Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
email Get AlterNet in your mailbox!

 
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Search:

House to Hold First-Ever Hearing on Transgender Rights

Posted by Tana Ganeva, AlterNet at 3:00 PM on June 25, 2008.


Hopefully the hearing will build the foundation for federal laws that protect transgender people from discrimination.
Post Tools
email EMAIL
print PRINT
24 COMMENTS

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

RSS iconTana Ganeva RSS Feed

RSS iconMain AlterNet RSS Feed

Get Tana Ganeva in your
mailbox!

 

On Thursday the House will hold the first-ever Congressional hearing on transgender rights. Introduced by Congressman Rob Andrews, D-NJ, the hearing will examine discrimination faced by transgender people in the workplace.

Andrews' home state of New Jersey offers some workplace protections for transgender people: a law passed in 2006 prohibits discrimination based on "gender identity or expression" in employment, housing and public accommodations. But New Jersey is one of only 13 states (and the District of Columbia) with policies banning discrimination based on gender identity. Most other states have protections that only extend to gays, lesbians and bisexuals; gender identity is not included.

Past efforts to secure protections on the federal level for transgender people have not panned out. In 2007, Representatives Barney Frank (D-Mass), Chris Shays (R-Conn.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisc.), and Deborah Pryce (R-Ohio) introduced the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), designed to provide protections to LGBT people similar to the Civil Rights Act of 1964. However, the version of the bill that was finally passed excluded language protecting transgender people from workplace discrimination.

Thursday's hearing will hopefully lead to legislation that does not shut out transgender rights from larger efforts to achieve LGBT equality. According to the National Center for Transgender Equality (NCTE), "This is not only an opportunity to be truly heard by our fellow Americans, it will help to build the foundation for significant changes in federal laws protecting transgender people from discrimination."

As expected, not everyone is happy about tomorrow's hearings; anti-gay rights groups have begun urging their supporters to protest the proceedings. Writes Regina Griggs, Executive Director of Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays & Gays: "Homosexuals and their transgender activist allies hope to use this hearing as a way of forcing the imposition of gender confusion upon all Americans ... " -- or, the standard wrongheaded, alarmist tripe that is always trotted out to block equal rights for LGBT people.

The hearings will be held at 10:30; portions of the proceedings will be aired on CSPAN and streamed on their website.

Digg!


Return to Tana Ganeva  » Post Tools: email EMAIL print PRINT 24 COMMENTS PERMALINK

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated. 		View:
Screaming
[Report this comment]
Posted by: bobtr900 on Jun 26, 2008 4:42 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This will bring the right wingers and their religious right out and screaming for blood. Another one for human beings and another one against their strictures. Here they come...duck and cover, the fur is going to fly.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» logic Posted by: planet doomed
» RE: Screaming Posted by: darkhorse
If only!
[Report this comment]
Posted by: www.suekatz.com on Jun 26, 2008 5:16 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thanks for the heads-up about these hearings - it is the first I have heard of them. You quote the fear-mongers as saying, "Homosexuals and their transgender activist allies hope to use this hearing as a way of forcing the imposition of gender confusion upon all Americans ..." and suddenly that doesn't seem like such a bad idea (if only we had the power.) A little honest gender confusion might do the majority a bit of good, shake up their artifically-absolute notions of gender and provide them with a chance to think/feel flexibly.
Thanks again,
Sue

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» cements gender roles Posted by: planet doomed
» RE: cements gender roles Posted by: Aureantes
» RE: cements gender roles Posted by: planet doomed
Flip Side
[Report this comment]
Posted by: darkhorse on Jun 26, 2008 2:07 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
While it might seem all good on the one side the flip side to all of this is the imposition of legally-medically mandated gender roles on everyone.

In Iran gays & lesbians face death penalties every day for being themselves but the state recognizes, enforces & endorses sex change operations for them in order to 'normalize' their existence. Transgender doesn't challenge anything at all but rather reinforces the socially-constructed gender binary through pseudo-scientific claims of 'inner experiences' of self.

Here in the US lesbians who resist the trans agenda forced on them every day are told that their 'gender identity' isn't a valid one by trans activists who seek to dismantle the lesbian culture developed over the last 40-50 years. Lesbians in other countries report the same efforts against them.

When anyone tells another that their gender choices aren't valid then you're looking at a group that seeks to enforce their views through the legal-medical monopolies and who seek to use the laws of our country to dominate others.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Adding... Posted by: darkhorse
» Regarding choices..... Posted by: Aureantes
Amputation Disorder or Body Integrity Identity Disorder
[Report this comment]
Posted by: planet doomed on Jun 26, 2008 9:13 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
http://www.newsweek.com/id/138932/ article on BIID.

Transgenderism has nothing to do with sexual orientation like heterosexuality or homosexuality; and in no way reflects sexual preference for one's partner. Instead, it concerns the belief that certain body parts on themselves make them "feel" better -- much like any other paraphilia such as Amputation Disorder, which is the belief that a person needs a healthy limb amputated.

Stop and think. Every fetish community insists that they are within the bounds of normal and seeks public acceptance -- every single one. Reasonable people demand reasonable answers.

Why is it not a fetish?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: how to prove an argument Posted by: planet doomed
A REAL woman is not transgendered
[Report this comment]
Posted by: planet doomed on Jun 27, 2008 8:29 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If we are going to say that a transwoman is a real woman, then we must also say that a real woman is transgendered.

It's that whole "if A equals B, then B must equal A" thing.

And the vast majority of real girls do not need androgen blockers, estrogen supplements, rib removal, facial reconstruction, silicon buttocks, breast implants, -- merely to APPEAR female.

The sad thing is that there exist many people who do not believe that real women are entitled to define ourselves. These folks have no problem believing that real women are born to serve others, even if we have to serve these assholes against our will. So these folks are confused when even a few real women refuse to be dumped into the catagory of "transgendered".

These folks believe that it is our very nature to serve others, and if we decline to be a doormat, they believe that there is something wrong with us. They keep trying to "help" us understand why it is our sacred duty to roll over for every stinking crying face which which comes along. These people are not the friend of real women; they are our enemy, for they want the very definiton of a real woman to become that of a plastic barbie doll.

What Orwellian mind fuck are these people attempting to pull over on society? How low does somebody's IQ have to be, in order to think that real women are plastic barbie dolls? How misogynistic must one be, in order to believe it is our sacred duty to redefine our natural selves as nothing more then a plastic canvass upon which we will accept any synthetic poison, merely because some crying freak has hurt feelings?

Real women are not transgendered; so transwomen cannot be real women.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Born to do /what/? Posted by: Aureantes
» RE: Born to do /what/? Posted by: darkhorse
» RE: Born to do /what/? Posted by: darkhorse
» RE: Born to do /what/? Posted by: Aureantes