Sex In The Public Square - The End of ENDA? - Comments

Thank you for this article.

Jamie — Tue, 13 May 2008 14:58:33 -0700

Thank you for this article. I'm a transwoman, and this was very heartening to read.

Correcting my overly optimistic critique

Elizabeth — Tue, 16 Oct 2007 02:37:24 -0700

I realized that I was way overly optimistic about where exactly the ENDA bill was in process. I referred to it as being in conference committee when it hasn't even been voted on by the House yet. Apologies! To be clear, HR 3685 is only moving out of the Judiciary Committee and toward the full House for a vote there. Click here to track the bill.

Trans-less ENDA

Elizabeth — Mon, 15 Oct 2007 19:15:40 -0700

JoeMyGod has this piece about the move forward today of the ENDA-sans-transgender bill. What a disappointment. As he points out, this is despite a massive outcry on the part of LGBTQ (note the T) folks ... and it represents a split between HRC and organizations like the National Gay and Lesbian Taskforce which stood by transgender folks and demanded an inclusive bill.

So, what do we make of HRC's strategic position? And given that the bill is going to be vetoed anyway (would you gamble otherwise?) does HRCs strategic position make sense? I read this, attributed to Barney Frank, in the NYT the other day:

“On the other hand,” he continued, “an announcement that this new Democratic Congress led by a woman who has been as committed to full rights for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people in every aspect of her career, that she had to kill a gay rights bill and couldn’t do anything at all would, I think, be the most negative message we could send.”

Clearly getting the bill out of the conference committee was the most important thing on their minds. Getting a fair bill out of the committee was not. Given that getting a bill out that would be signed by the president was impossible, what should the committee have done? I certainly would not have sold out an important part of the community for a symbolic gesture.

Barney Frank and ENDA

Elizabeth — Sat, 13 Oct 2007 16:41:52 -0700

The NYT ran an article yesterday with the headline "Liberal base proves trying to Democrats," in which they discussed Barney Frank's support for the "compromise" that leaves the transgendered out of ENDA. It's an interesting article because it talks about the difference between political expediency (which is something that leaders in congress are often concerned with) and the achieving of ideal goals, which is of course what we activists are most concerned with. But then there was this:

"Sometimes, though, the in-fighting can seem unreal, as with the recent fury directed by gay groups at Mr. Frank.

“Barney Frank is not gay enough?” asked Representative Thaddeus McCotter, Republican of Michigan, one of the most conservative members of the House.

Even Mr. Frank acknowledged the weirdness. “The likelihood that somebody is going to run against me in my district on the grounds that I have been insufficiently pro-gay is not very high on my list of concerns,” he said.

Does anybody think this is about whether the fury of gay rights and trans rights groups is over whether Barney Frank is gay enough? Or even whether he is sufficiently pro "gay rights"? No, the question is whether he is as pro-rights for all sexual minorities as he is for the mainstream gays.

Heterosexism isn't just about preventing gays from achieving equal rights, it's about privileging one very narrow sexual orientation (monogamous heterosexual marriage without too many toys or porn or kinky stuff) over all others.

I've come to believe that the gay rights movement and the sexual freedom movement are two separate, if intersecting, things.

Thanks!

Mojave66 — Fri, 12 Oct 2007 09:57:52 -0700

Thanks for the welcome, Elizabeth! I know Chris from another forum, he introduced me to SitPS and I'm loving it so much. GREAT work, you guys. >Why else would the word 'gay' when used as a weapon aimed at boys or young men attack not only their sexuality but also their basic masculinity. This. Precisely.

Gender nonconformity

Elizabeth — Thu, 11 Oct 2007 21:02:32 -0700

Mojave66, I couldn't agree more. In fact, I'd say that what ticks people off about gay people is precisely the fact that they are not conforming to the expected gender norms, which are in themselves heterosexist. In that sense, it's all about gender nonconformity. Why else would the word 'gay' when used as a weapon aimed at boys or young men attack not only their sexuality but also their basic masculinity.

Welcome to Sex in the Public Square. I hope we'll see you around frequently!

Another assumption

Mojave66 — Thu, 11 Oct 2007 08:22:19 -0700

Chris-- this piece is so wonderful. Thank you for writing it. There's another aspect of the whole anti-trans bullshit that annoys me, and it is this idea that there is a clear-cut demarcation between transgender people and homosexuals. As a rather butch lesbian I can say that noooo, it's very much a gray area, and it's the gender non-conformity that ticks people off more than the sexual orientation in most cases.

fixed link

Elizabeth — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 13:13:04 -0700

Thanks jeffliveshere. I fixed the link in the original piece as well (Chris, I hope you don't mind!).

linky problem

jeffliveshere — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 07:50:43 -0700

Howdy. Your link is slightly off. I think you want this instead .

The End of ENDA?

Chris — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 12:19:24 -0700

So, I've been sitting around for three days thinking about the situation with ENDA, and every time I sit down to write something, I find myself utterly voiceless, and wind up searching Wikipedia for the history of "Bizarre Love Triangle" or clicking the StumbleUpon button for hours on end. That's what I do when I want to procrastinate, and I am very, very good at procrastinating. I have procrastinated whole phases of my life with ease.