Previously Unpublished
I Told You So.
Yes, I Did. Yes, I Did. I Told You So.
(Or,
By Katrina C. Rose
During the week before Thanksgiving the city of Topeka, Kansas, enacted a gay-only rights ordinance, one that initially had included “gender identity or expression” in addition to “sexual orientation,” but was pared down in a 5-4 vote, with one of the five being a non-transgendered lesbian – the same week that a male-to-female transsexual a few counties to the east was acquitted of criminal charges that had been brought against her solely because she listed herself as a woman on a marriage license.
To me, just as that speaks for itself, so does the following:
|
WASHINGTON— Human Rights Campaign President Cheryl Jacques released the following statement today regarding the Topeka, Kan., City Council decision to ban discrimination based on sexual orientation in city hiring: “Red state or blue state, the
American people strongly support fairness. The city of The Human Rights Campaign is the largest national lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender political organization with members throughout the country. It effectively lobbies Congress, provides campaign support and educates the public to ensure that LGBT Americans can be open, honest and safe at home, at work and in the community. (1) |
Of course, the reason I view that as speaking for itself is that I know the following:
(a) That
the ordinance that was passed by
(b) That, even if ‘gender identity or expression’ had not been stripped from the bill (2) – with the approval of a non-transgendered lesbian member of said City Council – it would not be a “statement that no one should be fired from their job simply because of who they are” because, as actually is mentioned in the press release, the ordinance only addresses employment decisions by the corporate entity of the city itself; and
(c) That (a) and (b) above mandate the conclusion that this press release, taken as a whole, disproves the claim contained therein that HRC “effectively lobbies Congress, provides campaign support and educates the public to ensure that LGBT Americans can be open, honest and safe at home, at work and in the community.”
I ask the world: What interests of which transgendered people does former Massachusetts legislator Jacques – who, while she was a legislator, stayed in the closet until she could figure a way to turn her lesbianism into a political plus (such as parlaying it into a future quarter-mil-per-year gig as head of an organization that, in reality, represents rich, white, non-transgendered gays and lesbians) and does not appear to have done anything to even attempt to statutorily correct the insulting, transphobic, gay-only rights bill that the state had enacted in 1989 – think were positively enhanced by what happened in Topeka? Who does this so-detached-from-reality-that-she-has-no-business-even-representing-herself-much-less-a-group-of-people-who-apparently-need-never-apply-for-employment-with-her-organization (3) think was educated about transgendered people by what happened in Topeka in any way other than being taught that it is 101% okay for transgendered people to be excised from civil rights legislation?
And…what comes next?
Autumn Sandeen’s guess is as good as anyone’s:
With this kind of HRC response to a false triumph, I just can't wait until next year's versions of
ENDA and LLEEA are submitted--specifically to see what the HRC does when Sen. Kennedy
or Rep. Frank puts forward an ENDA/LLEEA without gender identity and expression language. (4)
As good – and, for anyone who has even one cell of self-honesty in his or her body, as accurate as anyone’s.
Because it is what is going to happen.
Not into anti-HRC reality?
Try this. Compare the following two
‘Net Nooz blurbs about the
|
What is Included? |
|
What is Missing? |
|
Council members voted 5-4 to
approve the ban. City attorney Brenden Long said the measure affects the city
of The council initially
considered a proposal that would have inserted the terms "sexual
orient-tation, or gender identity or expression" into sections of city
code that ban discrimination based on other reasons. Council members then voted
5-4 to amend the ordinance to remove the phrase "gender identity or
expression." About 70 people addressed
the council before the final vote. The first 20 speakers all urged the
council to reject the ordinance. Most of those were members of the Rev. Fred
W. Phelps Sr.'s congregation at Many others were from
conservative Christian churches, who suggested passage of the ord-inance
would define homosexuals as a protected class. Proponents of the ordinance said gay people don't choose to be gay. They also said the city has a moral obligation to protect human rights. |
Hint →→ ←← Hint ←← Hint |
Conservative capital of sexual orientation. Many
activists were disappointed, hoping the council would enact a broader
ordinance against discrimination in housing, lending, and
private employment. Yet a few took comfort in what they perceived as some
progress. Part of it was timing. The
vote on November 16 came two weeks after President Bush carried Kansas with
62% of the vote and during an election in which 11 states
approved con-stitutional bans on same-sex marriage. "We've just come out
of an election that was very bruising to the gay community," said Matt
Foreman, executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force.
"This small step by the But opponents of any gay
rights ordinance saw approval of only a small change--by a 5-4 council
vote--as a significant victory. Still, some worry that the new ordinance is a
step toward governmental acceptance of homosexuality. "I wonder if it's
just not the camel's nose under the tent," said Francis Slobodnik,
manager of the Topeka-area office of the American Society for the Defense of
Tradition, Family, and Property, an organization for Roman Catholics. couples won reelection. In in |
Would it surprise anyone to learn that the blurb on the right appeared on the website of The Advocate? (5)
I hope not.
Might it surprise anyone to learn that the blurb on the left appeared on the website of Boston’s Bay Windows? (6)
Well, for those who have been away for a while, it might. That paper has risen far above the transphobic depths in which it was mired during the reign of Jeff Epperly. (See, I do know how to doll out positiveness – when its warranted.)
But, The Advocate? Don’t be fooled by the fact that it allowed two transsexual women’s views on the outcome of the presidential election to appear in its pages. (7) In that December 7th section on the election, who got top billing? The gay-marriage-deluded head of the gay organization that can’t be bothered to hire a transgendered person to be its transgender rights specialist. (8)
Has anything ever really changed at that organization?
Has anything ever really
changed at HRC? Remember – HRC is the
cabal that had the grotesquely-deformed balls to declare, during the process of
That sound bite not good enough for ya? Try this one:
"This is an enormous victory that sends the message that discrimination is not acceptable in
|
HRC on
Maryland 2001 |
The
Commonality?? |
HRC on
Topeka 2004 |
|
|
“discrimination is not acceptable” -Elizabeth Birch |
←← Hint Anti-transgender discrim-ination is acceptable. |
Hint →→ Transgendered people collectively are no one. |
“no one should be fired” -Cheryl Jacques |
Is anything ever really going to change regarding HRC’s true objective on ‘the transgender problem’?
In your heart, you know what the answers to all of the above questions that I have posed are.
And, I’ve told you so for years.
I told you so when HRC showed its true colors in the spring of 2004 when it, as an entity, could not understand why transgendered people would picket the organization.
I told you so when I offered analysis of the so-called resolution that it promulgated this summer in an effort to con the remaining un-conned that HRC would actually go to the mat for transgendered people on the issue of ENDA (and whatever bill that replaces it.)
I told you so when it became clear that the people who run HRC are incapable of seeing the fact that gay marriage is far more damaging to the entire GLBT rights agenda than transgender employment protections ever will be.
And, I’m telling you now.
Human beings can indeed change sex (or gender or any other sexology-ese term you want; human beings have an inherent right to change legal sex designations), but leopards cannot change their spots.
And, as I’ve said on numerous occasions: You can’t polish a turd.
Red state or blue state. Local, state or federal. HRC is and will be what HRC is and always was.
Footnotes:
(1) Human Rights Campaign, HRC Statement on Topeka, Kan., Nondiscrimination Ordinance - ‘Red state or blue state, the American people strongly support fairness,’ said HRC President Cheryl Jacques, HRC.org, Nov. 23, 2004.
(2) Topeka Accepts Stripped Down Gay Law, 365Gay.com, Nov. 18, 2004. Don’t like the fact that a non-trasngendered lesbian was wiling to give gays and lesbians the right to discriminate against transgendered people? Tell Topeka City Councilmember Tiffany Muller how you feel: tmuller@topeka.org.
(3) Katrina C. Rose, No One Has the Right to Act Surprised, Nov. 8, 2004, at fn. 28 and accompanying text.
(4) E-mail from Autumn Sandeen to Katrina Rose, Nov. 24, 2004.
(5) Conservative
Capital of
Of course, after I initially posted this, the ever-so-reliable Queer Channel Media came through for me. Although not verbatim the same as what appeared in The Advocate, the following item, which appeared in the Houston Voice, proudly carries the banner of trans-erasure:
|
More Naional
News |
Topeka
Passes Pro-Gay Measure in Wake of Election,
(6) Topeka Passes Ordinance Banning Anti-Gay Discrimination, Bay Windows, Nov. 25, 2004.
(7) Calpernia Addams and Andrea James, We Can Change Hearts and Minds Through the Media, The Advocate, Dec. 7, 2004, at 30.
(8) Matt Foreman, Gay Marriage is the New Abortion. We Must Fight On, The Advocate, Dec. 7, 2004, at 28-29. Don’t think my characterization of him is fair? Peruse the following holiday press release:
A Day to Give Thanks, Indeed!
A Message from the National Gay and Lesbian
Task Force
MEDIA CONTACT: Dear members of the Task Force family, This Thanksgiving, let's all take a moment to remember, cherish, and give thanks to: The tens of thousands of volunteers and staff who worked so hard and gave so much for so many months to defeat the amendments and to elect pro-LGBT candidates to office. The 6.5 million non-gay people who voted against anti-marriage amendments on the ballot in 11 states on November 2. The elected officials with the decency and integrity to vote against or block anti-LGBT legislation during the last year. All those who have served all of us through their work in LGBT community centers, state and local political advocacy organizations, and in our community's anti-violence, HIV prevention, substance abuse, youth, and senior programs. Our non-gay family members, friends, co-workers and neighbors who supported us and our causes with words, love, time, and money. The thousands of individuals and couples who have pressed forward in the courts seeking redress from injustice, including those seeking marriage equality, and the legal advocacy organizations supporting them. The hundreds of members of the clergy who spoke out against anti-gay bigotry disguised as deeply held religious beliefs. The victims of discrimination and hate violence who were able to speak publicly about their experiences and to all those who counseled, comforted and advocated for them. And perhaps most of all, for the blessing - however bestowed - of being lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender. Matt
Foreman |
Matt Foreman, A Day to Give Thanks Indeed!, TheTaskForce.org, Nov. 24, 2004. A bit about marriage, another bit about marriage, a bit about “pro-LGBT” candidates, a bit about “non-gay family members, friends, co-workers and neighbors who supported us,” and, of course, the best of all, a bit about “elected officials with the decency and integrity to vote against or block anti-LGBT legislation during the last year.”
Funny…I don’t see anything about Tiffany Muller, the
non-transgendered lesbian who did not have the decency or integrity to stand up
for transgendered employees (and potential employees) of
Actually, its not funny at all – unless you know where your next paycheck is coming from (as Matt Foreman does) and are not a transgendered person working for, or seeking to work for, the City of Topeka, who knows that not only can she be discriminated against with impunity by employees of the City of Topeka who might happen to be non-gay, religionist bigots, but she can also be discriminated against with impunity by employees of the City of Topeka who might happen to be gay or lesbian and have no desire to associate with transgendered people.
(9) Katrina C. Rose, Maryland Gives
Special Rights to Homosexuals,
Also from the Gaytoday item - here are some other interesting quotes from those halcyon days of the first few months of the first Dubya faux administration:
Cathy Brennan, representing the Gay
and
Culmination indeed. I’m sure it was for all who got everything that they wanted from the bill. Has any attempt been made to add transgendered people to that 2001 gay-only law?
(10)
(11) HRC Statement, supra note 1 (emphasis added).
© 2004 Katrina C. Rose
Posted November 25, 2004; last modified November 26, 2004.