Finally Some Sanity!

Down in Mississippi the Starkville's city council took a secret vote to repeal the city’s non-discrimination ordinance and health benefits for LGBT people. The secret vote was 5 to 2 for the repeal but the mayor voted it.

Wiseman vetoes board's actions targeting LGBT employees
The Dispatch
By Carl Smith
January 9, 2015

Led by Vice Mayor Roy A. Perkins, aldermen voted 5-2 Tuesday to amend the city's plus-one insurance offering for only workers' spouses in state-recognized marriages and repealed Starkville's statement of equality, which included non-discrimination protections to LGBT employees for the first time.

Wiseman vowed to veto the actions after aldermen met behind closed doors for almost three hours nixed the two policies without offering a reason at the table or notifying the public of the coming move.
[…]
If the five-vote block holds, Wiseman's vetoes should be overturned. The mayor said the debate over the topics and subsequent vetoes should, at the very least, be held out in the open, before the public. 

Yup, they do things differently down in Mississippi, here in Connecticut it is against state law to hold secret meetings and votes except matters of employment and contract discussions. 

The Time Has Come…

…To make “Conversion Therapy” or as it is also known as “Reparative Therapy” illegal. There is an article last week in the New York Times about conversion therapy, “Is It Child Abuse to Make a Trans Child ‘Change’?” by three authors who discuss the topic. The first is by Cristan Williams the editor of the TransAdvocate, points out that the parents think they are helping their child but in reality they are hurting the child,

If Leelah Alcorn’s parents forced her into "conversion therapy,” I’m certain they thought they were helping her to become the heterosexual boy they believed she should be. I’m fairly certain that they wouldn’t have known how dangerous this practice is because there have been numerous anti-L.G.B.T. groups peddling this psychological snake oil to vulnerable families for decades. If I had to guess, I’d be willing to bet that the Alcorns were told that conversion therapy could be helpful and I’d be surprised if the reparative therapist disclosed to the Alcorns that the consensus of the medical and psychological community is that reparative therapy is harmful, especially when performed on youth.

While Jessica Valenti article points out that conversion therapy tells the child that they will not mount to anything,

L.G.B.T. youth need support from their families -- not derision. If you tell a child or teenager they’re not good enough, that they’re worthless, that who they are is broken or wrong, that’s abuse. So-called conversion therapy -- ideologically based counseling that teaches L.G.B.T people they can be “fixed” to be straight or cisgender -- is no different. I don't know the details of Leelah Alcorn's therapy or what her home life was like beyond what her online notes describe -- but forcing L.G.B.T children to attend counseling that tells them that who they are is shameful or "sick" is child abuse.

Breaking down a person’s self-esteem is not good therapy; it is the exact opposite of what therapy is supposed to do. I know for me I was depressed until I built up my self-esteem was I able to transition, before that I was very withdrawn.

The last article in the Times is by Jody L. Herman who writes about what research has shown,

So, what will work? For transgender people, researchers have found that family acceptance, social support and having a connection to the transgender community all reduce psychological distress and suicide attempts. Therefore, efforts to increase family acceptance, such as the Family Acceptance Project, and peer support among transgender people are promising interventions.

Love may not conquers all, but it sure helps.

A friend, Peterson Toscano tells the story of his ordeal with conversion therapy.

Peterson Toscano spent two decades and $30,000 trying to become straight.
 
He subjected himself to countless hours of learning to be what others described as more masculine and to be attracted to women.


Toscano’s “gay rehab” quest took him across three continents. It included three exorcisms and a failed five-year marriage.
 
In 1999, emotionally devastated, Toscano embraced his sexual orientation.
[…]
In reparative therapy, blame is often parceled out to either an overbearing parent, a negative experience or simple misbehavior, he said. The worst of the therapies included violent exorcisms, Toscano said.
 
“It brings a level of spiritual abuse,” he said. “It’s not just that you are sinful, but that you are potentially housing an evil spirit. For a young person to hear that — that’s a very scary thing.”
 
One of his lowest points came after two years in the residential program for “ex-gays” run by Love in Action of Memphis, Tenn., which Toscano said drained him of joy and humanity.
 
“When it didn’t work, I was told that it was my fault. That I didn’t try hard enough, didn’t want it enough,” he said. “It was constantly undermining my sense of self and the way that the world works. They try to unsettle you so you don’t trust your own ideas, your own opinions.”

He wrote a one man play about his experience called “Doin’ Time In The Homo No Mo’ Halfway House”


It is time for “Conversion Therapy” or “Reparative Therapy” be banned from being done on minors.

Dancing with Myself

Crazy Sam’s Saturday 9: Dancing with Myself (1980)

Unfamiliar with this week's tune? Hear it here.

1) This song is one of Billy Idol's biggest hits. Can you name another?
Rebel Yell.

2) When is the last time you danced around your home? 
When I got my workshop was acceptance letter.

3) In this song, Billy says he dances with his own reflection. Is there a mirror in the room you're in right now?
Nope.

4) Dancing with Myself is also the name of Billy Idol's 2014 autobiography. Let's say you're going to write your life story. What do you title it?
Two Lives Are Better Than One.

5) This month, Billy resumes his 2014-15 concert tour in New Orleans. Have you ever been to Louisiana?
Nope. I have been to almost all the states this side except Alabama and Louisiana.

6) In 1980, when "Dancing with Myself" was first popular, VHS players were all the rage. Do you still have yours?
Yup and I still use it.

7) In 1980, The Love Boat was getting good ratings. Have you ever taken a cruise?
Nope and I never want to take one.

8) Sally Field won her first Oscar in 1980 for the movie Norma Rae. Five years later she won a second Oscar for Places in the Heart and delivered one of the most quoted acceptance speeches in Academy history. Do you remember what she said?
I don’t think I ever watched a Oscar show.

9) In 1980, People magazine named Stephen King one of the most intriguing people of the year because he had two big paperback bestsellers -- The Dead Zone and The Shining. Do you have a favorite Stephen King book?
Nope, I never read any of his books but I saw a couple of Twilight Zone shows he wrote.

I still have my cold, but it is winding down. 

Still Under The Weather

I am still fighting a cold and I dug through the list of my most read posts and this was number two on the list, from July 12, 2011... "Gender Identity – Nature v. Nurture"

That has been argued over and over, and is just impossible to prove. But there is strong evidence that it mostly nature; however, I am willing to concede that there probably is a minor component that is nurture. One of the strongest arguments for nature is the result of research with intersex people; the researchers have found that when “corrective” surgery is performed on intersex babies that when they grow up they know their true gender. Dr. Reiner’s research has found that babies with ambiguous genitalia that were subjected to “corrective” surgery knew that their gender had been changed. He found that over 60% of the children identified as the opposite gender than they were raised as. In an interview in the New York Times he said, “That sexual identity is individual, unique and intuitive and that the only person who really knows what it is is the person themselves. If we as physicians or scientists want to know about a person's sexual identity, we have to ask them.”
This is a video of a documentary about David Reimer and what was done to him. He was born Bruce Reimer and due to a botched circumcision where they cut too much off. The doctors made him into a girl telling his parents, don’t worry, gender identity is all nurture. David proved them wrong, gender identity is mostly nature.

The video is a little long (46 minutes), so view it when you have the time and when you have taken your blood pressure medication. Because when you see what the doctors did in the name of research will make your blood pressure climb.

Sick Leave

I have been fighting a cold for the last week and the only thing that I want to do is sleep. So I'm posting an old blog from June 2007 about HB1044 the anti-discrimination bill vote in the Senate...

I apologize for the long post, but I felt it is important to see what some of the concerns were for the bill and how they were addressed. Even though I believe that their concerns are groundless we must address them for in their minds they are valid points of concern. We must show them that their fears are without basis this law has been in effect in numerous states and municipalities since 1975 the first city to do so was Minneapolis, MN and the first state was Minnesota in 1993. You will find that none of these states or municipalities have had any problems with teachers or students.

Here are excerpts from the testimony on SB1044, you can read the complete testimony here, and then use “Find” 1044 to get to the testimony on the bill.

The senators…
Senator McDonald (D) sponsored the bill in the Senate and is the Co-Chair of the Judicial Committee.
Senator Cappiello (R) was one of the sponsors who sponsored an amendment to exclude teachers from the bill.
Senator Kissel (R) is the ranking minority member on the Judicial Committee.

…SEN. CAPPIELLO:
Thank you, Mr. President. If I may, through you, I have a few questions to Senator McDonald.
THE CHAIR:
Please proceed, Sir.
SEN. CAPPIELLO:
Thank you, Mr. President. Senator McDonald, first of all, I would like to say I completely understand and appreciate the intent of this bill and, in most circumstances, would support it fully. But I do have one concern, and that's where my questions will lie.
Through you, Mr. President, if a school teacher in the second grade decides, for whatever reason, whether they are confused, whether they have an intention on changing genders, or they would just like to express themselves in a different manner, can someone, say, Mr. Jones, come into class and choose to dress like a woman? And would that be protected under this bill?
THE CHAIR:
Senator McDonald.
SEN. MCDONALD:
Well, through you, Mr. President, I guess I would at first take issue with some of the choice of words by Senator Cappiello. I don't believe that this is a confusion issue at all. As I indicated in my initial comments, this is an issue that goes to the heart of how an individual understands their life to be.
It's not a matter of confusion at all. It's a core element of their being. But having taken issue with the confusion component of Senator Cappiello's question, let me say that the issue of a school teacher in an elementary setting, or in any setting, is one that we considered.
And I would answer the question in this way. A teacher, or any individual who is in this circumstance, doesn't do anything precipitously or in a cavalier manner. In fact, it is a gut-wrenching process.
And oftentimes, these individuals have to deal with an incredibly complicated set of circumstances, factual, professional, personal, and emotional. And oftentimes, Mr. President, this issue is a life or death issue for transgendered individuals.
In fact, some individuals have only come to this conclusion that they must go through gender reassignment surgery in order to avoid suicide.
So I think it's important to understand that this is a much deeper issue than a choice. It is a much more profound issue than a choice.
And I think, as I said in the Education Committee, the issue of a teacher who is going through this circumstance would have clearly not only taken into consideration his or her personal life and his or her family life but his or her professional life as well.
This is not something that you do when you leave on a Friday and come back on a Monday. In fact, gender reassignment surgery often takes weeks and weeks, if not months, for recovery.
So in the circumstance of a teacher, one would expect that such an individual would be out of the classroom environment for weeks and weeks, if not months.
Having said that, I also said in the Education Committee that it is a medical condition, as I've stated. And I compared it to any other medical condition that a teacher might find him or herself involved with.
And I said, what would we do for a child when the teacher was suffering from cancer and had to have chemotherapy treatments and came back to school without any hair? Would that prove disturbing to a child? Yes, it might.
But we would use that as an opportunity to educate children, not to engender discriminatory notions about individuals who are suffering from cancer.
We would also do the same if a teacher happened to be involved in a car accident and had an arm amputated and was fitted with a prosthesis, perhaps a mechanical one with a mechanical hand. Would a child find that circumstance disturbing? Perhaps. But it was a medical condition that needed to be addressed.
And we would use that as a moment to educate a child. And the fact is that we have students in this state who suffer from gender dysphoria as well. And I am very cognizant of the fact that they suffer discrimination.
I suspect we wouldn't tell those students that they shouldn't be in classrooms because of their core identity. So the answer to Senator Cappiello's question is, in short form, notwithstanding my lengthy answer, is that a teacher would fall within the protections of this bill and its language.
THE CHAIR:
Senator Cappiello, you have the floor.
SEN. CAPPIELLO:
Thank you, Mr. President. Another question, through you, to Senator McDonald, if I may.
THE CHAIR:
Please proceed.
SEN. CAPPIELLO:
And let me back up a little bit. First, I would like to say that on Committee, when I voted against this bill, I expressed then, as I express today, my complete empathy for someone who is going through this because, obviously, this is a very, very difficult decision to make.
And someone who is going through this must be suffering a great deal because of a change that they would like to make. So I do empathize on that issue. But let me back up and get to the specifics of this bill, if I may, through you, Mr. President.
We're adding a definition with regards to gender identity or expression. So, through you, Mr. President, would that include an individual who would not choose to go through a gender change but maybe wishes to dress like the opposite sex?
THE CHAIR:
Senator McDonald, do you care to respond?
SEN. MCDONALD:
I will, Mr. President. And the short answer to Senator Cappiello's question is if that individual self-identifies as having an identity other than the one with which that individual was born, it would fall within the definition of gender identity or expression.
And I should also hasten to add, Mr. President, that under the guidelines from the American Psychiatric Association, an individual identified with gender dysphoria actually is required to live as the self-identified gender, I believe, for up to a year before they will be permitted to have the gender reassignment surgery.
So in effect, because of their mental health condition, they would be required to dress in a somewhat different fashion than their conforming gender identity might otherwise require….
…THE CHAIR:
Senator Cappiello.
SEN. CAPPIELLO:
Thank you, and through you, Mr. President, to Senator McDonald, are there not a number of people in this world who choose not to, and have no desire to, go through a sex change, but they choose to dress like the opposite sex.
And an example I will give is many years ago, some of you may remember, there was an individual who was in a position of authority in New Haven who chose, at night, we found out through unfortunate news accounts that it was a person who, I believe, was on the board of education or was superintendent in New Haven, who just chose to dress as a woman because they enjoyed to. And, again, that's a person's choice, but I would like to know if that would be included in this bill.
THE CHAIR:
Senator McDonald.
SEN. MCDONALD:
Through you, Mr. President, I'm not certain there's a new question there. I think, if Senator Cappiello is suggesting that this is an issue that is one that is addressing cross-dressing, I don't think that's within the scope of this at all.
This goes to a deeply held belief of how an individual identifies themselves as a human being. And, you know, I also have to say, Mr. President, that no one, in rational thought, no one would ever suggest that someone would dress in a manner that is not one traditionally associated with their assigned gender because it was fun or because it was easy.
These individuals suffer incredible, incredible ridicule, scorn, mockery, disdain, and discrimination. And under this bill, we would not engraft that ridicule, scorn, mockery, and discrimination into our statutes.
….SEN. KISSEL:
Thank you so very much, Mr. President. I'd like to commend Senator McDonald for bringing this bill forward. Over the last several years, we've had transgender folks come before our public hearings, on the Judiciary Committee, on any number of matters.
And I have to say that I admire their courage for coming into the public forum and asserting their rights or asking for expansion of the law to further protect their rights in the way that we set out, that a democratic society sets out.
And the hearings have exemplified, really clearly, the painful nature of the situation that many of these folks are going through.
God bless the individual that may have been struggling with their gender identity, and they've finally figured it out, and they've made a transition. And there are some folks that have made the transition and are very comfortable with that.
But they articulated the difficulties that they had when they were struggling with not feeling right about themselves, and some folks, that I would call women now, were happily married men at some other point in their lives, but they knew that something wasn't quite right, and so they made that transition.
Some folks were in the middle of that transition when they came and spoke to us. But at the root of so many of these stories were the public, no, I wouldn't say the entire public, without a doubt, but a small segment of the public's inability to be sensitive to these issue and, certainly, a very small, very small group of individuals that were mean-spirited and intolerant.
And I'm a live-and-let-live kind of person, and I think the State of Connecticut is a live-and-let-live state. Sort of been our nature for hundreds of years. Maybe that's why the rest of the nation looks at New England and calls us liberal. I don't call being tolerant liberal.
I call being tolerant being tolerant, being sensitive and understanding that we are all different. We can categorize each other, but we are all fundamentally different, all God's creatures, whether you believe in God or not, and that's your right too.
I find it abhorrent that we would set up a construct where individuals would be discriminated against because they had gender dysphoria, I think, is the correct terminology. They were unsure of themselves.
And we had clear public testimony that an individual, a good worker at his company, went through this and, bam, was fired. That's wrong. I don't care how you cut it. That's wrong.
There was nothing, that individual could not point to anything that he, and that's a tough one, now she, did on the job to merit being fired.
So he knew what it was all about. He went, unfortunately, one of the big lessons here is, and I hope anybody watching at home that might be, or reading the record, one of the lessons that was clear during the public hearings was do not settle quickly with your employer if you feel you've been the victim of this because you do have rights.
And unfortunately, a lot of these folks, they're so intimated, and they're so nervous about having to go through this transgender change, that they just sign on the dotted line because they need to pay the monthly bills. That was a horrible thing.
I mean, not only did the businesses fire these individuals, but then they quickly sent out their attorneys to get them to sign an agreement, to sign away whatever rights they may have had. That was abhorrent to me too.
I believe, in the State of Connecticut, the vast majority of corporations are sensitive to these issues, and they reach out to their employees, and that there's a deep well of respect and tolerance in our state.
But unfortunately, this is an area where we need to put this law on the books so that people that are struggling with this, and I agree with Senator McDonald, one would not go through with this lightly, but so that people who are struggling with this really have their rights protected.
And with your indulgence, I'll just leave you with this one thing. The other evening, I was watching one of my favorite programs, Law and Order. And the particular episode that I saw had to exactly with a transgender individual.
And it was a woman, a man who felt that they should be a woman, and had gone through the hormone treatment and everything else but hadn't gone through the final surgical proceeding and was lashed out at an individual for attacking them and was then put on trial herself, even though hadn't gone through the surgeon.
But in every other sense of the word, if you looked at the program, you would say this individual was a woman. And the whole issue had to do with, in New York, where, upon conviction, would that individual be housed?
And it had a very sad and horrible ending, where the woman, in every sense of the term, was sent to the men's prison and was beaten upon horribly.
And I haven't even gotten to this issue in this year's Legislature, when that program aired, but it makes you think, in so many areas of our society, society is moving so rapidly, in so many ways, the institutions that we've created have to catch up.
But I think that we have it within ourselves, and I actually believe our young people have the greatest capacity to accommodate change. I always have this conversation with my children, especially my son, Nathaniel, because his whole notion is change is good.
I can see, as I'm getting older, like when things change, I'm driving down the street, and something has been torn down and built up, the hardest thing to deal with is change is constant. We can never hold onto anything.
If something has been good, appreciate it because you can wake up tomorrow, and, boom, it's changed. But young people, they love change. Change is good because they're constantly changing. They're growing. Every new day brings something new.
So their view of it is different. So maybe when it comes to things like transgender and individual's rights and things like that, we need to think more like our children, and for some of us in this Circle, our children's children.
So there may be these issues. I think the law has been drafted in a way, narrowly tailored to acknowledge the rights of religious institutions, as we do with so many of our other discrimination statutes.
But in this instance, the testimony that we've heard at the public hearing for the last few years has made it very clear to me that this is a group of individuals in our state that deserves every amount of respect and dignity and rights as each and every one of us in this Circle. And that's why I strongly support this bill before us. Thank you, Mr. President...

And in the end the vote was almost unanimous, it was 30 Yeas, 4 Nays and 2 Absent. One of the Nays was Senator Cappiello.

Sen Kissel voted against the bill in 2011 and the vote went right down party lines. Between 2007 and 2011 the Connecticut legislature became very partisan. Back then there was a lot of voting across party lines and co-sponsored bills, but over the course of four years the voting started to become "them against us" as the Republican party became more conservative. 

Maybe A New Leaf Has Turned

With the new Pope people have said it is a whole new ballgame and I said “Show me the proof,” well it looks that there is some indication that there is change in the Catholic Church,

Catholic Deacon Pens Inspiring Letter On Parenting Transgender Children
The Huffington Post
 By Antonia Blumberg
Posted: 01/06/2015

For parents struggling with how to react when their child comes out as transgender, Catholic Deacon Ray Dever has three words of advice: Love your children.

In a touching blog published on the LGBT Catholic site, New Ways Ministry, Dever described his own experience having a child reveal her transgender identity while studying at Georgetown University. This happened shortly after Pope Francis made the groundbreaking remark "Who am I to judge?" in regards to the LGBT community and plunged his family "into all the questions and issues that Catholic families with LGBTQ children face."
[…]
"How can the Catholic Church discern how the Spirit is moving if it doesn't hear firsthand from the people that are directly affected by institutional policies and practices? Deacon Dever's essay shows that there is important evidence and valuable perspectives that the Church has not even examined."

This is just a small positive steep in the right direction, will others follow? Only time will tell. The Catholic Bishops are still opposing sexual orientation and gender identity non-discrimination legislation and they are still claiming the right to discriminate against us in parochial schools against LGBT people, employees and students.

Only time will tell.

Will Idaho Be Added To The List?

A poll in Idaho shows strong support for gender identity to be added to the anti-discrimination laws,

Poll finds Idahoans support ‘Add the Words’ anti-discrimination bill
The Spokesman-Review
By Betsy Z. Russell
January 6, 2015

The poll, by Utah pollster Dan Jones & Associates, queried 520 Idaho adults in late December and has a 4.3 percent margin of error. It found that 67 percent thought such discrimination should be illegal, while 27 percent didn’t and 6 percent didn’t know.

The poll findings come as Idaho’s legislative session opens with strong hints from legislative leaders that a full hearing on the “Add the Words” bill – legislation to add the words “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” to the Idaho Human Rights Act – will be held this year. The bill has been proposed for each of the past nine years but has never been allowed a full hearing. During last year’s session, more than 100 people were arrested in protests demanding that the bill be heard.
[…]
It also found that 64 percent of Idaho Mormons who said they were “very active” in their church supported making such discrimination illegal. Idaho Mormons who said they were “not active” in their church were 80 percent in favor; Catholics, 71 percent; Protestants, 57 percent; members of other religious denominations, 73 percent; and respondents not affiliated with any religion, 75 percent.

Or will it be the tenth year that the bill doesn’t get a hearing by the Republican controlled legislature.

Why Isn’t This A Hate Crime?

I think the police should investigate the stabbing as a hate crime,

NO HATE CRIME CHARGES IN STABBING OF SF TRANSGENDER WOMAN
SF Ch7 ABC News
January 6, 2015

SAN FRANCISCO (KGO) -- A San Francisco transgender woman is recovering from a brutal stabbing attack over the weekend. It began when a man starting shouting slurs at the woman and her partner, but police say they won't investigate it as a hate crime.

Two victims got off a Muni bus on Saturday at Golden Gate and Van Ness avenues to get away from a man screaming insults at them. However, once they were on the sidewalk, he was right behind them with a knife.
[…]
"He started calling us faggots and started on this tirade about us being transgender women and defrauding people by pretending to be female," Raucci said.

If there was ever a hate crime that needed to be prosecuted this is it. His statements sure showed his motive for the crime was hatred against transgender people.

San Francisco police say it won't pursue hate crime charges because it doesn't meet the criteria. Hulsey and Raucci don't know why.

"I'd hate to think they're downplaying this as a hate crime because we're transgender and they don't understand that," Raucci said. 

Why are the police not investigating it as a hate crime and let a jury decide? Is it because of bias against us as the victim said?

Update 1/7/14:
Attacker is charged with a hate crime,

SF DA Charges Man With Hate Crime Charge After Transgender Woman, 24, Stabbed on Muni
NBC News SF
By Lisa Fernandez
January 6, 2015

The San Francisco District Attorney's Office has charged a man with attempted murder and hate-crime enhancements after he allegedly stabbed a 24-year-old transgender woman on a Muni bus, and hurled epithets at her and her friend.

On Tuesday afternoon, Brodes Wayne Joynes, 54, was charged with attempted murder, assault with a deadly weapon, battery with serious bodily injury, two counts of criminal threats and false imprisonment. Spokesman Alex Bastian said all charges carry hate crime enhancements.

Teaching Discrimination

Don't it always seem to go
That you don't know what you've got
Till it's gone
Big Yellow Taxi
Joni Mitchell

One of the problems about discrimination and privilege is you don’t know you are doing it or that you have until you lose it or gain it. So how do you teach discrimination?

Men will deny that they have privilege.
Whites with deny that they discriminate against minorities.
Brown eyed people will claim that they are not discrimination against blue eyed people.

There was a famous experiment* that divided people in to two group those with blue eyes and those without blue eyes.

The Daring Racism Experiment That People Still Talk About 20 Years Later
Huffington Post
Posted: 01/02/2015

More than 20 years ago, "The Oprah Winfrey Show" conducted an experiment about racial prejudice that audiences will never forget. The year was 1992 -- in the wake of the deadly Los Angeles riots that erupted after the acquittal of police officers on trial for the beating of Rodney King -- and racial tensions in the country were running high. Yet, the "Oprah Show" audience members didn't suspect a thing when they arrived at the studio and were immediately separated into two distinct groups.

The division wasn't based on skin color, but eye color. "What we did was treat each group differently, discriminating against the people who have blue eyes, catering to those people with brown eyes," Oprah explained back then.

As the audience lined up to enter the studio, the blue-eyed people were pulled out of line, told to put on a green collar and wait outside. The brown-eyed people were told to step to the front of the line. Once indoors, the brown-eyed group was then treated to coffee and doughnuts, while the blue-eyed group could only stand around and wait. When the blue-eyed group saw that the brown-eyed group was going to be seated first, some became upset.

I think that this was important because it showed us about privilege and oppression.  You have to experience it first hand to really understand discrimination, it is that walking into a room and hearing the conversation stop and all the eyes turn toward you. It is that “Sir” that is meant as a putdown. It is all of those little microagressions each day.

I don’t think that a white person is the best person to teach black oppression. I don’t think that I should teach Cultural Competency about gays and lesbians, yes I know a lot about the culture but I have never experienced it first hand, the best teachers are those who have lived the life. We know first hand what it is like to lose privilege or gain it. I have know what it is like to have white male privilege and lose it. I don’t think a cis-gender person should teach Cultural Competency about non cis-gender people. I think that the "Best Practice" is for Cultural Competency be taught by a member of the culture.


So what do you think?

surveys

You can see the Frontline show “Jane Elliott's Blue Eyes Brown Eyes” here.

*This experiment thankfully could probably not be conducted today because of the emotional stress it put on the children. There are now laws and ethical standards would prohibit any experimentation on children that would cause undue stress on them.

The “Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment” changed the way we now view human experimentation, in 1974 Congress passed the National Research Act and the National Institute of Health established standards and requires everyone to be certified and go before an Institute Review Board before anyone can do research on human subjects. I had to be certified and go before the IRB when I worked on a grant to study AIDS/HIV in the trans community.

Brave?

People tell me I’m brave for transitioning but I say that I had no choice, the other option was too dark.

Cross-dressers arrested after ‘rowdy behaviour’Loud music, dancing in moving car attract traffic police attentionGulf News
By Habib Toumi Bureau Chief
Published: January 4, 2015

Manama: Police in Kuwait have arrested three cross-dressers as they were dancing to songs played loudly on the radio of their moving car.

The music and the dancing attracted the attention of a traffic police patrol in the commercial Salmiya area in the capital Kuwait City, prompting them to signal to the three “women” to pull over, local daily Al Rai reported on Sunday.

Upon the verification of the papers, the police discovered that the driver and two passengers were in fact men who were wearing women’s dresses.

One of the three had a record of cross-dressing and had been released upon signing a pledge not to wear women’s dresses in public again.

Are they brave or was it something that they had to do?

Sometimes here in the west was forget what other LGBT people face around the globe, sometimes it is a matter of life or death just when you hold hands or go out in public crossdressed.

This Is Not Right

No matter what you think about her family…

Leelah Alcorn’s funeral postponed after ‘threats’ against family
Pink News UK
By Dan Savage
January 2, 2015

The funeral for a transgender teenager who killed herself last week has been postponed after her family received threats.
[…]
Now the funeral and wake for Alcorn were postponed. The funeral was moved to a private location, confirmed Tim Tripp, family minister of the Northeast Church of Christ in Cincinnati to NBC News.

Tripp said: “The times and dates had been publicised [sic] and the family has received threats.”

He went on to say that the family had heard that there would be “disruptions”, and a sign on the door at the church read that the service and wake had been postponed.

We all despise the Westboro Baptist Church for their protests at funerals. When we protest and threatening her family we become like them, let’s take the high road.

Saturday 9: Kentucky Rain

Crazy Sam’s Saturday 9: Kentucky Rain (1970)

Next Thursday, the 8th would be Elvis' 80th birthday, so we're celebrating The King. Here is this week's song.

1. In this song, Elvis hitchhikes across Kentucky. Have you ever hitched a ride?
Nope, I was going to one time but I chickened out.

2. Elvis received his first guitar for his 11th birthday, even though he'd asked his parents for a bicycle. As an adult, how often do you ride a bike? 
Zero. I did right after college but I haven’t in the last forty years.

3. When Elvis was a child, his family was very poor, often living in rooming houses or public housing. His classmates teased him for being "trashy," which left him shy. Were you more shy or outgoing as a kid?
Shy, I was the quite one in the corner.

4. While in high school, Elvis mowed neighbors' lawns with a push mower and a sickle. According to The Home Depot, one of today's most popular mowers is a gas-powered Cub Cadet with a self-mulching feature. Tell us about your lawn mower.
It has been sitting in the garage collecting dust for about twenty years, I have someone mow the lawn.

5. In the 1950s, Frank Sinatra dismissed Elvis as, "deplorable." Yet by the time of Elvis' death, he had revised his opinion and said, "Elvis was the embodiment of the whole American culture." Tell us about something or someone you changed your mind about.
Tattoos, I thought it was a crazy thing to do to your body… but I have since changed my mind. Not that I want one, but hey if you want one that’s OK with me. Who am I to criticize.

6. After Elvis was discharged from the Army, his first performance was on a Sinatra TV special, sponsored by Timex. Do you wear a watch? 
Yes, I now have three watches. Okay, here is an observation… men’s watches runs for over a year on a battery while women’s watches you are lucky to get six months on a battery.

7. Coinciding with Elvis' 80th birthday, there will be an auction of Presley-related memorabilia at his home in Graceland. One item up for bid is a plush toy he gave to an Army buddy's wife in 1958 for the baby she was expecting. Do you know anyone who is looking forward to a baby in 2015?
Nope.

8. None of the items being sold at the Graceland auction actually belonged to Elvis at the time of his death. Everything left to daughter Lisa Marie remains in her possession. Do you have something you cherish that was given to you by a close relative?
Yes, lia sophia a gold earring and necklace set with my birthstone in the necklace. It was the first present that I got as Diana, but I couldn’t find it the last time I looked.

9. The US Postal service sold more than 500 million of the Elvis commemorative stamp. According to the Census Bureau, that was two stamps each for every man, woman and child in the United States. When is the last time you visited the post office?
Last Monday, the non-profit that I volunteer at has a PO Box that I check once a week.

I've been fighting a cold since New Years so I'm crawling back to bed. 

The First Amendment

More and more states are passing what they call Religious Freedom Laws but what they do in actuality is to give special rights to those with certain religious beliefs that allow them to ignore laws that they do not like. These laws turn the First Amendment upon its head. By saying that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” for almost 240 years that amendment has been interpreted to mean that laws aimed at certain religion are prohibited while laws that are equally applied to everyone do not violate the First Amendment.

Do you see the difference?

You can have zoning laws that say this is a residential area and churches and synagogue are allowed but not mosques. It is either all religious places of worship or none; you cannot select which places of worship will be allowed.

Last year I wrote a blog in this…

**************************

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The First Amendment has never been interpreted that laws which do not ban specific religions or religious practices but are for everyone such as the drugs laws are unconstitutional. For an example you can ban the use of peyote and it will also prohibit people taking peyote for religious ceremonies, the Supreme Court in a ruling in 1990 said that it can be banned. According to the ‘Electric Law Library,

The U.S. Supreme Court reversed, holding that the free exercise clause of the First Amendment did not prohibit the State of Oregon from banning the sacramental use of peyote through its general criminal prohibition laws, or from denying unemployment benefits to persons dismissed from their jobs for such religiously inspired use. In an opinion written by Justice Scalia (joined by Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justices White, Stevens, and Kennedy), the Court discarded the long-standing compelling interest test, holding that facially neutral laws of general applicability that burden the free exercise of religion require no special justification to satisfy free exercise scrutiny. Finally, the Court asserted that the free exercise of religion may be protected through the political process. According to the majority, its inability to find constitutional protection for religiously inspired action burdened by generally applicable laws does not mean statutory exemptions to such laws are not permitted or even desired…

But that is not the only court case that said the First Amendment rights were limited, there was also a Supreme Court case where a certain Amish sect claimed that they didn’t have to pay the Social Security tax because it violated their religious beliefs. In the Encyclopedia of American Civil Liberties said this about United States v. Lee, 455 U.S. 252 (1982),

When a person’s religious beliefs are at odds with actions of their government, and the person is required to support the government through taxes, there may be conflict. In deciding these conflicts, courts must weigh the government’s interest in the tax program against the burden on the individual’s rights under the free exercise clause of the First Amendment.

… in this case the Court did not require an accommodation on the part of the government. In a unanimous opinion, the Court ruled that there was no constitutional requirement for an exemption from social security taxes based on the free exercise clause. It also ruled that the existing statutory exemption only applied to the self-employed, not employers like Mr. Lee.

The same thing was true when the Quakers claimed a religious exemption from paying income tax because of their religious belief of pacifism. They lost their court case and had to pay their taxes.

Now the Republicans and conservatives are trying to twist the First Amendment to allow religious exemptions from anti-discrimination laws to allow people to discriminate sexual orientation and gender identity.

Washington Lawmaker Introduces Religious, Gay Discrimination BillThe Huffington Post
By John Celock
Posted: 04/26/2013
Legislation proposed in Washington state this week would allow businesses to deny service to the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender population and others, based on religious differences.

Under the terms of the bill, businesses in the state could refuse service to anyone whose religious or philosophical beliefs differ from their own. They could not, however, refuse service based on areas protected under federal law, which does not include the LGBT community.

This bill gives carte blanche powers to people to discriminate against LGBT people, all they will have to say that it is against my religion and they can discriminate. There are no religious tests to prove that it is really against their religion to discriminate because by definition they just have to state that and it automatically is true.

Do you remember a few months ago the Republicans got up on their soapbox and said that they had to be more inclusive… well it didn’t take long for their actions to show their true colors.

*************

Now it is Indiana that is trying to pass a “Religious Freedom” bill,

State Senator To File Religious Freedom Bill
Indiana Public Media
By Barbara Harrington
Posted December 29, 2014

State Sen. Scott Schneider, R-Indianapolis, plans to file a Religious Freedom Restoration Act during the upcoming legislative session.

While the details are still being worked out, the Indy Star reports the bill would allow small businesses to withhold services from same-sex customers.

So this law will give special rights to people who say that their religion allows them to discriminate against LGBT people. This I believe is a direct violation of the First Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment. The Fourteenth Amendment because it is not treating everyone equally, the bill says you can discriminate LGBT people but not against any other protected class.

Meanwhile in Rhode Island the courts are having none of this “religious freedom” special treatment,

Firefighters Don't Have Case After Pride Parade
Courthouse News Service
By Marimer Matos
Published: December 29, 2014

PROVIDENCE, R.I. (CN) - The Rhode Island Supreme Court ruled against a pair of Catholic firefighters who were forced to man the truck in a Pride Parade.
[…]
 Though the men complained to their chief that they were uncomfortable, as Catholics, with the assignment, they were denied relief and reluctantly joined the crew in the parade.

The judges said.

    "The respondents' participation in the parade as public servants carrying out a legitimate work assignment was not a deprivation of their constitutional rights," Justice William Robinson wrote for the court.
[…]
     No pertinent legal authority exists to support "the proposition that, in such specific circumstances, employees' rights are violated if they happen to possess religious objections to the beliefs of the group with which an otherwise legitimate work assignment requires brief interaction," according to the ruling.

     "The respondents' appearance in the parade, solely as members of the Providence Fire Department, did not constitute a form of expression on their part," Robinson wrote. "Rather, it was simply the accomplishing of a task assigned to an engine company of the Providence Fire Department, and the individuals chosen to carry out that assignment cannot be said to have engaged in personal speech by carrying out their work as public servants."

Notice that the judges called it a “legitimate work assignment” to exempt someone from a job everyone else has to do is special treatment.

The Nuclear Option

Or an alternate title “When parents don’t understand.” What are the child’s options when they come out to unreceptive parents?

There are more than you might imagine, an LGBT child doesn’t have to wait until they are 18 but all the options are not easy. The tragic story of the girl that committed suicide didn’t have to end that way, parents can be overridden in certain cases.

The first option is to grin and bear it, stick it out until they are eighteen. The other options involve interventions by family memembers or a social worker from a state agency and maybe the court system. Some states are now looking at parents who do not let their child transition as a form of child abuse and the courts can mandate the parents to let their child transition. This includes “Reparative Therapy” if the parents are forcing a child to have reparative therapy to make them “straight” the state mat step in to stop it even though it might not be banned by state law, it still might be considered child abuse or neglect.

If the parents throw the son or daughter out of the house before they are eighteen they are still responsible for the care of their child until eighteen and they maybe forced by the courts to pay childcare.

The child could also go to a mediator such as a social worker, a guidance counselor  or a state agency to talk to the parents. Another option if for the child to move into with a supportive relative, the courts have been known to give custody of LGBT children to an aunt or an uncle.

Then there is the “Nuclear Option,” emancipation. A child can petition to courts to be free of their parents. This means that the parents are not responsible for their child anymore, all legal ties are cut. The parents are no longer responsible for providing financial support; the child is on their own. That is why emancipation is a “Nuclear Option,” there is no going back and it is a very drastic step.

Here is what I found out about emancipation on the internet…
From the Nolo website,

What Emancipated Minors Can and Cannot DoEssentially, an emancipated minor functions as an adult in society. Although specific rights vary somewhat from state to state, usually an emancipated minor can:

• enter into legally binding contracts, including real estate purchases or apartment rentals

• enroll in the school of his or her choice

• sue or be sued in court

• apply for a work permit and keep any income earned from a job, and

• make healthcare decisions, including choices related to abortion and birth control.

• Most states place some limits on what an emancipated minor can do. For example, many states don't allow emancipated minors to:

• get married without parental consent

• quit school

• buy or drink alcohol, or

• vote or get a driver's license (before the legal age at which they would ordinarily be able to do so).

The website list alternatives to emancipation,

Emancipation is just one option in these situations. Other avenues to explore include:

• getting help from government or private agencies

• getting counseling for yourself or your family

• using a mediator to discuss and resolve differences with your parents

• living with another responsible adult, or

• living on your own with the informal consent of your parents.

In Connecticut you must be at least 16 to petition for emancipation, according to CTLawHelp…

What rights does an emancipated teenager have?
When you become emancipated, you have legal rights that other teenagers do not have. You also have new responsibilities that most teenagers do not have to worry about. You should weigh these rights and responsibilities carefully as you think about emancipation.

If you are emancipated:

• You may get your own place to live--but you will be responsible for paying the rent and any other costs.

• You may get medical care without your parents' permission--but you will have to pay the bills or arrange for financial help in paying them.

• You can sign contracts in your own name and are responsible for living up to the contract.

• You can sue other people, and you can also be sued by others.

• You are no longer under the control of your parents -- but they will also have no obligation to support you financially, or give you any food, clothing, or shelter. The State of Connecticut Department of Children and Families will no longer be responsible for helping you if you are abused or neglected. You are, however, entitled to the same protection by the police as any other person, including the right to be protected from violence by a family or household member.

• You may buy and sell property.

• You may get a driver's license or marriage license or join the armed services without your parents' permission.

• You may enroll in a school or college of your choice without asking your parents.

Notice that “You may get medical care without your parents' permission--but you will have to pay the bills or arrange for financial help in paying them.” and also that you wavier DCF help because you are now legally an adult.

One of the problems is that the LGBT child might not know of these options and might give up in despair, so if you know of a LGBT child whose parents are not supportive let the child know that there are things that can be done to help them transition.

Staycation – Mystic Seaport

A couple of Sunday’s ago I went down to Mystic Seaport for the day with some friends. The seaport had finished renovating the Charles W. Morgan a 19^th century whaling ship over the summer. Afterward they sailed up the New England coast and I was so envious, I wished that I could be on that cruise. But the trip the other weekend to the seaport changed all that. The overhead was only six feet high and the beams were only about 5’ 6” and the hatches were even lower. I made a number of unlady like comments as I kept bumping my head… whack... whack... whack... G*d d**n, s*n of a b***h! Whack...

As usual I took a slew of photographs, but I wanted to show them to you and maybe give the feeling of traveling on the ship. (I took the liberty of change her from a whaling ship to one that carried passengers)

So set your “Wayback Machine” to the year 1880.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

We arrived in town and we could see the masts from the ships in port...

As we arrive at the dock we can see our ship tied up with the other sailing ships…

As we carry our bags from the carriage we can get a good look at the ship…

Boarding the ship we walk past the wheelhouse and the chartroom off to the left, the stairs to below deck and is on the port side of the ship.

As we go below deck I sneak a peek at the captain’s lounge and his cabin, he even has his own bed  and head, luxuries that we won't have.

Well this will be our home for the next month month!

After we stored our bags we went back up on deck but we went through the cargo hole…

And we took a peek into the crew’s quarters, 27 seaman are crammed in this space!

On deck we could see another ship tied up, the square rigged Joseph Conrad...

We stood on deck while we got under way, this is probably the last look of land until we land in England.

Happy New Year!

As the New Year dawns, I hope it is filled with the promises of a brighter tomorrow, with peace, and fellowship.

May the sun shine, all day long,
everything go right, and nothing wrong.
May those you love bring love back to you,
and may all the wishes you wish come true!

Happy New Year!

Last Day Of 2014…

On this last day of the year tradition says we write about the year in review but instead I want to give you a chance to tell me what you think will be the important issues for our trans-community this coming year? What will be important on a national level and what will be important locally in your state?

Here in Connecticut I think our main focus should be on defining insurance coverage, we now have insurance coverage but no one knows what is covered? Some say only Gender Confirming Surgery and hormones, but others say all medical procedures that necessary including Full Facial Surgery, Chondrolaryngoplasty (trachea shave), electrolysis, breast reductions/augmentation, and other procedures a doctor feels that we need to increase the quality of life.

We need to continue working to improve care for LGBT seniors, and stop bullying in schools, and also get schools to obey the Connecticut Non-discrimination law.

Nationally I think we are dead in the water with a Republican controlled Congress, forget ENDA (Employment Non-Discrimination Act) but we need to keep up the pressure and not let it be forgotten. We also have to make sure that we don’t lose any ground, there is a good chance that the Republicans will try to pass some type of anti-LGBT bill like allow state to discrimination and ignore marriage equality or expand religious exemptions.

So what do you think should be on the legislature agenda? What will Congress do in the coming year?

Never Give Up

Does it seem like Florida’s Attorney General Pam Bondi is like the little Dutch boy with his finder in the dike [no pun intended] trying to stop the flow? Now she is saying that the court ruling only covers one clerk and not the whole state.

Gay marriage confusion clouds the Sunshine State
MSNBC
By Emma Margolin
12/30/14

With a week to go before a federal ruling that struck down Florida’s same-sex marriage ban officially kicks in, uncertainty over what exactly that ruling requires continues to cloud the Sunshine State.

Late Monday, Florida’s Republican Attorney General Pam Bondi filed a short legal brief stating that if a federal judge who overturned the state’s same-sex marriage ban earlier this year intended his ruling to apply throughout Florida’s 67 counties, he would have to issue a clarification explicitly saying so.

The state’s legal filing, submitted to U.S. District Judge Robert L. Hinkle at his request, argued that his August ruling – as written – required only one clerk named in the lawsuit to grant two plaintiffs in Washington County a marriage license on Jan. 6, the day Hinkle’s order takes effect. Bondi’s brief, however, also left open the likely possibility that Judge Hinkle would indeed clarify he meant to compel all county clerks in the state to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

Then there is the so called “Family” organization that filed a last minute lawsuit,

Citing that analysis, a majority of Florida’s clerks who participated in an Associated Press inquiry said they would not be granting marriage licenses to same-sex couples on Jan. 6. Florida Family Action (FFA) then announced on Tuesday that it had filed two lawsuits against three elected officials, including Orlando Mayor Buddy Dyer, because they had expressed plans to participate in same-sex couples’ weddings next week.

“All three of these officials have shown great contempt and disrespect for the rule of law and are behaving irresponsibly and unprofessionally,” said John Stemberger, FFA president, in a statement. “The federal court decision is clear that it only applies narrowly to the two plaintiffs and only in Washington County. Elected officials must be held accountable to the law and to the constitution they have sworn to uphold.”

Doesn’t  Florida Family Action remember California’s family group that the courts had said they didn’t have “standing” to file a lawsuit?

So the three ring circus continues.

No Hope

That is what I think the chances of passing GENDA (Gender Expression Non-Discrimination Act) in New York unless the governor is willing to trade a bill with the Republicans.

Transgender-led organization takes the lead at State of the State address (a guest post by Juli Grey-Owens)
Times Union
By Byrgen Finkelman
Posted on December 29, 2014

After 12+ years of advocacy work, it has become crystal clear that waiting, hoping, and praying that somehow, some day, the NY legislature will magically pass a law to protect transgender individuals from discrimination in housing, employment and public accommodations won’t work.

It’s also beyond dispute that collecting post cards, letter writing, phone banks, and standing outside the capital waving placards when no legislators are in doesn’t work – hasn’t worked for the past twelve years – and won’t work in 2015.

And we at the Long Island Transgender Advocacy Coalition (LITAC) are tired of doing what doesn’t work!

It’s time for New York Transgender (and gender non-conforming) individuals who want our Civil Rights to earn them.

We must take action, be visible, and bring pressure on our state elected government.

I don’t think being visible is going to do it, it going to take good old fashion horse trading. The Democrats control the Assembly and the governorship but the Republicans have control of the Senate.

Will he [the governor] want to spend enough political capital to push GENDA as 2016 presidential possibilities begin to form?

And that is the key, the Democrats will have to give something up and right now I don’t think they will over GENDA, the bill is probably way down on their list. I hope I'm wrong, but I don't think so.

Where You Wouldn’t Expect It

Sometimes I am surprise where I find support for trans-people. in the ultra-conservative state of Utah for example,

Op-ed: Utah’s transgender youth need our protectionSalt Lake Tribune
By Megan Thomas
First Published Dec 27 2014

Social norms in Utah are immensely impacted by its conservative religious culture that insists upon strict adherence to binary gender roles, sex-segregated groups, anti-LGBQTI precepts and a sexist organizational hierarchy.

Despite the family-centered values of our community, these conservative ideals have historically oppressed and suppressed its transgender children, resulting in death, neglect, or chronic gender identity dysphoria. A medically treatable condition, gender identity dysphoria is characterized by hopeless, lonely, obsessive reconciling of one’s inner self and one’s public self, often leading to depression and suicide. It should come as no surprise, then, that Utah’s teen suicide rate is among the highest in the country.
[…]
Transgender youth face even more challenges than the rest of the community upon "coming out." Utah youth are frequently subjected to conversion therapy, excommunicated from their church, alienated from their communities, and kicked out of their homes. Many who are not kicked out of their homes commit suicide or run away to escape persecution from their families and persistent bullying at school, from which the state offers no protection. As a result, nearly half of Utah’s one thousand homeless youth are transgender.

What is amazing is that the newspaper published the editorial.