct a logical argument?  Or, did you once have such ability and trade it for…Steven Gobie’s phone number?  I do hope it was something worthwhile.

Think about the following:

  1. Members of Congress votes on the federal ENDA, not the the legislators from the 50 states.
  2. There are other states besides New York, Massachusetts and Maryland - and they have representatives in Congress.
  3. Just as there were Congresspeople from New York and Massachusetts who were inclined to support federal gay rights before the legislature of either state was inclined to enact a gay rights law, it is certainly conceivable that some of the Democratic congresspeople from those states might be more inclined to consider federal trans-inclusion than their state-level counterparts are now.
  4. More of those states that have gay rights laws have trans-inclusive laws than have gay-only ones.
  5. If you’re going to talk about what the state legislatures are willing to do and not do, lets consider that the legislatures of Nebraska and Utah - as well as Maryland and Massachusetts - have enacted legislation recognizing the legitimacy of transsexualism.

But, taking all of that into consideration would mean that you might have had to construct an intellectually honest explanation for your transphobia.

Meaning, of course, you’d have to give up on passing your objections off as having any political basis and just flat out admit that you’re a male Janice Raymond.  You just don’t like trans people.  Period.

And, if he’d just go ahead and say that, he wouldn’t have to try to pass this crap off:

SMB: In an open letter you posted on the news Web site The Bilerico Project, you write that “there is more resistance to protection for people who are transgender than for people who are gay, lesbian and bisexual” and that the transgender community’s quest for equality is “a fairly recent addition to the fight” and “faces a steeper climb.” Has it been an historic mistake to include transgender people as part of the gay and lesbian rights movement?

 

BF: No. No more than I thought it was for people writing the equal rights amendment not to include us.

 

By the way…in the ’70s, as a member of the Massachusetts Legislature, I  campaigned hard for an amendment to the Massachusetts Constitution which protected people against gender discrimination, and people said, “Let’s include gays and lesbians,” and we said, “No, because it would lose that way.”

 

Once again, he’s saying we are where gays were in 1975.  Sorry Barn, that turd still don’t float.

Was it a mistake not to push for gay rights in the ’50s and ’60s? No, it just hadn’t occurred to people. 

Well, trans people pushed for recognition of our existence in several states back then - and succeeded. 

Where were you?

Oh…I think that would be the closet, right?

Movements take time. There was not a lot of self-awareness of people being transgender in the ’80s and ’90s. You can’t artificially create these things; they come up. The transgender community organized and came forward, but it’s only been less than 10 years.   

And you can’t take advantage of a tragedy that you yourself cause.  We were expelled from the gay movement by 1973.  With your position, you have stepped into their shoes.  You are the successor in interest to those early transphobes who ensured that there would be nothing ‘organized’ until (your time perception, not mine) less than 10 years ago.  You caused this problem.  You cannot now be heard to say it was something you had no control over and no responsibility for.

 

 

I filed a gay rights bill in 1972, and none of us at the time in the Massachusetts House, we did not say, “Oh, we’re gonna do gays and lesbians and bisexuals but not transgenders.” Nobody brought up transgender. The people who were transgender weren’t yet at the stage of self-awareness or self-assertion that we could do it.

Oh really?????????????

You were in the Massachusetts Legislature until your election to Congress in 1980.  There were other gay rights bills in Massachusetts between 1972 and 1980.

Here’s something else that popped up in Massachusetts between 1972 and 1980.

May 28, 1975

The Honorable Paul Guzzi
Secretary of the Commonwealth
State House
Boston, Massachusetts 02133
Dear Secretary Guzzi:On May 7, 1975, you requested an Opinion of the Attorney General concerning amending the birth records of transsexuals pursuant to Chapter 46, section 13 of the General Laws. Specifically you wanted to know:a) whether town clerks and registers of vital statistics are required under Chapter 46, section 13 of the General Laws to correct facts not correctly stated in the birth records of a person who has been granted a legal name change and who has completed surgical sex reassignment upon proof beyond a reasonable doubt of those facts as required by Chapter 46, section 13 ; and 

b) what proof is relevant to establishing the correctness of facts respecting a person’s sex and name.

With regard to the first of these questions, I am of the opinion that, in certain circumstances, town clerks and registers of vital statistics are required to correct facts, as to sex and name, in the birth records of post-operative transsexuals.

That’s a portion of an official opinion from Massachusetts’ then-Attorney General, Francis X. Bellotti.

I wonder…

Was there any opinion at that point from any official of the state that accepted any aspecy of gay life to that degree?

Yah…

I didn’t think so.

And, its not as if the issue of transphobia within the gay community did not appear in gay publications in Massachusetts during your time at the State House.  (For my readers, do some research on Gay Community News, a woman named Margo Schulter and the now-disused phrase “transsexophobia.”)

 

 

Part of the problem, I  have to say, is this: I’ve never seen a worse job of lobbying done by the transgender community. They seem to think that all they had to do was to get the gay and lesbian community to say “OK.” I  think they thought that this was a train, and that they were a car on the train. I  said to them, “You’ve got to work this, you’ve got to lobby people.” They did a terrible job of lobbying, and so we didn’t have the votes.

Send that paragraph in to your favorite ‘educators’ over at the Rhode Island Avenue Cesspool of Transphobia - along with a question: What the fuck have you people been doing since you first started claiming that you were doing ‘educating’ on trans issues?


Solmonese: Oops! My bad! Slip of the tongue!

May 7, 2008

From Southern Voice’s blog:

HRC president apologizes for ‘misspeaking’ at transgender conference
Solmonese talks with Atlanta activists in private meeting
By DYANA BAGBY, Southern Voice | May 6, 7:37 PM

Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese met with a handful of transgender activists in Atlanta last week and apologized for “misspeaking” at last year’s Southern Comfort conference, where he promised HRC would only support an Employment Non-Discrimination Act that included gender identity, according to people attending the meeting.

Southern Voice was not allowed to attend the meeting, held May 1 at the Atlanta home of Charlie Frew, a member of HRC’s national board of governors.

Solmonese met for more than two hours with Atlanta transgender rights activists Tracee McDaniel, founder of the Juxtaposed Center for Transformation; JCT board member and attorney Jamie Roberts; Dee Dee Chamblee, executive director of Lagender; Sir Jesse McNulty, educator and member of the Feminist Outlawz; and Shelley Emerson, a former HRC Federal Club member.

Roberts said Solmonese apologized for “misspeaking” at last year’s Southern Comfort Conference, where he promised HRC would only support an ENDA that included gender identity. Southern Comfort, the largest transgender conference in the nation, is held annually in Atlanta.

“He did apologize for misspeaking at Southern Comfort. But I think there was a lot of anger, disappointment and a lot of emotions for a lot of people,” Roberts said of HRC’s support of the sexual-orientation only ENDA. “It was very dehumanizing.”

After years of covering just “sexual orientation,” ENDA was introduced in the U.S. House last year with “gender identity” as well. But the category was dropped when the bill’s main backer, openly gay U.S. Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), said there were not enough votes to pass the broader measure. The U.S. House approved ENDA with just sexual orientation in November 2007; the Senate hasn’t voted.

HRC supports including gender identity in ENDA, but urged Congress members to vote in favor of Frank’s sexual orientation-only bill as an incremental strategy.

“I appreciated the opportunity to sit down with a few leaders of the Atlanta transgender community last week to discuss ways that we can move toward a fully inclusive ENDA together,” Solmonese said in a statement.  “I believe this open line of communication allowed all of us to gain a greater understanding of each other’s perspectives and underscored the fact that we share the common goal of equality for all members of our community.”

Charlie Frew, who helped organize the meeting with McDaniel, said Solmonese talked about what was said at Southern Comfort.

“He addressed that right off the bat. He said he understands and felt the pain,” Frew said.

“We all thought the bill would never be picked apart in committee. We always thought it would be inclusive,” he said.

McDaniel said she accepted Solmonese’s apology.

“Basically Joe apologized for what was said at Southern Comfort. It takes a lot for someone to apologize. I personally can’t speak for the whole community, but I accepted the apology although I think it needs to be done to the broader community,” McDaniel said.

“I think it was a productive meeting that should have happened when this fiasco began. But he did make the effort to address what was said at Southern Comfort,” she added.

McDaniel said she will also remain supportive of HRC because helping the transgender community “is bigger than myself and HRC.”

“They are doing the work, but actions speak louder than words,” she said.

Apology enough?

Frew said much of the meeting focused on how a bill becomes law, all the different twists and turns it can take in committees, and how HRC plays a role.

“Everyone expressed their feelings and told Joe what they went through and had the chance to ask questions. I think Joe did a great job of responding and he cleared up a lot of things and the sequence of events [the bill went through],” Frew said.

McNulty, however, said Solmonese’s apology wasn’t truly enough.

“He apologized for the ‘misspeak’, but never apologized for the action,” he said. “His rationale is that the vote was necessary and is still a victory.”

“They’re called the Human Rights Campaign, and that’s more than just gays and lesbians,” he said. “Butch lesbians and feminine men face the same discrimination we do. It’s not OK what they did.”

Roberts said she was glad HRC wanted to meet with Atlanta transgender activists and also praised the work HRC has done educating people on transgender issues, especially through its Corporate Equality Index. Today, companies can only score 100 percent on the index if they include gender identity in their non-discrimination statements.

HRC also recently published “Transgender Inclusion in the Workplace,” a guide for employers on issues including appropriate terminology surrounding gender identity and expression, creating policies to protect transgender workers from discrimination and expanding diversity programs to include gender identity and expression.

“At least they’re concerned enough to meet with us,” she said. “And I give [Joe] credit for that.”

But Roberts, who participated in the recent Trans Lobby Day in Washington, D.C., said the transgender community will not stop until it gets a favorable bill for Congress to vote on.

“It looks like [HRC] is working toward [a trans-inclusive bill] for 2011, assuming a friendly Democrat got into the White House,” she said. “I’m just adopting a wait-and-see attitude to see how serious they are about including gender identity in the bill.”

Frew said HRC plans to sponsor a job fair in Atlanta for transgender people sometime in the future and believes an inclusive bill will be passed.

“This is hard work,” he said, “but I’m optimistic we will end up in the right place with an inclusive bill.”

Discussion of the meeting will also take place tonight on Alternative Perspectives, a queer radio show on 89.3 WRFG FM, that airs from 7 p.m. to 8 p.m.


My, My. Isn’t This Conveeeeeeeeeeeeeeenient?

May 5, 2008

From Lynn Conway:

American Psychiatric Association Press Release (of 5-01-08): “APA Names DSM-V Work Group Members - Experts to Revise Manual for Diagnosis of Mental Disorders”.    Ken Zucker, who heads a reparatist clinic for gender-variant youth in Toronto, was named as Chair of the Sexual and Gender Identity Disorders Work Group for DSM Revision. Ray Blanchard, widely known for pronouncing that transitioned women are “men without penises”, was appointed as a member of that Work Group. Any bets on how this is going to turn out?

I’m putting two loonies on the Blanchard-Zucker-Lawrence-Bailey-Dreger loonies managing to completely de-legitimize our existence.

Of course, I can rest easy knowing that our good friends at HRC, who are so knowledgable about our issues because they tell us so, will expend as much time and money on combatting this as they do on promoting Cyndi Lauper.

Or not.


Yet Another Reason to Barf at the Sight of the Scampaign’s Purple-n-Yellow Lie, err…, Equal Sign

April 29, 2008

And it has nothing to do with ENDA!!!

In the gay political universe HRC doesn’t only stand for the candidate working with John McCain to tear down the Democrat McCain will face in November. It also stands for something far more loathsome and treacherous than Hillary, the Human Rights Campaign. HRC is an Inside the Beltway kiss ass advocacy group for gay people.

When it comes to electoral politics, you can almost always expect the worst from HRC.

This past February their in house magazine prominently featured Republican rubber stamp and fake moderate Susan Collins (R-ME), including a 2 page spread giving the false impression that Collins is not the enemy of gay people.

Today HRC announced its endorsements for Senate races around the country. They are asking the gay community to donate money to 10 cash-rich incumbents and four Democratic challengers, Jeanne Shaheen (DLC-NH), Mark Udall (D-CO), Tom Udall (D-NM), and Al Franken (D-MN). Among the incumbents is Collins, of course, who is running against a Democratic congressman, Tom Allen, who’s voting record on gay issues is excellent and who is a true friend of the gay community and someone who, again, unlike Collins, will never ever, vote to confirm rabid homophobic judges.

Did the Scampaign learn nothing from endorsing Al D’Amato ten years ago?

Oh…

Silly me…

What have they ever learned about anything other than how to line their pockets with money that could be going to affect real change?