Transgender Day Of Remembrance-The Peeps We've Lost

We are rapidly approaching a solemn day in which we transgender people and our allies memorialize the people we lost this year to anti-transgender violence.

I'm beginning a week of posts to commemorate the TDOR, and I'll start it with posting some photos in memory of the 200 plus people we've lost over the nine years we've been doing these events. Thanks to Barney and HRC, that list is only going to grow longer.

I want to point out as well that 70% of the people on the Remembering Our Dead site are people of color. May we NEVER forget the people whose lives were tragically taken away from us.



Stephanie Thomas and Ukea Davis



Nizah Morris




Chamelle Pickett



Chareka Keys



Tyra Hunter



Rita Hester



Amanda Milan



Gwen Araujo

Where's the Revolution?

TransGriot Note: This essay was originally published in The Nation's July 5, 1993 issue and posted to the Nation's website on January 1, 1998.
by Barbara Smith

When I came out in Boston in the mid-l970s, I had no way of knowing that the lesbian and gay movement I was discovering was in many ways unique. As a new lesbian I had nothing to compare it with, and there was also nothing to compare it with in history. Stonewall had happened only six years before and the militance, irreverence and joy of those early days were still very much apparent.

As a black woman who became politically active in the civil rights movement during high school and then in black student organizing and the anti-Vietnam War movement as the sixties continued, it seemed only natural that being oppressed as a lesbian would elicit the same militant collective response to the status quo that my other oppressions did. Boston's lesbian and gay movement came of age in the context of student activism, a visible counterculture, a relatively organized left and a vibrant women's movement. The city had always had its own particularly violent brand of racism and had become even more polarized because of the crisis over school busing. All of these overlapping influences strengthened the gay and lesbian movement, as well as the political understandings of lesbian and gay activists.

Objectively, being out and politically active in the seventies was about as far from the mainstream as one could get. The system did not embrace us, nor did we want it to. We also got precious little support from people who were supposed to be progressive. The white sectarian left defined homosexuality as a "bourgeois aberration" that would disappear when capitalism did. Less doctrinaire leftists were also homophobic even if they offered a different set of excuses. Black power activists and black nationalists generally viewed lesbians and gay men as anathema--white-minded traitors to the race. Although the women's movement was the one place where out lesbians were permitted to do political work, its conservative elements still tried to dissociate themselves from the "lavender menace."

Because I came out in the context of black liberation, women's liberation and--most significantly--the newly emerging black feminist movement that I was helping to build, I worked from the assumption that all of the "isms" were connected. It was simply not possible for any oppressed people, including lesbians and gay men, to achieve freedom under this system. Police dogs, cattle prods, fire hoses, poverty, urban insurrections, the Vietnam War, the assassinations, Kent State, unchecked violence against women, the self-immolation of the closet and the emotional and often physical violence experienced by those of us who dared leave it made the contradictions crystal clear. Nobody sane would want any part of the established order. It was the system--white supremacist, misogynistic, capitalist and homophobic--that had made our lives so hard to begin with. We wanted something entirely new. Our movement was called lesbian and gay liberation, and more than a few of us, especially women and people of color, were working for a revolution.

Revolution seems Like a largely irrelevant concept to the gay movement of the nineties. The liberation politics of the earlier era, which relied upon radical grass-roots strategies to eradlcate oppression, have been largely replaced by an assimilationist "civil rights" agenda. The most visible elements of the movement have put their faith almost exclusively in electoral and legislative initiatives, bolstered by mainstream media coverage, to alleviate discrimination. When the word "radical" is used at all, it means confrontational, "in your face" tactics, not strategic organizing aimed at the roots of oppression.

Unlike the early lesbian and gay movement, which had both ideological and practical links to the left, black activism and feminism, today's "queer" politicos seem to operate in a historical and ideological vacuum. "Queer" activists focus on "queer" issues, and racism, sexual oppression and economic exploitation do not qualify, despite the fact that the majority of "queers" are people of color, female or working class. When other oppressions or movements are cited, it's to build a parallel case for the validity of lesbian and gay rights or to expedite alliances with mainstream political organizations. Building unified, ongoing coalitions that challenge the system and ultimately prepare a way for revolutionary change simply isn't what "queer" activists have in mind.

When lesbians and gay men of color urge the gay leadership to make connections between heterosexism and issues like police brutality, racial violence, homelessness, reproductive freedom and violence against women and children, the standard dismissive response is, "Those are not our issues." At a time when the gay movement is under unprecedented public scrutiny, lesbians and gay men of color and others committed to antiracist organizing are asking: Does the gay and lesbian movement want to create a just society for everyone? Or does it only want to eradicate the last little glitch that makes life difficult for privileged (white male) queers?

The April 25 March on Washington, despite its historical importance, offers some unsettling answers. Tho comments that I've heard repeatedly since the march is that it seemed more like a parade than a political demonstration and that the overall image of the hundreds of thousands of participants was overwhelmingly Middle American, that is, white and conventional. The identifiably queer--the drag queens, leather people, radical faeries, dykes on bikes, etc.--were definitely in the minority, as were people of color, who will never be Middle American no matter what kind of drag we put on or take off.

A friend from Boston commented that the weekend in Washington felt like being in a "blizzard." I knew what she meant. Despite the fact that large numbers of lesbians and gay men of color were present (perhaps even more than at the 1987 march), our impact upon the proceedings did not feel nearly as strong as it did six years ago. The bureaucratic nineties concept of "diversity," with its superficial goal of assuring that all the colors in the crayon box are visible, was very much the strategy of the day. Filling slots with people of color or women does not necessarily affect the politics of a movement if our participation does not change the agenda, that is, if we are not actually permitted to lead.

I had had my own doubts about attending the April march. Although I went to the first march in 1979 and was one of the eight major speakers at the 1987 march, I didn't make up my mind to go to this one until a few weeks before it happened. It felt painful to be so alienated from the gay movement that I wasn't even sure I wanted to be there; my feelings of being an outsider had been growing for some time.

I remember receiving a piece of fundraising direct mail from the magazine Outlook in 1988 with the phrase "tacky but we'll take it" written next to the lowest potential contribution of $25. Since $25 is a lot more than I can give at any one time to the groups I support, I decided I might as well send my $5 somewhere else. In 1990 I read Queer Nation's manifesto, "I Hate Straights," in Outweek and wrote a letter to the editor suggesting that if queers of color followed its political lead, we would soon be issuing a statement titled, "I Hate Whiteys," including white queers of European origin. Since that time I've heard very little public criticism of the narrowness of lesbian and gay nationalism. No one would guess from recent stories about wealthy and "powerful" white lesbians on TV and in slick magazines that women earn 69 cents on the dollar compared with men and that black women earn even less.

These examples are directly connected to assumptions about race and class privilege. In fact, it's gay white men's racial, gender and class privileges, as well as the vast numbers of them who identify with the system rather than distrust it, that have made the politics of the current gay movement so different from those of other identity-based movements for social and political change. In the seventies, progressive movements--especially feminism--positively influenced and inspired lesbians' and gays' visions of struggle. Since the eighties, as AIDS has helped to raise consciousness about gay issues in some quarters of the establishment, and as some battles against homophobia have been won, the movement has positioned itself more and more within the mainstream political arena. Clinton's courting of the gay vote (at the same time as he did everything possible to distance himself from the African-American community) has also been a crucial factor in convincing the national gay and lesbian leadership that a place at the ruling class's table is just what they've been waiting for. Of course, the people left out of this new gay political equation of mainstream acceptance, power and wealth are lesbians and gay men of color.

Our outsider status in the new queer movement is made even more untenable because supposedly progressive heterosexuals of all races do so little to support lesbian and gay freedom. Although homophobia may be mentioned when heterosexual leftists make lists of oppressions, they do virtually no risk-taking work to connect with our movement or to challenge attacks against lesbians and gays who live in their midst. Many straight activists whose politics are otherwise righteous simply refuse to acknowledge how dangerous heterosexism is, and that they have any responsibility to end it. Lesbians and gays working in straight political contexts are often expected to remain closeted so as not to diminish their own "credibility" or that of their groups. With so many heterosexuals studiously avoiding opportunities to become enlightened about lesbian and gay culture and struggle, It's not surprising that nearly twenty-five years after Stonewall so few heterosexuals get it. Given how well organized the Christian right is, and that one of its favorite tactics is pitting various oppressed groups against one another, it is past time for straight and gay activists to link issues and work together with respect.

The issue of access to the military embodies the current gay movement's inability to frame an issue in such a way that it brings various groups together instead of alienating them, as has happened with segments of the black community. It also reveals a gay political agenda that 1s not merely moderate but conservative. As long as a military exists, it should be open to everyone regardless of sexual orientation, especially since it represents job and training opportunities for poor and working-class youth who are disproportionately people of color. But given the U.S. military's role as the world's police force, which implements imperialist foreign policies and murders those who stand in its way (e.g., the estimated quarter of a million people, mostly civilians, who died in Iraq as a result of the Gulf War), a progressive lesbian and gay movement would at least consider the political implications of frantically organizing to get into the mercenary wing of the military- industrial complex. A radical lesbian and gay movement would of course be working to dismantle the military completely.

Many people of color (Colin Powell notwithstanding) understand all too well the paradox of our being sent to Third World countries to put down rebellions that are usually the efforts of indigenous populations to rule themselves. The paradox is even more wrenching when U.S. troops are sent to quell "unrest" in internal colonies like South Central Los Angeles. Thankfully, there were some pockets of dissent at the April march, expressed in slogans like: "Lift the Ban--Ban the Military" and "Homosexual, Not Homicidal--Fuck the Military." Yet it seemingly has not occurred to movement leaders that there are lesbians and gays who have actively opposed the Gulf War, the Vietnam War, military intervention in Central America and apartheid in South Africa. We need a nuanced and principled politics that fights discrimination and at the same time criticizes U.S. militarism and its negative effect on social justice and world peace.

The movement that I discovered when I came out was far from perfect. It was at times infuriatingly racist, sexist and elitist, but also not nearly so monolithic. There was at least ideological room to point out failings, and a variety of allies willing to listen who wanted to build something better.

I think that homosexuality embodies an innately radical critique of the traditional nuclear family, whose political function has been to constrict the sexual expression and gender roles of all of its members, especially women, lesbians and gays. Being in structural opposition to the status quo because of one's identity, however, is quite different from being consciously and actively opposed to the status quo because one is a radical and understands how the system works.

It was talking to radical lesbians and gay men that finally made me decide to go to the April 25 march. Earlier in the month, I attended an extraordinary conference on the lesbian and gay left in Delray Beach, Florida. The planners had made a genuine commitment to racial and gender parity; 70 percent of the participants were people of color and 70 percent were women. They were also committed to supporting the leadership of people of color and lesbians--especially lesbians of color--which is almost never done outside of our own autonomous groupings. The conference felt like a homecoming. I got to spend time with people I'd worked with twenty years before in Boston as well as with younger activists from across the country.

What made the weekend so successful, aside from the humor, gossip, caring and hot discussions about sex and politics, was the huge relief I felt at not being expected to cut off parts of myself that are as integral to who I am as my sexual orientation as the price for participating in lesbian and gay organizing. Whatever concerns were raised, discussions were never silenced by the remark, "But that's not our issue." Women and men, people of color and whites, all agreed that there desperately needs to be a visible alternative to the cut-and-dried, business-as-usual agenda of the gay political mainstream. Their energy and vision, as well as the astuteness and tenacity of radical lesbians and gays I encounter all over the country, convince me that a different way is possible.

If the gay movement ultimately wants to make a real difference, as opposed to settling for handouts, it must consider creating a multi-issue revolutionary agenda. This is not about political correctness, it's about winning. As black lesbian poet and warrior Audre Lorde insisted, "The master's tools will never dismantle the master's house." Gay rights are not enough for me, and I doubt that they're enough for most of us. Frankly, I want the same thing now that I did thirty years ago when I joined the civil rights movement and twenty years ago when I joined the women's movement, came out and felt more alive than I ever dreamed possible: freedom.

Back To Da Ville

Nashville, that is.

Heading down there again for the day to hang out with my peeps and talk 'bidness'.

Tell y'all about it when I get back.

Dartmouth Transstudents Navigate Greek System

TransGriot Note: This was the second of a three part series published in the Dartmouth school paper about the experiences of transgender students on campus.

Transgenders try to navigate Greek system
from The Dartmouth
by Amanda Cohen
May 3, 2007

In an effort that is exceptional among most fraternities and sororities, Epsilon Kappa Theta sorority forced its membership to examine the definition of “woman” in offering membership to Sasha Bright ‘09, a biologically male transgender student.

Dartmouth’s Greek system, to which over 60 percent of eligible students belong, presents another angle through which students are prompted to consider the implications of gender. Twenty-four of the 27 recognized Greek organizations on campus determine membership eligibility based on gender.

“The Greek system definitely reinforces a strong gender binary on this campus. That makes things very difficult,” said Kris Gebhard ‘09, who is transitioning from female to male. “I have, sort of, by staying out of it, avoided some personal frustration.”

Gebhard said he was not interested in joining a sorority, but is skeptical of the kind of masculinity promoted by the fraternities.

“I think there would definitely be a hierarchy of masculinity [within a fraternity], and I would be toward the bottom of it, if not at the bottom,” Gebhard said.

Unlike Gebhard, Bright said she wishes she were able to join an organization based on the gender she presents.

“I’ve considered [rushing], but the only houses I’d be open to are mainly the coeds. I’d like to join a sorority,” Bright said. “If I hadn’t been born a boy, I would have joined.”

According to Shane Windmeyer, coordinator of Lambda 10, a national clearinghouse that heightens awareness of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender issues in fraternities and sororities, there is typically little knowledge and great misunderstanding about trans-identification within the Greek organizations.

“I would say today that the transgender student is largely left out, if not invisible, from the frat or sorority experience when it comes to traditionally fraternities or sororities,” he said.

Windmeyer added that Greek organizations tend not to take the initiative in tackling these issues.

“Sadly, fraternities and sororities, the way they deal with issues is that they react to problems,” he said. “So if you want a fraternity or sorority to deal with an issue, you have to wait for a problem to land in their face.”

According to Megan Johnson, assistant director of Coed, Fraternity and Sorority Administration, CFS does not currently plan to address how a transgender student fits into single-gender Greek organizations unless Greek community members specifically ask to address this issue.

“Because it’s not something that’s on our radar, it is not an area that our office is focusing on,” she said. “And I’m not saying that that’s right either, but there hasn’t been enough energy or conversation generated for us to say that we really need to pay attention to this.”

Johnson recognized that if the intersection of transgender students and Greek houses is not addressed, these students may hesitate to seek membership in a gender-exclusive organization for fear of being rejected based on biological sex. Local organizations, she noted, do have the power to address the question.

“I don’t know what the motivation for a group to take the first risk would be unless they spent some time thinking and dialoguing about it,” Johnson said.

At Theta, the issue was discussed when one of Bright’s friends, a member of the sorority, brought the possibility of offering Bright a bid to the attention for the other members. Theta hosted a discussion for interested members to explain transgender identification and answer any questions.

Danielle Strollo ‘07, a member of Theta, said that most of the members seemed supportive of allowing a transgender student in the house.

“We felt at the house that we could be ready for that. It was a really good discussion,” Strollo said. “Some people that we felt [may be] more inclined to have problems with somebody who was transgender or gay — those people didn’t come to the discussion.”

In determining who is eligible to join a single-sex organization, Windmeyer said, fraternities and sororities should also consider what happens if a current member comes out as transgender, or if an alum transitions after graduating.

Joanne Herman ‘75, a member of Sigma Phi Epsilon fraternity, transitioned almost 30 years after graduating. After receiving a request from Sig Ep to update her contact information, Herman — who as an undergraduate went by Jeff — wrote a letter explaining her transition and gave them the option of taking her off their list if they wished. Herman said she has not received any mail from them since.

The assumptions about sex and gender within the Greek system extend beyond questions of memberships and into behavior within houses’ social spaces.

Bright, Gebhard and Tiger Rahman ‘09, who is transitioning from female to male, agreed that they feel the most comfortable in coed organizations. Rahman, who plans to begin hormone therapy, noted that the pressure to drink in all Greek social spaces can be difficult for someone taking hormones. Testosterone, a part of such therapy, can affect the liver.

Bright said that since she has begun transitioning, she has perceived a shift in how she is treated in fraternities.

“People, they will not respect your personal space,” Bright said. “Some guys will brush up really close, way closer than I like.”

For Bright, who has not yet begun hormone-therapy but presents as a girl, said that she worries when she gets too close to someone that they will notice the stubble on her face.

“Usually this whole campus is about hookups anyway,” said Bright, who said she is sexually attracted to men. “I have had guys who wanted to hook up with me, but I’ll turn them down. I don’t explain it.”

Romijn Keen To Be 'True' Transsexual

November 15, 2007

Rebecca Romijn was so determined to accurately portray a transsexual in the hit TV show 'Ugly Betty', she asked her transgender pals for acting tips.

The actress, who plays transsexual Alexis Meade in the comedy series, was desperate not to come across as a man in drag and wanted her character to be as glamorous as possible.




She says, "I have several transgender friends, so a lot of choices I've made, especially early on, were made with them in mind.

"One of my close friends is a man who became a woman and she's as feminine as any biological women you've ever met. Another, I didn't realize was transgender until I'd known her for years.

"I felt this role was an incredible opportunity, something that hadn't been done on primetime TV."

Copyright World Entertainment News Network

(c) 2007 The E.W. Scripps Co.

How A Self-Hating Drag Queen Helped Cost Us ENDA Support

And no, I'm not talking about Barney Frank, who hates transpeople period.

One of the things I've been warning the GLBT community about over the last two years is how the Shirley Q. Liquor controversy would come home to roost one day if they didn't take forceful steps to deal with it.

White GLBT peeps who found the minstrel act funny pooh-poohed mine and others assertion that SQL would (or could) possibly be used as a wedge issue in the African-American community.

Well, I'm about to say I told you so.

In this ENDA post mortem, while trying to ascertain why CBC offices who were solidly on board with HR 2015 that Dawn and I'd lobbied back in May were suddenly shaky on the issue, I discovered an interesting reason for the ENDA sqeamishness.

The Hi Impact Leadership Coalition (Lou Sheldon's TVC African-American sellout ministers division) returned to the Hill to lobby CBC offices in the wake of our Transgender Lobby Week to kill the Hate Crimes bill. They had a not-so-secret weapon in hand: the June issue of Rolling Stone containing the SQL article.

Their copies of the magazine had Syimone's comments prominiently highlighted. Syimone is a African-American drag queen (at least on the outside) who just happens to be from Louisville, where Dawn and I reside. She was tapped for comments for this pro-SQL article.

Let me rehash what Syimone said in that June interview.

I’m not offended by Shirley Q. Liquor because my sexuality is more important to my sense of who I am that my skin color is, and I don’t see the so called Black community out there in the streets protesting for my right to love and fuck and marry who I want.”

My source told me that those anti African-American comments were gleefully pointed to by the Hi Impact ministers. Not only did reading about Shirley Q. Liquor's minstrel show piss them off, Syimone's comments added gasoline to their pissivity as well. While the Hi Impact Leadership Coalition's stated mission was to kill hate crimes, this lobbying trip had the inadvertant effect of pissing off enough CBC members to initially shift several CBC votes out of our column on ENDA.

In addition to the ten votes we initially lost, the Hi Impact 'Don't Muzzle Our Pulpits' smear campaign combined with the anti hate crimes, anti-ENDA calls, visits they received most of the summer from Hi Impact church congregants and intense pressure from the Hi Impact boys moved other CBC members from solidly on our side to wavering.

We already have major problems in the African-American transgender community in terms of our images and 'ejumacating' our people on transgender issues. We don't get much ink or air time as is, so any African-American transpeople who are asked to interview for a media outlet need to be aware of this fact. We need to go into that media interview opportunity making sure that we are on point, accurate, articulate and paint this community in the best possible light.

Syimone obviously forgot that lesson, but then again she considers herself more 'gay' than African-American. I guess after November 7 you're not as 'gay' as you thought you were, huh?

Yo, sis, how does it feel to be cut out of legislation by your gay 'friends' and being used as the tool to grease the skids to make it happen?

HRC Pastoral Letter Debunked

TransGriot Note. HRC has been on a 'schmooze and confuse' charm offensive in the wake of the odious transgender-free ENDA vote last week trying to get back in the community's good graces. (good luck with that) This was a pastoral letter they sent out to GLBT ministers. A response to it came back from Reverend Paul Turner of Atlanta, GA who I had the pleasure of meeting at the 2004 SCC.

First, the letter from Harry Knox.

Dear Colleagues and Friends,

Now that the vote on the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) has
taken place in the House, I want to write to all of you to reconfirm
our commitment in the Religion and Faith program toward educating
people across the country about transgender people, the particular
struggles they face, and why a fully inclusive ENDA is essential for
all of us. In the days ahead we will be talking with many of you as
we make our plans; we'll also want to know how we can help you with
your work on transgender issues.

I am writing today, however, to speak to the hurt, anger, and feelings
of betrayal many of you have felt as a result of the recent struggle
in our community around this bill. The last four weeks or so have
been among the most painful of my career as I have heard transgender
sisters and brothers I love express their hurt over being left out yet
again. I have agonized with many of you, my colleagues, over
strategic decisions that seemed to put us over against each other,
even as we leaned heavily on personal regard for each other and
commitment to the long term success of our whole LGBT community to get
us through.

At this point you know that HRC made a political calculation over what
we thought was the best position we should take moving forward. The
bill passed by the House yesterday is not the bill any of us wanted.
After a deep and painful process we made the decision to stay at the
table with Congress and support the non-inclusive ENDA legislation, HR
3685 in the House.

Our president, Joe Solmonese, has consistently stated our ultimate and
unequivocal commitment to a fully inclusive ENDA. Supporting HR 3685
was, in his mind, the best way toward getting a truly inclusive bill
passed as quickly as possible. I believe his sincerity and trust his
political instincts. In addition, I personally believe that we never
win by standing still. To not move forward at this point would have
set back our work in significant ways - our choice was between moving
forward and falling backward.

I believe that if members of Congress have a positive experience
voting for employment protection for gays, lesbians, and bisexuals and
getting re-elected in the process, they will be more likely to support
a fully inclusive bill in a year or two. However, if the bill had
died in committee or had been voted down on the floor, the negative
experiences of members of Congress would ensure that we would have
little chance of getting any bill to the table in the foreseeable future.

I also know that many of you disagree. As your colleague and friend,
I honor your feelings and respect your wisdom. That we have disagreed
over this strategic decision is painful for me and I hold in my heart
the pain it has caused you.

My hope and prayer is that you will see in the actions of the HRC
Religion and Faith Program the commitment to building support for a
truly inclusive ENDA that I have felt and seen in my colleagues here
at HRC over the last few weeks. There are about 60 districts
represented by members of Congress who were ready yesterday to support
protections for LGB folks, but not yet ready to do so for transgender
people. Sharon, Kyla, and I plan to make our commitment to justice
for transgender people manifest in our hard work to educate the people
of those districts and ultimately, the men and women who represent
them in Congress.

I don't ask that you put your hurt and pain behind you; those
experiences have a great deal to teach us about how we can move
forward. What I do hope is that our pain will not prevent us from
taking the necessary next steps together. All of us are precious in
God's eyes and all of us are necessary for the hard work ahead.

Please pray for me and all your colleagues at the Human Rights Campaign.

God bless you all,
Harry Knox, Director
Religion and Faith Program
Human Rights Campaign Foundation
1640 Rhode Island Ave, NW
Washington, DC 20036
202.716.1612 (cell)
harry.knox@... (hrc.org)

****


Reverend Turner's response

Dear Harry,

Nice try with this letter, but it does not wash.

The transgender are real flesh and blood people and are not HRC's bargaining chip.

<<"At this point you know that HRC made a political calculation over
what we thought was the best position we should take moving forward.">>

There is no going forward if everyone is not with us.

This is not Animal Farm where "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal then others"!

HRC has made a horrible and tragic miscalculation...a poll of 500 people does not speak for the entire LGBTQ community.

HRC sold it's sisters and brothers down the river for a bill they knew was not going to pass or have a chance in hell of becoming law.

When a house is on fire you don't stand outside and decide whom you are going to rescue, the attempt is made for all.

If the hypocrites in congress didn't want transgender people in the bill, then they should have been forced to make an amendment to take it out from the floor...not have HRC bargaining and agreeing that a part of our community was expendable and could simply wait for another day.

By removing Transgender people from the bill y'all sent a clear message to everyone concerned that the transgender community is somehow not on equal footing with the rest of the community.

This was wrong and you my friend know it. Pastorally speaking you and the rest of HRC chose to be the Esther who didn't bother to go before the King. Shame on you. I wonder how many Transgender people will die because even HRC thinks they are not worthy of protection? This was a time for leadership, guts and courage.

Y'all said it couldn't get through with Trans as apart of it, that it would have lost...well my friend you may have won the battle but HRC may have cost themselves far more then they think.

I cannot express how sad and disappointed I am in you...as a pastor you should know that God's people are not expendable at any price!

So your attempt to "explain" to "sooth", to "justify" this despicable act on the part of HRC falls far short.

I am no longer a supporter of HRC, nor will I honor their name or pass on their e-mail with their weekly calls for money. They will not again receive one dime of my money or the church's and I will certainly encourage folks to find other organizations to give to other then HRC. I do believe there are organizations out there that still understand the meaning of community and that without all the hard work of the Trans community we would be nothing.

I know this doesn't mean a hell of lot to you, as I am not one of the high profile pastor's that you run with these days, nor is our church all that important to you or HRC, but you have lost my support and more importantly my respect.

I am of a mind to call for a boycott of the HRC dinner in Atlanta as well as any other HRC events in this city that seek our hard earned money. I might be persuaded to change my mind providing HRC admits their mistake and makes amends with the transgender community...but hey you and I both know that is not going to happen.

It is truly a sad day.

Reverend Paul M. Turner
Sr. Pastor
http://www.gentlespirit.org

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.

On Like Donkey Kong

One of the things I've been chuckling about in the wake of my JCPS Board of Education hearing appearance Monday is when one of the opposition speakers, in the wake of Dr. Frank Simon's three minute 'gays are disease carriers' one note rant, had the nerve to whine about my Forces of Intolerance comment.

Aww, you feeling a little insecure? The truth hurts, don't it? As I told him when he passed me on the way back to his seat, "If the white sheet fits, wear it my brother."

I find it amusingly ironic that the GLBT haters around the country get their noses out of joint and act like offended debutantes when we progressives call them out on their bigotry and faith-based hatred. They get all huffy and grouse like this gentleman did that just because we're on opposite sides of a policy debate doesn't mean we should call them names.

You know, I'd be inclined to agree with that statement except for one thing. You people frequently don't practice what you screech at us.

Over the last decade you Reichers have called us GLBT peeps disease carriers, Sodomites, parasites, Communists, un-Christian, un-American, traitors, terrorists, pedophiles, termites in need of a Godly fumigation (Pat Robertson's words), blamed us for every natural and man-made disaster since 9-11 and said other interesting things I won't waste bandwith repeating.

The way I see it, we owe you a decade's worth of verbal beatdowns and then some. I will be most happy to give you modern day Pharisees what you so richly deserve.

It's on like Donkey Kong as far as I'm concerned. If you think this liberal-progressive is gonna sit back and let y'all get away with disrespecting her, y'all got me confused with a Washington DC Democrat.

I delight in serving up fresh verbal beatdowns to the Forces of Intolerance. It makes my day when you whine and squeal like kindergartners when we give back to you what you have been dishing out to us over the last decade.

So stop whining. Don't start no static, won't be none. Just be warned that when y'all throw that anti-GLBT shade, I'm part of the school of progressives that hits back. So if you truly desire a civilized debate, then stop the hate and communicate.

But if you don't:

Your mama's so intolerant she has a picture of Ann Coulter on her living room wall.

If y'all wanna keep playing the dozens, bring it on. Your side has far more things I can zap you with such as your penchant for wearing pointed hoods, being modern day Bull Connors, crossdressing and engaging in the sexual practices you denounce, admiring and emulating the tactics of a 1930's European dictatorship, your faith-based hypocrisy, using the Flintstones as the basis for intelligent design...

You get the picture.

Montgomery County, MD Unanimously Passes Transgender Rights

TransGriot Note: Too bad Barney Frank, Speaker Pelosi, HRC, the state of Maryland and the Democratic Party didn't exhibit the same amount of moral leadership that the people of Montgomery County just did and pass transgender rights in ENDA.


Montgomery County Approves Trans Bias Bill
Bars discrimination in housing, employment, accommodations
By JOSHUA LYNSEN | Nov 13, 4:56 PM

Montgomery County has approved a law that bars discrimination against transgender residents and workers, overcoming objections raised by several conservative groups.

Coiuncil members voted 8-0 on Tuesday to “prohibit discrimination in housing, employment, public accommodations, cable television service and taxicab service on the basis of gender identity.”

The law becomes effective 90 days after being signed by County Executive Isiah Leggett, which he’s expected to do before month’s end.

Dana Beyer, who is transgender and works for Montgomery County Councilmember Duchy Trachtenberg, praised the vote.

“I’m thrilled that it was unanimous,” she told the Blade moments after the measure passed. “It’s very touching.”

Beyer said the measure also would give new momentum to similar efforts elsewhere.

“I think it’s a day of celebration,” she said. “It’s another step toward getting these protections on the state level and on the national level.”

Tuesday’s vote puts Montgomery County alongside Baltimore as the two Maryland jurisdictions to have such laws.

Thirteen states have laws barring discrimination based on “gender identity or expression” in employment and almost 100 cities have similar ordinances.

Collectively, the laws cover about 37 percent of the U.S. population, according to estimates from trans rights groups.

Beyer said Montgomery County becomes the first jurisdiction in suburban D.C. to pass such laws.

Efforts in Montgomery County began earlier this year after state lawmakers in Annapolis failed to pass a bill enacting similar safeguards statewide.

By a 6-5 vote, the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee rejected in March a measure that sought to outlaw transgender discrimination in the areas of employment, housing, credit and public accommodations.

In the wake of that decision, Montgomery County officials drew up local protections.

While supported by groups such as Equality Maryland, the measure drew opposition from Parents & Friends of Ex-Gays & Gays, plus other conservative groups.

Efforts to derail the measure included the distribution of fliers at area Metro stops and elsewhere that feature a door labeled, “Locker room for women & men who think they are women.”

The flier asserts the measure would “allow males who self identify themselves as females to have open access to all women’s and girls’ restrooms, locker rooms, dressing rooms, and showers.”

Trachtenberg, the bill’s sponsor, told the Associated Press that she removed the reference to the use of public restrooms “after a flood of e-mails, phone calls and radio advertisements criticized it.”

But the concession did little to stave opposition. Beyer said opponents of the measure “were acting out, showing signs, yelling and screaming” before Tuesday’s vote.

Regina Griggs, director of Parents & Friends of Ex-Gays & Gays, could not immediately be reached following Tuesday’s vote.

But an open letter by Parents & Friends of Ex-Gays & Gays opposes the measure for several reasons, including privacy concerns.

It says the bill would “guarantee the right of a biological male who identifies as female to appear nude in women’s locker rooms in the presence of nude biological females.”

The letter also says the measure does not include “reasonable exemptions” for businesses with less than 15 employees and religious organizations, and “trivializes the significance of biological sex.”

The role of the county’s Human Rights Commission also is questioned, with the letter noting officials need not only receive and adjudicate complaints of discrimination, but could also “initiate such complaints.”

Beyer said Tuesday the county’s Human Rights Commission would only respond to complaints that are filed by others.

She also said complaints that the measure would allow men to use women’s restrooms or locker rooms were false claims intended to stir “bathroom hysteria.”

“No trans person in the midst of transition, before genital surgery, goes and exposes himself or herself in any public facility,” she said. “It’s never happened. There’s never been [such] a police report filed in the United States.”


Joshua Lynsen can be reached at jlynsen@washblade.com.

November 2004 TransGriot Column

Black History Month Lesson: Three Months Early
By Monica Roberts
Copyright 2004, THE LETTER

TransGriot Note: This column originally appeared in THE LETTER in November 2004.

Well folks, by the time you read this the election should’ve already taken place. We’ll either be celebrating the fact that Bush is packing up for a one-way trip to Crawford or we’ll have four more years of mean-spirited misleadership to endure. I pray that the odious amendment to the Kentucky Constitution banning same-sex marriage died a horrible death.

Now, let’s get to the column.

One of the things that’s irritated me about the same-sex marriage amendment battle has been the use of sellout Black ministers to shill for them instead of Dr. Frank Simon and Company.

The Reverend Jerry Stephenson commented during a local September 17 rally that “gay rights activists have hijacked the civil rights movement and that Blacks don’t believe that homosexuals ought to be married.”

Speak for yourself, Rev. Jerry. I believe that if two people love each other and want to get married, it's their business. I could care less whether they’re the same gender or not. Neither the state of Kentucky nor the United States Congress should be attempting to enshrine intolerance in our constitution at the behest of Bible-thumping bigots. I’m in good company. Ambassador Carol Moseley-Braun, Coretta Scott King, Julian Bond, Rep. John Lewis, Dr. Henry Louis Gates, Rev. Al Sharpton, Dr. Joycelyn Elders, Whoopi Goldberg, and former San Francisco mayor Willie Brown are some of the folks with our skin pigmentation that agree with me. By the way reverend, I am also a Christian.

Let me get back to focusing on Rev. Stephenson’s ignorant assertion that gays have hijacked the civil rights movement. He and the rest of his fellow Stepford Negroes got that talking point directly from the Concerned Women for America, an organization that has been less than friendly to African-Americans and our issues over the years.

By the way Rev. Stephenson, since you were sleeping in class during Black History Month, let me hip you to the fact that gays and lesbians played a major role in the Civil Rights Movement. Can you say Bayard Rustin? I thought you could.

This gay Black man was not only a co-founder of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference with Dr. Martin Luther King, but was one of his principal strategic advisors. Rustin was the person who introduced Dr. King to Gandhi’s non-violence philosophy, the major ingredient in the series of campaigns that won passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. He was also lead organizer of the 1963 March on Washington in which Dr. King gave his immortal ‘I Have a Dream’ speech.

Coretta Scott King pointed out during a April 1998 speech to the 25th Anniversary Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund luncheon that “Gays and lesbians stood up for civil rights in Montgomery, Selma, Albany GA, St. Augustine FL and many other campaigns of the Civil Rights Movement.” She said that “Many of these courageous men and women were fighting for my freedom at a time when they could find few voices for their own, and I salute their contributions.”

She also had this to say about gay rights and the civil rights movement:

"We have a lot more work to do in our common struggle against bigotry and discrimination. I say “common struggle” because I believe very strongly that all forms of bigotry and discrimination are equally wrong and should be opposed by right-thinking Americans everywhere. Freedom from discrimination based on sexual orientation is surely a fundamental human right in any great democracy, as much as freedom from racial, religious, gender, or ethnic discrimination."

Amen, Mrs King.

Monica's Excellent JCPS Board Meeting Adventure

It's been a busy couple of days for me, but fighting intolerance is a never ending job.

Saturday night I ended up protesting an HRCoid at the Out and About dinner. Today I spent most the afternoon and evening speaking in front of the Jefferson County School Board to urge that they move forward with a employment policy addition that adds sexual orientation AND gender identity.

I arrived at the Van Hoose Education Center in fly girl fashion diva mode, just in time for the committee hearing that was being held on the issue. Hey, these meetings are televised on local cable TV, so a sistah has to look good.

I did get to speak for a few moments in front of that three person committee, but they voted 2-1 to recommend to the full board that they proceed with adding sexual orientation only.

So the day's not getting off to a great start. I was even more upset when I went to use the facilites and discovered that I left my makeup bag on the bathroom sink at home.

However, I had to shake it off because the board meeting was starting at 7 PM and I was scheduled to speak along with 8 other people on the pro side. We didn't know how many peeps on the anti side would show up and really weren't too concerned about it. We had a multi ethnic and varied group ready to be drum majors for justice.

Our group included two teachers, JCPS parents and students and other progressive Louisville peeps. One of those teachers was an award winning private school transgender one who was fired 24 hours after a Catholic school principal made the local news. The principal was arrested for allegedly soliciting in drag on 18th Street, a known transgender hooker area in Da Ville. The transgender teacher didn't even work at the crossdressing principal's school, but was fired anyway.

We eventually had a total of 30 people show up while the anti side could muster only six. The most delicious part was because the JCPS board was doing recognitions, the entire left side of the meeting room was taken up with the kids, their proud parents, and administrators and teachers there for another part of the meeting agenda. We'd already grabbed the front three rows on the right hand side of the meeting room, so the anti side had to sit behind us.

The CON side consisted of three speakers and about six people total holding their 'no special rights' signs. Two of them were the usual suspects involved with the local Forces of Intolerance.

After two hours they finally got to the part of the meeting in which citizens can address the board on various issues. The order of speakers basically goes in terms of the order in which you called the JCPS secretary to sign up.

The ground rules are you have three minutes to speak. You get a 30 second warning bell, and then a double bell to signal that your time is up.

After I spoke, I ironically had the infamous Dr. Frank Simon called to speak behind me. He's the legendary Klansman (oops, allergist) who's allergic to GLBT people and progressive issues. He's the head of KY Right To Life and a constant nattering nabob of negativity in Da Ville anytime progressive policies are being proposed. He crawled from under his rock to go on a three minute 'GLBT people cause AIDS, typhoid and other diseases' rant before he left the podium.

The second anti speaker was a elderly white grandfather from the South end Okolona neighborhood. He spouted the standard rhetoric about the 'Homosexual Agenda' and not wanting his granddaughter being taught 'how to be a lesbian' by public school teachers.

The third anti speaker was a Black representative of Rev. Jerry Stephenson, our resident Black GLBT hater. I ripped Jerry's behind in a November 2004 TransGriot newspaper column about his comments during the marriage amendment battle in which he stated that GLBT peeps din't have anything to do with the African-American civil rights movement and he was tired of 'our movement being hijacked'.

The sycophant apologized for Jerry not being there and whined about my Forces of Intolerance barb. When he passed me when he was done speaking I said to him, "If the white sheet fits, wear it my brother."

Their negative rhetoric was countered by us kicking knowledge, quoting stats, and telling heartfelt stories before the meeting adjourned for the evening.

My prayer is that we not only changed some hearts and minds tonight, but won a few votes in the process.

Oh by the way, here are my remarks to the board. Enjoy.

***

Dr. Berman, Chairman Hardesty, distinguished school board members and fellow citizens.

I'm Monica Roberts, a resident of District 2 and the child of a retired Houston Independent School District teacher. I left my hometown and I'm now a six year resident of Louisville.

I am a transgender person and concerned citizen who is here tonight to give a voice and put a face on the people that are being left behind by the proposal to only cover sexual orientation in JCPS employment policy and not gender identity as well.

By proposing to move forward to cover sexual orientation only, you are saying to me and other transpersons in Jefferson County that we are not valued, we are not worth protecting from discrimination, and our desires to help contribute our talents to help build our society aren't wanted.

If the LA Unified School District, the second largest district in the United States can not only cover gender identity but come up with comprehensive policies on this issue, what's holding JCPS back?

The Fairness laws have the language, the law has been around since 1999, it's been tested in the conservative 6th District US courts, so I fail to understand why we simply can't use this language to cover everyone?

This is being pushed as an 'incremental rights' approach, but as I and other transpeople know all too well, incremental rights passed for one group leads to EXPONENTIAL increases in bigotry and discrimination directed at the non-covered people by the Forces of Intolerance.

This is our state, our country, our city, our county and our school district as well. Educating the next generation of leaders is a major priority that we can all agree on. We need to have the flexibility to attract the best and brightest people to work for and remain employed by JCPS.

The best and brightest also includes transgender people as well. I humbly ask as a citizen that JCPS include gender identity as well in the proposed employment policy addition.

Thank you.

2007 Miss International Queen Pageant

It looks like the Thais got what they wanted. One of their homegirls took the Miss International Queen crown.






Thanyarat Jiraphatphakorn, AKA Nong Film, was crowned Miss Tiffany Universe only a few short months ago. She got to enjoy another crowning ceremony in Pattaya Saturday night during the fourth annual edition of this pageant.

The pageant was conducted in Thailand November 5-10. The talent took place on Friday, November 9 with the televised finals on Saturday. Tiffany's Show Pattaya runs the event and claims to be the world's largest transsexual cabaret. They do have competition from not only other cabarets in Thailand, but the Amazing Philippines Show as well. A spokesperson said that they expected more than 25 million Thai television viewers to tune in to the finals which were televised live.



The first runner up was Miss Brazil, Aleika Barros and the second runner up was Miss Philippines, Chanel Madrigal.



Interestingly, there was no contestant representing the United States in this year's edition of the pageant. Jazmine International from New York chose to represent Puerto Rico.



This one was dominated by the Asian girls. Half of the 23 contestants represented Asian nations. There were 4 representing the Philippines, 3 each representing Nepal and Japan and one representing Malaysia in addition to the homegirl from Thailand.

The European reps were in the house as well. There were two girls representing Switzerland, and one each from Great Britain, Germany and Italy.



The South American beauty pageant hotbeds of Venezuela, Colombia and Brazil were represented along with the nations of Mexico and Costa Rica and the Caribbean islands of Cuba and Puerto Rico.



The cool thing about this pageant is that in Thailand, this pageant is taken as seriously as Miss Universe or any other beauty pageant.

"I feel excited and so happy. Everybody enjoyed the contest and I didn't expect anything like this," the 21-year-old student said from atop her throne after winning $10,000 USD and the title.

"This is the night I have been preparing for my whole life," gushed Colombia's Melania Armenta, a 25-year-old model.

Last year's queen Erica Andrews performed "Mexican Aztec" -- an upbeat, pulsating dance homage to her homeland complete with ancient pyramids, flashing native symbols and historic outfits.



In the costume round, Thanyarat had to compete against a butterfly, a swan and a Mercedes Benz, but the top prize in the category was given to Japan's Beni Tsukishima for her authentic kabuki ensemble.

Tanyarat's angelic white-beaded evening wear, fit for the grandest of galas, gave way to the more salacious floral pink bikini in the swimsuit competition, showing off her shapely legs and slim figure.

But she finally wooed the crowd with dedication to loftier issues.

"Global warming is one of the most serious problems the world faces today," she said when asked how she helps educate people on environmental issues.

"I tell them to 'think about it'. It's your world too," she said.



The crowd, consisting of mostly Thais and tourists, cheered loudly for the homegrown favorite but were upstaged by feverish, flag-waving Filipinos who supported four of their compatriots.

Thai transsexuals have slowly been leaving the cabarets for mainstream success in music and other endeavors, helped in part by the popularity of beauty contests.

Pageant participants praised Thailand for its progressive attitude towards transgender people.

"There is still a lot of discrimination against people like me in the Philippines," said 24-year-old Chantal Rain Marie Madrigal, from Manila.

"Thailand is like a utopia for transgender people."

So long live the new Miss International Queen. It'll be interesting to see who takes it next year.

East Coast GLBT National College Admission Fair

photo-University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine

For out college bound GLBT students, choosing the right campus for them can be a trying experience. Fortunately there's a 501c3 organization called Campus Pride that wants to not only help students find the perfect college, but halp create a safer learning atmosphere for them as well.


On Saturday, December 1 they will be holding a National College Admission Fair from 11 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. in Houston Hall on the University of Pennsylvania campus. The address is 3417 Spruce Street, Philadelphia, PA Any prospective high school students and their families are welcome to attend the fair and no registration is required.

In addition, Campus Pride will host special feature presentations throughout the day including a 1:30 p.m. presentation entitled 'Finding Your LGBT-Friendly Campus'.

Campus Pride was founded in the fall of 2001 and launched a year later in October 2002. It started as an online community and resource clearinghouse called Campus PrideNet founded by M. Chad Wilson, Sarah E. Holmes and Shane L. Windmeyer, witn Windemeyer serving as its executive director.

In 2006 the organization broadened its outreach efforts and restructured as the current educational non-profit organization Campus Pride. As part of the restructuring process, the Lambda 10 Project for LGBT Fraternity & Sorority Issues became an educational initiative of Campus Pride.

Campus Pride envisions campuses and a society free of LGBT prejudice, bigotry and hate. It works to develop student leaders, campus networks, and future actions to create such positive change.

So if you're a GLBT student or ally who lives near the University of Pennsylvania campus, you may want to check out this interesting college admissions fair.

If you need further infromation about this upcoming event you can call (704)277-6710 or E-mail Campus Pride ED Shane Windemeyer at shane@campuspride.org