10/01/2007
House Postpones Action on Non-Transgender ENDA
According to a press release from the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force, "Tomorrow’s scheduled House committee action on a version of employment non-discrimination legislation without protections for transgender people has been postponed. A statement from Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Chairman Miller, Representative Frank and Rep. Baldwin said this would 'allow proponents of the legislation to continue their discussions with Members in the interest of passing the broadest possible bill.'"
NGLTF Executive Director Matt Foreman added: "Today's announced postponement of the scheduled House mark-up on the transgender-stripped Employment Non-Discrimination Act takes us in a positive direction. In this defining and morally transformative moment, our community has come together in an unprecedented way and said once and for all that we will leave no part of our community behind. We appreciate that a decision has been made to slow down this process, and we look forward to working with Congress over the upcoming weeks to educate them as to why this substitute bill strategy is seriously flawed, convince them to abandon this strategy, and instead advance a fully inclusive ENDA later this month."
Also, according to the NGLTF, a letter signed by 90 national and state LGBT organizations was sent to Congress today urging them to reject legislation that excludes transgender people.
There is also a petition online urging Congress to pass ENDA as it was originally envisioned, with all LGBT people included.
you may have missed...
Trans Inclusion Cut from ENDA After Vote Reveals Lack of Support [tr]
Posted 7:44 PM EST by Andy Towle in Discrimination, Gay Rights, News | Permalink
Like it?
Subscribe to FREE Towleroad daily headlines with our RSS feed!
RECENT STORIES:
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
When the horrible happens and we lose the majority in '08, thanks for cutting off our nose to spite our face! Brilliant maneuvering! Way to snatch a defeat from the jaws of victory!
Posted by: nycredneck | Oct 1, 2007 7:54:24 PM
Tranny, tranny, tranny get your adverbs here.
Posted by: Becks07 | Oct 1, 2007 8:08:29 PM
Amen NYCRN! Being Gay/Lesbian and being an individual with gender identity issues have nothing to do with one another - apples and oranges...
Posted by: TNBlueDogDem | Oct 1, 2007 8:12:31 PM
" Being Gay/Lesbian and being an individual with gender identity issues have nothing to do with one another - apples and oranges"
Except when you've been fired because of your gender expression (ie. being too butch if you're a woman, or too nelly if you're man). Gender identity/gender expression doesn't just protect transgender people.
Posted by: Eve1973 | Oct 1, 2007 8:23:05 PM
EVE, if you actually read the passage that you lifted from my post, you will discover that I did not mention gender expression. Not once. But since you brought it up, gender expression and gender identity fall into the apple and orange cart as well. And furthermore, if one cannot keep from 'queening-out' at work then one's professionalism is in question and I am not so sure that all of us should go down on that little pink ship...
Posted by: TNBlueDogDem | Oct 1, 2007 8:41:14 PM
And all the crap they toss around about Dems not being able to get anything done in Washington is proven, yet again. What idiots. Even with the majority Dems are losers. I can't believe my choices are limited to these idiots, since the Repugs are no choice at all.
Posted by: Gregg | Oct 1, 2007 10:40:32 PM
Wow such anti-trans bias here.
It was members of the trans community who were the leaders at Stonewall, and who started the fight for every right we have now.
This is the very least that can be done in return.
Posted by: Patrick M | Oct 1, 2007 10:45:01 PM
Wow such anti-trans bias here.
It was members of the trans community who were the leaders at Stonewall, and who started the fight for every right we have now.
This is the very least that can be done in return.
Posted by: Patrick M | Oct 1, 2007 10:45:16 PM
as a gay man, I want to say that I fully support including trans people as part of ENDA, because if there is anyone in OUR community who needs ENDA, it's trans people. The Transgender Law Center compiled these statistics on the issue of employment for trans people:
Nearly 60% respondents earn under $15,300 annually
only 8% earn over $45,900
Only 25% are working full-time
16% are working part-time
Nearly 9% have no source of income
Over 57% percent report experiencing employment discrimination, but only a little over 12% have filed an administrative or civil complaint as a result.
I've never encountered an employment issue for being gay in my 40 year life, but trans people deal with employment discrimination every day. So while I think it's a great thing to make sure gays and lesbians are protected from discrimination, in this area especially, the group that desperately needs this law is transgender people.
Have a heart people - don't just look out for your own civil rights, but look out for your sisters and brothers too.
Posted by: SFNathan | Oct 1, 2007 11:11:41 PM
"It was members of the trans community who were the leaders at Stonewall"
I have read at least, that this is actually a myth; the Stonewall Inn was a "conservative" gay bar, they didn't admit trannies.
As for income stats of transsexuals, perhaps you're inverting causation? Just a thought.
And yay for "leaders" of the gay community shooting us all in the foot. This is the most important politically feasible piece of federal legislation and they throw it away for PC bullshit.
Posted by: Steve | Oct 1, 2007 11:41:56 PM
I of course support trans rights. But that is no reason to NOT pass ENDA without trans inclusion. One does not equal the other. If gay people get rights, doesn't that move trans rights FORWARD? How does "no rights for anyone" help any of us?
Cries of "anti-trans bias" is just crying wolf.
Posted by: Gregg | Oct 1, 2007 11:55:22 PM
I'm not convinced that keeping transgender people included in ENDA will kill the bill. Barney Frank has had some of the worst political advice over the years (we can thank him for "Don't Ask Don't Tell, for instance...).
The opponents of gay rights will use transphobic arguments against ENDA, regardless of if ENDA include trans people or not. Every time they want to go after gay rights, they try to vilify gay people in every way they can. Excluding Transgender people isn't going to win over any opponents of ENDA. It's just going to leave one part of our community out of having civil rights.
You people who are such whiners for your own rights but care so little for other people's rights seem like hypocrites to me. How could you be so concerned about losing an opportunity for your own civil rights, but than be so completely callous towards the rights of other people? It's like your attitude is just "gimme mine and the rest can get theirs later".
As far as I'm concerned, I don't deserve civil rights for myself unless I'm willing to stand up for other people's rights too. This isn't just about me as a gay man - it's about all of us who face discrimination.
I'm sorry, but it's really selfish to say that we should leave transgender people behind when we have the opportunity to stand up for all of our rights.
Posted by: SFNathan | Oct 2, 2007 1:37:38 AM
"As for income stats of transsexuals, perhaps you're inverting causation? Just a thought."
That's the type of thing that homophobes say about gays who lose their jobs due to homophobia... It was their own fault.
Look in the mirror much?
Posted by: Puck | Oct 2, 2007 1:54:20 AM
The Stonewall a "conservative" gay bar? You're kidding, right? It was full of lower class, disproportionately black and Latino gender-benders. Of course there were surely "straight-laced" gays there too, but I don't think that that was really their main clientele.
Posted by: Lia | Oct 2, 2007 3:05:25 AM
I agree, gender identity has nothing to do with sexuality, however I believe transgender people deserve the same rights as anyone else. I think it really should be covered under gender discrimination (like it is here in the UK).
Depending on your definition, being gay, bisexual or a lesbian is a type of transgender. By loving someone of the same sex you are standing outside of your prescribed gender role. Ultimately our fight is all about gender. The right to be and love any gender you choose.
Sean
Posted by: Sean Green | Oct 2, 2007 4:47:46 AM
Great - so we are all screwed now. Did it ever occur to any of you ignorant assholes that ENDA could be amended to include trans issues ONCE IT WAS ENACTED?!?!? Once more, PC bullshit has nailed us with no lube.
Legend has it that it was a group of drag queens at Stonewall - doesn't equate to being born in the wrong body.
Sexual orientation is not TRANS GENDER. I am a man, I know I am a man, I have no desire to be a woman. However, my ORIENTATION is to love another man.
Puck - calling a gay man a homophobe for expressing a logical opinion is just f-cked up.
Posted by: shane | Oct 2, 2007 8:07:39 AM
I agree this is stupid to delay. I don't know any trans folks and I wish them all the best but the cutting off our nose to spite our face comment is so fitting.
This is why gay & lesbian individuals will always struggle for equality rights - some of the most vocal activists have a childish "all or nothing" mentality that every single derivation of the community must be included in everything ... so we often get nothing.
I also agree with the post above - I am a man .. attacted to men ... I have no gender expression issues nor do any of the many, many gay & lesbian folks I know.
Of course both my partner and I work for Fortune 100 companies with DP benefits and non-discrimination policies ... so good luck folks! Nice work!
Posted by: ATLSteve | Oct 2, 2007 9:25:48 AM
http://www.indegayforum.org/news/show/26644.html
"But one thing is clear. It is wrong to characterize the Stonewall Inn as having been a sanctuary for genderqueers (unless that term encompasses non-transgendered gay men). Murray writes that "men familiar with the milieu then insist that the Stonewall clientele was middle-class white men and that very few drag queens or dykes or nonwhites were ever allowed admittance."
But don't take Murray's word for it, consider what Sylvia Rivera herself told the historian Eric Marcus for his book, Making History: "The Stonewall wasn't a bar for drag queens. Everybody keeps saying it was. ... If you were a drag queen, you could get into the Stonewall if they knew you. And only a certain number of drag queens were allowed into the Stonewall at that time." The night of the Stonewall riot was the first time Rivera had ever even been to the bar."
Posted by: Steve | Oct 2, 2007 10:07:58 AM
This AINT just an issue of transsexuals and transgendered people. Maybe most of you think you can pass some kind of "masculinity test", but I got news for you. Once your co-workers find out that you are gay there are always those that are going to challenge that view you have of yourselves. To many homophobes the very fact that you are gay is a rejection of your "manhood". And God forbide they find out with all your attempts at "manliness" you like taking dingdong up your butt. To most homophobic gay-haters that act is the epitomy of un-manliness.
Funny thing is I'm not even passionate about including transgender folks in a federal law--it's too damn hard to get idiot yahoos in Congress to even think about transfolk as being human beings. Transpeople should concentrate on local legistlation, and even then it's only in big cities that are also LIBERAL with liberal black mayors (couldn't resist that, hee hee)that you are going to get anti-discrimination ordinances with included transgendered people.
But again, you "mainstream" gay guys kill me with you belief that you're so traditionally masculine that you are "unclockable". Yeah, if you're nerdy like Senator Craig, then you can "pass". That damn Matt Sanches doesn't even "pass" once you watch him for a while and hear that semi-manly GAY voice.
Posted by: Derrick from Phily | Oct 2, 2007 10:20:26 AM
wow, I was expecting everyone here to be HAPPY about this.
I thought most people here stood for EQUALITY.
I guess you only want equality for yourself, and not everyone.... sounds a lot like the people most of us criticize.
Posted by: gabriel | Oct 2, 2007 10:23:54 AM
That damned homophobic, transphobic Martin Luther King Jr. All he cared about was securing his own rights. Didn't give a damn about his LGBT brothers and sisters.
Posted by: 24play | Oct 2, 2007 10:39:37 AM
Why can't the trannies get their own lobbyists and get their own damn rights?
Why do they need to glom on to the gays? Go hook up with illegal aliens or ANY other group.
Trannies are not always gay, so there is NO need for them to lay their shit on us!
Posted by: dc-20008 | Oct 2, 2007 10:40:33 AM
Because of the strong comments, I assume that those persons who are in favor of ENDA without gender identity inclusion work with their national and state organizations as part of their advocacy and lobbying efforts. I assume then that you are active in your community registering LGB and T persons to vote. I assume that you have a relationship with your US Representative, US Senator, State Represenstative, and State Sentator. I assume that you talk about LGBT and/or T issues with them and encourage them to support nondiscrimination laws and policies. I assume that because of your passionate position that you are actively working everyday to make equality happen. Maybe not. Please become informed and become educated. First of all, if you think ENDA was going to become law with the President signing it in any form, then I assume you must have some inside White House information. If you think that that it is easy to add gender identity later, then please let us know why that is not the case in most states. History is replete with examples of holding out to include everyone to make sure that laws are inclusive. Yes, in many states - communities of color waited on hate crime legislation until LGB and/or T were included. What relationship did they have with one another? Um....principles of equality I guess. I encourage you to work with your national organizations and state organizations to become more involved and become informed so that your voice can be constructively heard. We need your passion but not from the sidelines.
Posted by: Paul | Oct 2, 2007 10:45:08 AM
Progress, in the realm of civil rights, has always happened incrementally.
There is a difference between activism and politics. Activists refuse to compromise out of principle and thus, want everything now... even if that means that they are willing to sacrifice the chance of actually passing a bill banning discrimination based on sexual orientation. Unless ENDA contains gender identity, activists would rather not let it pass, even if it means that thousands of people are fired for being gay in the process. Which they will be partially responsible for.
People who work in politics may seem less passionate and principled, but focus on getting results and getting bills passed. Sometimes the bills aren't perfect, but people in politics understand that a step in the right direction gets a person closer to the final destination than refusing to budge.
It is disgusting that gay activist organizations are bragging about blocking a vote on ENDA when they should be pushing for it. It's not a perfect bill, but it could actually pass!
I am completely against discrimination against transgendered people, but I agree with some of the posts above. Being transgendered has nothing to do with being gay or lesbian, and including it in ENDA makes the bill a lot more complicated because issues of insurance and all of that will come up. I urge transgendered people and their allies to work at the local level in their own communities to pass laws like those in places like Key West, that ban discrimination based on gender identity.
Hopefully we will live in an ideal world someday, but if we stop any progress because we want everything at once, we'll never come close to getting there.
Posted by: Ian | Oct 2, 2007 10:51:02 AM
Paul, I don't know what the state-by-state score is for hate crimes laws, but I do know there are 31 states today where it is perfectly legal for a person to lose a job based on their sexual orientation (and no doubt many more where gender identity is not a protected class). I believe employment discrimination based on race is illegal in all 50 states.
So, while there have no doubt been some shining examples of communities of color waiting on protections until GLBT protections are enacted, that seems to be exception—perhaps because communities of color understand better than anyone that winning civil rights is a process.
There are principles of equality and then there are strategies for winning it.
Posted by: 24play | Oct 2, 2007 11:01:07 AM