S
Serena
Guest
Transgenders Are Not Like Blacks
http://outsidethewire.mensnewsdaily.com/2007/11/10/transgenders-are-not-blacks
Whenever some group wants to legitimize their cause, they think it
apropos to liken their inconvenience to what Blacks went through
during the aftermath of slavery and segregation. They use the phrase
"civil rights", which is code for Black people.
One minor point: there is no comparison, thus any attempt at such is a
disgrace and insult to every Black person in America, and his or her
intelligence.
Many in Bay Area call anti-bias measure an act of betrayal
San Francisco Chronicle Staff Writer Leslie Fulbright
Thursday, November 8, 2007
National civil rights organizations are celebrating the passage by
the House of legislation that would add "sexual orientation" to a list
of federally protected classes, but some San Francisco groups refuse
to take part in the party.
The vote Wednesday on the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, also
known as ENDA, postponed several times, was ultimately revised to
remove protection for transgender workers, which upset gay rights
groups here and across the country. Democratic leaders said the
removal was necessary to get the act passed. But more than 300
lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender leaders opposed the exclusion,
saying it is unfair and sends the wrong message.
I don't want to sound insensitive, but why do we always have to be
sensitive towards the feelings of others? In the case of the
transgendered, can they not understand that what may be a change or
choice for them, may result in the disruption of any workplace. People
are people. People try not to stare, but to be honest, very few of us
would not view this as normal. Since the "change" requires radical
surgery, it is not.
The transgendered also have a bad rap. Not from us, but from the gay
community itself. Ever been to a gay rights parade lately? It's not
what one would think of as family friendly, and the public
representatives of the gay community hardly perform muchof what we
would think of as good public relations.
In the case of the transgendered, they have the same rights and
protections all of us do. I'll even go as far as saying being gay may
be genetic, but just because you feel like you're in the wrong body
doesn't make it so. Using radical surgery to right a "wrong" may be
okay in their eyes, but the rest of us may see things differently.
Calling us bigots because we do won't invite much sympathy.
We're all expected to accept what we see, but have the transgenders
taken the time to REALLY look in the mirror? It's not polite to stare,
but sorry; they just don't look right, and if it's a distraction in
the workplace, it's no one's fault but theirs.
"People are livid," said John Newsome, co-founder of And Castro
for All, a bias awareness group. "If the first step out of the gate
leaves people behind, it is an ill-conceived first step."
Female to male doesn't look all that odd. Look at your average
feminist. They dress and act like men. However, the male-to-female
shift is a little different.
For one thing, many male-to-female transgenders dress like hookers. It
looks like they use thick make-up in an effort to hide whiskers. The
female hormone injections must not be kicking in. Women don't have
Adams' apples. Most women wear professional attire in the workplace,
and few would wear four or five inch heels. Mini-skirts on "guys" with
big thighs doesn't look right. Big hands with bright red nail polish...
the list goes on.
After all this, WE are supposed to act like this is normal. You tell a
woman she should feel comfortable in a ladies room with a "man" in the
next stall, or in a women's locker room.
"I feel an obligation to 15-year-olds dreading to go to school
because of the torments, to people afraid they'll lose their job in a
gas station if someone finds out who they are. I feel an obligation to
use the status I have been lucky enough to get to help them, and I
want to ask my colleagues here, Mr. Speaker, on a personal basis,
'Please, don't fall for this sham. Don't send me out of here having
failed to help those people.' Yeah, this is personal. There are people
who are your fellow citizens being discriminated against. We have a
simple bill that says, 'You can go to work and be judged on how you
work, and not be penalized.' Please don't turn your back on them."
- Congressman Barney Frank (D-MA)
Maybe activists and teachers shouldn't spend so much time on a 15-year-
old's sexuality in the first place. Transgenders could take a little
time and think about the people they associate with, and it's not only
awkward at the workplace.
For example, things could get awkward at school. WHY do I have to be
put in the position of explaining to my fourth-grade daughter why
teacher Mr. Smith is now Miss Smith, and if I don't I'm called
"intolerant"? Who put us in this position in the first place because
of their "choice"?
Back to the San Francisco Chronicle article....
The Human Rights Campaign, the NAACP, the Anti-Defamation League
and the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights supported the revised
bill, saying an incremental approach is sometimes necessary, and that
the move marks a step forward.
Again, this is the part that always pisses me off: the whole gay
rights is a "civil right" thing. Maybe this is one reason why many
Blacks don't identify with the gay "struggle."
"We are happy for our lesbian and gay brothers and sisters and
understand that we are making legislative progress, but we feel that
there is a lot of work still to be done," said Cecilia Chung, deputy
director of San Francisco's Transgender Law Center. "We are
disappointed that this version is not all-inclusive."
The comparison between what gays "go through" today, versus what Black
people went through during slavery and subsequent segregation up to
today is an insult.
THERE IS NO COMPARISON!
When I come into a room, I can't hide my blackness. All gays have to
do is keep their sexual orientation to themselves and everything would
be fine!
How long would I be at a job if I made it known individually to every
one of my co-workers who I preferred to have sex with. If any
heterosexual did that, there'd be so many complaints about that person
"contributing to a hostile work environment."
have found a black sympathizer....
"I, for one, fought too long and too hard to end discrimination
based on race and color, not to stand up against discrimination
against our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters. During the 1960s, we
broke down those signs that said "white" and "colored." Call it what
you mean, to discriminate against someone because they are gay, is
wrong, it is wrong! It is not right. Today we have an opportunity to
bring down those signs! Now is the time to do what is right, what is
fair, what is just! The time is always right to do right. Let us pass
this bill."
- Congressman John Lewis (D-GA)
What signs are we talking about? I've never seen a signs that read
"straights" and "gays". What is Congressman Lewis talking about?
No one ever sicced dogs on Rosie O'Donnell. No one told Ellen
Degeneres to go to the back of the bus. Again, the whole comparison of
blacks and gays is absurd and insulting.
The act, which passed 235-184, makes it illegal for employers,
except for churches and the military, to make decisions about hiring,
firing, promoting or paying an employee based on sexual orientation.
Its chief proponent is Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., a gay rights
advocate. The 1964 federal civil rights law already bans
discrimination based on race, color, religion, gender or national
origin.
There are clear reasons why churches and the military are exempted.
Remember the whole "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" military thing that was
passed during the Clinton Administration? The media chose sides and
presented to us whimpy soldiers complaining about gays in the
military.
I remember seeing an interviewed Marine complain about taking a shower
next to a gay man. I'm sure he was probably one out of many who were
interviewed, but his remarks were selected as representative of
military thinking.
"It's not that we're tolerant in my district in California and San
Francisco. It's that we have so much respect for the role that each
person plays in our society. So tolerance, maybe. Respect, definitely.
But let me also add, that it is the pride that we take in that
diversity, and it is the pride that I take in the gay, lesbian,
bisexual, and transgender community that brings me to the floor today
to urge a "yes" vote on this important legislation."
- House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA)
There was wisdom in ENDA. Gays deserve protections because
discrimination of any kind is wrong. But let's not go too far.
We're told gay people can't change who they are. Transgenders did, and
it's not our fault they really don't look right. Don't call the rest
of us bigots while calling yourselves the equivalent of post-slavery
Blacks.
We all have to behave a certain way in public. That way is to be
considerate of others. Consideration shouldn't be a one-way street.
Once it becomes mutual, maybe then we'll have equality for all.
http://outsidethewire.mensnewsdaily.com/2007/11/10/transgenders-are-not-blacks
http://outsidethewire.mensnewsdaily.com/2007/11/10/transgenders-are-not-blacks
Whenever some group wants to legitimize their cause, they think it
apropos to liken their inconvenience to what Blacks went through
during the aftermath of slavery and segregation. They use the phrase
"civil rights", which is code for Black people.
One minor point: there is no comparison, thus any attempt at such is a
disgrace and insult to every Black person in America, and his or her
intelligence.
Many in Bay Area call anti-bias measure an act of betrayal
San Francisco Chronicle Staff Writer Leslie Fulbright
Thursday, November 8, 2007
National civil rights organizations are celebrating the passage by
the House of legislation that would add "sexual orientation" to a list
of federally protected classes, but some San Francisco groups refuse
to take part in the party.
The vote Wednesday on the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, also
known as ENDA, postponed several times, was ultimately revised to
remove protection for transgender workers, which upset gay rights
groups here and across the country. Democratic leaders said the
removal was necessary to get the act passed. But more than 300
lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender leaders opposed the exclusion,
saying it is unfair and sends the wrong message.
I don't want to sound insensitive, but why do we always have to be
sensitive towards the feelings of others? In the case of the
transgendered, can they not understand that what may be a change or
choice for them, may result in the disruption of any workplace. People
are people. People try not to stare, but to be honest, very few of us
would not view this as normal. Since the "change" requires radical
surgery, it is not.
The transgendered also have a bad rap. Not from us, but from the gay
community itself. Ever been to a gay rights parade lately? It's not
what one would think of as family friendly, and the public
representatives of the gay community hardly perform muchof what we
would think of as good public relations.
In the case of the transgendered, they have the same rights and
protections all of us do. I'll even go as far as saying being gay may
be genetic, but just because you feel like you're in the wrong body
doesn't make it so. Using radical surgery to right a "wrong" may be
okay in their eyes, but the rest of us may see things differently.
Calling us bigots because we do won't invite much sympathy.
We're all expected to accept what we see, but have the transgenders
taken the time to REALLY look in the mirror? It's not polite to stare,
but sorry; they just don't look right, and if it's a distraction in
the workplace, it's no one's fault but theirs.
"People are livid," said John Newsome, co-founder of And Castro
for All, a bias awareness group. "If the first step out of the gate
leaves people behind, it is an ill-conceived first step."
Female to male doesn't look all that odd. Look at your average
feminist. They dress and act like men. However, the male-to-female
shift is a little different.
For one thing, many male-to-female transgenders dress like hookers. It
looks like they use thick make-up in an effort to hide whiskers. The
female hormone injections must not be kicking in. Women don't have
Adams' apples. Most women wear professional attire in the workplace,
and few would wear four or five inch heels. Mini-skirts on "guys" with
big thighs doesn't look right. Big hands with bright red nail polish...
the list goes on.
After all this, WE are supposed to act like this is normal. You tell a
woman she should feel comfortable in a ladies room with a "man" in the
next stall, or in a women's locker room.
"I feel an obligation to 15-year-olds dreading to go to school
because of the torments, to people afraid they'll lose their job in a
gas station if someone finds out who they are. I feel an obligation to
use the status I have been lucky enough to get to help them, and I
want to ask my colleagues here, Mr. Speaker, on a personal basis,
'Please, don't fall for this sham. Don't send me out of here having
failed to help those people.' Yeah, this is personal. There are people
who are your fellow citizens being discriminated against. We have a
simple bill that says, 'You can go to work and be judged on how you
work, and not be penalized.' Please don't turn your back on them."
- Congressman Barney Frank (D-MA)
Maybe activists and teachers shouldn't spend so much time on a 15-year-
old's sexuality in the first place. Transgenders could take a little
time and think about the people they associate with, and it's not only
awkward at the workplace.
For example, things could get awkward at school. WHY do I have to be
put in the position of explaining to my fourth-grade daughter why
teacher Mr. Smith is now Miss Smith, and if I don't I'm called
"intolerant"? Who put us in this position in the first place because
of their "choice"?
Back to the San Francisco Chronicle article....
The Human Rights Campaign, the NAACP, the Anti-Defamation League
and the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights supported the revised
bill, saying an incremental approach is sometimes necessary, and that
the move marks a step forward.
Again, this is the part that always pisses me off: the whole gay
rights is a "civil right" thing. Maybe this is one reason why many
Blacks don't identify with the gay "struggle."
"We are happy for our lesbian and gay brothers and sisters and
understand that we are making legislative progress, but we feel that
there is a lot of work still to be done," said Cecilia Chung, deputy
director of San Francisco's Transgender Law Center. "We are
disappointed that this version is not all-inclusive."
The comparison between what gays "go through" today, versus what Black
people went through during slavery and subsequent segregation up to
today is an insult.
THERE IS NO COMPARISON!
When I come into a room, I can't hide my blackness. All gays have to
do is keep their sexual orientation to themselves and everything would
be fine!
How long would I be at a job if I made it known individually to every
one of my co-workers who I preferred to have sex with. If any
heterosexual did that, there'd be so many complaints about that person
"contributing to a hostile work environment."
have found a black sympathizer....
"I, for one, fought too long and too hard to end discrimination
based on race and color, not to stand up against discrimination
against our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters. During the 1960s, we
broke down those signs that said "white" and "colored." Call it what
you mean, to discriminate against someone because they are gay, is
wrong, it is wrong! It is not right. Today we have an opportunity to
bring down those signs! Now is the time to do what is right, what is
fair, what is just! The time is always right to do right. Let us pass
this bill."
- Congressman John Lewis (D-GA)
What signs are we talking about? I've never seen a signs that read
"straights" and "gays". What is Congressman Lewis talking about?
No one ever sicced dogs on Rosie O'Donnell. No one told Ellen
Degeneres to go to the back of the bus. Again, the whole comparison of
blacks and gays is absurd and insulting.
The act, which passed 235-184, makes it illegal for employers,
except for churches and the military, to make decisions about hiring,
firing, promoting or paying an employee based on sexual orientation.
Its chief proponent is Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., a gay rights
advocate. The 1964 federal civil rights law already bans
discrimination based on race, color, religion, gender or national
origin.
There are clear reasons why churches and the military are exempted.
Remember the whole "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" military thing that was
passed during the Clinton Administration? The media chose sides and
presented to us whimpy soldiers complaining about gays in the
military.
I remember seeing an interviewed Marine complain about taking a shower
next to a gay man. I'm sure he was probably one out of many who were
interviewed, but his remarks were selected as representative of
military thinking.
"It's not that we're tolerant in my district in California and San
Francisco. It's that we have so much respect for the role that each
person plays in our society. So tolerance, maybe. Respect, definitely.
But let me also add, that it is the pride that we take in that
diversity, and it is the pride that I take in the gay, lesbian,
bisexual, and transgender community that brings me to the floor today
to urge a "yes" vote on this important legislation."
- House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA)
There was wisdom in ENDA. Gays deserve protections because
discrimination of any kind is wrong. But let's not go too far.
We're told gay people can't change who they are. Transgenders did, and
it's not our fault they really don't look right. Don't call the rest
of us bigots while calling yourselves the equivalent of post-slavery
Blacks.
We all have to behave a certain way in public. That way is to be
considerate of others. Consideration shouldn't be a one-way street.
Once it becomes mutual, maybe then we'll have equality for all.
http://outsidethewire.mensnewsdaily.com/2007/11/10/transgenders-are-not-blacks