THE TRANSBUSTER

October 22, 2005 ·

Chris Crain’s editorial lamenting that HRC apparently has finally decided to put their money where their mouth was and decide to become a GLBT rights organization and not just a rich gay white male rights organization, actually brought a smile to my face. His nit-picking over Mara Keisling’s numbers in the Hate Crimes Bill and his complaint of “trans-jacking”, would almost be funny if it weren’t for the damage that such naïve divisiveness brings to the LGBT community. He just doesn’t get … or perhaps there is another agenda!

Crain states: “It’s one thing to make the case to crime-control conservatives that violent crimes against transgendered people require stiffer sentences, and quite another to ask them to expand worker lawsuits against businesses to cover those in the midst of gender transition. The latter is a much harder case to make and saddles gay-inclusive ENDA with an unreasonable and unfair burden.”

Crain seems to be saying that perhaps it is not acceptable to kill and maim transgenders, but if they need a job to survive, forget it! But he says it in a very obtuse manner, rather than speak about employment, which is what ENDA is all about, he instead focuses solely on lawsuits against businesses implying an unreasonable and unfair burden. Do I detect some “Karl Rovian” logic here? Discrimination is discrimination, and I believe the ENDA law deals with “reasonable accommodation”. In fact, 35% of America’s population is covered by explicit legislation or judicial opinions protecting transgender people in employment. Are we now deluged with lawsuits in those areas? Mr. Crain apparently subscribes to the old saw, “When you don’t have a good argument, change the subject.”

Recently, I had an extended one on one conversation with a leading “liberal” Congressman, an attorney by trade who expressed some reluctance to sponsor a trans-inclusive ENDA. I realized that he was talking about some hypothetical academic situations and I was talking from the point of view of a businessperson who has faced a lot more challenging situations in real life. It was ironic that the legislator had taken a position regarding business and employment, but could not see the practical solution from the viewpoint of the business person!

As a former consultant for a major accounting firm and principal of a business employing over 300, I can speak about the art of reason in business and dealing with employees. Good, loyal employees are hard to find and one makes reasonable accommodations to retain them. If they are not good … well, that’s another story, then we double check with attorneys.

Mr. Crain seems to be jealous of the fact that some transgenders can marry in more parts of this country than he. What was his reaction when the marriages of Christie Littleton in Texas and J’Noel Gardner in Kansas were effectively nullified by the activist right wing supreme courts of their respective states? What was his comment about that transwoman in Kansas who was actually arrested for applying for a marriage license in 2004?

I must admit that I’m quite upset when he calls the policy of demanding transgender rights right alongside of gay rights, “immoral”! Immoral?! This type of statement puts him in agreement with moral leaders such as Rev. Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell! It does make one think!

Barbra Casbar

Vice-Chair – Garden State Equality

In category:Opinion
Next Post

Sucking the Tit

I wrote the following post to an Indy listserv in response to a misunderstanding about our local advocacy group, Indiana Equality xxxx, ever since you posted about the fact that there was never going to be a protest of the…
Read
Previous Post

Open Letter to Windows Media

By Autumn Sandeen Dear Windows Media Management, I find it difficult to believe that Windows Media truly believes "Newspapers should reflect all aspects of their readers' lives" and that its "superior editorial content and community involvement sets apart". Although your…
Read
Random Post

Three Card Monte, Bailey Style

I'm getting rather tired of posting about this, but J. Michael Bailey is at it again. He posted "Transsexual Smokescreen: Ignoring Science In “The Man Who Would Be Queen” at Scientific Blogging.com. The post is a microcosm of the disingenuous…
Read
Random Post

[UPDATED] Trigger Warning! Focus on the Family is coming to a theater near you!

A friend and I recently went to see the new Hobbit movie. The lights dimmed and imagine my surprise when the following movie preview flashed across the screen: My friend and I both gasped at the same time. This was…
Read
Random Post

Looking Back: How The G&L Views The T

“Progress, far from consisting in change, depends on retentiveness.” — George Santayana There’s been quite a buzz in recent months over our GLBT community – particularly how the GL views and treats the T. It’s reached a fevered pitch with…
Read
Random Post

University Of Pittsburgh Imposes A Transphobic Gendered Facilities Policy

When the 2012-13 school year rolls around, I'll be joining much of the Big East Conference in hatin' on the University of Pittsburgh for a different reason other than their upcoming 2013 departure from the Big East for the ACC.…
Read
  1. i agree with your overall point, but not as much with how you are making your argument against crain’s article.

    like with the hate crimes/employment issue, i think he’s right in stating that it’s easier to make the argument for lgbt inclusive hate crimes legislation than for lgbt inclusive employment laws. generally speaking, there is more legislation prohibiting violent crime against a broader range of individuals than there is legislation protecting individuals’ employment rights. however, just because it’s easier to make the argument for one type of legislation doesn’t make it right to exclude trans from other legislation.

    and the with the marriage issue, i think he was stating that we shouldn’t take existing rights away from one group because the other doesn’t have them. by itself that also makes sense, but that doesn’t mean that when advocating additional/new legislation that trans should be excluded to benefit the lgb part of the community.

    hopefully that makes sense… i’m a bit tired. i do agree that his argument is irritating and then some…

  2. i agree with your overall point, but not as much with how you are making your argument against crain’s article.

    like with the hate crimes/employment issue, i think he’s right in stating that it’s easier to make the argument for lgbt inclusive hate crimes legislation than for lgbt inclusive employment laws. generally speaking, there is more legislation prohibiting violent crime against a broader range of individuals than there is legislation protecting individuals’ employment rights. however, just because it’s easier to make the argument for one type of legislation doesn’t make it right to exclude trans from other legislation.

    and the with the marriage issue, i think he was stating that we shouldn’t take existing rights away from one group because the other doesn’t have them. by itself that also makes sense, but that doesn’t mean that when advocating additional/new legislation that trans should be excluded to benefit the lgb part of the community.

    hopefully that makes sense… i’m a bit tired. i do agree that his argument is irritating and then some…