I hate it when a member of the LGBT community, known to have engaged in anti-trans inclusion in ENDA activities in the past, speaks about the removal of perceived gender/gender identity and expression/transgender people as if she is a voice of reason. Given that model, Winnie Stachelberg should absolutely in no way be considered a voice of reason on transgender inclusion in ENDA.

She recently wrote a piece for The Center For American Progress entitled One Inch at a Time, where she argues:

…The House bill is not as inclusive as policies in many major companies and a growing number of states. But history may inform us that while passing legislation that only prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation may not be the perfect strategy, it may hasten, and be a critical predicate for, legislation that protects the entire LGBT community over time.

…And the transgender community isn’t the only group that will likely be left out of this narrower version of the legislation, including employees of small businesses, employees of religious institutions, and gay and lesbian individuals in the armed forces. But this bill was built on compromise; it was never intended to be the whole package, and should therefore be seen as a first step.

This kind of discrimination is wrong and has no place in our country. None. And it is wrong to fire someone because of their sexual orientation or gender identity. But right now the votes to pass an inclusive bill are just not there.

…Promoting a firm understanding of the need for legislation is the critical first step toward moving legislation through Congress. Groups have also begun educating Congress and the public in recent years about the need to protect the transgender community, and these efforts must continue with increased vigor. Going forward, we need to harness the energy of all of our progressive allies and redouble our collective efforts to educate policy makers and the rest of America on the importance of protecting the entire LGBT community from bias and harm.

…Since the first introduction of LGBT non-discrimination legislation in Congress by Rep. Bella Abzug (D-NY) in the 1970s, a tremendous amount of effort and time have been spent educating federal policy makers about the need to protect gay, lesbian, and bisexual Americans from workplace discrimination.

I believe we can and should make progress—one step, and one inch, at a time.

Of course, Ms. Stachelberg’s statements on educating congresspeople might carry more weight if her own actions in the 1990’s weren’t 180 degrees out of phase with that “education” position. If it takes education, it should be noted that she, as an HRC lobbyist in the late 1990’s, “educated” congresspeople against transgender inclusion in ENDA:

Elizabeth Birch for a while eclipsed Janice Raymond as Transgender Public Enemy Number One when she was quoted at a Chicago GLBT event as stating that transinclusion in ENDA (the Employment and Non Discrimination Act) a top legislative priority of transgender leaders would happen ‘over her dead body’.

That sowed the seeds to the growing perception amongst transpeople that HRC was ‘The Enemy’. It got worse when transgender lobbyists were told by sitting senators, congressmembers and various staffers that HRC Capitol Hill lobbyists Nancy Buermeyer and Winnie Stachelberg showed up on the Hill accompanied by GenderPac’s Riki Wilchins before transgender lobby events in 1997, 1998, and 1999. They asked those members and staffers to tell the transpeople coming to Washington that inclusion in ENDA wasn’t possible, but hate crimes was. That revelation so enraged the transgender community that a group of activists that included yours truly founded NTAC in 1999.

So is Winnie Stachelberg a known transphobe arguing against transgender inclusion in ENDA, or is she just a person who because of her previous anti-transgender congressional “educating” should in no way be considered “a voice of reason” when it comes to perceived gender/gender identity and expression/transgender inclusion in ENDA?

I tend to believe she’s a known transphobe now trying to sound like a voice of reason on ENDA.  Her commentary is an irritating distraction in the process of trying to pass a fully inclusive ENDA.