Sunday, October 7, 2007

Personal thoughts on ENDA

Gay, lesbian and bisexual people who think it acceptable to pass a version of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act that leaves out transgender people should take a refresher course in gay history.

Maybe then they would realize the 1969 riot at the Stonewall Inn so often credited with instigating the gay rights movement would never have had the impact it did were it not for the drag queens who stood up to the New York City police.

They should also read the Human Rights Campaign’s 2008 Corporate Equality Index, which reports 98 percent of rated employers “provide employment protections on the basis of sexual orientation,” while only 58 percent provide protections on the basis of “gender identity.”

A trans-exclusive ENDA only leaves the members of the LGBT community most vulnerable to workplace discrimination more isolated. Any gay, lesbian or bisexual people who think otherwise should understand their opinion reeks of the same sour smell effused by early feminists who disregarded lesbians, early white activists who disregarded the existence of non-white gays and lesbians and all of those people who still think the military operates without the valuable services of LGBT people.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

Thanks for the suggestions, Kevin. I am a gay person "who think[s] it acceptable to pass a version of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act that leaves out transgender people."

You're right that drag queens were crucial to Stonewall's riot. I agree that we need to honor their contribution. So are you saying that we should honor drag queens by passing trans-inclusive non-discrimination laws today? I think drag queens and trans people alike would take issue with being lumped together like that. I don't think a drag queen and a trans person are the same thing. Do you?

It's awful that trans discrimination can and does take place in so many workplaces. Have you forgotten that sexual orientation discrimination can and does occur also? Unfortunately, trans-inclusive non-discrimination is still a tough issue to sell to members of Congress, but sexual orientation-inclusive non-discrimination is more attainable. Like it or not, they are the ones who need to be persuaded to support it, because they are the ones who get to pass (or defeat) trans-inclusive non-discrimination.

You and I both agree that a trans-exclusive ENDA doesn't go far enough. So what are we to do? Get neither one passed until members of Congress are ready to pass them both? I think we should do a little triumph now, and another triumph later, instead of trying to get a great big win all at once. Maybe when someobody is fired for being gay, and has no ENDA to protect him because activists wanted trans-inclusive or nothing, you can explain to him why it was better to protect nobody than to protect some people.

Kevin Rector said...

Thanks for the comments, moon dog. You make great arguments, and write well on why a small victory now is better than a full victory at some undetermined time down the road.

I don't think "a drag queen" and "a trans person" are the same, necessarily, but I do think some people consider themselves both. And, I think it is fair to say that some of the drag queens at Stonewall may have identified with the trans community, which has fought and thankfully won more recognition since 1969.

- Kevin

Lena Dahlstrom said...

Actually I'm a hetero CD and a drag queen, and the show I perform in has three drag queens who are also trans women -- and there's a number of others around town here in SF.

Watch "Screaming Queens" about the Compton's Cafeteria riot before Stonewall and you'll find a number of the queens were trans women -- I know one of them personally. Likewise with "Paris is Burning."

The vast majority of trans women are not drag queens, and would be offended by the suggestion they are, but it's not a mutually exclusive thing.

BTW, Moon dog, you do realize that Bush is going to vote ENDA anyway, regardless of whether it includes trans protections or not. So the whole controversy is over something that's strictly a symbolic vote anyway. And what kind of message does it give pro-bigotry forces that we're willing to cave before the going gets tough?