In New York State the Assembly passed the Gender Expression Non-Discrimination Act (GENDA) and in Houston they passed the Houston Equal Rights Ordinance (HERO) what do these have in common besides the obvious?
There were backroom discussions with a snip, snip there and a snip, snip here. There where thing are dropped from the bill to make it more pliable to the opposition. In Massachusetts they snipped public accommodation from the bill in order to pass the bill.
In Houston they cut out a lot, but then in the final round they restored them so the ordinance came out almost untouched, what will happen in New York is anyone’s guess. Will it die for something like the fourteenth year?
This article in the Dallas Voice that was written before the final vote criticized the compromising process.
He goes on to write,
The question is will New York drop public accommodation to pass GENDA like Massachusetts did so they could say they have protection for trans-people?
Here in Connecticut and both New York and Massachusetts the reasons that we have favorable court ruling was that the legislature never passed a gender non-discrimination bill. So the court cases ruled in our favor was because we could say that we are included in the non-discrimination laws under sex and/or disability since the legislature never voted otherwise. When I asked lawyer friends in Massachusetts what will happen now since the legislature has voted and they have excluded public accommodation, what will happen now with the courts and they answered it is anyone guess, it is a crap shoot.
Will New York go the route of Massachusetts and bargain away some of our rights just to pass the bill or will they stand pat?
There were backroom discussions with a snip, snip there and a snip, snip here. There where thing are dropped from the bill to make it more pliable to the opposition. In Massachusetts they snipped public accommodation from the bill in order to pass the bill.
In Houston they cut out a lot, but then in the final round they restored them so the ordinance came out almost untouched, what will happen in New York is anyone’s guess. Will it die for something like the fourteenth year?
This article in the Dallas Voice that was written before the final vote criticized the compromising process.
The transgender bargaining chipWe have seen it SONDA in New York State where we were thrown under the bus and still haven’t recovered. We have seen it in ENDA in 2007 when we were taken out of the bill.
Posted on 06 Jun 2014
By Emerson Collins
t’s a tried and true tactic in successful negotiations: Always start out by asking for more than you actually want to get out of a deal in order to get what you need. That way, you have room to give up some things to the other side to make them feel like you are reaching a compromise while still getting everything you originally wanted. It’s a technique used by everyone from a 3-year-old who asks to eat every cookie in the jar and settles for four to celebrity divorce proceedings where someone gives up the Aspen house and the Miami condo to keep the primary residence in Hollywood. The tactic is most successful when what you are giving up is something you truly do not care about, or do not care about enough to really fight for it.
We have a long-running problem in the march toward LGBT equality. Often in the course of our work to enshrine equality in legislation from the municipal to the federal level, the first thing offered up a compromise at the negotiating table is equal protection for the transgender community.
He goes on to write,
But at some point — and really it should have been a very long time ago — it has to stop being acceptable to the cisgender LGB part of the community to even consider giving up transgender equality protections in order to succeed in creating new laws. If that is the price of success, it is not a success. It is an abject failure.In New Hampshire there was legislation introduced to add constitutional protect for sexual orientation, they wanted to amend their Constitution to make sure that they are protected even through there is a non-discrimination law for sexual orientation. However, they still haven’t gotten protection trans-people… but they do have marriage equality!
It cannot be enough that cisgender LGBs get our protection. Fighting for equality cannot mean “fighting for just enough equality to include me.” If that were the mindset of straight allies, LGB equality would not be where it is.
Harvey Milk famously said, “It takes no compromise to give people their rights … It takes no political deal to give people freedom.” Thirty-five years later, it is time for cisgendered LGBs to stop considering compromise and political deals at the expense of the transgender community. We cannot consider compromising the rights of others. We cannot consider political deals that do not give all people freedom.He is one gay guy who gets it!
The question is will New York drop public accommodation to pass GENDA like Massachusetts did so they could say they have protection for trans-people?
Here in Connecticut and both New York and Massachusetts the reasons that we have favorable court ruling was that the legislature never passed a gender non-discrimination bill. So the court cases ruled in our favor was because we could say that we are included in the non-discrimination laws under sex and/or disability since the legislature never voted otherwise. When I asked lawyer friends in Massachusetts what will happen now since the legislature has voted and they have excluded public accommodation, what will happen now with the courts and they answered it is anyone guess, it is a crap shoot.
Will New York go the route of Massachusetts and bargain away some of our rights just to pass the bill or will they stand pat?
No comments:
Post a Comment