Darkside Rainbow

Sorry I’m so late with an update today, kids. I’ve been working some fierce overtime on one of my jobs and running low on sleep, and I overslept this morning - not only missing my usual before-work writing time, but also making myself a little late for work. Oops. So this is the first time I’ve had a moment to sit down and write anything all day (which isn’t boding well for my second novel, either).

…okay, it’s a tiny bit my fault, too, since I stayed up too late last night watching The Fast and the Furious, enduring bad acting and scripting for the sake of a little Vin Diesel and some hot muscle cars. Hush.

Sliiiiiding right back onto topical discussion: normally I save anything transgender-related for my Thursday’s Transgender Tales posts out of some sick addiction to alliteration, but I think since today’s Tuesday my little literary quirks are safe in discussing what’s been going on with ENDA, the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, and the U.S. House of Representatives.

I’ve been following this with some curiosity, not just because ENDA affects the entire GBLTQ community, but out of interest in how it might affect several of my trans friends. Last week, ENDA stalled in the house when apparently the trans-inclusive language became a problem (I’d love if someone could provide me with a better explanation of how, as I don’t quite understand this), and was split into two separate bills: ENDA and…GENDA? Did that really say GENDA? Oh, shoot me now.

This, naturally, ticked off quite a few people in the LGBT world, and resulted in a lot of pressure from the activist division, especially with ENDA slated to go forward with transpeople excluded and GENDA slated for a later date. Now House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has postponed advancing ENDA, until further discussions on the provisions of the bill.

I’m hoping they come to some kind of resolution on an inclusive bill, because I have serious problems with segregating the “T” from GBLTQ/LGBT/however you want to write it. First, the separation into two bills presents a dangerous uncertainty; while ENDA could be approved, GENDA (I die a little inside every time I type that) could easily die on the House floor, leaving transfolks without the workplace protections afforded to gays, lesbians, and bisexuals.

Second, I can’t help but feel a bit of general unrest centered around the way we in the GBLTQ community already treat transgenders. I’d be lying if I said that we weren’t a bit hypocritically nasty at times; when we’re welcoming, we do it with great fanfare and open arms, but when we aren’t, we’re as cruel as straights have been to us. I don’t like the idea of further separating transpeople out from our ranks, when we should be working harder to pull together as a community. That’s why I’m glad the various activist organizations have spoken out against the separate bills.

I can’t help but wonder if the bills were separated due to understood differences between sexual identity and gender identity, and a perceived need to draft separate legislation to address both. I, personally, think it’s unnecessary. Yes, transpeople are going to require a few extra provisions in the workplace, but I think those provisions could be taken care of with a bit more specificity in an all-inclusive bill rather than anything separate. Drafting a separate bill is just causing unnecessary complications, and placing transpeople in danger of losing needed protections of their freedoms and rights in the workplace.

But that’s just my two cents. Hey, what do I know?

ENDA, employment non-discrimination act, GENDA, workplace protections, house of representatives, house speaker nancy pelosi, transgender, transvestite, transsexual, crossdresser, crossdressing, mtf, ftm, m2f, f2m, male-to-female, female-to-male, gender identity, gender dysphoria, transition, transitioning, sex change