Calling criticism “counter productive,” Representative Barney Frank again supported an exclusionary ENDA. Keeping his date with reporters, the homo-politico insists it’s better to get some rights than all rights:
Should we kill the whole bill?
I have a very profound difference with people who say we should…I do not think you deny people protection if you can. A sexual orientation-only bill would be very helpful.
Frank also said that pulling the bill will ultimately hinder gay rights – and the Democrats.
The headline will be, ‘Pelosi pulls gay rights bill from agenda,’ that they didn’t have enough votes to pass it. I don’t understand how that helps us.
Gays or the Democratic party?
Bryan
Both I think.
Gregg
Cue the trans-extremists to start screaming and bashing Frank.
Heather_L_James
Cue the homocentric Chelsea gays to chime in that der homofuhrer is beyond reproach. Oh wait you already did.
Tamara R.
What’s extremist about wanting the same civil rights?
Sorry, I’ll just lay down and stop fighting. I didn’t know I was being extreme.
Gregg
Touchy touchy
Gregg
Nothing wrong with wanting civil rights.
There is something wrong with saying that others should give up achievable rights now because their own rights are not achievable now.
Lena Dahlstrom
The thing is ENDA-lite wouldn’t protect those (queer _or_ hetero) who are perceived to be gay or lesbian — as long as bigots are careful not to mention the H word. In other words: “we didn’t fire you because you’re gay/lesbian, we fired you because you’re nelly/butch.” Its a tactic employers already exploit, as GLAD points out: http://blog.glad.org/2007/10/weakened-enda-makes-no-sense.html
“As GLAD knows from the calls we get on our InfoLine, the discrimination experienced by many gay men, lesbians and bisexuals is based not directly on their sexual orientation, but on their presentation — their gender identity or expression. They are “too feminine” or “too masculine” and they make their employers uncomfortable — and they’re fired.”
Which is why Lambda Legal, GLAD and other legal groups in the trenches fighting these sorts of cases say ENDA-lite creates a huge loophole that neuters protection for all but the straight-acting among us.
BTW, if you take the “it’s not my problem” ‘tude to its logical conclusion, why should hetero folks — like those behind the current Seven Straight Nights lobbying effort http://www.sfbaytimes.com/?sec=article&article_id=6918 –bother to support equal rights protections and marriage equality. After all, it’s not their problem.
Tamara R.
So put yourself in my shoes Gregg.
What’s the correct response when they yank you from the bill? “Hooray for you! Don’t worry about us. We don’t need rights.”
Or would you be screaming bloody murder like all us “extremists?”
jbran
Does anyone here see that freaking Rome wasn’t built in a day? Sometimes these things are gradual and not because anyone is any less deserving of rights than others, but because the majority of people voting on this bill (and the majority of their constituents)can’t relate to the matter at hand. So, the more separated from their experience, the harder a time they are going to have passing the bill. I just don’t understand attacking Frank — do you really think he’s the enemy here? And, FYI – I couldn’t be farther from a Chelsea gay or whatever label is being tossed around. I’m just a guy who’d like to see some progress.
SeaFlood
Not the straight-acting, the gender conforming.
It is too easy to conflate sexual orientationist language and gender (____?___) language — they aren’t the same.
The one thing I have wanted from this… gross injustice has been for transfolks to wake up and realize that GBLs do not have our best interests at heart. How could the little fascists? We know our communities better than anyone else. We know the ins and outs. We know that there are many GBLs who are just as uncomfortable with T’s as hets are. I cannot tell you how many conversations I have witnessed where gay men have talked shit about transmen. I cannot tell you have many conversations I have witnessed where lesbians have talked shit about transwomen. And GenderQueer and gender fluid people tend to make all of them, gay, lesbian, transitioning to one position of the binary or the other, explode from the impossibility.
Simply put: There’s trouble all over. We have to own that our community has really serious issues when it comes to gender identity. Perhaps it is from the association of gay with the opposite gender from the person who identified. Maybe. But we should get over pretending T folks are just trying to take something away from cisgendered folks because we want protecting, too.
The argument made aligning this with het support is a weak one… hets don’t support GLBs… this is just their way of making sure the thing doesn’t pass. This bill has been at least THIRTEEN years in the making and the gay community supported same-sex marriage instead of it starting in 1994. I know because as a young gay genderqueer I was INCENSED. But I grew up that day, realizing, in profound manner, much akin to the epiphany I had in regards to being a racialized body within GLBT spaces, that there were places where my concerns overlapped with the community/culture as a whole, and places where I was left out alone on my ass without knowing who was in my corner backing me.
At nearly 32 years old, I don’t still.
If this bill can pass without T, it will not be a win for all of us. Just those who can fit the paradigm of gay white America — the dominant ideology. And maybe that is what it will take for “the rest of us” to band together and figure out how to do liberty, freedom, and equal rights for ourselves.
jbran
SeaFlood, you wrote, “If this bill can pass without T, it will not be a win for all of us. Just those who can fit the paradigm of gay white America — the dominant ideology. And maybe that is what it will take for “the rest of us†to band together and figure out how to do liberty, freedom, and equal rights for ourselves.” So,if you did band together, the passing of the bill without T would be a win for you.
Heather_L_James
Jbran, I will tell you why I am upset with Frank; he accuses trans people of trying to kill the whole bill. This simply isn’t true. Several groups, most notably Lambda Legal and the ACLU, have presented very valid reasons as to why this is bad legislation for lesbians and gays. Ask yourself, who would know better than Lambda and the ACLU what legal arguments are being presented by the defense when these discrimination law suits arise? I can’t think of anyone, and if there is it certainly wouldn’t be Barney Frank. Like all politicians, gay or straight, white or black, female or male, he is out of touch with the real world.
Another reason I am upset is that he has stooped to flat out lying. In that press conference Frank stated that the inclusive ENDA didn’t even have enough support to get out of committee. I fail to see how a bill that had 171 co-sponsors could fail to make it to the floor for a vote. If it didn’t have the support in the full House to pass, then just say that, but this doom and gloom of making it out that the inclusion made the bill unpalatable to nearly everyone is counterproductive.
As far as my rhetoric above; I can’t stand this whole “shh if yuns cry too loud loud papa’s gwinta beat us all” mentality. If you want to move forward with the amended ENDA go right ahead, I won’t stop you. But I also won’t stop posting the reasons why I think it is a bad legislation, and why I think Frank is clueless.
DavidDust
We should trust Barney Frank…
tvonthefritz
Gregg, do you honestly think gay rights is acheivable? The majority of Americans would be quick to label your position as “extremist.”
Heather_L_James
Why David? Why, when the two groups most involved with discrimination cases are saying that the bill is no good, should anyone GLBT trust him? I applaud the man for being the first openly gay member of the House. I respect him for living a genuine life. But this blind support I just don’t understand.
I don’t acknowledge “everything he has done for the community” as a valid point. Other than passing a “say what you want about us, just don’t kill us” hate crimes law that is going to be vetoed any day now, what positive has happened in the legislature for anyone under the GLBT umbrella? Are we counting the blocked marraige amendment? What? Educate me please.
Heather_L_James
TV you are wrong. Recent polling shows the majority of Americans support employment protection for both gay AND transgendered individuals. Why these politicians continue to pander to the small but loud, bigoted minority is another mystery I would like to solve.
jbran
Heather, your points make perfect sense. This is the first issue like this to arise in my lifetime and I’m pretty flummoxed as to how to proceed. We’re essentially hinging our hopes on the hearts and consciences of people who aren’t like us (heterosexuals), and they have religion to hide behind. So, it all feels very tenuous. I don’t think anyone should lie down, but I still wonder if it makes more sense to achieve was is “possible,” then include others as time goes on. I know that sounds horrible.
jlina
the play’s been made. transfolks will be taking the fall no matter what happens. If we get an inclusive bill again and it loses, it’s our fault. If the non-inclusive bill passes, it’ll be used to divide and conquer our movement, to set the gender-normative queers against the flaming or butch queers, based on people’s willingness to play good queer.
Or, if it loses now because it’s this much more high profile, that loss will be blamed on the trans people. Which would be the best outcome for Pelosi, because she can claim that she tried, and our organizations blew it, thus getting backing from at least half the gay community for the democratic party without having to expose vulnerable congressfolk to a yes vote on a politically dangerous vote.
We’re being played, people. Politicians do not have our best interests in mind. So it’s stupid to trust people like Pelosi and Frank… but it’s just as stupid to pretend that our protests will change a goddamn thing. They knew what they’re doing, and so long as even half the commentary on the issue supports them (and thanks to the informal 50/50 rule of “covering both sides” it will be) that fix is not going to be changed.
hisurfer
Criticism is part of democracy. It is not counter-productive. We’re not frakkin’ sheep.
Lena Dahlstrom
FWIW, the National Center for Lesbian Rights just joined in with Lambda Legal, the ACLU, GLAD, employment law professor Jillian Weiss and the Transgender Law Center pointing out the huge gaping holes left by ENDA-lite.
Says GCLR: “Over the past two decades, many federal courts—including the U.S. Supreme Court—have adopted astoundingly narrow constructions of anti-discrimination statutes. We would be foolish—and irresponsible—to ignore this body of case law as we are attempting to pass an effective statute that will protect members of our community from discrimination….
A few commentators criticizing Lambda Legal’s analysis have demanded a “list†of state court decisions that have narrowly construed sexual orientation-only laws. Such a demand shows a fundamental misunderstanding of employment discrimination litigation. Only eight states have laws that prohibit only sexual orientation without also including gender identity, and there are very few published LGBT employment discrimination decisions in those states. We know from our own firsthand experience that LGB employees who have experienced discrimination that might be characterized as based on gender nonconformity have a very difficult time finding a lawyer to represent them in those states because of the uncertainty as to whether the law prohibits this type of discrimination.
Moreover, even if an LGBT employee finds a lawyer to file such a case, most employment discrimination cases settle and never result in an appeal that establishes precedent. Experienced lawyers thus have to read the case law not just for what it expressly states, but for what it shows is likely to happen in other litigation. What has happened in the federal courts under other anti-discrimination laws shows why we, Lambda Legal, the ACLU, GLAD, and the Transgender Law Center are deeply concerned about the inadequacy of a sexual orientation-only bill.”
adamblast
The bill *without* trans protections was considered worthy, if incomplete, for a decade or more by the exact same groups claiming it’s full of gaping holes now. More to the point: they’re aligned with T-rights, and so now they’re making their analysis fit their political decisions.
Yes, our activists are soundly against this, no debate. But our activists are wrong, and our politicians are right.
SeaFlood
jbran… you make no sense to me.
adamblast… I am willing to see this: “But our activists are wrong, and our politicians are right.” However, I cannot help but feel and think that this is wrong wrong wrong. Not simply because I am part of the “T”, but because… when I think about it and look at it… and I can do this because I am B/black which means I am drawing on my subjective history as a racialized body… it’s as if the lighter-skinned B/black people were granted voting right and equality under the law because they are viewed to be “less threatening” and “more politically viable” than darker-skinned B/black people.
While there is a disconnect — cuz I did hear what Frank said about the two having different lives, they are not so completely foreign to each other.
Consider, for example, Chris Crocker. People like him need to be protected under this bill, too. However, if the separation occurs, he is left to wallow until that day gender discrimination can be made into such an issue primarily that a bill of this nature can pass.
Seriously, NOW is the time. Right now. Not later.
This is not the time to get/show greed and selfishness.
Lena Dahlstrom
adamblast — Have you considered that maybe they’ve decided it’s problematic because they’ve now had a decade’s worth of trying to litigate discrimination cases in places that have sexual orientation but not gender identity/expression protections.
As I’ve mentioned, the butch who was thrown out of the Caliente Cab Co. restaurant restroom — and who’s suing under NYC’s _gender expression_ protections — illustrates how many gays and lesbians are discriminated against because of the way they look/act by people who have no idea who they’re sleeping with.
Gregg
@ TAMARA R. – I see nothing wrong with screaming bloody murder for your rights! I just have a problem with those extremists who say that if trans folks don’t get rights right now, then neither should gay folks. That simply does not make sense.
Tamara R.
Gregg, we’re not taking anything from you. We’re saying we shouldn’t be left off the bill.
Ok. Jeez… let me just say my piece here about what makes me so sad, and then I’ll go away.
I don’t really like the language on either side of this, “extremists,” “fascists,” whatever. This issue is driving us apart.
The conservatives have made their play. Divide and conquer. I honestly can’t wait for this whole thing to be over… unfortunately… the way I think it’s going to go down (with ENDA-lite) is going to leave a whole hell of a lot of hard feelings between the two camps the republicans have defined. It won’t really ever be “over.” =(
I may not agree with some of the language, but SeaFlood is right. This is a ploy. The haters hate you LGB as much as they hate us T. We’re all “deviants.” How is dropping the T gonna give us more votes?
Like it or not, the hetero-cisgender world groups us together. As I came out to people as trans, you know what they said almost every single time? “You know I have gay friends and let me tell you all about them and how I have no problem with them…”
That’s why it’s LGB+T… because we’re all sexual-outlaws. One group, on the outside trying to get in.
So here’s where I take personal offense: Why does Frank think excluding TG-folk is going to gain him votes, when the hetero/cisgender-folks see us all as one group, and will see the bill just as offensive/inoffensive as before?
I think it has to do with some people of the LGB persuasion being personally ashamed of their Trans brothers and sisters. Some LGB-folks now see themselves as insiders and put us T-people on the outside… because we’re extra-queer or something.
I’m not pissed off at you for wanting to get your rights. I’m not trying to take you down with me. I’m not taking anything away from you…
I think you’re falling for what the republicans have told you. I don’t think that excluding transpeople will get you a single vote you didn’t have before. And I’m sad: I’m afraid you believe them because deep down you’re ashamed of your queer siblings.
dusty
I have had it with this debate. The ‘Queer” movement needs to stop this absurd “all aboard” mentality.
Trans are NOT part of the queer community. Sexual identity and sexual preference are very different.
We here all the time, “I identify a as a woman.” Then we are to call that person “she” and treat “her” like any other women. Well guess what, now that he can be a heterosexualist. NOT QUEER.
Trannys, organize and fight your own battle.
tvonthefritz
Dusty, now correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t the transgendered folk fight tooth-and-nail at the gay rights impetus of Stonewall? They’ve been a part of the gay rights “movement” since 1969.
Lena Dahlstrom
Dusty, I hate to inform you but a lot of late-transitioning trans woman are attracted to women. So when they transition they go from being seen as hetero men to being seen as — wait for it — lesbians. Likewise, there are trans men who are attracted to men.
Oh, and did I mention that most trans men who are attracted to women spend years in the lesbian community before transitioning. And that trans women who are attracted to men are often are part of the gay community (perceived as ultra-femmy gay men) before transitioning. (In both cases, it’s usually because butch and nelly are visible niches they can try to fit into.)
And a number of those trans women remain in the gay community post-transition — like the three of the drag queens I perform with. (They started doing drag as gay men, and post-transition it’s one of the jobs they can still get in the face of some pretty massive job discrimination.)
But hey, other than that, we’ve got nothing in common.
Bill Perdue
This is not just an issue of sacrificing transgendered people’s rights, although to be clear they got by far the most brutal treatment handed out by the Democrats.
First lets be clear that the original version of ENDA would have about as good at eliminating homobigotry as earlier civil rights laws have been at terminating racism, sexism, etc. in the workplace. They’re all deliberately toothless and they put the legal and financial burden on the victims.
Still, we need the original version very badly. We can fight to make it better after it gest passed.
Frank, Pelosi and the Democrats did more than toss part of our community under the bus and condemn to permanent second class citizenship. Then they proceed to gut what was left of the bill.
The disemboweled carcass of ENDA is beginning to reek. Read the Lambda Legal explanation of what Frank and Pelosi did. Then you’ll be able to understand the firestorm of condemnation against them.
Every element of the GLBT equation loses on this one. The only ones who stand to gain are the homobigots who take pleasure in refusing to hire us and pleasure in firing us. They’re going to save billions because we’re ALL going to continue to be second class citizens. No doubt the homobigots will find a way to let Barney, Nancy and the other Democrats know how appreciative they are.
SeaFlood
Tamara R. I liked your language very much and I applaud you for what you said. Especially because it can be hard to maintain your thoughts when in the thick of this. I really appreciated and liked your response.