As posted in the Http;//groups.yahoo.com/geroup/TVGAdvocay/message/14429
This is related to the NCTE's current tour of major cities.Here is a NCTE community and civil rights update from May 2007 that mentions 12 items. At the time, some activists had reported that they had heard about efforts to strip gender identity from ENDA. The post was a response to their reports. NCTE said "the rumors that were started are baseless and, I think, spreading them further would be irresponsible. "In hindsight, the "rumors" were not "baseless" and NCTE held some inaccurate beliefs or assumptions. ( See items 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, and 12 in the original post. You may wish to read the original post before reading the comments here.) How could a responsible, credible organization be so wrong on that many of the items? As NCTE tours the major cities in the US, it may be helpful to determine if NCTE's incorrect assumptions detrimentally affected the community and continue to affect it's relationship with the community. It may also be helpful to determine what factors contribute to the propensity for NCTE to hold onto inaccurate assumptions and discredit those who challenge their assumptions. Like HRC, NCTE may try to move forward without addressing some core moral, ethical and political issues. Is NCTE going to ignore the core issues and pretend that the toothpaste is back in the tube or will they address the issues, recognize that the toothpaste is not going back into the tube, and find a moral and ethical path to be a productive, constructive, unifying force in the community?At least they know that the topics that need to be discussed are "Community" and "Civil Rights." They may want to add "Moral," "Ethical," and "Integrity" to the list of topics because they will not build a community or make progress in the civil rights arena without addressing those issues in a more enlightened and responsible manner.Let's hope that NCTE's assumptions and analysis of the political situation in DC are more accurate next time. Let's hope they are more open to receive information from activists who challenge their assumptions. Let's hope that they will not discredit and marginalize transgender activists who challenge their assumptions. Let's hope NCTE has much, much more wisdom than they had in May.Liz--- In
TGV_Advocacy@ yahoogroups. com, "Mara"
wrote:>> Greetings. It's been a long time since I have been on this list. > Been kind of busy.> > One of the down sides of that though is that it means I haven't been > able to do as good a job as possible at keeping people up to date > about what is happening in DC. A few people pointed out to me over > the last fews days that there has been some inaccurate information > on some listservs so I thought I'd add my two cents.> > First some really good news: The Connecticut state Senate passed > the gender identity anti-discrimination bill today. Everyone is > increasingly optimistic about final passage this year (needs a House > vote in next two weeks). Since Governor Douglas in Vermont signed > that bill yesterday, if CT passes it in the next few weeks, that > would 14 states--much better than the one we had only six years > ago. For everyone who attended our target states conference last > year, yee-ha, there are soon only seven states left with sexual > oreintation and not gender identity protections.> > Now back to the federal policy work, which is primarily what we at > NCTE do. Let me throw out a few statements that summarize what I > know. I know some of these may be controversial, and I am willing > to have discussion about them. At the end of this posting, I will > invite everyone to a phone call for this evening (sorry for the > short notice, but maybe we can do another call next week.)> > 1. The House Hate Crimes bill (H.R.1592), which is trans-inclusive, > passed the House of Representatives on May 3 by a notably larger > margin than it passed in 2005. This has been very heartening for us > and all of our allies.> > 2. There was no effort to strip gender identity from the bill, > other than a half-hearted one as an offered but not debated > amendments in committee. It was not even debated. There was an > amendment to strip both gender identity and sexual orientation that > was debated, but it too had no chance. I was personally at the > Judiciary Committee hearings and mark-up session and at no time was > our inclusion in doubt that day. [A mark-up session is when a > committee hears proposed amendments to bills and then votes on the > bill.] Incidentally, a legal counsel to one of the members of the > committee wore an NCTE lapel pin for several days and throughout the > mark-up session to show his support for transgender people. That's > how far things have come here.> > 3. The LGBT community, as well as our supporters in Congress, were > 100% rock solid behind our inclusion. At no time did any LGBT > organization ever even face the question of whether to support a non-> inclusive bill. That debate has been over for a couple of years > now. I am 100% confident that had it come up though, which it > didn't, everyone would have been rock solid. And, by the way, > opponents of the bill would have been no happier having the trans > part of us stripped out if sexual orientation remained. Everybody > here gets that.> > 4. The Human Rights Campaign (HRC) did an incredibly skillful and > professional job as a lead organization on lobbying for the bill. > Their work and efforts were absolutely everything that any LGBT > person could hope for--they really did ALL LGBT people proud. And > they as individuals and as an organization are putting their hearts > into transgender work and we should be very appreciative.> > 5. In the Senate, the Hate Crime bill (S.1105) was introduced by > Senators Kennedy and Smith. It is inclusive and, on a side note, > Senator Kennedy said so repeadedly and acknowledged NCTE for our > work on the bill. He was very trans-positive.> > 6. Just because the White House has threatened a veto and there are > probably insufficient votes to override does not mean the Hate Crime > bill will not become law. First though, to the Senate for > consideration.> > NOW ENDA> > 7. NCTE has played an active part in drafting the new ENDA over the > last three years. Though not perfect, it is amazing and will save > jobs and lives. So much has been happening that we have not yet had > a chance to really explain the langauge. Sincerely sorry about that.> > 8. Every LGBT organization whose position is known to me is 100% > behind the bill and our inclusion in it. Congressman Frank is 100% > behind the bill in the House. He is an absolute supporter of > transgender rights and of our inclusion in ENDA. He is doing > spectacular work on behalf of all LGBT people. No one is doing > more. Period.> > 9. We are very optimistic that basically the same trans-inclusive > ENDA will be introduced in the Senate very soon. Note that I > say "optimistic" and not "certain." Also note that I say "basically > the same" because, well, who knows?> > 10. Rumors that a non-inclusive ENDA will be introduced in the > Senate are unequivocally only rumors that seem to have been started > by individuals who appear to be out of the loop. Unfortunately lots > of people who heard the rumors have spread them without > verification. I cannot promise that an inclusive ENDA will be > introduced-- that is not up to me--but I will say that everyone in > the process is very optimistic. I also will say that the rumors > that were started are baseless and, I think, spreading them further > would be irresponsible.> > 11. Once the language of ENDA (as introduced already in the House > and hopefully soon in the Senate) is better understood, I think that > some of the concerns expressed on this list will be ameliorated. > Again it is not perfect, but nobody will be sacrificed by the > language of this bill.> > 12. Our Allies: Years ago, we didn't have too many. We had to > educate and, yes, fight our way back into the LGBT movement. I know > there are still imperfections and I know that some trans people are > still skeptical. Yet, I can tell you without hesitation that the > entire organized LGBT movement is with us now. Our education > worked. Our indignation worked. It is our moral responsibility now > to embrace the people we asked and demanded to be our allies. If we > do not believe in education, in persuasion, in redemption, we have > no right being in civil rights. Why educate if not to win over? Why > win over if not to embrace and move forward together? HRC really is > an LGBT organization now and getting a lot of great work done for us > all. Congressman Frank and Senator Kennedy too. Let's move on > together.> > Believe it or not, that's the short version.> > Now, to continue this conversation, you may email me directly at > mkeisling@.. . Additionally, I am happy to invite > anyone who wants to a conference call this evening at 9PM Eastern. > I apologize for the short notice but I just thought of the idea and > the rest of the week is less good. I will look for another > opportunity to have another call maybe next week some time.> > This call is only for people on this listserv.> > On the call, I can answer questions about> > 1. Language in either bill.> 2. Process moving forward> 3. Clarification of anything said in this email> 4. Rumors, rumors, rumors> > Because we cannot guarantee a secure call, we will not be talking > about specific strategy or about specific meetings with specific > members of Congress.> > On the call with me will be at least one of the lawyers who was also > on the ENDA drafting workgroup. Since I am not an attorney, I > thought that might help with language or legal questions.> > Our conference call system only handles 100 people maximum, so if > more than that attend, only the first 100 will get on.> > People tell us they sometimes need to try multiple times to get > through to our calls. > > Because it might get loud, we may need to mute everyone but the > speaking at times. It is not an attempt to silence anyone just to > allow speaking.> > Everyone is welcome; only civil converstation allowed.> > I apologize that because of our very modest budget, we are not able > to provide a toll-free call-in number.> > I will not have access to the Internet between now and 9:00PM, so > asking me questions about the call on the listserv will be > fruitless. I will not see them until tomorrow.> > The call-in information is > > Wednesday May 23> 9:00PM EASTERN TIME> 563-843-7000> passcode 1109174#> > > I hope some of you can join this call. And I'll also try to set up > another call for next week.> > Hope this information helps.> > Mara> > Mara Keisling> Executive Director> National Center for Transgender Equality> mkeisling@.. .>__._,_.___
Messages in this topic (78) Reply (via web post) Start a new topic
Messages Database This related to the NCTE's current tour of major cities.Here is a NCTE community and civil rights update from May 2007 that mentions 12 items. At the time, some activists had reported that they had heard about efforts to strip gender identity from ENDA. The post was a response to their reports. NCTE said "the rumors that were started are baseless and, I think, spreading them further would be irresponsible. "In hindsight, the "rumors" were not "baseless" and NCTE held some inaccurate beliefs or assumptions. ( See items 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, and 12 in the original post. You may wish to read the original post before reading the comments here.) How could a responsible, credible organization be so wrong on that many of the items? As NCTE tours the major cities in the US, it may be helpful to determine if NCTE's incorrect assumptions detrimentally affected the community and continue to affect it's relationship with the community. It may also be helpful to determine what factors contribute to the propensity for NCTE to hold onto inaccurate assumptions and discredit those who challenge their assumptions. Like HRC, NCTE may try to move forward without addressing some core moral, ethical and political issues. Is NCTE going to ignore the core issues and pretend that the toothpaste is back in the tube or will they address the issues, recognize that the toothpaste is not going back into the tube, and find a moral and ethical path to be a productive, constructive, unifying force in the community?At least they know that the topics that need to be discussed are "Community" and "Civil Rights." They may want to add "Moral," "Ethical," and "Integrity" to the list of topics because they will not build a community or make progress in the civil rights arena without addressing those issues in a more enlightened and responsible manner.Let's hope that NCTE's assumptions and analysis of the political situation in DC are more accurate next time. Let's hope they are more open to receive information from activists who challenge their assumptions. Let's hope that they will not discredit and marginalize transgender activists who challenge their assumptions. Let's hope NCTE has much, much more wisdom than they had in May.Liz--- In http://us.f456.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?To=TGV_Advocacy%40yahoogroups.com, "Mara" wrote:>> Greetings. It's been a long time since I have been on this list. > Been kind of busy.> > One of the down sides of that though is that it means I haven't been > able to do as good a job as possible at keeping people up to date > about what is happening in DC. A few people pointed out to me over > the last fews days that there has been some inaccurate information > on some listservs so I thought I'd add my two cents.> > First some really good news: The Connecticut state Senate passed > the gender identity anti-discrimination bill today. Everyone is > increasingly optimistic about final passage this year (needs a House > vote in next two weeks). Since Governor Douglas in Vermont signed > that bill yesterday, if CT passes it in the next few weeks, that > would 14 states--much better than the one we had only six years > ago. For everyone who attended our target states conference last > year, yee-ha, there are soon only seven states left with sexual > oreintation and not gender identity protections.> > Now back to the federal policy work, which is primarily what we at > NCTE do. Let me throw out a few statements that summarize what I > know. I know some of these may be controversial, and I am willing > to have discussion about them. At the end of this posting, I will > invite everyone to a phone call for this evening (sorry for the > short notice, but maybe we can do another call next week.)> > 1. The House Hate Crimes bill (H.R.1592), which is trans-inclusive, > passed the House of Representatives on May 3 by a notably larger > margin than it passed in 2005. This has been very heartening for us > and all of our allies.> > 2. There was no effort to strip gender identity from the bill, > other than a half-hearted one as an offered but not debated > amendments in committee. It was not even debated. There was an > amendment to strip both gender identity and sexual orientation that > was debated, but it too had no chance. I was personally at the > Judiciary Committee hearings and mark-up session and at no time was > our inclusion in doubt that day. [A mark-up session is when a > committee hears proposed amendments to bills and then votes on the > bill.] Incidentally, a legal counsel to one of the members of the > committee wore an NCTE lapel pin for several days and throughout the > mark-up session to show his support for transgender people. That's > how far things have come here.> > 3. The LGBT community, as well as our supporters in Congress, were > 100% rock solid behind our inclusion. At no time did any LGBT > organization ever even face the question of whether to support a non-> inclusive bill. That debate has been over for a couple of years > now. I am 100% confident that had it come up though, which it > didn't, everyone would have been rock solid. And, by the way, > opponents of the bill would have been no happier having the trans > part of us stripped out if sexual orientation remained. Everybody > here gets that.> > 4. The Human Rights Campaign (HRC) did an incredibly skillful and > professional job as a lead organization on lobbying for the bill. > Their work and efforts were absolutely everything that any LGBT > person could hope for--they really did ALL LGBT people proud. And > they as individuals and as an organization are putting their hearts > into transgender work and we should be very appreciative.> > 5. In the Senate, the Hate Crime bill (S.1105) was introduced by > Senators Kennedy and Smith. It is inclusive and, on a side note, > Senator Kennedy said so repeadedly and acknowledged NCTE for our > work on the bill. He was very trans-positive.> > 6. Just because the White House has threatened a veto and there are > probably insufficient votes to override does not mean the Hate Crime > bill will not become law. First though, to the Senate for > consideration.> > NOW ENDA> > 7. NCTE has played an active part in drafting the new ENDA over the > last three years. Though not perfect, it is amazing and will save > jobs and lives. So much has been happening that we have not yet had > a chance to really explain the langauge. Sincerely sorry about that.> > 8. Every LGBT organization whose position is known to me is 100% > behind the bill and our inclusion in it. Congressman Frank is 100% > behind the bill in the House. He is an absolute supporter of > transgender rights and of our inclusion in ENDA. He is doing > spectacular work on behalf of all LGBT people. No one is doing > more. Period.> > 9. We are very optimistic that basically the same trans-inclusive > ENDA will be introduced in the Senate very soon. Note that I > say "optimistic" and not "certain." Also note that I say "basically > the same" because, well, who knows?> > 10. Rumors that a non-inclusive ENDA will be introduced in the > Senate are unequivocally only rumors that seem to have been started > by individuals who appear to be out of the loop. Unfortunately lots > of people who heard the rumors have spread them without > verification. I cannot promise that an inclusive ENDA will be > introduced-- that is not up to me--but I will say that everyone in > the process is very optimistic. I also will say that the rumors > that were started are baseless and, I think, spreading them further > would be irresponsible.> > 11. Once the language of ENDA (as introduced already in the House > and hopefully soon in the Senate) is better understood, I think that > some of the concerns expressed on this list will be ameliorated. > Again it is not perfect, but nobody will be sacrificed by the > language of this bill.> > 12. Our Allies: Years ago, we didn't have too many. We had to > educate and, yes, fight our way back into the LGBT movement. I know > there are still imperfections and I know that some trans people are > still skeptical. Yet, I can tell you without hesitation that the > entire organized LGBT movement is with us now. Our education > worked. Our indignation worked. It is our moral responsibility now > to embrace the people we asked and demanded to be our allies. If we > do not believe in education, in persuasion, in redemption, we have > no right being in civil rights. Why educate if not to win over? Why > win over if not to embrace and move forward together? HRC really is > an LGBT organization now and getting a lot of great work done for us > all. Congressman Frank and Senator Kennedy too. Let's move on > together.> > Believe it or not, that's the short version.> > Now, to continue this conversation, you may email me directly at > mkeisling@.. . Additionally, I am happy to invite > anyone who wants to a conference call this evening at 9PM Eastern. > I apologize for the short notice but I just thought of the idea and > the rest of the week is less good. I will look for another > opportunity to have another call maybe next week some time.> > This call is only for people on this listserv.> > On the call, I can answer questions about> > 1. Language in either bill.> 2. Process moving forward> 3. Clarification of anything said in this email> 4. Rumors, rumors, rumors> > Because we cannot guarantee a secure call, we will not be talking > about specific strategy or about specific meetings with specific > members of Congress.> > On the call with me will be at least one of the lawyers who was also > on the ENDA drafting workgroup. Since I am not an attorney, I > thought that might help with language or legal questions.> > Our conference call system only handles 100 people maximum, so if > more than that attend, only the first 100 will get on.> > People tell us they sometimes need to try multiple times to get > through to our calls. > > Because it might get loud, we may need to mute everyone but the > speaking at times. It is not an attempt to silence anyone just to > allow speaking.> > Everyone is welcome; only civil converstation allowed.> > I apologize that because of our very modest budget, we are not able > to provide a toll-free call-in number.> > I will not have access to the Internet between now and 9:00PM, so > asking me questions about the call on the listserv will be > fruitless. I will not see them until tomorrow.> > The call-in information is > > Wednesday May 23> 9:00PM EASTERN TIME> 563-843-7000> passcode 1109174#> > > I hope some of you can join this call. And I'll also try to set up > another call for next week.> > Hope this information helps.> > Mara> > Mara Keisling> Executive Director> National Center for Transgender Equality> mkeisling@.. .>__._,_.___
Messages in this topic (78) Reply (via web post) Start a new topic
Messages Database
