HRC got hit where it hurts today. Donna Rose and Jamison Green, the last two trans folk on the Business Council, resigned. For those of you not up on HRC’s many tentacles, the Business Council monitors gay and not-so-gay friendly businesses and tallies them in the Corporate Equality Index. HRC most recently brandished against Wal-Mart.
Former Board member Rose and Green’s resignation comes after Human Rights Campaign flip-flopped on the non-inclusive ENDA. The non-profit originally said it wouldn’t back the Employment Non-Discrimination Act without trans inclusion, then it said it would support an act that didn’t include trans folk, and then it backstabbed and supported the measure. People were not pleased, not least of all Rose and Green, who write:
The letter’s signed “In Solidarity and Equality”. We’re not sure if they include Solmonese on that one…
Download the Rose and Green resignation here.
24play
When Donna Rose leaves the campaign of Hillary Clinton, who does not support marriage equality, and instead endorses Gravel or Kucinich, who do, I might take her outrage over HRC’s decision to support a trans-less ENDA seriously.
Until then I call bullshit. Rose seems to have no problem with incremental gains and practical political strategy when it comes to choosing a presidential candidate to shill for. So why can’t she understand HRC’s (eventual, poorly communicated, badly fumbled) position on ENDA?
Leland Frances
Because, so far, Ewan Wolfson has not been able to brew up a Mad Marriage Disease the same way others concocted the virulent and dementing Mad Tranny Disease.
As someone named Marc wisely wrote on Queerty some time back:
“Even Tammy Baldwin, who carried the trans amendment, ended up voting enthusiastically for ENDA. The writing was on the wall, the shrieking harpies in United ENDA misjudged the situation and used their substantial, formidable organizing talents to the wrong ends, and we are poised to see ENDA move through the Senate.
We have learned that it is not politically wise for a small group to alienate a larger group by insisting that all legislation for the larger group not move until the smaller group has made its case.
We have also learned that political promises, like promises from parents, can’t always be kept. Mom promised me a blue toy car, but when we got to the toy store, there were only red toy cars. Did she break her promise or were events beyond her control? HRC promised ENDA+T, but when they got to Congress, ENDA+T didn’t have the votes for reasons beyond HRC’s control.”
praenomenal
Once again Leland you speak from a position of disdain and thus show how you feel. You don’t want to support trans rights, fine, but do not try and make it sound like it is not an issue.
Matt
Disdain in context or not, the Marc quote is highly appropriate.
Michele
Matt, I gather you are not Trans or at Stonewall on that hot June night. Well I am Trans and A lot of my old girl friends were at Stonewall and they were Trans women. We started it you just want to ride on our coat tails.
Gregg
Bullshit Michele.
hells kitchen guy
Michelle, I’m on your side, but read one of the 20 or so books about Stonewall, and you’ll learn that the vast majority of people at stonewall were gay men, of various ethnicities. yes, there were dykes and trannies there. But so what? “You” are not the “we” who was at Stonewall.
Gregg
Also, Stonewall was a touchstone, but not the “start”.
Zoe Brain
OK, so the President of HRC goes to the biggest TG conference in the country, promises not to backstab them again as has been done so many times in the past, and the donations roll in.
Then he finds out he can’t keep his promises. OK, never attribute to malice what is adequately explained by incompetence.
So the HRC starts a campaign to fix it… actually no, they backpedal, saying that they neither support nor oppose. A compromise, like the one that didn’t work in New York.
And all this time, they do damage control, keeping their TS board members informed, so they can get their input. Except they don’t, the “insiders” keep them in the dark, pending developments, while they strategise.
Then the “inner party” reverses course, and not only support a trans-free ENDA, but oppose any amendments to it, like the Baldwin amendment.
Then they talk to the TS members… wait, no, they’re still in the dark.
Then they mark down any congresscritter who wanted TGs to be included, and voted on that basis.
THEN they consult with the TS members…. no they still don’t.
This is no longer adequately explained by incompetence.
Dana
Petty. Shortsighted. Childish. ENDA would get no where at all without HRCs ceaseless efforts. There are dozens of national glbt groups out there, pick the one you like best, but don’t bash the others. The petty infighting does no one any good, except right wing.
Polar Bear
Note Zoe’s posting. You can’t send your exdir to lie
before 1000 T people, take thousands in donations away, and expect us to say ‘aw, shucks” when the lie
comes to light. Unlike gay people, T people have to pay thousands to be their type of queer. We don’t have it to donate to liars.
T people have very, very long memories. HRC can never expect T people to support them ever again,
period. Firing Solmonese would not help; he’s the dummy, we want the ventriloquist’s ass in the sling, not the dummy’s.
PhyllisMs
ENDA wasn’t a toy story or a fairy tale. Sorry, I don’t buy your “mommy didn’t buy me a blue toy” story. Grow up…
PhyllisMs
Oh, if you forgot, it wasn’t “ENDA” plus a “T”, is “was” an “LGBT”, coalition. Tragic for everyone, a loss for any agenda of “Equality For All”.
PhyllisMs
“yes, there were dykes and trannies there.”
So there was a “WE”, at stonewall wasn’t there? And the “T” wasn’t as cut and dry as it is today. Many effeminate men were considered “flaming queens”, todays transgenders, don’t think for a minute that doesn’t border on hypocracy.
PhyllisMs
stonewall was a touch stone? ENDA will be a mile stone in the LGB-t history…a rift that can and seems to be swelling and will be a detriment to us all. This joinging sides is not good for the L’s, G’s, B’s or T’s…I fear.
PhyllisMs
“The petty infighting does no one any good, except right wing.”
But, I will never “forget” …ever!
PhyllisMs
They knew what it meant when no one would talk to them. I would have had to leave too. When I work for a company in management and the board did the same thing, I’m no longer useful to them and the sad part, is that I feel they simply used the Trans folks to weight their cause ( a unified LGBT ) and at the last minute, they waffled, and possibly in the secret, this strategy could have been known for a long time before, knowing they would withdraw inclusion all along. (The world is an evil and crooked place). This was a planned action by none other than, Joe Solmonese, to freeze these girls out!
Militarily speaking, The HRC “broke ranks” and during war, it’s tantamount to treason if your ordered to hold your ground, and punishable by firing squad.
How can two walk together lest they agree?
As somebody said here before, “Let HRC die on the vine”. With friends like that we don’t need any enemies. There are plenty of other upstanding organizations to stand proud with and I’ve read the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force is one amongst many many others and as far as I understand, also the Stonewall Democrats.
Someone close to me (who is with Pflag) got a letter in the mail for a donation and her response sent with HRC’s own paid postage (“No Postage Necessary”) was “NO WAY!”
It may be sad to lose an old friendship but such is life, sometimes two must part ways.
Remember, Ms.Rose and Mr. Green were board members, working dutifully and representing well, deserving of reception and for all to address the concerns of all HRC’s supporters. Some reconcillation was possible and I think that’s what Donna Rose and Jamison Green were waiting for,(three weeks?), but to be treated in that manner shows complete disrespect, a slight, and a shun. Reprehensible! HRC may survive, but I don’t want to walk with them. I’ll take me own road, however it may be, at least it will be me bed and I will make and be proud of who I am and what I got, without HRC. If you can comprimise your principles, you don’t have any.
I’ve had to kiss a little ass in my day and time (for my own good), but that’s as far as I go!
I am sure Ms. Rose and Mr. Green discussed this at length, but with no recourse with HRC, what else could they do? And, as for their positions they held and their tenure, I respectfully support them both and their decision and I think we should rally behind them.
They were simply, froze out…, as we all were on Nov. 7th, 2007, a mile stone in history of the LGB-t.
Phyllis
PhyllisMs
When Donna Rose leaves the campaign of Hillary Clinton, who does not support marriage equality, and instead endorses Gravel or Kucinich, who do, I might take her outrage over HRC’s decision to support a trans-less ENDA seriously.
Hey, don’t try to force me to join your GD church! “Those who live in glass house’s shouldn’t throw stones”
Deena
I will not condemn Joe. I, however, no longer trust his representation and wish he would resign so that HRC might build a brighter future and hopefully an honest one. To me this is a simple matter of integrity not a them versus me issue.
PhyllisMs
The petty infighting does no one any good, except right wing.
And who chose sides first? The HRC supporters of a non-inclusive ENDA…You might call it “petty infighting”, but I don’t think the results of a major rift in a coalition will be “petty”, but quite serious and as Polar Bear stated, you expect us to just go on our way saying “aw,shucks?” I hope the rift becomes devastating for all, that a great lesson in human rights equality and untiy is learned, and hopefully not have to be repeated.
Deena
Gotta be careful that people don’t start ordering a BLT hold the G sandwich. I have many Gay friends. Joe is not among them. Can’t trust his word.
PhyllisMs
Sometimes I do get angry with the gay sector, but only because of people who want to minimize us(the “t” sector) and minimize the event of the ENDA fiasco.Tragic for everyone, a loss, for any agenda of “Equality For Allâ€.
I have gay friends( but,first, I suffered being a queer in a straight world in 1962 thru 1975, then thought I was just a bi_sexual, later considered I was just gay, only to realize I was a transsexual; where do they get this us and them shit, I been them all, baby!) who had nothing to do with what went on behind closed doors with Mr. Frank and the HRC and “their” political processes. Some of my friends knew nothing of it, preoccupied with college events, still recovering from Halloween, but those who attack us here or anywhere, I will stand toe to toe, with what’s just and what is right.
Joe’s not going to resign, and is why Ms. Rose and Mr. Green distanced theirselves after being frozen out. The ripple effect is not over or the tremors and I would hope that the board would oust Joe Salmonese but, who’s to say he won’t be there “behind the scenes”? I say let HRC “die on the vine”, there’s many more great organizations who think alike,and are just as smart and tactful as the HRC deems itself, but to go against the majority of their LGBT associates should spell death.
LauraT
All the comments preceding this one are proving the point. Joe Solmonese has succeeded in making divisions and disagreements within the queer community worse. He is a divider, not a uniter. We have got to stop arguing about the rights and roles of subsets of the LGBT community, and start fighting with one voice for the queer community. That’s all of us–including the “T,” even though the transgender community was sacrificed to the cause of ENDA. Even the “L,” even though there may have been fewer of us at Stonewall. It’s time to go, Joe. If you can’t speak for all of us, you should not be allowed to represent us. I talked about why Joe should resign on my blog at lifeonq.com. Check it out at: http://lifeonq.com/2007/11/28/human-rights-campaign-shows-its-true-stripes-with-transgender-exclusion
Deena
Agreed. TBLG with no Joe!
Jin
Okay, well speaking as a Canadian who pays close attention to American politics (because it inevitably affects everyone else), I have to say that the HRC’s betrayal ranks as the single most shocking piece of political betrayal I have ever seen in my life. And I used to live in Europe, where backstabbing is a finely-honed art.
This was so transparently a setup from the beginning. Keep the T for cred and bux, and then chuck them overboard when they start getting inconvenient.
I would hate to be in a plane crash in the mountains with these guys.
Tom
This is all very interesting. I am not at all surprised that Donna left the Busniss Council. How can one possibly stay on it when all they do is talk trash about the organization. I heard that Ms. Rose was at the Dallas Black Tie–on HRC’s dime to to a Corporate event–and she went to the local press to trash HRC. Ms. Rose seems like the spoiled child that does not get her way…so she takes all of her toys and leaves. I just hold on to the fact that there are two sides to every story. BUT, glad to hear she won’t let HRC pay for her travel anymore!
Zoe Brain
Tom, a little hypothetical.
Say there was a Human Rights Organisation that was involved in activism to get rights for minorities in housing and other areas.
Say this HRO had had a reputation for being Homophobic, due to utterances by its presidents such as “Human Rights for Gays? Over my dead body!” by the President.
Say that in 2002, there was a change of regime, and a decidedly no-homophobic president appointed.
Say that shortly thereafter, a Gay was allowed on the board (paying $50,000 a year for the privilege), and this guy and a lesbian appointed to the action section, not just the political wing.
Say that after a few months of this, the new president was forced to resign, and after that, not a single gay employee was hired, not even as a janitor. But at least the mission statement was amended two years later to include Gays as a repressed minority group in need of protection.
Say that in 2007, the president of this HRO went in front of the largest annual GLB conference and promised that not only would they not support and Human Rights legislation that excluded Gays, but would actually oppose it.
THEN say that they did the exact opposite, and the token Gay board member was not just not invited, he wasn’t even informed of the meetings that decided the new policy.
Then this HRO actively worked against any amendment that would include Gays, again with no consultation with either the single Gay or the single Lesbian in the whole organisation.
So of course, the two token GLBs resigned. How could they not? The HRO was now 100% straight, totally gay-Free from the Janitor upwards.
And *then* someone wrote a post about the Gay who was a former board member – and who had contributed upwards of a quarter of a million dollars because of that – a post just like yours. Wouldn’t they look like an equine posterior?
Now how do you think your post makes you look?
Tom
Good try ZB…very hypothetical. You are missing my point. While we know all of Donna’s efforts, struggles and emotions, HRC is not hanging the dirty laundry out to dry. There are two sides to every story.
BTW, in every organization and corporation I have ever worked with…if you are in a position of leadership, you are typically not allowed to have a blog that discusses every discussion you have with said organization. If you do, you are asked to leave or are terminated.
When you get facts, I may listen and perhaps agree with some of your story.
PhyllisMs
What side do we not already know? Are three sides to coin now? LOL
PhyllisMs
You havent’ agreed with one single thing…Don’t bull shit.!
Tom
PhyllisMs, get some rest, it was late when you replied! No bull shit…I never said I agreed with one single thing!
PhyllisMs
I said “NO Bull Shit” meaning don’t give feed us bull shit about “you’ll agree when”… You’ll never agree to anything, for the sake of arguing the pointless.
your statement:
“When you get facts, I may listen and perhaps agree with some of your story”.
You don’t seem to see the forest for the trees.That’s why “discusuib with you is pointless”.
PhyllisMs
I don’t have my glasses on….