ENDA the week edition …
#1 – On Wednesday, October 3rd, Donna Rose resigned from the Board of Directors of the Human Rights Campaign …
Community. Integrity. Leadership. Vision. These are the foundational pillars of Equality. These are the values that draw many of us into advocacy roles. Those tenets provide a clear roadmap when things like politics, expediency, agenda, and power cloud the picture as they so often do. They pave the way to the moral high-ground, and those who follow them with trust and patience will ultimately find their efforts rewarded.
…
The current situation regarding ENDA is nothing short of a politically misguided tragedy. A tool that could and should be a unifying beacon on the heels of the historic passage of fully inclusive Hate Crime legislation has been split. Transgender brothers and sisters again find themselves separated, isolated, and disempowered. People in positions of power have decided that their personal legacy and the promise of political expediency are more important than protecting our entire beautiful community. The time is here to make a strong statement to demonstrate to them that they are wrong.
In 2004 the HRC Board voted to support only fully-inclusive Federal legislation. That decision paved the way to my participation with the organization, and was a significant step in the healing process. Since that time we have worked together tirelessly towards a goal of Equality for all. Less than a month ago HRC President Joe Solmonese stood before almost 900 transgender people at the Southern Comfort Conference in Atlanta to pledge ongoing support and solidarity. In his keynote address he indicated that not only would HRC support only a fully inclusive ENDA, but that it would actively oppose anything less. That single pledge changed hearts and minds that day, and the ripple affect throughout the transgender community was that we finally were one single GLBT community working together. Sadly, recent events indicate that those promises were hollow.
An impressive coalition of local and national organizations has lined up to actively oppose the divisive strategy that would leave some of our brothers and sisters without workplace protections. This effort has galvanized community spirit and commitment in ways few could have imagined, and it has demonstrated to those who would divide us that anything less than full inclusion is unacceptable Organization after organization has seized the moral high ground knowing that this is a historic opportunity that cannot be squandered, and that it is our moral obligation to ourselves and to generations that will follow to make a loud, clear, unmistakable statement that we are a community and we will not be divided. There is a single significant organization glaringly missing from that list. The Human Rights Campaign has chosen not to be there.
…
I hereby submit my resignation from my post on the Board of the Human Rights Campaign effective Monday Oct. 8, 2007. I call on other like-minded board members, steering committee leaders, donors, corporate sponsors, and volunteers to think long and hard about whether this organization still stands for your values and to take decisive action as well. More than simply a question of organization policy, this is a test of principle and integrity and although it pains me greatly to see what has happened it is clear to me that there can only be one path. Character is not for compromise. I cannot align myself with an organization that I can’t trust to stand-up for all of us. More than that, I cannot give half-hearted support to an organization that has now chosen to forsake the tenets that have guided my efforts from day one.
…
History teaches painful lessons. Any celebration of rights gained at the expense of others is not a celebration. It is a failure of effective leadership. It is to offer the promise of a tomorrow that you know in your heart will never come. It is to choose to turn your back on those who need you most, who do not have the voice or the stature to speak for themselves.
The time is here for leaders to lead, for those who say they stand for community to act forcefully and with purpose. Anything less is to forsake the pillars of Equality for the empty promise of something less. The word that we have for that in our language is “Courage”. It’s the kind of courage it takes for GLBT people to show up for work each and every day, living authentically, wondering if that will be their last day. I call on my brothers and sisters at the Human Rights Campaign, for Speaker Pelosi and Congressman Frank, and for equality-minded leaders everywhere to lead by example and to do the right thing.
And four more recommended reads are …
#2 – Terrific piece (“No ENDA Without Trans Protections“) from Doug Ireland writing in the Gay City News yesterday, including this quote from Sean Strub, the founder of POZ magazine …
“Trans people are trotted out as ornaments to demonstrate our diversity when useful, but otherwise are often treated like third-class citizens within the movement, ‘their’ issues relegated to something that is outside of the ‘mainstream’ gay agenda. To me, their issues are our issues, and anyone who can’t understand that needs to read some history.”
Ireland ends with …
What, after all, are the transgendered asking for? As transgender leader Jennifer Finney Boylan – a novelist and professor of English at Colby – put it in a speech at the National Press Club in May, they want a country “where Americans understand that transgendered people come in all shapes and sizes and embodiments, where to be a cross-dresser or a transsexual or a drag queen or trans man or genderqueer is seen as simply another way of being human.”
Only if the gay community’s organizational spokespeople at all levels take a tough line and say we won’t support this bill if the trans are thrown overboard and declared less than human will there be any hope of getting trans protection back into the bill.
State LGBT organizations should hold their state Congressional delegations’ feet to the fire on this – and not spare the kerosene. This is not the moment for HRC-style capitulationism to preserve “access” for the future – that feeble game makes us all look like wimps, and always leaves us getting screwed. Instead we must all stand up loud and firm and protect those whose visibility makes them the most vulnerable to discrimination and hatred – i.e., the transgendered.
No Trans Protection, No ENDA – that must be our slogan.
#3 – From Gabriel Rotello at The Huffington Post yesterday, “If ENDA Doesn’t Protect The Transgendered, It Doesn’t Protect Me” …
…
Researchers now think that this is all connected, that all gay and transgendered people occupy places on a continuum between the two main genders.
At one extreme are masculine gay men and feminine lesbians who could easily pass as straight, and whose only obvious sex-atypical trait is their sexual orientation. At the other extreme are people who are so gender-atypical in so many ways that some choose to have an operation to bring the body in line with the soul. But what distinguishes us is that we all, to some degree or another, have major traits that place us somewhere between the two primary genders.
In that sense, all LGBT people are transgendered.
Not only does this idea offer a more expansive definition of what we really are, but it also better explains why we are oppressed.
Homophobes don’t merely hate us because of how we make love. Rather, they hate how we make love because it violates our expected gender roles. Really, we are hated for gender transgression.
…
So in light of that, the decision to remove what we currently call transgendered people from a bill to ban anti-gay discrimination in the workplace couldn’t be more misguided.
Yes, sure, all the other arguments against the removal of transgendered people from ENDA are valid, foremost among them that we are sacrificing the most vulnerable among us for the political expediency of getting a bill passed.
But if you look at LGBT people as all, in a sense, transgendered, such a bill is not merely sacrificing the rights of one sexual minority within our movement. It’s betraying and denying the strange, wonderful, mysterious and very human thing that makes us what we are.
#4 – From Jody Huckaby, the executive director of PFLAG, writing in the Washington Blade today, “
REALISTICALLY SPEAKING, IN an environment where the president has threatened to veto hate crimes legislation — a bill that protects people from violence — it is unlikely that ENDA, if passed by Congress, would get signed into law. Given this unfortunate reality, how can we allow the legislative process to become a time to prove that the strategies of our opposition can work?
The argument that civil rights are achieved incrementally may have in the past been true. This does not mean that this is the way things ought to be. As a movement, we’ve agreed that “settling” for incremental advances in marriage isn’t acceptable — civil unions aren’t the same as marriage. Similarly, settling for only covering one part of our community in protection from discrimination should be no different.
Knowing that the possibility of this bill becoming law is slim should be the chance for us to prove that we are family and that each one is equally deserving of the same rights and protections. If there is more educational work to be done, let it happen now, but let’s not let the education that we give to the public be that we can be divided.
#5 – Finally, from Tracy Baim yesterday in the Windy City Times, ‘Not Without Our “T”‘ …
The GLBT community is not just a series of letters thrown together out of convenience. Rather, our movement includes those four key letters because each are inter-connected in their histories, and their experiences. It has taken a long time for our community to more fully embrace the differences within, even though “transgender” individuals have always been intimately linked with our movement ( from cross-dressing Hollywood stars to drag queens at Stonewall ) .
But society does not so easily separate us. When an employer fires a butch lesbian because of what she wears, he or she does not do this because they understand the differences between sexual orientation and gender identity. An effeminate gay or straight man may be fired because of how he talks, “like a girl.”
And even if our enemies had a sophisticated understanding between homophobia and transphobia, should it matter why they fire a G, L, B or T? Because lesbians are more acceptable to general society ( or at least ignored ) , should we first get coverage for them, and then the bisexuals, then gay men, and then the transgendered?
No, we will not be divided.
…
We do not want our rights at the expense of anyone else. That is too high a cost to pay.