Today's Messages (OFF)
| Unanswered Messages (ON)
| Forum: Political Issues |
|---|
| Topic: Implementing the Hate Crimes Bill |
|---|
| Implementing the Hate Crimes Bill [message #91453] |
Thu, 25 February 2010 13:46 |
 sherri-ann 
Messages: 149
Registered: February 2009
Location: ohio/nyc |
Senior Member |
|
|
I just received this post:
Implementing the Hate Crimes Law
transgenderequality | February 25, 2010 at 4:27 pm | Categories: Uncategorized | URL: http://wp.me/pKrry-3v
Yesterday, Lisa Mottet (Director of the Transgender Civil Rights Project at The Task Force) and I led a training on gender identity for members of the Community Relations Service of the Department of Justice. These are the folks who go in to mediate when communities are faced with tensions or violence; up until the passage of the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act last year, they were restricted to situations of conflict that centered on race or national origin. The new law allows them to add gender, disability, sexual orientation and gender identity to their jurisdiction. This is the first time the federal government has extended protections for transgender people and one of the very first positive mentions of sexual orientation. They have been meeting for trainings and conversations so that they can take on these new responsibilities well.
Over my five years with NCTE, we've worked to pass gender-identity inclusive laws and now suddenly we have a new task: working with the government to implement pro-lgbt legislation. Wow ... what a different experience to be on the side of putting a law into practice, not just trying to get it through Congress.
When we did the training yesterday, we told them why trans people have good reasons not to trust the government and law enforcement, we shared the stories of Tyra Hunter and Brandon Teena and others, and we explained the extreme violence done to trans people. We pointed out that if 15 trans people are killed in the United States in a given year, and the government records the overall homicide rate as around 15,000, that means that as many as 1 in a 1,000 murders in this country are bias killings against trans people. This is horrific. We shared our resources about communities responding to violence and what we think may help as they mediate conflicts.
We as a community know all of the horrible statistics ... but here's one of the insights I've had for my own work: I've been struck with the commitment of the folks we've been meeting with at the Department of Justice. We're talking directly with people who are dedicated to following and fully implementing the law and, more importantly, who really do have a commitment to making our country less violent and treating people with the respect and dignity we all deserve. The career they've chosen is one which lets them make a difference for people like us. At a hate crimes coalition meeting in January, I was really moved to listen to an FBI agent talk personally what it meant for her to be able to now address crimes against lgbt people. Before, she had the difficult task of explaining to victims of bias-motivated crimes that sexual orientation and gender identity weren't protected categories under federal law and there was nothing she can do. Now there is and that is a change that is very meaningful to her as well as to us.
Obviously, these are just the very beginning steps in a process that we hope will both save transgender lives and bring about justice when lives are lost. But having a law in place and being able to work to bring the promise of this law to concrete reality in our lives is a much better place to be.
Justin
At least a positive beginning! 
Sherri
|
|
| | Topic: O'Donnabhain tax case decided |
|---|
| | Topic: Clark County Democratic Party |
|---|
| | Topic: Sad news about a transgender artist dead in Haiti. |
|---|
| | Topic: Transexuals coverd by healthcare in ontario |
|---|
| | Topic: US Employment Non-Discrimination Act ENDA |
|---|
| US Employment Non-Discrimination Act ENDA [message #68019] |
Wed, 23 September 2009 06:17 |
LanieB
Messages: 349
Registered: August 2008
Location: Florida |
Senior Member
BL3d |
|
|
ENDA hearing tomorrow -- your action needed today
I received this e-mail from the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force. I'm passing it on. Please take action. A simple phone call will help. Love to you all.
I'm not sure if this link will work, but here it is. You can try it.
http://www.kintera.org/site/c.iqLRI2OxGlF/b.5468833/k.5D38/C all_Your_Representative.htm?msource=ENDA09hrhe1&auid=534 8560
LanieB
From: Rea Carey, Task Force Action Fund (ActionFund@thetaskforceactionfund.org)
Sent: Tue 9/22/09 2:46 PM
To: LanieB
Hearings on ENDA are scheduled to begin TOMORROW. (Wed 9/23/09)
Even if you've taken action before, Congress needs to hear from you TODAY!
We must pass ENDA now.
Dear LanieB,
It's outrageous, but true -- 97% of people who are transgender or gender non-conforming have experienced mistreatment, harassment, or discrimination on the job.
That's what the first-ever study on discrimination against transgender people by the Task Force and the National Center for Transgender Equality discovered. And what's even more shocking -- in most states, employment discrimination against LGBT people is perfectly legal.
This is unacceptable. We must pass the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) now.
Hearings on ENDA are scheduled to begin tomorrow, and the movement on this important legislation signals the beginning of the end of a long battle. But it's not guaranteed that we'll win -- and without your action today, we may not.
Even if you've taken action before, Congress must hear from each and every one of us today, before the hearings. They need to know that we won't stand for anything less than full equality in this country. LGBT workers are currently protected from discrimination in 12 states and over 100 localities -- but that is just not good enough. No one anywhere should ever have to fear losing their job simply because of their sexual orientation or gender identity.
Please, join us in telling Congress to pass ENDA once and for all and then urge your friends, family, and co-workers to act as well. We'll be keeping you updated in the coming weeks on the bill's progress.
Thank you for taking action and continuing the fight for full LGBT equality.
Yours,
Rea Carey, Executive Director
National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Action Fund
|
|
| | Topic: WH not appealing Schroer judgement |
|---|
| WH not appealing Schroer judgement [message #61572] |
Wed, 01 July 2009 22:03 |
nancy
Messages: 88
Registered: October 2007 |
Member |
|
|
Full article at link
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31685186/ns/politics-white_house /
WASHINGTON - The Obama administration is not fighting a nearly $500,000 judgment for a Library of Congress hiree who lost the job while undergoing a gender change from a man to a woman.
The Justice Department let the deadline to appeal the decision pass Tuesday, a day after President Barack Obama hosted gay supporters at the White House and promised to be their "champion." Some activists have complained he has not led on their causes, including ending the ban on gays in the military.
Diane Schroer, a retired Army Special Forces commander from Alexandria, Va., had been offered a job at the Library of Congress when he was a man, David Schroer. The job was rescinded the day after Schroer told a library official he was going to have an operation to become a woman.
|
|
| | Topic: Straw Poll in Oklahoma for same sex marriage |
|---|
| Straw Poll in Oklahoma for same sex marriage [message #57621] |
Wed, 06 May 2009 11:23 |
CarolynnL
Messages: 875
Registered: October 2007
Location: Heartland |
Senior Member |
|
|
Naturally non binding, there was a straw poll by the Rant on KFOR television out of Oklahoma City. There is a small legislative group and a bunch of religious leaders that are trying to make a big deal out of gay marriage. So the RANT ran the poll to see how people really felt.
Out of 5,000 respondents, more or less, the results were 57% for gay marriage, 28% against, and the residual was for civil unions.
Will not make the religious opposition happy, no indeed. This is the same state that got out a large turnout for a Defense of Marriage vote on the ballot for marriage being between one man and one woman 4 years ago. Wonder where all these folks were then?
|
|
| | Topic: Isaiah Berlin - Two Concepts of Liberty |
|---|
| Isaiah Berlin - Two Concepts of Liberty [message #57421] |
Sun, 03 May 2009 17:10 |
Capucine 
Messages: 111
Registered: October 2007 |
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi Sherri-Ann,
Here's a short discussion of Isaiah Berlin's Oxford University Lecture in 1958. I wrote my thoughts after reading it. This lecture addresses the ideas of many of the main actors of the Frankfurt school, so I thought that you could find it interesting.
I just discovered these notes which date back to January of this year.
Capucine
Isaiah Berlin's 'Two Concepts of Liberty' (1958)
Liberty, or freedom, is the prime need of humanity after air, water and food. It is dubious whether the supply of even those basics can be assured to sustain life, if freedom of the individual is not present. Liberty for me has two aspects, that of the body and that of the mind. It is easy for others to control another person's body, but much more difficult to influence the mind. Nobody can make you think in any particular way. However, they can force your body to make actions you would much rather not.
However, this is not the twin aspects of liberty that Berlin refers to. He focuses on the physical, rather than the mind. His concern is with the actions which are and are not permitted. He does not take into account the basis in reason for the morality that he supports.
1/9/09
Liberty can only refer to an individual, not to a collective. Here Berlin is not specific. He could well be referring to 'society' as well as individuals. I understand that he's a socialist. Hence he has a built-in bias towards the collective. However, he criticized the 'Positive' liberty concept, due to its misuse by many political movements. This tendency was initiated by Rousseau, practiced by the Jacobins in a major bloodletting throughout Europe. Later, influenced by the French Revolution, most liberal thinkers adopted some form of 'Positive' liberty attitudes, not the least of which was the spirit of Universal Military Service, which lead to the catastrophe of the First World War. Subsequent to that, the NSDAP and the Bolchovics applied a combination of Kantian altruism and positive liberty to slaughter people in the tens of millions.
The concept of 'Negative' liberty, as described by Berlin, is the basis of Individual Rights – Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness – found in the US Constitution. The recognition of the individual's right to act as he thinks fit, so long as this does not involve coercion or fraud over another person. Mill's Harm rule fits well with this concept. However, Mill had some hangups which made exceptions of certain thought processes and limited the concept of free speech. Both these restrictions are of course completely unacceptable.
First, one must admit that each human must be allowed to think any way he may think appropriate. There can be no limits. The expression of those thought in words, whether written or spoken, equally cannot be limited, except to the extent that they break the rule of coercion or fraud. A false statement leading to the harm of another person is the equivalent of fraud, even if it is made purely out of meanness or revenge without profit motives.
Secondly, no economic activity can be considered to do anyone else harm, unless it is undertaken obliging the other party to participate through coercion, as through a government monopoly, or similar situation. Few individuals ever have the power to coerce. If they do, it is through their government, the entity which retains the sole right to use force within society. Government coercion is as evil as that of any individual.
1/16/09
Berlin sees freedom or liberty as two distinct concepts. In his opinion they do cover every possible aspect of the meaning of either of these words. One probably has to start from the realization that one can be free to do something or free from somebody or a threat. These are opposite concepts. Perhaps even being the choice between liberty and security. One can only have one at a time. A choice has to be made between them.
Berlin expresses his distinction as Positive and Negative Freedoms. The Negative parallels the idea of "free to" and the Positive the "free from". However, the Positive is much more complicated and almost sinister, compared to the Negative.
Negative freedom is simple. Everything is permitted. It is up to the person to act. Limits are imposed, ideally voluntarily, through a healthy moral code. In most societies, this is reinforced by the law, which implies the use of force, if its provisions are not complied with. This is then an artificial restraint on freedom. The problems here begin where the moral code is flawed. An anti-life moral code will create damaging restriction on the healthy development of the individual person. A wide freedom to act depends therefore on a good understanding of the needs of the human to enhance his life.
Positive freedom has to be achieved by effort. At its simplest, it is a question of overcoming the restraints of nature through will power or technology. Examples are stretching of the mind and body to achieve a goal, as well as the use of an internal combustion engine to move faster than possible with one's body alone. However, this effort has to come from oneself without any aid from others to be termed freedom. Fundamentally Positive freedom is a matter of using one's brain. One is free to act, hopefully. To determine one's goals requires one to think. By analysis and thought, one can establish one's ethical code, or road map for one's life. One's values necessary for the advance of one's life will become the basis of all decisions.
Berlin views an aspect of this latter concept, which can lead to anomalies. Certainly everyone is free to express their opinions and ideas freely. There can never be any restriction on that point. Equally every listener is entitled to reject the words of another and disagree. So long as the disagreement remains on a "live and let live" basis there is no problem, but if the disagreement is not permitted, then the Negative freedom of the listener has been limited arbitrarily.
Rousseau's argument justifying the enforcement of the "General Will" has opened the door to this abuse of people's freedom to reject other's ideas. Rousseau rejected in fact the concept that each person is separate and individual, having the Right to his own views irrespective of the majority's opinion. He maintained that each person was only an element of society as a whole, and therefore subject to the Will of the majority. Hence he advocated the dictatorship of the majority. Ideally each individual should be free from interference by the majority so long as he does not commit any act of violence or fraud.
Berlin does not discuss an important issue, which is of vital impact on the individual – who is to be free, the Individual or the State, Tribe, Group, or Family. He appears to be assuming that it is the State, who has full freedom to act, and which seeks to secure freedom from threats from other States. The individual has minimum Negative freedom and precious little Positive freedom. Each individual is expected to sacrifice himself for the benefit of the State.
|
|
| | Topic: APA announces new taskgroup on treatment options |
|---|
| APA announces new taskgroup on treatment options [message #57146] |
Wed, 29 April 2009 09:33 |
CarolynnL
Messages: 875
Registered: October 2007
Location: Heartland |
Senior Member |
|
|
Full release appended below. Somewhat misleading with the term "evidenced based" in the introduction. Not a review of the recent evidence. Members of the committee are split by moderately supportive folks and Zucker/Blanchard collegues from CAMH.
APA Task Force Reviews Possible Gender Identity Disorder
Treatment Guidelines Date: Tue, 28 Apr
2009 13:14:33 -0400 From: APA
CommunicationsOffice<Press@psych.org><mailto:Press@psych.org>
To: undisclosed- recipients: ;
For Information Contact:
For Immediate Release:
Eve Herold, 703-907-8640
April 28, 2009
press@psych.org<mailto:press@psych.org>
Release No. 09-22
Jaime Valora, 703-907-8562
jvalora@psych.org<mailto:hturner@psych.org>
APA Task Force Reviews Possible Gender Identity Disorder
Treatment Guidelines
ARLINGTON, Va. (April 28, 2009) — The American Psychiatric
Association (APA) Board of Trustees has established a task force
on the treatment of Gender Identity Disorders (GID) to address
concerns about the relative lack of evidence-based treatment
guidelines and to determine if guidelines should be developed.
The task force was created on a recommendation by the APA
Committee on Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual Issues. For the full
release
< http://www.psych.org/MainMenu/Newsroom/NewsReleases/2009News Releases/APATaskForceReviewsPossibleGenderIdentityDisorder.a spx> .
Online advanced registration for reporters will be open through
May 8. Reporters can also register on site. For more information
and to register, visit the newsroom
<http://www.psych.org/MainMenu/Newsroom/OnlinePressRoom.aspx> .
Additional information on the meeting and the scientific program
can be found here
< http://www.psych.org/MainMenu/EducationCareerDevelopment/Mee tings.aspx> .
The APA Office of Communications & Public Affairs is available
anytime to arrange interviews on any mental health topic.
Office of Communications & Public Affairs
American Psychiatric Association
1000 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 1825
Arlington, VA 22209
703.907.8640
------------ --------- ----
For Information Contact:
For Immediate Release:
Eve Herold, 703-907-8640
April 28, 2009
press@psych.org<mailto:press@psych.org>
Release No. 09-22
Jaime Valora, 703-907-8562
jvalora@psych.org<mailto:jvalora@psych.org>
(Full Release)
APA Task Force Reviews Possible Gender Identity Disorder
Treatment Guidelines
ARLINGTON, Va. (April 28, 2009) — The American Psychiatric
Association (APA) Board of
Trustees has established a task force on the treatment of Gender
Identity Disorders (GID) to
address concerns about the relative lack of evidence-based
treatment guidelines and to determine
if guidelines should be developed. The task force was created on
a recommendation by the APA
Committee on Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual Issues.
The board asked the task force to review the literature on the
treatment of Gender Identity
Disorder at different ages and to report back with "an
opinion as to whether or not there is
sufficient credible literature to take the next step and develop
treatment recommendations."
The board asked the task force to communicate with the Diagnostic
and Statistical Manual of
Mental Disorders (DSM) work group on Gender Identity Disorder,
which can serve as a resource
on diagnostic issues during the term of the task force.
After the May 2008 announcement of DSM-V work group membership,
the APA received many
inquiries regarding the Gender Identity Disorders work group on
treatment. These inquiries most
often dealt with treatment controversies for GID in children,
rather than issues related specifically
to the DSM text and diagnostic criteria. While the diagnosis and
treatment of mental disorders are
inextricably linked, separation of the diagnostic mission of the
DSM work groups from the
evaluation of treatment issues is especially important.
Gender Identity Disorders Task Force on Treatment members have
been identified and appointed
by APA President Nada L. Stotland, M.D., M.P.H. They include APA
members William M.
Byne, M.D., Ph.D.; A. Evan Eyler, M.D., M.P.H.; Edgardo Jorge
Menvielle, M.D., M.S.H.S.;
Richard Randall Pleak, M.D.; and David A. Tompkins, M.D. Advisors
include Susan Bradley,
M.D.; Eli Coleman, Ph.D.; Richard Green, M.D., J.D., and Heino F.
L. Meyer-Bahlburg, Dr., rer.
nat.
|
|
| | Topic: Barney Frank statement on Hate Crimes Legislation |
|---|
| Barney Frank statement on Hate Crimes Legislation [message #56057] |
Mon, 13 April 2009 09:37 |
CarolynnL
Messages: 875
Registered: October 2007
Location: Heartland |
Senior Member |
|
|
Bilerico, USA
Barney Frank statement on hate crimes bill
Filed by: Bil Browning
April 10, 2009 3:30 PM
Representative Barney Frank's office sent out a statement the other day on the recently reintroduced hate crimes bill. It's after the jump for your reading pleasure and discussion. Personally, I find it interesting from an editor's point of view that the word "transgender" got capitalized while "gay," "lesbian," and "bisexual" didn't.
Frank Hails Planned Committee vote on Hate Crimes Bill
Congressman Barney Frank today announced that legislation to assist state and local law enforcement with investigation and prosecution of hate crimes is moving forward in the U.S. House of Representatives.
Congressman Frank is an original co-sponsor of the bill, the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Act of 2009 (H.R. 1913), which will be considered by the House Judiciary Committee during the week of April 20th. It is expected that the bill will be passed by the committee and will come to a vote on the House floor this spring.
"I am proud to have participated in drafting a Hate Crimes Bill that is fully respectful of the rights of free speech and association, " said Congressman Frank, "but also offers needed protection to those who are victims of physical crimes based on hatred. The law already increases penalties for crimes motivated by hatred in several categories, so the absence of protection for gay, lesbian, bisexual, and Transgender people is particularly egregious. This bill remedies that gap in a responsible way, fully respectful of constitutional rights and I look forward to it being passed and signed by a President who is committed to ending discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity."
The legislation would address a limitation in the current law, which prevents federal involvement in investigating or prosecuting hate crimes that do not involve a federally protected activity, such as voting. The new legislation would also remove the current prohibition on federal involvement in cases having to do with gender, gender identity, sexual orientation or disability.
The new bill would not supersede state and local jurisdiction over the overwhelming majority of hate crime cases. However, it would allow the federal government to provide aid to state and local authorities at their request.
The legislation only applies to violent crimes, and it does not infringe on free speech in any way.
The FBI, which tracks hate crimes nationally, identified 7,624 such crimes in 2007 alone, the last year for which data is available. These are defined as criminal incidents which target persons because of personal characteristics, such as race, religion or sexual orientation. It is thought that these acts are widely under-reported, and that the actual number of violent hate crimes is significantly higher.
The Hate Crimes Prevention Act has received support from virtually every major law enforcement organization, including the International Association of Chiefs of Police, the National Sheriffs Association, the National District Attorneys Association, and 31 state Attorneys General.
During the last Congress, identical legislation (H.R. 1592) passed the House with wide bipartisan support (237-180), but failed to garner sufficient support to come to a vote in the Senate. It is expected that if the bill passes the House, the Senate will also bring the legislation to a vote.
Filed under: National Politics
Tags: Barney Frank | gender identity | hate crimes | press release | sexual orientation
http://www.bilerico.com/2009/04/barney_frank_statement_on_ha te_crimes_bi.php
|
|
| | Topic: TSA wants to know your gender |
|---|
| TSA wants to know your gender [message #54653] |
Sat, 21 March 2009 00:48 |
CarolynnL
Messages: 875
Registered: October 2007
Location: Heartland |
Senior Member |
|
|
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
TSA wants to know your gender
Late last year, the Transportation Security Administration finalized
regulations for its
soon-to-be-launched < http://www.chicagotribune.com/travel/chi-getting-around-09-m ar09,0,7204465.column> "Secure
Flight < http://www.tsa.gov/what_we_do/layers/secureflight/index.shtm>"
program, intended to streamling the vetting of passengers and eliminate
false matches with its watch list for terror suspects. Under the program,
TSA rather than airlines will do the matching, but airlines will be required
to obtain and pass along a new set of information from passengers, including
their full name, date of birth, and gender. Privacy groups, naturally, oppose
the program <http://epic.org/privacy/airtravel/secureflight.html>, which TSA
has declared exempt from the federal Privacy
Act <http://www.tsa.gov/assets/pdf/nprm_pae.pdf>(PDF).
Transgender
individuals are also understandably worried by any
suggestion of collecting and "matching" gender information.
It's important to note that in this case the purpose is not to match the
individual's declared gender against, say, their own passport or birth
certificate, but instead to match it against TSA'a watch list for terror
suspects. In the new federal rules for Secure
Flight<http://www.tsa.gov/assets/pdf/secureflight_final_rule.pdf>(PDF),
TSA explains why it is asking about gender:
Many names are gender neutral. Additionally, names not derived from the
Latin alphabet, when translated into English, do not generally denote
gender.. Providing information on gender will reduce the number of false
positive watch list matches, because the information will distinguish
persons who have the same or similar name. Consequently, TSA is including
gender as a required element of the SFPD, which covered aircraft operators
must request from individuals and which individuals must provide to the
covered aircraft operator.
Thus, TSA has no reason to care about your gender as such - it wants to
quickly and efficiently tell whether you might be the same "Lee Anderson" or
"Alex Parker" as the one on its list. In its explanation of the program for
travel agents < http://www.tsa.gov/assets/pdf/secure_flight_passenger_data_d efinitions.pdf>(PDF),
TSA says that "Aircraft operators will collect gender based on the
declaration
of the individual making the booking." Thus, according to the way the
program is supposed to work, they are just comparing the passenger's
declaration to the watch list.
In practice, it's not likely to be that simple. As the Human Rights Campaign
noted in its opposition to the proposed
regulations <http://otrans.3cdn.net/cfa0dcd01aaca2691a_fem6iitbe.pdf> (PDF),
it's not clear whether enhanced screening of an individual will, in
practice, result if airline staff happen to notice a discrepancy with the
passenger's identity documents. Airlines may feel it's simply the right
thing to do, because gender discrepancies are viewed as suspicious - and the
regulations give them authority to decide that. Likewise if an individual
declines to make a declaration about gender. Moreover, the regulations
provide for hefty fines for those making a false statement about any
required data, including gender. How will it be decided if someone's
declaration regarding their gender is "false"? Even if no transgender folks
are ever fined, they have reason to fear the process.
While TSA's makes a logical argument that gender data would be helpful to
them in streamlining the process, they haven't and can't make the case that
it's necessary. If this requirement helps prevent harassment and
inconvenience for some travelers by eliminating erroneous matches, it will
simultaneously cause the same and potentially even worse problems for
transgender travellers.
The Obama administration wasn't in on the process of writing these rules,
which were finalized last October. It's not clear if these are among the
regulations the administration is reviewing and may reverse, but TSA appears
set to go ahead with rollout of the program.
Posted by Polymorphous Perversity at 12:12 PM
Labels: counterterrorism, transgender
http://polyperversity.blogspot.com/2009/03/tsa-wants-to-know -your-gender.html
|
|
| | Topic: New Video at the GLAD Site (Anti-discrimination laws should include gender identity) |
|---|
| | Topic: Transgender Equality and the Federal Govt. |
|---|
| Transgender Equality and the Federal Govt. [message #53924] |
Fri, 06 March 2009 12:55 |
CarolynnL
Messages: 875
Registered: October 2007
Location: Heartland |
Senior Member |
|
|
View this on our web page http://www.nctequality.org/news.html
Transgender Equality and the Federal Government
Join Us
DC is an exciting place to be right now! Be a part of it and join us for our Lobby Days, April 26-28 and educate your members of Congress about the need for transgender equality. You can register online today.
Quick Links
Visit Our Website
NCTE's Resources
Support our Work
About NCTE
Join Our List
March 5, 2009
What would federal policy look like if transgender people were fully and fairly included? Over the past months and years, NCTE has compiled a list of 112 separate policies that directly impact the lives of transgender people and our families that need to be added, removed or changed. Our latest publication, "Transgender Equality and the Federal Government" outlines each of these issues. We expect that some of these policies can be changed in the short term, while others will require long term activism. Some of the issues here will be at the forefront of NCTE's work in the coming year and in other areas, our partners in this work will be the ones to lead, with our support.
We believe that our community should be informed about the ways in which the federal government is impacting all of our lives. We share the responsibility for advocating for fair treatment under the law and we hope that you will play a role in making these changes.
NEW RESOURCE
"Transgender Equality and the Federal Government" was compiled by NCTE's staff, with input from dozens of individuals and organizations who brought their expertise on these diverse policies.
View as a PDF
Read online
TAKE ACTION
Join us April 26-28 in Washington, DC as we speak directly with Congress about the issues outlined in this document. We will arrange meetings for you to meet with lawmakers and tell them why, as one of their constituents, you need protection from discrimination and violence. These meetings are critical to the process of making lasting policy change both for ourselves and for the transgender people and their families, friends and allies in generations to come. Won't you join us? More information is available on our website.
|
|
| | Topic: Reclaim Oklahoma Anti-GLBT campaign and 2 day meet |
|---|
| Reclaim Oklahoma Anti-GLBT campaign and 2 day meet [message #49875] |
Wed, 14 January 2009 18:55 |
CarolynnL
Messages: 875
Registered: October 2007
Location: Heartland |
Senior Member |
|
|
Anti-Gay Group 'Reclaim Oklahoma' Plans January 'Homosexual Agenda' Event In OKC
December 8, 2008
By James Miko
http://www.gossip-boy.com/Clouds_Over_America.html
UPDATE JANUARY 12, 2009
Oklahoma State Representative Sally Kern will be giving her speech about the Homosexual Agenda at the 'Clouds Over America' conference on Friday, January 23rd, at 8:30 PM.
The two-day conference sees Paul Blair's 'Reclaim Oklahoma' joining forces with the John Birch Society to draw in patriots and religious leaders from across Oklahoma to detail this year's plans to "reclaim" Oklahoma for God. Called a "God, Guns, and Gays" call to action, approximately 275 will gather to discuss ways to bring their extremist Christian ideology into state and local government, libraries, and schools. Additional topics include Islamic Terrorisim, Obama's Radical Influences, and the Founding of America - God's Sovereign Hand.
Already legislators affiliated with the group have introduced bills in the state house to force prayer, creationism, and religious viewpoints into publicly funded schools.
Reclaim Oklahoma is bringing in national John Birch Society spokesmen including its president John McManus.
The Southern Poverty Law Center operates the Intelligence Project that monitors hate and extremist groups in America - originally the project was called Klanwatch. Beginning in the 1990's the SPLC began identifying militia groups that were being spawned off what it called a Patriot movement and its links to white supremecist organizations. In a recent report from 2007 chapters of the John Birch Society were identified as being part of this movement. That comes from the SPLC site itself at:
http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=7 66
The John Birch Society advertises the conference at http://www.jbs.org/downloads/cloudsoveramerica.pdf
The John Birch Society has previously opposed the Civil Rights Act and school desegregation and has been described as "the suit-and-tie branch of the Ku Klux Klan" due to its white supremacy leanings. Its past efforts have seen it attempting to repeal the Civil Rights Act, distributing segregationist literature, decrying "racial mongrelization", and organizing a paramilitary guerilla group that can respond if what they call the New World Order takes over.
Charles Key, a current Oklahoma state legislator, is a top member of the local Birch cell (chapters are called cells), who after the Murrah Federal Building bombing in 1995, tried to deflect blame from Timothy McVeigh and militia groups by claiming the U.S. government was behind the terror attack - as did the John Birch Society. Within a year after the bombing, Steve and Sally Kern appeared in Oklahoma and closely aligned themselves with Key. Coincidentally, the couple had previously resided in Idaho where James Brandon, the husband of Sally Kern's employer Barbara Brandon , was a close friend of Randy and Vicky Weaver. Vicky Weaver was killed by federal agents in what has become known as the Incident At Ruby Ridge. McVeigh claimed Ruby Ridge and Waco were the reasons he sought revenge against the US government.
When Key was accusing the Clinton Administration of a cover up over the bombing, he used Bill Graves as his legal advisor. Graves sold his home to Stephen and Sally Kern in 1999. Sally Kern later took over Graves' House of Representative seat for District 84 and adopted his anti-gay and Christian dominionist agenda. While he was a legislator, Graves filed bills to ban LGBTs from adopting or marrying and to force schools to post the Ten Commandments in every classroom.
Graves is currently a district judge in Oklahoma County; a post he achieved with the help of Tim Pope, who currently awaits trial with Brent Rinehart for a series of alleged campaign crimes. Representing Pope for those charges is Stephen Jones - Timothy McVeigh's former attorney. For more on this refer to our previous story:
http://www.gossip-boy.com/Rineharts_Nest.html
Sally Kern gained fame in 2008 with her claims that homosexuals were worse than terrorists. Rep. Kern has used a number of aliases and variations of her name during her frequent moves around the country. Currently, it is Sally R. Kern. Her birth name is believed to be Sarah Rogers.
This past October, Gossip Boy columnist Hunter was threatened by a Bircher named Tiffany Titsworth after he wrote a column about Charlie Meadows, president of the Oklahoma Conservative Political Action Committee, who had helped the group MOMS distribute post cards about Jim Roth's homosexuality in an attempt to influence the corporation commissioner race.
Hunter pulled the following photos from her MySpace page. (photos did not load)
update December 8, 2008
Edmond-based homophobe and Sally Kern ally Paul Blair will launch his anticipated mission against the LGBT Community in January. Blair, pastor of Fairview Baptist Church and founder of Reclaim Oklahoma for Christ, has scheduled a "state of the Christian union" conference called 'Clouds Over America' to discuss the homosexual agenda and other issues.
Blair's actions have been closely monitored for two months after this publication received information that he would be leading a new anti-gay movement in Oklahoma City. The January conference appears to be the launch of that drive.
The two-day meeting is being publicized with the following poster found at http://reclaimoklahoma.org/Clouds%20over%20America.jpg
Blair is assuming a more public role in fighting gay rights and will be flaming the passions of fundamentalists, who are being organized and directed to contact their legislators in support of bills Rep. Sally Kern proposes. Such bills will force Christian reconstructionalist beliefs into state law; many of which will directly impact the lives of gays and lesbians, who are their main target.
The gathering is being fully hosted by Reclaim Oklahoma and Blair, who founded the organization in 2006. From January 23 – 24, 2009, attendees will gather at the Character First Training Center at 520 West Main in Oklahoma City, to hear state and national speakers discuss how Christians need to take America back and battle LGBT attempts at gaining civil rights.
Reclaim Oklahoma's previous conferences have revolved around developing strategies to attack homosexuality and make gays and lesbians ineligible for rights and protections afforded their straight counterparts. The group focuses on gaining political allies and convincing fundamentalist religious leaders to return to their congregations and incite their church members over the dangers of an imagined gay agenda.
They use language meant to trigger a violent and outraged reaction from church goers, such as claiming that gays are going after their children in school to recruit them. Additional manipulations involve the tweaking of fears their members may harbor such as comparing gays to terrorists. Were any physical attacks made on LGBTs, the leaders like Blair and Kern could claim their hands were clean of any carnage that may occur.
In July, Blair and Reclaim Oklahoma sponsored a conference at Oklahoma Christian University in Edmond that included a keynote speech by national gay opposition leader Mat Staver. In a precursor to Proposition 8, Staver, an attorney, led the fight to have the California Supreme Court outlaw gay marriage. He failed at that effort and opponents then introduced Prop 8, which amended the California State Constitution.
The group believes that the separation of church and state is a myth and have distorted and taken out of context quotes made by Founding Fathers to claim that America is a Christian Republic and old Biblical Code should supersede the United States Constitution. According to their beliefs, that code calls for the public execution of homosexuals.
Of gays Blair has stated in a post on http://www.stephenblack.org, "Homosexuality is dangerous. Homosexuality is sinful. Homosexual marriage will destroy the very existence of the home in America. Never in the history of America is the traditional home facing the threat of extinction as it is today."
Stephen Black is the executive director of the OKC-based ex-gay group First Stone Ministries. The ministry publicly claims to be about healing and love, but under the helm of Black the para-church has joined forces with gay civil rights opponents.
Paul Blair was the main speaker and top organizer for March 2008's 'Rally For Sally', an event at the State Capitol to show support for Rep. Sally Kern after she generated national controversy by claiming gays were worse than terrorists and likened homosexuality to a cancer that should be removed rather than ignored.
During his speech he asked the crowd if they stood in support of Sally Kern. After an ovation, Blair said, "Pardon me let me say, GOVERNOR SALLY KERN!" His comments about the rally, as well as videos of the speeches given, can be found on the home page of his website http://www.reclaimoklahoma.org
A phone call to Reclaim Oklahoma verified that Sally Kern is a featured speaker for the 'Clouds Over America' conference.
During the November 15th action at OKC City Hall where LGBTs actioned for equality, Blair appeared in two televised news reports condemning the protest. On November 20th, he appeared on Fox News 25 lauding the library commission's new policy to keep GLBT literature 60" above the ground.
Reclaim Oklahoma's website has a page off the main menu at http://www.reclaimoklahoma.org/page11.html titled Homosexual Agenda. You have to directly link to the page and know it exists as it and several other pages are not listed on the site's menu. Gossip Boy was given the link by a source, who did not reveal their identity to us. The source, also, directed us to news about the conference.
The page details no actual 'Homosexual Agenda' however. It only contains a copy of the article appearing on Black's website and the following two Biblical verses:
"You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination." Leviticus 18.22
"If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall be put to death; their blood is upon them." Leviticus 20.13
In defiance of federal tax laws found within the Johnson Amendment, which forbid endorsing a political candidate from the pulpit, Blair joined with 32 other pastors around the country in an initiative launched by Focus on the Family's Alliance Defense Fund to condemn Barack Obama and push for John McCain's election. A religious watchdog group called 'Americans United For Separation of Church and State' filed complaints against Blair and five others with the IRS.
Gus Booth, one of Blair's partners in the pulpit freedom action, said that homosexuality is immoral and Obama's refusal to denounce homosexuality and abortion is "evil, wicked and immoral. Obama condones what the Bible condemns."
The location of the meeting, which is the Character First Training Center, is not without its own history of controversy.
An entry in Wiki concerning Character First says:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_of_Character
Criticism
Critics argue that the movement is a thinly veiled attempt to reduce the separation of church and state and an attempt to legally require conformity and obedience in society [12]. Additionally, critics eye the foundation and funding of the program by various evangelical leaders including those in the Dominionist movement [13]. Finally, the character traits emphasized by the program are criticized for over-emphasizing orderliness and obedience which critics find especially troubling when mixed with a political agenda with "template" legislation [14], some of which emphasizes enabling schools to purchase IACC character training materials [15]. The program is described by some to be "purely motivational" and thus difficult to measure in its "intangible benefits" [10].
Previous reports by Gossip Boy have shown both Blair's and Kern's connection to the dominionist movement.
From a Wiki article on Dominionism:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominionism
Dominion Theology
Dominion Theology is a grouping of theological systems[3] with the common belief that society should be governed exclusively by the law of God as codified in the Bible, to the exclusion of secular law, a view also known as theonomy. The most prominent modern formulation of Dominion Theology is Christian Reconstructionism, founded by R. J. Rushdoony in the 1970s. Reconstructionists themselves use the word dominionism to refer to their belief that civil government should be controlled by Christians alone and conducted according to Biblical law.[4][5]
The group Religious Tolerance claims that were the dominionists to gain control, something not thought likely however, that the use of the death penalty would be greatly expanded, when the Hebrew Scriptures' laws are reapplied. People will be executed for adultery, blasphemy, heresy, homosexual behavior, idolatry, prostitution, etc. The Bible requires those found guilty of these "crimes" to be either stoned to death or burned alive. Reconstructionists are divided on the execution method to be used.
|
|
| | Topic: Writer for Slate wants Warren booted |
|---|
| Writer for Slate wants Warren booted [message #48384] |
Mon, 29 December 2008 17:02 |
CarolynnL
Messages: 875
Registered: October 2007
Location: Heartland |
Senior Member |
|
|
This article came from the admittedly very liberal, humanitarian oriented, SLATE online magazine.
Shame on You, Rick Warren
Still more reasons to boot the huckster of Saddleback from the inauguration.
By Christopher Hitchens
Posted Monday, Dec. 29, 2008, at 2:43 PM ET
It seems to have been agreed by every single media outlet that only one group has the right to challenge Obama's promotion of "Pastor" Rick Warren, and that group is the constituency of politically organized homosexuals. But why should that be? Last week, I pointed out that Warren maintains that heaven is closed to Jews and that his main theological mentor was a crackpot "end-of-days" ranter. Why is this not to count against him as well?
Do we need our presidential invocation to be given by a bigmouth clerical businessman who is, furthermore, a religious sectarian? Let me add a little more to the mix.
In November 2006, Warren made a trip to Syria and was granted an audience with the human toothbrush who has inherited control of that country and all its citizens. Bashar Assad, the dictator of Syria, is also a religious sectarian—his power base is confined to the Alawite sect—and in the intervals of murdering his critics in Lebanon, he does not expect to receive very many distinguished American or European guests. Of late, the most eminent I can think of have been David Duke, former grand wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, and George Galloway of Britain's so-called Respect Party, and I believe only Galloway—an old fan of Baathism in all its forms—got an audience with the Grand Toothbrush himself.
Whatever time Warren managed to get with the dear bristled leader was not wasted—you should check out the hilarious parody of Don Quixote and Sancho Panza that accidentally results from the official photograph—and whatever hospitality he received from the Syrian authorities did not go unreturned.
"Syria," he told his viewers back home by video, is "a moderate country, and the official government rule and position is to not allow extremism of any kind."
This is a highly original way to describe a regime that is joined at the hip with the Iranian theocracy, that is the patron of Hezbollah in Lebanon, and that is the official and unabashed host of the fugitive Hamas leadership whose military wing directs massacre operations from Damascus itself. (One might also add that the Syrian Baath Party's veteran foreign minister, Mustafa Tlas, published a book under his own name that accused Jews of using the blood of non-Jewish children for the making of those ever-menacing Passover matzos. I suppose it depends how you define extremism.)
According to an undenied report from the Syrian state news agency, SANA, Warren followed his Assad meeting with another get-together, this time with a mufti. The resulting press communiqué read like this:
The Mufti called for conveying the real image of Syria, national unity and its call to spread peace, amity and justice to the American people which the US has distorted their image throughout the world. Pastor Warren expressed admiration of Syria and the coexistence he saw between Muslims and Christians, stressing that he will convey this image to his church and country.
(As one who has spent time in Syria, I can confirm that the official translations are indeed of that abysmal level. But Warren cannot wriggle out in this fashion, because most of the worst of what he said was recorded and transmitted in his own voice.) Our good pastor also found the time to tell his captive audience—if I may use such an unoriginal phrase in a literal way—that 80 percent of his countrymen opposed the administration's policy in Iraq. Assume yourself, dear reader, to be one of that possible 80 percent. Did you ever ask to be spoken for by Warren, who was a guest of a regime that sponsors al-Qaida infiltrators in Iraq, or to see him denounce the administration in front of an audience of Syrians that had no choice but to listen to whatever it was told? For shame.
And a shame, too, that on Inauguration Day we may also have to stand still—out of respect rather than fear, it is true—and listen to a man who is either a half-witted dupe, a hopeless naif, a cynical tourist who does favors for the powerful, a religious nut bag, a cowardly liar, or perhaps some unappetizing combination of all five. I personally think that the all-five answer is the correct one, because you cannot just find yourself in Syria, smirking into the face of the local despot and being treated like a treasured guest. The thing has to be arranged, and these things take time.
So what was the motive? Listen again to Warren's driveling broadcast for the folks back home at the megachurch:
"In fact, you know Saul of Tarsus—Saul was a Syrian. St. Paul, on the road to Damascus, had his conversion experience, and so Christians have been here the longest, and they get along with the Muslims, and the Muslims get along with them. There's a lot less tension than in other places."
I can absolutely see what Warren hoped to get out of this sordid little trip, the evidence of which he vainly tried to conceal when it threatened to become embarrassing. He wanted to be on video for his open-mouthed followers as he posed "on the road to Damascus." And he didn't care what deals he had to make, with Baath and Toothbrush Central Command, in order to bring off such a fundraising coup. But now it's the sandals of Obama that are being exploited by the same tub-thumper, and one has not merely a right but a duty to object to having as an inaugural auxiliary a man who is a pushover for anti-Semitism, Islamic sectarianism, "rapture" theology, fascist dictatorship, 10th-rate media trade-offs, and last-minute panicky self-censorship all at the same time.
Is there nobody in the Obama camp who can see that this is not just a gay issue? And is there no gay figure who can say that Warren is objectionable for reasons that have more to do with decency, democracy, and the Constitution?
The televised, Bible-bashing entrepreneur is perhaps the single most unattractive and embarrassing phenomenon that modern American culture has ever produced. It would be nice if we could begin a new era in the absence of this racket and these racketeers, and if enough people can find their voices, we still may be able to do so.
[Updated on: Mon, 29 December 2008 17:03]
|
|
| | Topic: A sexual threat to global Fundies |
|---|
| A sexual threat to global Fundies [message #48361] |
Mon, 29 December 2008 14:32 |
CarolynnL
Messages: 875
Registered: October 2007
Location: Heartland |
Senior Member |
|
|
This was forwarded to me from a friend who subscribes to Democracy in Action. It seems a little disorganized with all the hyper breaks, but is interesting if you stick with it.
http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=Vw le4AwOKgVHwULNGXAD9ZH8Hqw9LvPk
*The Sexual Threat to Global Fundamentalism
http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=gw 21J%2Fpo4SjS8GHvqUpygGgsZ5lrDFDc
by Michelle Goldberg
*The Sexual Threat to Global Fundamentalism
Why have homosexuality and gender-bending displaced Jews and
anti-Semitism as the bogeymen of fundamentalists across the globe?
http://tinyurl.com/8t27yh
*SNIP-- *
*These days, right-wing Christianity is rarely anti-Semitic in the
classic sense of the term. It may not be especially friendly to Jews,
but it rarely singles out Judaism as a demonic and cosmic evil; as
something that cannot be reconciled with a wholesome society.
Homosexuality now occupies that space in the fundamentalist Christian
imagination, even in places like Uganda where homosexuals are nearly
invisible.
This is partly due to the globalization of the religious right
http://www.religiondispatches.org/archive/religiousright/766 /proposition_8%2C_the_mormon_coming_out_party
a phenomenon that Rick Warren—with all his overseas contacts—exemplifies as
well as anyone. It's also a result of the globalization of civil rights
rhetoric. Last week, for example, sixty-six United Nations member states
signed a declaration calling for the decriminalization of homosexuality
worldwide. (The United States, predictably, was the one major Western
nation that refused to sign).
Such pressure from the developed world lets anti-gay leaders cloak
themselves in anti-imperialist righteousness, in which gay rights become
a decadent Western imposition that poor countries must be protected
from. The Vatican justified its opposition to the declaration by saying
that it would "pillory" countries that ban homosexuality, creating "new
and implacable acts of discrimination"—i.e., discrimination against
countries that persecute and imprison gay people.
Beneath the globalization of the culture wars, though, lies something
deeper—something that has led religious figures worldwide to project a
torrent of fears and anxieties onto a small and often powerless
minority. European Jews, once attacked as rootless cosmopolitans, have
frequently been viewed as symbols of modernity. Today, homosexuality has
displaced Jews as symbol and placeholder; as synecdoche for Modernism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synecdoche
(Synecdoche (pronounced "si-NEK-duh-kee", IPA: /sɪˈnɛkdəˌki/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English
from Greek http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Greek>/sinekdohi/ (συνεκδοχή),
meaning "simultaneous understanding") is a figure of speech
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Figure_of_speech in which:*
* *a term denoting a part of something is used to refer to the whole
thing (Pars pro toto
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pars_pro_toto ), or *
* *a term denoting a thing (a "whole") is used to refer to part of
it (Totum pro parte)
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Totum_pro_parte>, or *
* *a term denoting a specific class of thing is used to refer to a
larger, more general class, *
|
|
| | Topic: US holdsout condemning international declaration |
|---|
| US holdsout condemning international declaration [message #47698] |
Fri, 19 December 2008 22:33 |
CarolynnL
Messages: 875
Registered: October 2007
Location: Heartland |
Senior Member |
|
|
OK, no surprise here.
US Balks at Condemning anti-gay Laws.
UNITED NATIONS – Alone among major Western nations, the United States has refused to sign a declaration presented Thursday at the United Nations calling for worldwide decriminalization of homosexuality.
In all, 66 of the U.N.'s 192 member countries signed the nonbinding declaration — which backers called a historic step to push the General Assembly to deal more forthrightly with any-gay discrimination. More than 70 U.N. members outlaw homosexuality, and in several of them homosexual acts can be punished by execution.
Co-sponsored by France and the Netherlands, the declaration was signed by all 27 European Union members, as well as Japan, Australia, Mexico and three dozen other countries. There was broad opposition from Muslim nations, and the United States refused to sign, indicating that some parts of the declaration raised legal questions that needed further review.
"It's disappointing," said Rama Yade, France's human rights minister, of the U.S. position — which she described as in contradiction with America's long tradition as a defender of human rights.
According to some of the declaration's backers, U.S. officials expressed concern in private talks that some parts of the declaration might be problematic in committing the federal government on matters that fall under state jurisdiction. In numerous states, landlords and private employers are allowed to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation; on the federal level, gays are not allowed to serve openly in the military.
Carolyn Vadino, a spokeswoman for the U.S. mission to the U.N., stressed that the United States — despite its unwillingness to sign — condemned any human rights violations related to sexual orientation.
Gay rights activists nonetheless were angered by the U.S. position.
"It's an appalling stance — to not join with other countries that are standing up and calling for decriminalization of homosexuality," said Paula Ettelbrick, executive director of the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission.
She expressed hope that the U.S. position might change after President-elect Barack Obama takes office in January.
Also denouncing the U.S. stance was Richard Grenell, who until two months ago had been the chief spokesman for the U.S. mission to the U.N.
"It is ridiculous to suggest that there are legal reasons why we can't support this resolution — common sense says we should be the leader in making sure other governments are granting more freedoms for their people, not less," said Grenell, who described himself as a gay Republican. "The U.S.. lack of support on this issue only dims our once bright beacon of hope and freedom for those who are persecuted and oppressed."
More than 50 countries opposed to the declaration, including members of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, issued a joint statement Thursday criticizing the initiative as an unwarranted attempt to give special prominence to gays and lesbians. The statement suggested that protecting sexual orientation could lead to "the social normalization and possibly the legalization of deplorable acts" such as pedophilia and incest.
The declaration also has been opposed by the Vatican, a stance which prompted a protest in Rome earlier this month.
A Vatican spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi, said the Roman Catholic Church opposed the death penalty and other harsh repression of gays and lesbians, but he expressed concern that the declaration would be used as pressure against those who believe marriage rights should not be extended to gays.
A new Vatican statement, issued Thursday, endorsed the call to end criminal penalties against gays, but said that overall the declaration "gives rise to uncertainty in the law and challenges existing human norms."
The European nations backing the declaration waged their campaign in conjunction with the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
The Dutch foreign affairs minister, Maxime Verhagen, said countries that endorsed that 1948 document had no right to carve out exceptions based on religion or culture that allowed discrimination against gays.
"Human rights apply to all people in all places at all times," he said. "I will not accept any excuse."
He acknowledged that the new declaration had only symbolic import, but said it marked the first time such a large number of nations had raised the cause of gay rights in the context of General Assembly proceedings.
"This statement aims to make debate commonplace," he said. "It is not meant to be a source of division, but to eliminate the taboo that surrounds the issue."
Although the declaration's backers were pleased that nations on six continents had signed it, there were only two from Asia and four from Africa.
|
|
| | Topic: Miami judge rules against Florida gay adoption ban |
|---|
| Miami judge rules against Florida gay adoption ban [message #45440] |
Tue, 25 November 2008 17:23 |
Hilary 
Messages: 4090
Registered: October 2007
Location: 2, Camberwick Green Pop. ... |
Senior Member
BL Administrator
BL3d |
|
|
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081125/ap_on_re_us/gay_adoption s
MIAMI – A judge on Tuesday ruled that a strict Florida law that blocks gay people from adopting children is unconstitutional, declaring there was no legal or scientific reason for sexual orientation alone to prohibit anyone from adopting.
Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Cindy Lederman said the 31-year-old law violates equal protection rights for the children and their prospective gay parents, rejecting the state's arguments that there is "a supposed dark cloud hovering over homes of homosexuals and their children."
She noted that gay people are allowed to be foster parents in Florida. "There is no rational basis to prohibit gay parents from adopting," she wrote in a 53-page ruling.
Florida is the only state with an outright ban on gay adoption. Arkansas voters last month approved a measure similar to a law in Utah that bans any unmarried straight or gay couples from adopting or fostering children. Mississippi bans gay couples, but not single gays, from adopting.
The ruling means that Martin Gill, 47, and his male partner can adopt two brothers, ages 4 and 8, whom he has cared for as foster children since December 2004.
"I've never seen myself as less than anybody else," Gill said. "We're very grateful. Today, I've cried the first tears of joy in my life."
He said the two boys have been practicing writing their new last names, and the older one said: "That's what's going to make us a family."
Attorneys for the American Civil Liberties Union, who represent Gill, said the case was the first in the nation in which numerous experts in child psychology, social work and other fields testified that there is no science to justify a gay adoption ban.
The state planned a swift appeal, likely setting up a battle that could reach the Florida Supreme Court. A judge in gay-friendly Key West also found the law unconstitutional in September, but that ruling has not been appealed and has limited legal reach.
The state presented experts who claimed there was a higher incidence of drug and alcohol abuse among gay couples, that they were more unstable than heterosexual unions and that the children of gay couples suffer a societal stigma.
Organizations such as the American Academy of Pediatrics, American Medical Association and American Psychiatric Association all support permitting same-sex couples to adopt.
Lederman rejected all the state's arguments soundly.
"It is clear that sexual orientation is not a predictor of a person's ability to parent," the judge wrote. "A child in need of love, safety and stability does not first consider the sexual orientation of his parent. The exclusion causes some children to be deprived of a permanent placement with a family that is best suited to their needs."
Florida Assistant Attorney General Valerie Martin said an appeal would be filed on behalf of the state Department of Children & Families. She declined additional comment.
Neil Skene, special counsel for DCF, said the judge did an "excellent job" on the case, but the department still must enforce state law. He noted that DCF placed the foster children with Gill.
"We think this is a wonderful foster parent," Skene said.
Reaction came quickly from advocates of gay, lesbian and transgender parents who have long considered Florida's law the most draconian in the nation. Jennifer Chrisler, executive director of the Boston-based Family Equality Council, said the decision is a "long-overdue recognition of the equal ability of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people to raise happy, healthy families."
"The best interests of children should be decided by parents, families, professionals and judges, not opportunistic politicians and interest groups," Chrisler said.
John Stemberger, chairman of a successful drive earlier this month to pass a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage in Florida, called the ruling "classic judicial activism" and predicted it would be reversed on appeal.
"Everywhere in the law where children are affected, the standard must always be what is in the best interest of the child," said Stemberger, an attorney in Orlando. "What is stunning to me is that when it comes to dealing with gays, that standard goes out the window. Children do better with a mother and a father."
___
|
|
| | Topic: Dred Scott decision location |
|---|
| Dred Scott decision location [message #44380] |
Sun, 09 November 2008 11:35 |
PostOplesbian
Messages: 521
Registered: October 2007
Location: Phila Pa .==>. Central... |
Senior Member |
|
|
"...from an Obama rally in St. Louis, Missouri, a couple of weeks ago —100,000 people.
On Bill Moyer's Journal tonight, he described a photo...
"...from an Obama rally in St. Louis, Missouri, a couple of weeks ago —100,000 people.
Now look more closely at the background, at that old building with a copper dome turned green with age. That used to be the courthouse where slaves were auctioned from the steps.
In 1846, Dred Scott and his wife Harriett, both slaves, went there to appeal to the court for their freedom. They said they had been living in states and territories where slavery was outlawed and so should be let go.
They were, briefly, but soon were returned to slavery. When their appeal reached the United States Supreme Court, 11 years later, Chief Justice Roger Taney refused to free them. He ruled that slaves did not have the rights of citizens because Harriet and Dred Scott were, quote, "Beings of an inferior order, and altogether unfit to associate with the white race, either in social or political relations, and so far inferior that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect."
You know the storm that followed —civil war, Lincoln's assassination, the failure of reconstruction, Jim Crow, white supremacy, lynching. So much blood shed, so much suffering, so many martyrs.
My grandchildren have a hard time understanding the America I try to describe to them from my own childhood in East Texas. Across the Deep South whites still resolved to keep blacks in their place, often with a holy fervor [photo of a cross burning].
Above all they were determined to keep blacks from voting, voting meant equality —power. When black veterans coming home from fighting for their country, tried to register, they were assaulted and arrested. In South Carolina one black soldier riding the bus home after 15 months in the South Pacific, angered the driver with some minor act that struck the white man as uppity. At the next stop the veteran was taken off the bus by the local chief of police and beaten so badly he went blind. The police chief was put on trial and acquitted, to the cheers of the courtroom.
In one Georgia county the only black to vote had also just come home from the war. As he sat on his porch the day after the primary, he was shot and killed, and a sign posted on a nearby black church boasted: "The first nigger to vote will never vote again."
Signs like that did not come down easily. It would take Montgomery, Birmingham, Selma. It would take the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act, and countless individual acts of heroism. And it would take, finally, take someone like Barack Obama, who, if he had been born a generation earlier, could have been lynched for the audacity of hope, but who now saw that America was changing, is changing, has changed, and that he might be the agent for lifting from around our necks this great stone from the past, by refusing himself to be haunted or ruled by it.
He will of course disappoint; all presidents do —and the first black president will be no more exempt from reality and human nature than the 43 white men who came before him. We don't know what he will do in office. He has promised that he will take us "there" without saying what "there" entails, or what hard choices must be made. We shall see.
But that is ahead of us. For now, it is only right that we remember how long it has taken to get here, and the price paid by so many to bring us this far."
|
|
| | Topic: Hot Buttons on Ballots |
|---|
| Hot Buttons on Ballots [message #43735] |
Thu, 30 October 2008 14:32 |
CarolynnL
Messages: 875
Registered: October 2007
Location: Heartland |
Senior Member |
|
|
Social issues so volatile that the presidential campaigns sidestepped them will be on the ballots in several states next week, including measures that would criminalize most abortions, outlaw affirmative action and ban same-sex marriage in California, one of only three states that allows it.
In all, there are 153 proposals on ballots in 36 states.
In Washington, voters will decide whether to join Oregon as the only states offering terminally ill people the option of physician-assisted suicide. Massachusetts has three distinctive measures on its ballot — to ban dog racing, ease marijuana laws and scrap the state income tax, a step that could unleash budgetary tumult.
The main presidential rivals, Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain, have rarely made proactive comments during the campaign about same-sex marriage or affirmative action — issues on which the public is deeply divided. Abortion also has seemed like an uncomfortable topic for them at times, although Obama makes clear he supports abortion rights and McCain says he would like to ban most abortions.
But in a half-dozen states, these three issues are front and center.
Same-sex marriage
Florida, Arizona and California have constitutional amendments on their ballots that would limit marriage to a man and a woman. More than two-dozen states have previously approved such amendments, but none were in California's situation — with same-sex marriage legal since a state Supreme Court decision in May and thousands of gay and lesbian couples already wed.
The rival camps view the California vote in epic terms, with the outcome of Proposition 8 having enormous influence on prospects for same-sex marriage rights in other states.
"If we lose California, if they defeat the marriage amendment, I'm afraid that the culture war is over and Christians have lost," said Donald Wildmon, founder of the American Family Association. "California is a big dam, holding back the flood — and if you take down the dam in California, it's going to flood 49 other states."
Obama is expected to win easily in California, but the vote on Proposition 8 is expected to be close. Of keen interest to both sides is how churchgoing black and Hispanic voters — in general a pro-Obama constituency — will vote on the ballot measure.
Both Obama and McCain say they oppose same-sex marriage. But Obama, unlike McCain, opposes Proposition 8 and endorses the concept of broader rights for same-sex couples.
Gay rights also is an issue in Arkansas, where a ballot measure would prohibit unmarried couples from adopting or being foster parents. Conservatives backing the idea say it's aimed at same-sex couples, who are able to adopt and be foster parents in most states.
|
|
| | Topic: Mental Health Parity Act of 2008 Wall Street bailout |
|---|
 Mental Health Parity Act of 2008 Wall Street bailout [message #42788] |
Mon, 13 October 2008 14:03 |
alliebnorth
Messages: 411
Registered: April 2008
Location: Location. Location |
Senior Member |
|
|
|
No Message Body
[Updated on: Sun, 02 November 2008 21:15]
|
|
| | Topic: Conneticut overturns Gay Marriage Ban |
|---|
| Conneticut overturns Gay Marriage Ban [message #42664] |
Fri, 10 October 2008 13:44 |
CarolynnL
Messages: 875
Registered: October 2007
Location: Heartland |
Senior Member |
|
|
Conn. court overturns same-sex marriage ban
Court finds law discriminates by limiting Marriage to heterosexual couples
HARTFORD, Connecticut - Connecticut's Supreme Court ruled Friday that same-sex couples have the right to marry, making that state the third behind Massachusetts and California to legalize such unions.
The divided court ruled 4-3 that gay and lesbian couples cannot be denied the freedom to marry under the state constitution, and Connecticut's civil unions law does not provide those couples with the same rights as heterosexual couples.
"I can't believe it. We're thrilled, we're absolutely overjoyed. We're finally going to be able, after 33 years, to get married," said Janet Peck of Colchester, who was a plaintiff with her partner, Carole Conklin.
Justices overturned a lower court ruling and found in favor of the plaintiffs, who said the state's marriage law discriminates against them because it applies only to heterosexual couples, therefore denying gay couples the financial, social and emotional benefits of marriage.
"Interpreting our state constitutional provisions in accordance with firmly established equal protection principles leads inevitably to the conclusion that gay persons are entitled to marry the otherwise qualified same sex partner of their choice," Justice Richard N. Palmer wrote in the majority opinion that overturned a lower court finding.
"To decide otherwise would require us to apply one set of constitutional principles to gay persons and another to all others," Palmer wrote.
Gov. disagrees, but won't fight ruling
Connecticut already permitted same-sex civil unions that grant largely the same state rights as to married couples, but lack the full, federal legal protections of marriage.
Gov. M. Jodi Rell said Friday that she disagreed with the court's ruling, but will not fight the ruling.
"The Supreme Court has spoken," Rell said in a statement. "I do not believe their voice reflects the majority of the people of Connecticut. However, I am also firmly convinced that attempts to reverse this decision — either legislatively or by amending the state Constitution — will not meet with success."
Because Friday's decision was based on the state constitution, the ruling cannot be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, NBC News reported. The ruling is to take effect shortly.
Eight same-sex couples sued in 2004, saying their constitutional rights to equal protection and due process were violated when they were denied marriage licenses.
The plaintiffs wanted the court to rule that the law discriminated against them because it applies only to heterosexual couples, therefore denying gay couples the financial, social and emotional benefits of marriage.
The only U.S. states that allow same-sex couples to marry are Massachusetts and California.
Peck said that as soon as the decision was announced, the couple started crying and hugging while juggling excited phone calls from her brother and other friends and family.
"We've always dreamed of being married," she said. "Even though we were lesbians and didn't know if that would ever come true, we always dreamed of it."
|
|
| | Topic: Georgia transgender politician wins legal battle |
|---|
| Georgia transgender politician wins legal battle [message #42419] |
Mon, 06 October 2008 14:24 |
nancy
Messages: 88
Registered: October 2007 |
Member |
|
|
http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/stories/2008/10/06/ge orgia_transgender_politician.html
The Georgia Supreme Court found a transgender Riverdale city council candidate did not mislead voters when she ran as a woman last November.
The court unanimously ruled in favor of Michelle Bruce Monday.
Two unsuccessful city council candidates, Georgia Fuller and Stan Harris, filed suit against Bruce and the city of Riverdale last year. Fuller and Harris accused Bruce of lying to voters when she ran as a woman and Riverdale City Clerk Stephanie Thomas of tampering with voting machines.
Today, Supreme Court Justice Hugh Thompson wrote that the candidates did not produce any evidence of "fraud, misconduct, irregularity or illegality."
In their suit, Fuller and Harris allege Bruce's name is Michael Bruce. Their attorney, new Clayton school board member Michael King, argued that Bruce's birth certificate lists her as Mickey Dwayne Bruce and a man.
Bruce, who identifies herself as transgender and a woman, said she changed her name in Clayton County Superior Court in 1980 to Mickey Michelle Bruce and goes by Michelle Mickey Bruce.
Fuller and Harris had asked the court to overturn the November election and halt a December runoff. The two went to the Supreme Court after a Spalding County Superior Court judge threw out the suit, allowing the runoff to be held.
Bruce, who was elected to the Riverdale City Council in 2004, lost her bid for a second term to Atlanta firefighter Wayne Hall.
Bruce could not be reached for comment Monday afternoon.
|
|
| | Topic: Australian Human Rights Commission Report on TG Documentation |
|---|
| Australian Human Rights Commission Report on TG Documentation [message #41852] |
Sat, 27 September 2008 01:36 |
ZoeB 
Messages: 1617
Registered: September 2007
Location: Canberra, Australia |
Senior Member
BL3d |
|
|
Original available online here
Introduction
The Commission's Sex Files project was established to conduct research and consult with the sex and gender diverse community in Australia on the issue of legal recognition of sex in documents and government records.
During the Commission's project, members of the sex and gender diverse community raised concerns about the legal recognition of sex, particularly in relation to the ability of a person to change the sex recorded on their birth certificate. The Commission has been told that a desire to identify legally as a particular sex may be due to psychological sex or gender identity reasons.
This document outlines proposed reform to the legal recognition of sex in Australia. Its purpose is to stimulate discussion and input to assist in shaping the Commission's reform agenda in relation to legal recognition of sex. The Commission will also seek further input from the sex and gender diverse community on the details of the proposed reform in due course.
What is the identification system in Australia and how does it effect people who are sex or gender diverse?
Australia has a common framework for confirming and protecting the identity of its citizens. This framework classifies types of official documentation as evidence of a person's identity. Information about sex or gender is an important component of a person's identity. Most official documents and records contain information about a person's sex. However, some documents and records contain information about gender not sex.
The most important identity documents are known as cardinal documents, which are seen as the most trusted evidence of identity and citizenship. Usually cardinal documents contain information about a person's sex. For persons born in Australia, cardinal documents are birth certificates or name change certificates. For persons not born in Australia, cardinal documents are citizenship certificates or the information contained in the database held by the Department of Immigration and Citizenship.
People who are sex or gender diverse may seek to change the information that is recorded on these cardinal documents and records. Once those cardinal documents are changed, a cardinal document can be used to amend the sex or gender noted on other documents and records.
However, there are currently some significant limitations. Reform of the process for changing cardinal documents and other related areas dealing with gender-identifying documents and records would enhance the rights of the sex or gender diverse community to identify as a particular sex.
What is the current system for changing information on cardinal documents?
The current system by which a person can amend a cardinal document will depend on whether that person was born in Australia or elsewhere. Changing a cardinal document is important as it provides an official identity and enables the alteration of other documents and records.
For a person born in Australia, state and territory legislation enables a person to change their legal sex on their birth certificate if they satisfy certain criteria. Different processes exist depending on the state or territory, although throughout Australia certain categories of people who are sex and gender diverse are excluded from accessing those processes.
For a person not born in Australia, the process for changing information on a citizenship certificate or in immigration records will depend on several factors. Some of those factors include when and where the person underwent sex affirmation surgery.
The current system generally excludes:
* married persons
* persons who have not undergone genital surgery or other sex affirmation surgery
* persons who have undergone genital or other sex affirmation surgery overseas
* children and young people under 18, and
* persons who wish to be identified as intersex.
The key reform features for the legal recognition of sex
In order for persons to legally identify as a particular sex, several reforms to the current system for altering documents and records would be useful. The main focus of the reform is to ensure that cardinal documents and records can be altered to appropriately reflect the sex with which the person identifies.
The key features of the reform proposal being developed by the Commission are as follows:
1. Married persons: a person's status as married would not impact on whether a person can request a change in sex.
2. Persons who have not undergone sex affirmation surgery: a person who cannot or chooses not to undergo surgery would not be automatically ineligible to request a change in their legal sex. (Note 1)
3. Persons who undergo sex affirmation surgery overseas: a person who undergoes sex affirmation surgery overseas would be able to have that change appropriately recognised, without necessarily requiring supporting documentation from the overseas surgeon who performed the procedure.
4. Children and young people: children, young people and their parents would be able to seek a birth certificate and passport that match the identity of the child or young person.
5. Recognition of intersex: persons who cannot or do not identify as either male or female would be able to choose to be identified on their birth certificate and passport as intersex.
6. Centralised and uniform system: a central body would be created with the function of co-ordinating and facilitating changes of sex in official documents and records. In addition, or in the alternative, state, territory and federal processes would be made consistent in order for persons who seek to identify as a particular sex to be treated equally.
7. Clarity in definitions: current Australian law uses different terminology and definitions for persons who require their sex to be legally recognised. There is debate regarding the meaning of terminology such as transsexual, transgender and intersex. Reform would focus on the process for changing legal sex rather than seeking to define persons. This will promote a more inclusive system. (Note 2)
Who would be able to request a change in sex under the proposed system?
Under the proposed reform, a request for a change in sex could be made by a person who:
* is 18 or above, and
* is an Australian citizen or permanent resident of Australia, and
* has undergone or is undergoing 'sex affirmation treatment', and
* seeks to be permanently recognised as another sex.
Under the proposed reform, the parent(s) of a child or the guardian of a child could also make a request for a change in sex on behalf of a child who:
* is under 18, and
* is an Australian citizen or permanent resident of Australia, and
* has undergone or is undergoing 'sex affirmation treatment', and
* seeks to be permanently recognised as another sex.
The definition of 'sex affirmation treatment' under the proposed reforms would mean a surgical procedure or medical treatment to alter the sexual characteristics of a person. Alteration of genitals or reproductive organs would not be required to satisfy this definition.
Will the proposed system provide for an option to identify as intersex?
Under the proposed reforms a request to be identified as intersex could be made by a person who:
* is an Australian citizen or permanent resident of Australia, and
* seeks to be permanently recognised as intersex.
The definition of 'sex' in the proposed reforms would mean the attribute of male, female or intersex.
Who would determine whether a change in sex is accepted under the proposed system?
The preferred model would include the establishment of a national board as part of the proposed reforms.
Appropriate appointments to the board could be outlined in legislation. For example, legislation could provide that the board include a person with a transsexual or intersex condition and a medical specialist working in the area of sex and gender diversity.
Legislation would provide the national board with functions to liaise with other departments to change records, including state/territory birth registries and to provide advice and publicly available information about the policies and procedures concerning the legal recognition of sex. The board would also have the function of receiving and determining applications for official recognition of a change in sex.
If a national board is not created, a uniform scheme could still operate with determinations about sex made by state/territory births registries (Note 3) , state/territory magistrate courts (Note 4) or a specialist board established at the state/territory level (Note 5).
What documents would be required to support a request for a change in sex under the proposed system?
Legislation would outline what documents are needed to support the request of a change in sex under the proposed reforms.
For example, legislation could state that a request for a change in sex must be supported by:
* one statutory declaration by a doctor or medical practitioner stating that a person has undergone or is undergoing sex affirmation treatment, and
* one statutory declaration from the person requesting the recognition of sex that they identify as a particular sex and intend to do so permanently. In the case of a child and depending on the age of the child, the legislation could stipulate that the parent(s) or guardian must make a statutory declaration in relation to the child's desire to identify as particular sex.
Legislation could also outline different supporting documents for a request to identify as intersex.
How would documents and records other than cardinal documents be changed under the proposed system?
The national board as described above would be tasked with assisting the alteration of other documents and records.
The national board could also advise on inconsistent policies and procedures and any future reform if necessary.
How would the proposed reforms be implemented?
In order to support these reform features, a combination of legislative and policy reform would be necessary. Harmonisation of state, territory and federal systems would also be required to ensure that the systems were consistent and streamlined.
Legislative reform could occur either through the enactment of federal legislation or by uniform state/territory legislation.
Notes:
1. The Commission notes that views and opinions vary on the necessity of surgery to request a legal reassignment of sex. The Commission has heard from people who require or required psychological and anatomical harmony achieved through surgery to alleviate their condition. For others surgery is not required for a person to live, identify and present as a particular sex. The Commission acknowledges that access to affordable sex affirmation treatment is of concern to many in the sex and gender diverse community. The Commission also believes that a person who genuinely lives as a member of a particular sex should not be prevented from legal recognition on the basis that they have not undergone genital or reproductive surgeries alone.
2. Much of the research and consultation conducted by the Commission during the sex and gender diversity project has focused on the issue of terminology. The Commission will use this research to determine the use of affirmative language in any reform proposals.
3. As currently occurs in some states/territories in Australia.
4. As currently occurs in South Australia.
5. State/territory specialist boards could be modelled on the existing Western Australian Gender Recognition Board.
Comment
Australia has a Constitution that borrows heavily from the US model. It is a Federation of States and Territories, each with their own legislative framework. The main difference is that Marriage is a Commonwealth (ie Federal) issue, not a State one.
This document could be useful as a framework for a similar home-grown made-in-the-USA solution.
|
|
| | Topic: Water the issue not included in the energy issue |
|---|
| Water the issue not included in the energy issue [message #41521] |
Sun, 21 September 2008 21:37 |
lisagurl
Messages: 2100
Registered: October 2007
Location: inside |
Senior Member
BL3D |
|
|
One sixth of the world's population does not have access to clean drinking water. More than 2 million people, most of them children, die each year from water-borne diseases.
People in India, where millions don't have access to clean drinking water, fill buckets from a supply pipeline.
Water-related problems aren't restricted to the developing world. A harmful pesticide, banned by many European countries, remains widely used in the United States, where it runs into rivers and streams.
And one expert estimates California's water supply will run out in 20 years.
These sobering statistics come from "FLOW," a new documentary film about the world's dwindling water supply. The filmmakers and their sources argue a combination of factors, including drought and skyrocketing demand, have created a looming global crisis that threatens the long-term survival of the human race.
|
|
| | Forum: New Beginnings |
|---|
| Topic: My own site |
|---|
| My own site [message #66573] |
Sun, 06 September 2009 14:30 |
JoannaM
Messages: 168
Registered: April 2009
Location: Socorro, New Mexico |
Senior Member |
|
|
http://joanna.thepumas.net/forum
basically a small startup right now. Open to all members of the spetrum, fully moderated to make it more difficutlt for prevs and naredowells to harass our memebers.
|
|
| | Topic: A letter to my friend |
|---|
| A letter to my friend [message #40605] |
Tue, 09 September 2008 18:41 |
| Anonymous |
|
|
|
The following is a letter I wrote to my friend. I share it because I think the subject speaks to us all. It also raises issues about leading blended vs. open lives, and just what reality awaits for us. Some statements you will disagree with. I left them in anyway, so you can see the whole letter.
FYI, I am post-op and live a largely blended life, and recently had someone from my past appear to maliciously wreak havoc in my present. The person is a woman who was attracted to me as a man -- which in my life were often the people least accepting of my transition. Here is the letter:
Yeah, you were 100% right: anything said by [Jane Doe] shouldn't bother me. That's absolutely correct and I agree. It "shouldn't." It totally should not. I mean, in a perfect world, we would all be immune to the slings and arrows of others. No one would be bothered by anyone else's words or deeds. But no matter how desirable that would be, that's not the world I actually live in. I'm not a perfect enough person to be unaffected by [Jane]'s words and deeds. Oh, most of what she says ... doesn't bother me one bit. But this thing about attacking me as a human being, denying me equal human status, that does bother me. "Should" it? I don't know. It's easy to say no, but in some ways, I think it definitely should.
Let's face it, we don't like to admit it out loud, but I am a member of an oppressed minority. I know we like to talk about how I'm not, and functionally I am doing my best to be just another woman. But in real world terms my relative lack of current oppression has everything to do with my success at hiding the cues of my minority status, and not from any great strides by humanity in recognizing me as "real." And while we can all cheerfully agree that I am "simply a real woman," and no longer a "transwoman," there are about six billion people walking the earth today who would disagree with us if they read me. Some would disagree to the point of murder and obliteration. And that is a reality I can't ignore. [Jane] is one of those people, and since she arrived from the past I can't "hide" my status from her.
Crimes against transwomen are on the rise, which is due to our increased visibility. We can't be immune from the hatred, we can only hide ourselves from it. When we are discovered, we make people uncomfortable...we pull the rug out from under people's assumptions. We're catalysts for a changed paradigm, and most people don't want to change their views of the world. They'd rather kill the catalyst, obliterate it. And when transwomen are killed, they are not simply shot or stabbed, their faces and bodies are mutilated in an attempt to erase their humanity. That is a reflection of how people feel, even in 2008, and that is the silent reality I live with that I can never discuss. I don't think we can stop the people from feeling that way. I think we can only hide when we can, and stand up for ourselves when we are confronted with it.
Aside from the very palpable shame and damage to our sense of self that is caused by haters, failing to stand up for ourselves when confronted with hate simply emboldens the haters. If I can go this far, they wonder, how much farther might I be able to go? Some go as far as killing and mutilating. Others take more hidden actions against us: denying us jobs, spitting in our restaurant food, puncturing our tires, excluding us from groups and snickering behind our backs.
[Jane Doe] is a symbol of the hidden hatred that is all around me. If I didn't pass well – if I looked and talked like [name deleted], for instance – I could see and feel that hatred on a daily basis if I were aware enough. And even when I did not see it, even when good and decent people encountered me, the discomfort would still be there. When we don't blend in well, we make people uncomfortable, sometimes enough to turn them to rage and an attempt to obliterate us in order to save their concept of an orderly world.
[Jane Doe] is doing what she can to obliterate me. If she was the killing kind of person, I have no doubt that she would kill me. She would not just end my life, she would smash my face with a rock until it was nothing but a pile of red mush, unrecognizable as a human being. She would dismember me, cutting off the offending parts, and obliterate them, as well.
That's what [Jane] means to me: the person who would obliterate my humanity from the face of the earth. If you think that is an exaggeration, I say you're wrong. It is exactly what she would do literally if she could bring herself to, and is what she is trying to do figuratively and functionally, instead. [Jane] is the face of hate in my life.
I understand that there are possible hidden consequences to sending the letter I wanted to send. You are wise to caution me that it is risky to poke a grizzly bear, even when you think it can't reach you. If the bear is sufficiently motivated, you might find that it discovers a way to get at you. And so, despite the strong desire to stand up for myself and give her as good as she gives me, I demur.
And that leaves the effects of hatred poured all over me like sticky honey. Covering me. Difficult to get off. Making me feel dirty. And it evokes the feelings of all the people in my transitioning past who have ever hated me for who I am: The man who raped and beat me. My parents. My brother. My ex. [My customers] who left me and complained about me. The teens in the gas station who yelled threats and threw beer bottles at me, and scared the shit out of me. The many people who stared and snickered. The waiter who made a point of calling me "sir." The religious nuts who said I am an abomination before God and who threatened me with eternal torture. The politicians who want to take away what few rights I have. The jokes we transwomen are made of on TV. And the asshats in the [organization]. All these things are real. All these things inflicted a collective hurt that lingers, even though I really, really, really want to be able to wish the hurt away, just like people suggest. "Just don't let it bother you. What do you care what they think?" (Sigh...) If only I could. You have no idea how badly I want to be able to do that.
You may discount those things I mentioned. You may believe them unimportant or unworthy of acknowledging, or simply drama from the past. But their effects are real and unavoidable for me, as is the case for each one of us who have undertaken this path. I am one of the lucky ones. For me, all that stuff means only emotional remnants, and those relatively minor. But for 75% of us, it means chronic unemployment. Uncounted numbers of us suffer neuroses and psychiatric disabilities because of it. A third of us are killed or take our own lives. The vast majority of us suffer marginalization and varying levels of exclusion from the mass of society. And there are many other effects. I could not run for political office if I wanted to. Because I don't think I "pass" (i.e., "hide") flawlessly, there are hundreds of jobs I could not hold. (There goes my career as a weather bimbo on the local news!) And as much as I try to carve myself out from the collective of transwomen, when I think of them I realize that there, but for the grace of god, go I.
And so, when caution and fear command that I not stand up to [Jane Doe], I am left with little outlet for my hurt and rage, save for a ceremonial blood-letting with someone who knows and understands. A shared event of meaning, like a wedding or a funeral or a church service. Or perhaps more like an exorcism. A chance to rail together and shake our fists at the air, to give the evil a name and to give it voice and recognition. To shake it loose from inside, and send it out into the universe where it can no longer do me harm. A ceremonial venting.
So that's what I was going for. But it was brought up short in the form of loving but premature advice to "get over it" being poured on my vent like cold water. I get that not everyone understands or enjoys this process, and that you may be one of them. Some don't see the need for it; some see it as a waste of time and energy. Some don't understand why the person in need can't just cut to the chase and do the "obvious" healing thing. I'm not sure where you stand, but you certainly do not see the same necessity for it that I do. People all over the planet seek the process out, though, for myriad reasons, from a bad day at work, to break-ups, to murders, so I'm pretty sure there is some validity to my feeling of need.
I actually don't disagree with you about sending the letter. I don't see the potential harm, but I recognize that there could be some somewhere that I don't see, and I acknowledge the wisdom of your caution, even if it seems to go against everything you've told me about standing up for myself. I'm not disagreeing with you. I accept the truth of what you said, or at least the wisdom of it. I accept it even if I don't like it. You convinced me, and that's why I deleted my letter and didn't save it.
So, you see, I listen to you. I didn't get angry because you said things I didn't agree with. I agreed with you, albeit reluctantly about the letter. And the proof of that agreement is that I deleted my letter when I could have saved it or sent it. You did, in fact, convince me. And I absolutely agree with you that I shouldn't let [Jane] bother me. Believe it or not, that concept wasn't new to me last night, and I was not shying from it. I want very much to feel as you say I should feel. My inability to do so may be a failure on my part, but it is not to ignore you, or disagree with you, or be angry with you. I do agree that doing that would be a wonderful resolution. Absolutely. I'm just not sure how to get there from here without going through the venting process. But I heard you, and I agree with you.
Anyway, I just thought you should know that I agree with you, I heard you, and I was just looking to vent.
|
|
| | Topic: Introducing Queers United |
|---|
| Introducing Queers United [message #40351] |
Fri, 05 September 2008 13:37 |
| Anonymous |
|
|
|
As a trans and Queer activist I want to say hello and take the opportunity to share my activist site Queers United with you all.
http://www.queersunited.blogspot.com
|
|
| | Topic: A Movie About Trinidad, CO |
|---|
| A Movie About Trinidad, CO [message #39855] |
Fri, 29 August 2008 09:37 |
CarolynnL
Messages: 875
Registered: October 2007
Location: Heartland |
Senior Member |
|
|
US - Film - "Trinidad" - A fascinating visit to the 'sex change
capital of the world...' [2008-08-28 Austin 360]
http://www.austin360.com/movies/content/movies/stories/2008/ 08/0829agliff.html
A fascinating visit to the 'sex change capital of the world'
In their documentary 'Trinidad,' Austin filmmakers PJ Raval and Jay
Hodges look at Colorado's transsexual underground that is very much
above ground
By Chris Garcia
AMERICAN-STATESMAN FILM WRITER
Thursday, August 28, 2008
Gracefully does the small town of Trinidad, Colo., wear its title as
the "sex change capital of the world." It's a fact of life, taken
with a shrug here, the random wrinkled nose there. Mostly, the
population of 9,000 coolly accepts the designation with even,
perhaps, a ray of pride.
File the phenomenon under: "When very progressive things happen to
small rural towns."
It began when a Dr. Stanley Biber conducted the area's first genital
reassignment surgery in 1969 and took off from there. In 2003, after
performing almost 6,000 sex-change operations, Biber, then 80, handed
over his practice to Dr. Marci Bowers. Marci used to be Mark, and she
became the first transgender surgeon to perform these operations.
Two of her patients are Laura and Sabrina, and the three of them and
their captivating life dramas are the focus of Austin filmmakers PJ
Raval and Jay Hodges' documentary "Trinidad," which screens Thursday
at the Alamo Ritz during the Austin Gay and Lesbian International
Film Festival. The festival runs Wednesday through Sept. 7.
Avoiding "before and after" sensationalism — part of a sex-change
operation is tastefully depicted — Raval and Hodges trace the women's
personal stories with curiosity and sensitivity, using quaint, rural
Trinidad as a mountain-girdled backdrop. As in any documentary worth
its video stock, universality about the human condition is the
subtext of "Trinidad."
"It makes (viewers) think about their own lives, if they're living on
their own terms and really expressing who they are," Raval says. "If
anything, it will give them the courage to be who they are."
The film's directors met five years ago as co-workers at Cinematexas.
While Hodges is new to filmmaking, Raval has cultivated a long résumé
that's made him something of an Austin film star. He's best known as
the cinematographer on the features "Room" and "The Cassidy Kids" and
the recent Sundance Film Festival documentary winner "Trouble the
Water." He also shot "Trinidad."
Much of the crew on "Trinidad" boasts strong local connections,
including editor Kyle Henry (the director of "Room") and executive
producer Matt Dentler (former South by Southwest Film producer).
Hodges and Raval express breathless gratitude to the Austin Film
Society, City of Austin, AGLIFF and fellow filmmakers for aiding the
production.
"It's about a town in Colorado, but it's really an Austin film,"
Raval says.
Earlier this summer, "Trinidad" enjoyed a well-received world
premiere at the Los Angeles Film Festival, followed by screenings at
Outfest. (Raval says they're negotiating for a distribution deal.)
Playing it for Austin is something else, though. It's a homecoming.
American-Statesman: Why Trinidad?
Hodges: We heard about Trinidad at a dinner party from a psychologist
of one of the patients there, because patients have to go through a
year of psychological evaluation to make sure they really identify as
a transgender. We were like, "Wow, there's this town in the middle of
nowhere with tons of transsexuals in it?" It was built up with all
this mythology created around it.
Raval: It sounded like a town where you walk down the street and
there's transgender women everywhere. We saw articles that made
claims that there were size-12 pumps in all the stores and lots of
big women clothing stores all over.
Was there a lot of de-mystification once you got there?
Raval: Absolutely.
Hodges: We contacted Marci Bowers, the main surgeon in the film, and
she invited us out to check it out and to talk in person. Our first
trip was about five days in 2004.
Raval: It was initially a "research trip," but we brought our cameras
and started shooting a little bit, met people and got the feel for
the town. What interested us is that there really is this universal
idea of acceptance and self-expression, which is something everyone
goes through. This is just a particular form of it.
Hodges: Usually this subject is treated voyeuristically.
Raval: We were coming at it as personal stories, portraits of these
women and what they've gone through to express who they are.
Hodges: We shot over two and a half years and spent about four months
out there, so we really got to know the characters, and they opened
up to us and let us in.
With the pickups, strong religious foundation and cowboy culture,
there seem to be parallels between Trinidad and, say, any small town
in Texas. Except, of course, for the transgender population.
Hodges: I grew up partly in West Texas and I was, like, "There's no
way this could possibly happen there!" But it's been part of
Trinidad's landscape for more than 30 years.
Raval: It's a small town and everyone has a stereotype about a small
town, especially in America. That intrigued us. It defied the
stereotype of small-town America. Generally you think of that as very
conservative, very unaccepting.
Yet you show that side of the town in the film. Some of the interview
subjects express distaste.
Raval: The question is: Can people coexist? And they do. That's what
we set out to explore. Fine, we meet these people who say they're
very religious and have a very specific value system. But does that
mean they're going to actively impose their thoughts on someone else
in the town? For the most part they don't. They're respectful.
Hodges: It's "live and let live." We heard that a lot: "Trinidad's a
live and let live place."
Raval: "To each their own." "Who's to say?" We heard that one a lot,
too.
What did you learn about people and life making the film? Any
epiphanies?
Hodges: That my problems are really minor. (Laughs) I learned a lot
of confidence from the women. They're incredibly strong people who've
been through a lot. Look at Sabrina, who's been knocked down time
after time. But she's still great, happy and confident.
Raval: They're incredible women who inspire both of us. They really
know who they are and are committed to finding out who they are. They
understand what the consequences are, but they also understand the
importance of expressing yourself and being true to yourself.
Something that's a little sad is how most of the transgender patients
are deep into middle-age and only now fulfilling their dream of
complete transformation.
Raval: I think that all of them tried for several years to suppress
what was in them.
Hodges: Sabrina actually says in the film that when she met her wife,
she told her she was a cross-dresser. It became more of an identity
issue, not just something she did on the side.
Raval: They come from a different age and generation. Transsexual and
transgender issues are at the forefront now. You can read about kids
who are 12 or 13 who identify themselves like that. There's a greater
understanding of it, and people like Marci, Laura and Sabrina are out
there educating people. That's something we're hoping to do with the
documentary. Transgenders are part of every community. All the women
in the movie were fathers, husbands, brothers. It's not like a small
community tucked away somewhere. This is someone you might actually
know.
'Trinidad'
SCREENING
'Trinidad' screens at 8 p.m. Thursday at the Alamo Ritz (320 E. Sixth
St.). Directors Jay Hodges, below left, and PJ Raval will be there.
The 21st annual Austin Gay and Lesbian International Film Festival
When: Wednesday through Sept. 7
Where: Alamo Ritz, 320 E. Sixth St.
Cost: $10 per movie; all-access badges and film passes are also
available
Information: www.agliff.org
--
Copyright 2008 The Austin American-Statesman.
|
|
| | Topic: Thank You! |
|---|
| Thank You! [message #37025] |
Tue, 22 July 2008 22:34 |
DJ
Messages: 9547
Registered: October 2007
Location: Home |
Senior Member
BL3d
Blogs Moderator |
|
|
Well......the New Beginnings page finally got a little action.
About time.
Ok Peps....we need to keep a little action going on out here.
It's our "Face" on the web......
There are people out there seeking answers.....
WE have them.
Let's get their attention.
If YOU are new to this site.....stick around.
Questions? Stress? Anxiety? This is the place to find comfort..
This is where I found hope.....you can to.
Visitors Welcome!
You members????
|
|
| | Topic: Rebirth: A Transgendering Surgery Creates a New Life |
|---|
| Rebirth: A Transgendering Surgery Creates a New Life [message #34860] |
Fri, 20 June 2008 19:59 |
| Anonymous |
|
|
|
If you like astrology, you may be interested in this:
http://ayurastro.com/astrology/?p=28
|
|
| | Topic: Pie Jesu Domine, Dona eis requiem. |
|---|
| | Topic: Being whom but just being you thats what it's all about ? |
|---|
| Being whom but just being you thats what it's all about ? [message #23315] |
Mon, 17 March 2008 20:45 |
Diana 58
Messages: 292
Registered: October 2007
Location: Colorado |
Senior Member
BL3d |
|
|
How do you feel about yourself?
How do you feel about others?
Really do you really care and you should?
What do you feel about life in general?
I'd Like To Teach the World To Sing (In Perfect Harmony)
The New Seekers
You know are you hiding within yourself I know I did for many years so now its time to come out and celebrate but for everyone so enjoy be apart of everyone both new and old and that includes you!!!
I'd like to build the world a home
And furnish it with love!!!!!!
Grow apple trees and honey bees and snow-white turtle doves!!!!!
I'd like to teach the world to sing
In perfect harmony!!!!!
I'd like to hold it in my arms and keep it company
I'd like to see the world for once
All standing hand in hand!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And hear them echo through the hills "Ah, peace throughout the land"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
(That's the song I hear)
I'd like to teach the world to sing (that the world sings today)
In perfect harmony
(Lead singer and background singers singing simultaneously)
I'd like to teach the world to sing
In perfect harmony
Id like to build the world a home
And furnish it with love
Grow apple trees and honey bees and snow-white turtle doves
Sorry but it is the real thing about what but all of us so lets all just love and be caring about one and everyone!!!!
|
|
| | Forum: Casa BL.....the Fashion Forum |
|---|
| Topic: A couple of resourses |
|---|
| | Topic: What's this all about? |
|---|
| What's this all about? [message #86923] |
Mon, 25 January 2010 21:24 |
Hilary 
Messages: 4090
Registered: October 2007
Location: 2, Camberwick Green Pop. ... |
Senior Member
BL Administrator
BL3d |
|
|
This is a public forum intended to be a place to post fashion thoughts. It is open to members and non members; anonymous posting is fine.
Copy and paste links and pictures to well know magazines and news items but please give them full credits if possible.
Posts can be TS or not; just remember a good women needs a good wardrobe.
Otherwise the usual BL rules apply. Enjoy.
|
|
|
Current Time: Wed Mar 10 06:48:57 EST 2010
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.16237 seconds
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
O'Donnabhain tax case decided
) does not have a GBLT chapter.
Transexuals coverd by healthcare in ontario
