HRC, Keep Your Moneygrubbing Mitts Off Our TDOR

The TDOR is a time for us to memorialize the people we lost to anti-transgender violence. It's a event that's designed as a way for our allies to show support to our community.

In Louisville, the TDOR celebration has been organized by the wonderful people at the Louisville Presbyterian Theological Seminary. We will celebrate the 5th annual local observance tomorrow night at 7 PM in the Caldwell Chapel on the LPTS campus.

While we deeply appreciate our allies and can't thank you enough for the love, support and help that you have given us over the years, there's one group that in my opinion should NOT be welcome at any TDOR event this year and for the foreseeable future.

In the wake of their odious and morally bankrupt handling of ENDA (which will result in more transgender deaths until we have full civil rights) HRC is co-sponsoring TDOR memorials in Washington DC, Houston, Phoenix and Chicago.

They have revealed themselves to be the Antichrists of civil rights and have no respect for anything but cash, so why should we dishonor the memories of transpeople who died by having an organization that worked to pass a transgender-free ENDA, took $10K-20K of our money at SCC while saying they would oppose a non-inclusive ENDA and has spent a decade opposing our inclusion sign up as the sponsor of TDOR events?

Their opposition to our inclusion in ENDA is a contributing factor along with the anti-transgender hatred to some of the transpeople we memorialize at TDOR's being on that list in the first place.

So until HRC mends its ways, why should we give them the opportunity to keep perpetrating the 'illusion of inclusion' and claim in their fundraising efforts that they are transgender friendly? Their deeds not only speak loudly as to the type of organization they are, it speaks to their moral fiber as well.

HRC 'Charm Offensive' Talking Points

TransGriot Note: This was sent to me by a friend who despises and is deeply offended by what HRC and Barney Frank did to the transgender community. Over the last week HRC has been beating the bushes in the GLB_t community trying to spin last week's transgender-free ENDA vote and sanitize their anti-transgender history. We in Louisville heard some of these talking points in Vic Basile's speech last Saturday.

***
Speaking Points this week’s ENDA vote

o HRC amended its policy this week on ENDA, and moved to support the non-inclusive bill in the House.

o HRC adopted the strategy because we strongly believed that having the vote, even on an incomplete bill, is crucial to setting the stage for the next Congress and getting a fully inclusive bill to a President who will actually sign it into law.

o Having a vote on an incomplete bill as a means of bringing people along is a strategy that has worked with other important legislation on the Hill, ranging from the Family and Medical Leave Act – which was introduced and voted on in many forms before signed into law in its complete form, and most notably the strategy worked just this year when the fully inclusive Hate Crimes bill passed both the House and the Senate.

The Matthew Shepard Act – also known as the Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act or the Hate Crimes bill, which passed both houses of Congress this year as a fully inclusive bill, was voted on multiple times in both the House and the Senate when it was still only a sexual orientation only bill.

Having a strong and compelling record of votes on the incomplete, non-inclusive bill gave HRC and leaders on the Hill the leverage needed to pass the fully inclusive bill this year.

The vote this week in the House on ENDA is not the vote that HRC and many of our allies wanted. We did everything possible, from comprehensive field work, to corporate advocacy, to lobbying to have a vote on the fully inclusive version of ENDA.

HRC and other political leaders believe that since the non-inclusive ENDA is moving forward, it must pass. If it were to be pulled or defeated in a bad vote, it would be a setback for going forward with any GLBT legislation in Congress for many years to come.

HRC made the hard choice to support this bill as part of a long term strategy to passing a fully inclusive bill in the future – just as we did with the Hate Crimes Legislation.

HRC will use this week’s vote to establish a baseline of support among members of Congress so that we can firmly establish which members are with us, and which ones need more education. This is a first step – not the end game.

HRC is going to redouble our educational efforts on transgender issues moving forward with an eye on the next 14 to 18 months, leading up to the next time that we might have a vote on ENDA in a new Congress.

***

Yeah, right. More HRC prevarication.

The word from people inside the Beltway is that the Mattachine gays are extremely pissed because we transgender people dared oppose this non-inclusive ENDA bill.

We watched you disingenuously strip us out of our legislative Holy Grail, diss us on the Hill and in the media as being selfish, and y'all thought that we were going to just sit idly by twiddling our thumbs while y'all pass a bill that we see as a life-or-death issue without us?

Y'all been doing too much Ecstasy.

As our punishment for fighting for our community's interests, according to our Beltway sources, the Mattachine gays have vowed that we transpeople are going to get frozen out of ANY federal GLBT civil rights legislation until 2013.

Once again, the true transphobic colors of HRC and its leadership cadres rear their ugly heads.

The Kentucky Fairness Alliance Dinner Protest

Last night I had the pleasure of attending the Kentucky Fairness Alliance Out and About dinner here in Da Ville at the Frazier Arms Musuem. KFA is our statewide GLBT org who is just as pissed as we are about the non-inclusive ENDA.

It was shaping up to be a great event. Robbie Bartlett, one of our local favorite blues, R&B and jazz singers was the entertainment. I had a great time talking to her about a variety of subjects before she had to exit the table and join her band in preparation for her performance. We had some local and state politicians that came to show their support along with many members of the progressive civil rights community in Louisville. I had a great time kicking Transgender 101 knowledge to some of our straight allies who were sitting with me at the Fairness Campaign table.

Unfortunately, the keynote speaker was the first executive director of the Homosexual Rights Corporation, Vic Basile. So when he strode to the podium to make his speech, I stood up and turned my back to him.

Another transperson at the dinner joined me along with five other guests. Others picked that moment to head to the bathroom or take cigarette breaks. When Basile got to the point in his speech about the ENDA passing on Wednesday being a historic moment, there were scattered boos in the room.

The protest had the effect of making Basile angry and I noted he started stumbling over his speech. When he was done I sat down as he got some weak golf clap applause. He hightailed it out of the room before I could pin him down about some selective retelling of African-American civil rights history in support of the HRC 'incremental rights' spin they are trying to use to justify cutting transgender people out of ENDA.

My point is that your push for 'incremental rights' will result in exponential increases in bigotry, discrimination and violence against transpeople like myself. We've already seen the anti-transgender sentiment surface during the ENDA debate among some elements of the GLB communty. And as Terrance at the Republic of T blog so eloquently put it, the 'incremental rights' crowd is extolling the virtues of using spoonfuls of justice to counteract shovelfuls of injustice.

It's not cool when you're the one at the receiving end of the shovelfuls of injustice.

In Basile's speech he made the point about standing in the way of intolerance. For a few minutes last night I took his advice and did just that.

The Shady HRC Commissioned Poll

One thing that my father always hammered home to me as me and my siblings were growing up (and he would know since he ran radio stations for a living) was never accept what a media outlet is telling you until you ask the how, who, what, when, where and why questions and what their motivation is for saying it.

My father's wisdom has come roaring back to me ever since I heard about the poll published in Advocate.com that stated that 70% of the GLB community favored moving ahead on a transgender-free ENDA.

Just to catch you TransGriot readers up with this, the Advocate reported on the eve of the ENDA vote the results of a poll comissioned by HRC. It seems to indicate a strong majority of gays and lesbians supported passing the Employment Nondiscrimination Act even though it did not include protections for transgender people.

The stench from this poll started jumping out at me immediately. HRC commissioned it. The Mattachine gays have been getting beat up over the fact that 300 organizations are united in NOT having an ENDA proceed without transgender peeps and HRC is the lone holdout. They have had people openly question the incrementalist strategy that they wish to pursue.

Now this poll comes out less than 24 hours before debate starts on the Hill, it's immediately published and seized on by the incrementalist crowd as 'evidence' that the community wants to move forward even if it doesn't protect transgender people.

Okay, so lets take a look at the poll questions.

The poll was a random survey of 514 LGBT Americans conducted by Knowledge Networks, Inc. of Menlo Park, CA. It asked participants two questions concerning ENDA. The first asked which of the following three statements was closest to reflecting their views:

A. National gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender civil rights organizations should oppose this proposal because it excludes transgender people.

B. National gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender civil rights organizations should support this proposal because it helps gay, lesbian, and bisexual workers and is a step toward transgender employment rights.

C. National gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender civil rights organizations should adopt a neutral stance for this proposal because while it helps gay, lesbians, and bisexual workers, it also excludes transgender people.

67.7 percent of the respondents chose answer B, 15.8% agreed with statement A, 12.8% agreed with statement C, and 3.6% did not answer.

But check out how this is worded. One of the things that you have to watch for and think about when you read poll results and analyze them is how the question is worded.

So let's do that.

National gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender civil rights organizations should support this proposal because it helps gay, lesbian, and bisexual workers and is a step toward transgender employment rights.

Note the part I have in bold print. The question worded so that you think that passing a non-inclusive ENDA is a step toward transgeder emplyoment rights.

Excuse me? The step toward transgender employment rights was leaving HR 2015, the inclusive ENDA alone and not stripping transgder people out of it in the first place.


The second question asked people the following: "This proposal would make it illegal to fire gay, lesbian, or bisexual workers because of their sexual orientation. This proposal does NOT include people who are transgender. Would you favor or oppose this proposal?"

In response, 59.1% said they favored the proposal and felt strongly about it, 15.4% said they favored it but did not feel strongly about it, 15.1% opposed it and felt strongly about it, 8.8% opposed it but did not feel strongly about it, and 1.6% did not answer.

Of the 514 people the poll surveyed, 246 respondents identified as male, 262 identified as female, five identified as female-to-male transgender, and one person identified as male-to-female transgender. The poll was conducted between October 2-5. The margin of error was +/- 4.3 percentage points at a 95% confidence level.

I have a lot of questions about these so-called random GLBT people they surveyed.


How would a polling company know someone was GLBT unless they had that information in advance, especially if they're doing a RANDOM sample? Where did they get a list of GLBT peeps to question? What part of the country did these 514 people reside in? Did they target the calls to areas that have strong anti-transgender sentiment? Did they call their HRC Federal Club members?

My suspicion is that they surveyed HRC Federal Club members, who are viruently anti-transgender and by doing so, would guarantee the results they wanted. HRC has already been burned on a previous poll they tried to do in North Carolina a few years ago.

In 2001 Equality NC conducted a survey partially funded by HRC that was conducted by an independent polling company. They asked over 2000 North Carolinians of all persuasions if they would prefer working with gays and lesbians, compared to Transgender people. To HRC's shock and surprise, there was an overwhelming majority voting in favor of working with Transgender people.

So since HRC has a proven history of deceptive and morally bankrupt behavior, and of burying poll results that don't come out the way they want them to, count me among the skeptics as to just how accurate this poll was.

Why Is The Catholic Church Hatin' On Transpeople?

In October 1953 a Cuban newspaper conducted an interview with Father Hilario Chaurrondo. At the time he was a blunt, outspoken, down to earth and very popular priest known throughout the island for his prison advocacy and other work that kept him close to the grittier aspects of life in pre-Castro Cuba.

I read this eye-opening snippet of the article in the book Christine Jorgenson-A Personal Autobiography. This particular chapter in the book covers Christine's visit to Havana to perform at the Tropicana. Here's what Father Chaurrondo had to say about Christine.

"I am familiar with the Cristina Jorgenson case right from its very beginnings. I have followed it in the press and have read her memoirs. Very interesting-very. These are the things which leave us bewildered by the progress of the days we live in.

A doubt came into our mind. Should we ask him or not? Well, when all is considered, Father Chaurrondo is considered a "man of the world".

"Father, you are aware that Cristina is legally a woman with all the rights and attributes inherent in such a social condition. Would you be disposed to give your blessing to Cristina marry a man in church?"

Father Chaurrondo doesn't flinch and he replies as if it were the most natural thing in the world.

"If her application for a Catholic ceremony carries with it all the presiquites and prior dispensations of the Archbishop, I would say yes."

"Would Cristina's case involve special dispensations?"

"No. Only the normal procedure. Just as for any other woman. As far as we are concerned, Cristina is a woman since she has been so designated by the United States, where they know what they are doing."

"And the Archbishop's dispensation?"

"Cristina is an alien resident, and in such cases certain requirements have to be met for reasons of diocese and parish. I repeat, Cristina's case calls for no special treatment. I can marry Cristina Jorgenson in the church once the usual and current regulations have been complied with. The procedure will be no different with her than with any other woman."

Father Chaurrondo is clear, frank, simple and definite. Cristina Jorgenson can be married by the Church.

"Look my son, we priests nowadays have seriously to study the realities of life. We're not like the priests of sixty years ago, or as I was when I first began."

Chaurrondo's voice softened at memory of those first years of his priesthood.

"The secret of confession is inviolable, otherwise I would tell you stories of Cristinas and Cristinos of every color under the sun. At the beginning my soul grieved and sorrowed at the horror and shame. Now it's different. I read Maranon (Gregorio Maranon, a famous Spanish endocrinologist) and even dig football. Times change, but the eternal truths are immutable."

...we take our leave of Father Hilario Chaurrondo who remains behind in the yard before his Church of Mercy, smiling in his own kindly, jolly way which somehow makes him seem Don Camillo himself.

We carry the news with us like a bomb. A Catholic prelate in Cuba is the first representative of any church, religion or sect ever to make such a clear pronouncement on the Cristina Jorgenson case. It remains to be seen what the reactions to his statements will be amongst the Catholic congregations, not only in Cuba but throughout the world.

****

How prophetic the closing paragraph in that 1953 artcle was.

Fast forward to January 2003.

VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- After years of study, the Vatican's doctrinal congregation has sent church leaders a confidential document concluding that "sex-change" procedures do not change a person's gender in the eyes of the church.

Consequently, the document instructs bishops never to alter the sex listed in parish baptismal records and says Catholics who have undergone "sex-change" procedures are not eligible to marry, be ordained to the priesthood or enter religious life, according to a source familiar with the text.

That document mentioned was completed in 2000 and was credited to Jesuit Father Urbano Navarrete of Spain (far left in this photo with Pope John Paul II) who is a retired canon law professor at Rome's Gregorian University.

Father Navarrete wrote a 1997 article on transsexualism in an authoritative canon law journal and has been consulted by the doctrinal congregation on specific cases involving transsexualism and hermaphroditism. He was just elevated to cardinal by Pope Benedict XVI.

But one of the things not mentioned is that the Vatican was being advised by a 30 year enemy of the transgender community: Dr. Paul McHugh.

A man with a personal axe to grind against transgender people got himself named as an advisor to the Vatican. He has used that position to turn the Catholic Church into an intolerant bastion of transphobia, at least at the leadership level.

Yes, the same Dr. Paul McHugh who has much Hateraid for transgender people and takes credit for killing the Johns Hopkins Gender Clinic.

McHugh has ties to neoconservative Catholic groups, not surprisingly is a member of the President's Council on Bioethics, and is frequently quoted by anti-transgender groups such as NARTH and the Concerned Women for America. McHugh claims responsibility for helping get J. Michael Bailey's anti-transgender character assassination screed The Man Who Would Be Queen published through the National Academy of Sciences.

McHugh's still chomping Hater Tots after all these years. He had this to say in a 2004 article for the conservative Catholic publication First Things entitled Surgical Sex

"...The post-surgical subjects struck me as caricatures of women. They wore high heels, copious makeup, and flamboyant clothing; they spoke about how they found themselves able to give vent to their natural inclinations for peace, domesticity, and gentleness—but their large hands, prominent Adam’s apples, and thick facial features were incongruous (and would become more so as they aged)...."

During his time at Johns Hopkins from 1975-2001, after he assumed the chairmanship of the Psychiatry department from Dr. Joel Elkes, he assigned Dr. John Meyer to do a long-term follow-up study of 50 transsexuals who underwent SRS at Johns Hopkins. The 1977 Meyer Report claimed that SRS confers no objective advantage in terms of social rehabilitation for transsexuals. The paper was widely criticized at the time as flawed, but was used as the pretext by McHugh to close the Johns Hopkins Gender Identity Clinic in October 1979.

Interestingly enough while he hates on transgender people, McHugh doesn't show the same level of vitriol toward child molesters. Check out this August 21, 2002 Washington Times report by Judith Reisman and Dennis Jarrard entitled Strange Bedfellows.

If you found the clergy sex abuse scandal shocking, prepare for another jolt: the Catholic bishops are getting their "expert" advice on pedophilia from people who have covered up or even defended sex between men and children.

The bishops recently chose Dr. Paul McHugh, former chairman of the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences at John Hopkins University School of Medicine, as chief behavioral scientist for their new clergy sex crimes review board.

Yet Dr. McHugh once said Johns Hopkins' Sexual Disorders Clinic, which treats molesters, was justified in concealing multiple incidents of child rape and fondling to police, despite a state law requiring staffers to report them.

"We did what we thought was appropriate," said Dr. McHugh, then director of Hopkins' Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, which oversaw the sex clinic. He agreed with his subordinate, clinic head Fred Berlin, who broke the then-new child sexual abuse law on the grounds that it might keep child molesters from seeking treatment.

****


Fortunately, the Catholic rank and file members take issue with the idiocy and increasing anti-transgender intolerance at the top, which has only intensified since Benedict XVI became pope in April 2005.

Dignity USA, an organization of GLBT Catholics is fighting to stop the madness. Dignity chapters are located around the country and around the world where gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered Catholics are welcomed for mass. It is not sanctioned by Rome or local Catholic bishops and masses are held in Episcopal churches and in other houses of worship.

When the anti-transgender statement was made public in 2003, Dignity issued a statement in which it took the Vatican’s doctrinal congregation to task for “trivializing the life-long struggles of our transgender and inter-sexed sisters and brothers in Christ.”

Marianne Duddy, who was president of Dignity USA from 1993-1997, wrote that "transgendered individuals have been a part of the Catholic Church faith communities for decades and that their spiritual, emotional and physical challenges are enormous — and humbling."

“There are profound truths about humanity and about God to be learned from their experience,” she wrote. “Transgender people need pastoral attention that is respectful and open, not judgmental and dismissive. The Vatican statement fails to take into account current medical, physiological, psychological and sociological findings.”

Despite the official negative church position on trans issues, there are individual church parishes around the United States and abroad that are more accepting, if not openly embracing of those who are transgender, gay, lesbian and bisexual. Some parishes fly below the radar of local church authority, meeting as house churches or small faith communities.

When asked in a 2006 Washington Blade interview about why GLBT peeps stay in the church, then Dignity Executive Diretor Debra Weill said, "For me as well as others in the LGBT community, we stay because our faith is rooted in the Catholic liturgy and faith traditions. It is not rooted in the ignorance of statements that come from the Vatican. It’s in what the Catholic Church teaches about loving one another and serving others.”

Dignity is in this battle for the long haul. At their Austin, TX convention they issued their response to a November 2006 United States Conference of Catholic Bishops document entitled Ministry to Persons with a Homosexual Inclination: Guidelines for Pastoral Care.

In the DignityUSA Letter on the Pastoral Care of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) People 2007 they sought to address some of the critical pastoral needs of the LGBT community. It gives voice to the concerns of Catholic LGBT persons regarding their role in the church; calls on the bishops of the United States to put an end to prejudice and discrimination against LGBT people in the church; and expresses the hope, expectation and just demand of LGBT Catholics to be full participants in their church, as is their right by baptism.

McHugh has ruined not only the lives of many transpeople in the United States, but is now setting up the conditions to spread his hatred through an institution that impacts people around the world. These negative policies will impact transgender people not only who are members of the Catholic Church but non-Catholics around the world as well. They are already being cited by governmental agencies to deny transgender people basic human rights.

McHugh and the conservacatholics who share his views would be wise to remember I Corinthians 15:10.

“By the grace of God I am what I am, and God's grace to me has not been without effect.”

Dignity USA and groups like it around the world are fighting to ensure that the Church lives up to its humanitarian principles. We can only hope and pray that the results of this battle will be a more positive religious climate.

We pray the misguided people in the Vatican will see the error of their ways and not only Catholics, but all faiths will open their doors and hearts to let us fully practice our spirituality in an open and accepting atmosphere that reflects our humanity.

But then again, if past history is any indicator, I may be waiting a while for that to happen. It took the Catholic Church 500 years to acknowledge the error of persecuting Galileo and Copernicus for daring to suggest the Earth revolves around the sun.

Barney Come Clean

Today is National Coming Out Day. In the spirit of that and in the midst of this ongoing family feud over ENDA, we've had some folks in the GLB community have a coming out of sorts as well.

The transbigots.

Their poster child just happens to be the guy who is quarterbacking ENDA throughout the House, Rep. Barney Frank.

The transbigots, like their kissin' cousins in hate groups and the Religious Reich use their power, White Male Privilege and media bully pulpits to thwart the progress of a minority group for their own selfish gain.

It should be clear at this point who the leading transbigots are in this community. John Aravosis and Chris Crain along with Barney head the list. There are other transbigots that operate on a national, state and local level who see it as their mission to make the GLB community rainbow pure and transgender free.


But as I know from my African-American history, nothing is more dangerous to civil rights than having bigots in charge of writing and enacting civil rights law.

So Barney, come clean and stop prevaricating. You hate transgender people and have since your days in the Massachusetts Legislature. You're not a friend to our community.

Can you handle that truth?

A friend of our community would fight just as hard or harder to include us in legislation that we need, instead of engaging in Orwellian doublespeak and blaming the transgender community for the failure of your 'with all deliberate speed' approach to including transgender peeps inro federal law.

If you were the transgender community's best friend, you'd be honest with the GLB community and tell them, like Lambda Legal did that transgender inclusion in ENDA is necessary for this bill to cover 'errbody' in this community.


Khadijah Farmer's suit is Exhibit A to the fact that discrimination based on 'gender identity' happens not only to transgender peeps, but gay, lesbian and straight people as well.

If you were the champion for transgender people you claim you are, then you need to stop telling the lie that we haven't done the education on the Hill. We been educating folks on the Hill since 1994. I've personally taken part in lobbying efforts in 1998, 1999 and 2007 and helped plan NTAC's 2001 lobbying effort.

Maybe that education isn't getting through because of the HRCites that inhabit many of the congressional staff positions on the Hill in liberal-progressive offices. It wouldn't shock me if these aides are conveniently failing to pass on the information from transgender people that visit their offices or shield you congressmembers from it.

There are reams of information on the Internet and elsewhere about the violence, the unemployment/underemployment we face, and the general lack of respect for our civil rights that transpeople face. If you claim there are legislators who need 'more educating', who are they?

You're not going to tell us that because you know that 24 hours after you utter their names, they'll be flooded with calls from the transgender community and our allies.

Barney, you don't want that education to happen because you and the Mattachine clones in the GLB community DON'T want a transgender inclusive ENDA to pass. You have been duplicitous and underhanded not just during this entire sorry affair, but the entire time you've led the effort to pass ENDA.

So why should we transgender people trust you, much less believe anything you say now? You have let your personal hatred of transgender people get in the way of doing what's morally right and just. Having you as the lead legislator for the efforts to pass ENDA is the equivalent of asking the KKK Grand Wizard to pass federal legislation that would benefit African-Americans.

He'd do to African-Americans exactly what you're doing, Rep. Frank. Cut us out of the bill, then come up with some tortured logic and spin to try to justify it.

Oh snap, that was the modus operandi for the Dixiecrats.

It's past time for somebody that doesn't have a personal hatred for transpeople to become the lead legislator for getting ENDA passed.

The New Barney Theme Song

(Sung to the tune of the Theme From Barney)
Dedicated to the transphobic congressman from Massachusetts

I love you, you love me
But I don't if you are T
With a wink and a nudge to my friends at HRC
Took transpeeps out of ENDA, yes sirree.

Wait Your Turn?

Frankly, I have never yet engaged in a direct action movement that was 'well-timed' according to the timetable of those who have not suffered unduly from the disease of segregation.

For years now I have heard the words "Wait!" It rings in the ear of every Negro with a piercing familiarity. This "Wait" has almost always meant "Never".

Rev Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr
'Letter From Birmingham City Jail', April 16, 1963.

Ever since I begun fighting in 1998 in conjunction with other transgender people around the country to expand the work of Dr. King, I have heard a late 20th-early 21st century variation of that paragraph uttered from the lips of numerous gay and lesbian people when it comes to transgender civil rights.

Wait your turn.

Wait my turn? Wait my turn for what?

Did you gay and lesbian people 'wait you turn' when you pushed for inclusion in civil rights legislation in the 70's?

Did you gay and lesbian people 'wait your turn' when you demanded that funding for HIV/AIDS research and finding a cure for it get higher priority in the 80's?

Did you 'wait your turn' when you demanded that your rights be acknowledged and respected in the 90's?

Did you gay and lesbian people 'wait your turn' in 2003 when you disastrously pushed for marriage equality one year before a critical presidential election?


How dare you part your lips to even say that to us. We transgender people are the ones who had the cojones to stand up to police harassment in San Francisco in 1966 and during the Stonewall Rebellion in 1969 while you gay and lesbian peeps were cowering in your closets. It is transgender blood that is being shed and transgender peeps who are discriminated against, denigrated, and disrespected by our foes and even by you, our so-called allies.

You have repeatedly cut us out of civil rights legislation on every level of government with the soothing words of 'we'll come back for you'. That has been proven over the years to be an odious lie as we wait for you in many jurisdictions across the United States to fulfill your broken promises.

Yesterday, led by your point gay Rep. Barney Frank, you once again cut us out of a bill that frankly, we need more than you do. You uttered the lie that 'we'll come back for you' and help you pass the 'GENDA bill' while pulling HR 2015 that was inclusive and replacing it with a gay and lesbian only one in addition to GENDA.

We transpeople know that you will bury that GENDA bill in a subcommittee, never call hearings on it and let it die a painful death while you selfishly fast-track your gay and lesbian only ENDA bill to the House floor for passage.

The sad part is that President Bush isn't going to sign it, so why start a civil war in the GLB community over this issue?

If there's anything that the misguided pastors of the Hi Impact Leadership Coalition have been proven right on is that your GLB civil rights movement is not like ours. Your GLB movement is selfish, morally bankrupt, exclusive and has been so since 1971, while the Civil Rights Movement led by Dr. King was a morally strong and inclusive one. You have more in common with the Dixiecrats than with civil rights warriors such as Rep. John Lewis (D-GA).

You say the country is not ready for transgender inclusion in civil rights law. Just today Oprah Winfrey did a show on transgender people and is doing another one on October 12. Transgender people are getting more positive coverage every day. Surveys prove over and over again that the public is more enlightened on the transgender issue than the Barney Franks of the GLB movement who are still drinking the hate-on-transpeople Kool-aid of Janice Raymond and Jim Fouratt.

As a transperson who also happens to be a proud African-American, the 'wait your turn' to me and transpeople who share my ethnic heritage sounds eerily similar to what Supreme Court Justice Roger B. Taney wrote in the Dred Scott Decision majority opinion 150 years ago: That I have no rights that you are bound to respect.

Wait your turn.

Rep. Frank and all you gay and lesbian conservaqueers who share his myopic self-centered views, how long must I and other transgender people wait for their constitutional rights in your infinite wisdom? It's sickening that transpeople in other countries around the world such as Spain and Great Britain are gaining and have more rights than those of us who live in the so-called cradle of democracy.

Will little six year old Jazz, the transkid profiled in Barbara Walters 20/20 story on transgender people have to wait until she's 21 to get constitutional protection?

How about Rochelle Evans in Fort Worth? Will she have to wait until she's 45 to get a law that protects her civil rights?

How long will transgender prom queen Crystal Vera have to wait? How long will Jake, the 16 year old transman profiled on today's Oprah show have to wait?

Rep. Frank and Speaker Pelosi, do you have the balls to tell the parents of these transkids that they must 'wait their turn' for their constitutional rights?

How long will transpeople who've been fighting this pitched battle with you for a decade over ENDA and simple inclusion in the GLB community since the 1970's have to wait? Can you walk into a TAVA meeting and tell our transgender veterans who honorably served our country, fought to protect, extend and defend people's civil rights and freedoms abroad that they have to 'wait their turn' to have the same freedoms extended to them at home?

Can you look all the parents and family members of deceased transpeople such as Rita Hester, Tyra Hunter, Gwen Araujo, Brandon Teena, Deborah Forte, and hundreds of others in the eye and tell them that transpeople have to 'wait their turn 'to have their civil rights codified into law?

So if you couldn't 'wait your turn', then why would you dare ask us, the shock troops of the GLBT movement to do something that you yourselves are unwilling to acquiesce to?

The Trouble With Harry

By Dr. Sylvia Rhue
August 9, 2007

Bishop Harry Jackson, of the High Impact Leadership Coalition, is back in the news with attacks on Barack Obama, calling him a "dangerous man" and a "junior or infant Christian."

Barack Obama appeared on LOGO and HRC's presidential debate Thursday August 9. All of the candidates were asked about marriage equality for LGBT people. Although he is for full civil union rights, Obama feels he cannot open the door of equality all the way with full marriage rights for LGBT people. But even his moderate stance gets a
berating from Bishop Jackson.

When speaking to a group of Black ministers at a forum in Tennessee, Barack stated:

"I specifically pointed out that if there's any pastor here who can point out a marriage that has been broken up as a consequence of seeing two men or two women holding hands, then we—you should tell me, because I haven't seen any evidence of it…And there are some folks who, coming out of the church, have, you know, elevated one line in Romans above the Sermon on the Mount."

Jackson's response: "He's dead wrong concerning what the scriptures say, and more importantly, he's dead wrong in terms of the Scriptures, and in terms of reading culture. The culture has gone in a different direction, and the devaluation of marriage is a major problem, and I believe that he's a very dangerous man because he sounds reasonable, he sounds engaging, but he's misinformed." Jackson goes on to call Obama a "junior or infant Christian."

He states that "I think what most African-Americans buy is that there should be justice for all, in terms of the outworking of civil law. What they do not buy is that we should not rename sin as something righteous and holy."

Bishop Jackson is dead wrong. It is Jackson who has an infantile understanding of human sexuality and a wrong headed theology regarding Christ's message of inclusion. Jackson does not understand, or refuses to understand the concept of sexual orientation. Sexual orientation is morally neutral.

One of the definitions of the word "sin" is "to miss the mark". Jackson misses the mark of the Love ethic for his gay and lesbian neighbors, which is central to Christian theology. When Bishop Jackson came to NBJC's Black Church Summit this past Spring, he had the opportunity to look LGBT people in the eye and hear their stories of love, commitment, devotion, honor and duty. He nodded his head acting as if he understood. He acted as if he had learned something. Unfortunately, from his behavior and statements since that day, it was all just an act.

We should defer to an authentic Biblical scholar, Rev. Peter Gomes the Plummer Professor of Christian Morals at Harvard University, who writes: "No credible case against homosexuality or homosexuals can be made from the Bible unless one chooses to read scripture in a way that simply sustains the existing prejudice against homosexuality and homosexuals. The combination of ignorance and prejudice under the
guise of morality makes the religious community, and its abuse of scripture in this regard, itself morally culpable."

If Bishop Jackson ever thought he might be a drum major for justice, he has missed he mark.

Dr. Sylvia Rhue is Director of NBJC Religious Affairs. She can be reached directly at shrue@nbjc.org

Transpeeps and the Po-Po's Still Have Drama

There's been a long history in the United States of tension between the police and the transgender community. In fact, the August 1966 Compton's Cafeteria Riot in San Francisco and the June 28, 1969 Stonewall Riots that are considered the start of the United States GLBT civil rights movement have a similar root cause:

GLBT people finally getting fed up with being harassed by police.

So it didn't suprise me when Amnesty International released on September 22, 2005 the first in a series of reports that documented what we in the transgender community have known, talked about and experienced for years. Despite the major gains we've made over the last 40 years in having our civil rights recognized and respected, the problem of police harassment still persists.

Called Stonewalled: Police Abuse and Misconduct against Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender people in the United States, the Amnesty International report revealed that transgender people experienced some of the most egregious cases of police brutality.

AI heard reports of transgender individuals being subjected by police to discriminatory profiling as sex workers; “policing” of transgender individuals bathroom use; sexual, verbal and physical abuse; inappropriate and illegal searches to determine a transgender individual’s “true” sex; and a failure to protect transgender individuals from abuse while in detention.

A subsequent report was released in March 2006 called Stonewalled: Police Abuse and Misconduct Against Lesbian, Gay and Transgender People in the U.S. that documents serious patterns of police abuse, including incidents amounting to torture and ill-treatment. It also points out that GLBT persons of color are particularly vulnerable to this abuse and it is compounded by the systemic racism and homophobia prevalent in many US police forces. GLBT peeps are also singled out for selective enforcement of "morals regulations," bars and social gatherings regulations, demonstrations and "quality of life" ordinaces.

How serious is the problem? In San Antonio, one of the four cities profiled in the September 2005 report, veteran police officer Dave Gutierrez was convicted and sentenced on January 19 to 24 years and four months in prison for raping and assaulting then 21 year old transwoman Starlight Bernal during a June 10, 2005 traffic stop.


It's also come to light that the investigation into transwoman Nizah Morris' death in Philadelphia is pointing disturbing fingers at the police. The recent classification of transwoman Erica Keel's death as an accident has exacerbated tensions between the Philadelphia police department and the transgender community to the point that it became an issue in the Philadelphia mayor's race.

The negativity affects us in multiple ways. The police failing to act, or being openly (or covertly) hostile to transgender people affects their attitudes toward solving crimes committed against us.

That lack of action emboldens people who wish to bring harm to us. They assume that the police, their ministers, society and the justice system are on their side and they'll get away with committing the crime against us. Previous cases in which people were prosecuted for committing murders against transgender people that received little or ridiculously low sentences feed into that perception. The 'trans panic' defenses that attorneys use to get their clients off also don't help along with the reluctance of prosecuters to use hate crimes statutes if they happen to have one in their jurisdiction that covers us. That has the unfortunate effect of encouraging crimes to be committed against us, not deterring it.

The drama between us and the police means that many transpeople are reluctant to report crimes when they occur because of the fear you'll get even more harrasment from the officer that's supposed to help you. If you think I'm kidding, ask JoLea Lamot's family what happened on November 24, 1998 when her mother Nancy called 911 on JoLea's behalf because they feared she'd accidentally overdosed on some medication.

The late Marvin Zindler used to say on his reports back home that 'it's hell to be poor'. It's also hell to be transgender. One message that needs to be made loud and clear is that we transpeople are taxpaying citizens as well. We don't need the po-po's adding to the drama we already get just for living our lives.

Serving and protecting the public also includes us as well.

Bishop Harry Jackson's Claims Divisive and Untrue

Jackson's Claims Divisive and Untrue

July 1, 2007
by: Rev. Dr. Michael Eric Dyson
Sylvia Rhue, Ph.D.

Bishop Harry Jackson of the High Impact Leadership Coalition and pastor of Hope Christian Church in Maryland is leading the misguided attempt to scare Black ministers into backing his efforts to derail the much needed Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act also known as the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act. In doing so he is distorting the facts about a law which would provide local law enforcement with addition tools to stem the tide of intentional acts of violence and murder.

Contrary to Bishop Jackson's assertions, this bill will not "muzzle clergy", and it is not "anti-Christian". This bill should be passed because it is fair, overdue and much needed. The House passed a version last May and the Senate should pass it as well.

Bishop Jackson's claims are based on bias that is divisive, destructive and untrue. Hate crimes laws punish violent acts, not beliefs or thoughts, not even violent thoughts. The proposed federal statute does not punish, nor prohibit in any way, free expression of one's religious beliefs.

Pastors will remain free to condemn, demean, defame and dehumanize their gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered congregants and neighbors as they feel called by their religious beliefs. This bill will not change the First Amendment and we would not support any law that undermined this precious freedom.

On the other hand, we work with clergy who respect gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people, and honor the many gifts they have brought to the Church, especially to the Black Church. We believe this is the American way—we value the separation of church and state. We also believe it is the authentic way of Christ.

We also suggest that Bishop Jackson take a course in basic human sexuality since so much of his resistance to equal rights for LGBT people lies in his stated assumption that homosexuality is a "choice", while being black is not. Sexual orientation is not a choice. It is a innate, God-gifted, morally neutral state of being.

We hope and pray that Bishop Jackson will focus some attention on Christ's message of inclusion as we did when we invited him to speak to our members during our recently held Black Church Summit at Mother Bethel AME Church in Philadelphia. From that experience alone the good Bishop should have known that we would never support a law that would silence him in his own pulpit.

Rev. Dr. Michael Eric Dyson
Sylvia Rhue, Ph.D.

The writers are respectively the Chair and Director of the National Black Justice Coalition's Religious Advisory Committee.

The GOP Hates Science

Sung to the tune of 'She Blinded Me With Science’ by Thomas Dolby’




It's ignorance in motion
The science hating GOP
They’re causing a commotion
Hating peeps that are GLBT
But the GOP hates science
"The GOP hates science!"
Because they failed biology

Stem cell research won’t occur
‘Cause the GOP hates science-science!"

"Science!"

Kissing up to the fundies
"The GOP hates science-science!"

"Science!"
"Science!"

Mmm - but it's ignorance in motion
The science hating GOP
They’re causing a commotion
Hating peeps that are GLBT
The GOP hates science
"The GOP hates science!"
Because they also failed geometry

Global warming’s a myth you see
"The GOP hates science - science!"
"Science!"
Mmm Mmm, Mmm Mmm- Rig voting booth machinery
"The GOP hates science - science!"
"Science!"

It's ignorance in motion
Fox News constantly lies to me
They’re causing a commotion
Messed with our nation’s harmony
The GOP hates science
"The GOP hates science!"
Hate SRS technology

"Good heavens Miss Sakamoto - you're a transsexual!"

Hey -I don't believe it!
They’re on CNN!
Talking that 'intelligent design' BS again!
All the anti-gay research
And junk science books
Based on Biblical contortions

But- It's ignorance in motion
The science hating GOP
They’re causing a commotion
Hating peeps that are GLBT
Oh - but the GOP hates science
"The GOP hates Science!"
The GOP hates -