Looking Back Ten Years Ago

“Progress, far from consisting in change, depends on retentiveness.” — George Santayana

There’s been quite a buzz in recent months over our GLBT community – particularly how the GL views and treats the T. It’s reached a fevered pitch with Rep. Barney Frank tampering with the ENDA language and the release of the movie “Trannies With Knives” by gay male prostitute-turned-film maker Israel Luna (of which I’ll write on later).

While all this was transpiring, a couple of anniversaries passed without notice. Ten years ago this past Monday, on March 22, 2000 was the meeting between the National Transgender Advocacy Coalition (NTAC) and the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) at HRC HQ in downtown DC, not far from K Street.

Six weeks earlier, on Feb. 11, 2000 was the National Roundtable meeting between the Gay & Lesbian organizations, Trans organizations and a few from academe at the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force (NGLTF) headquarters, then on Kalorama NW. in Columbia Heights.

The NGLTF roundtable was the brainchild of their executive director, Kerry Lobel, with assistance from PFLAG, and came at a crucial point in GLBT history. It was a period of flux, where the Trans community first began truly exercising its voice.

Only nine months had passed since the largest Trans lobby day on record at GenderPAC, but it created fissures within the T community, with GPAC announcing a move toward “gender” and later “gender orientation.” Also at that lobby day was a seeming closeness developing between GPAC and the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) and a simultaneous cooling off between them and NGLTF.

Meanwhile the Trans community who were not part of the east coast cabal were breaking from them, and speaking out independently and more pointedly about HRC, with one faction forming what became NTAC later in 1999. At the same time, NGLTF was becoming more pointedly critical of HRC, with PFLAG and others cooling off towards both they and GPAC.

New alliances were being struck, rhetoric was being lobbed back and forth and the community seemed to be roiling. The timing was perfect to have a meeting of the minds to hash things out and avoid a boil-over.

Besides Kerry Lobel and Blake Cornish from NGLTF, and Rob Schlittler and Cynthia Newcomer of PFLAG, and other notables (of whom I can still remember) were Nancy Buermeyer of HRC, Chai Feldbum of Georgetown School of Law, Robert Sember of Columbia School of Public Health, as well as reps from LLEGO, NYAC, Lambda Legal and GLMA.

The bulk of the Trans attendance was NTAC: Monica Roberts, Dr. Sarah Fox, Michael Gray, Chelsea Goodwin, Rusty Mae Moore and I in person, with Dawn Wilson, Yoseñio Lewis, Katrina Rose and Deni Scott via teleconference. Additionally attending were Pauline Park and Donna Cartwright from NYAGRA. Even though Donna would not resign from GPAC’s board for another eight months, she did not declare to represent them at this meeting, curiously enough.

The meeting displayed unspoken symbolism of the community status quo. For the T community it was a watershed, displaying that we did actually have some strong allies, and quite a bit more than we’d presumed. It also showed that GPAC was beginning to wane in the community’s eyes so soon after working collegially with HRC. HRC was feeling surrounded, pained and combative due to their being the only non-inclusive org (they had still refused to add Trans to their mission statement even) and the controversy swirling around their participation in the Millennium March.

And NTAC personified the spirit of this juggernaut of energy in the Trans movement of not waiting or settling for clever image-crafting sleight of hand (such as “gender” being all-inclusive) nor pat answers of accepting that we must be “incremental” and left out of gay rights bills. For many T-folk outside of the northeast (and increasingly within as well) it was becoming obvious we needed something different, with stronger and more forthright representation.

“The meeting was a very good start to build alliances,” NTAC vice-chair, Yoseñio Lewis, noted at the time. “For the most part everybody played well together. There was a tense moment when Nancy Buermeyer brought up the friction between HRC and NTAC.”

Indeed I was out of the room getting the nickel tour with Kerry Lobel, and when we walked back in, it was over: Monica Roberts and Chelsea Goodwin had their backs up, Nancy Buermeyer was crying and Michael Gray was offering to set up a group-to-group meeting between HRC and NTAC. Nancy shoved, and apparently Monica and then Chelsea shoved back.

However, to a person, everyone except Buermeyer left that roundtable with a lot of hope and enthusiasm.

And for the record, I’m not overlooking out NCTE. At that point no one in political circles had heard of Mara Keisling as she was still months away from her first participation in Trans activism with GPAC, and three years away from creating her own organization.

“When minds meet, they don't just exchange facts: they transform them, reshape them, draw different implications from them, engage in new trains of thought. Conversation doesn't just reshuffle the cards: it creates new cards.” — Theodore Zeldin, philosopher

The following month was “the fact-to-face” at HRC presaging their eventual move to include the T in their mission statement. The meeting, set up by Michael Gray, occurred as the IFGE conference in Arlington, VA was taking place (giving us an opportunity to knock out two birds with one throw).

For my part I wanted no participation in this meeting or the trip. At that time, I was having bouts of heart arrhythmias, major burnout, stress from both of the support groups I was heading (including one member’s suicide the month before) and major stress from my misogynistic boss at the time which included a fight over having to take those three days off of work.

Added to this was additional pressure from NTAC’s interim chair, Dawn Wilson, who insisted/demanded that I (as a steering committee member) attend the meeting as a show of support, even though I had no clue what the ‘ask’ was to be or what we hoped to accomplish with it. Additionally Monica Roberts had already left one of her buddy passes reserved for me at Continental Airlines (where she worked).

It was my opinion (accurate, as it turned out) that HRC would not view us lowly Trans folk as contemporaries or equals in any of our lifetimes and was against my better judgment, but I relented.

My trip was timed so that I’d have enough time to land in DCA (Reagan National Airport), trek over to the Crystal City Hilton where IFGE’s convention was located, drop my luggage off in the room I’d share with Anne Casebeer, Dawn Wilson and Monica Roberts who were driving down from Louisville, change into a business suit and then travel presumably en masse to HRC.

Arriving at the hotel, I noticed that my roomies- hadn’t checked in. Hmm … quandary! Time was tight for the meeting to begin, I had no clue how long it would take in transit to HRC’s HQ and I didn’t know if my roomies were just driving straight in to HRC. I didn’t even own a cell phone at that point!

Plan B, I hailed a cab and traveled to HRC, then housed in an office suite not far off of K Street lobbyist's corridor. Arriving early, I slogged upstairs with baggage in tow and cooled my heels at the front office, looking like some kind of Trans refugee in my faded jeans and running shoes. Needless to say there were numerous staffers walking through, giving (ahem) the semi-discreet side-eyed looks as they walked through, wondering “what is this in our office?”

While sitting there waiting, I kept wondering why I was even there, how the airlines almost didn’t let me on the plane due to buddy-pass complications, and how I wished I would’ve simply missed the flight and stayed home and gone back to work. There was a legit excuse!

As 2PM neared, Nancy Buermeyer popped out and brought me (bags and all) into the conference room. We met and chatted quite a bit as we occasionally ran into each other over the years, beginning in 1996 at Houston’s ICTLEP conference. Nancy, Tony Barretto-Neto and I even went out country & western dancing at a local lesbian bar, The Ranch. Keep in mind that I was brand new to activism in 1996, and was in “discovery phase” of seeing which side was right: Phyllis Frye’s hard-line anti-HRC, or HRC’s being unfairly maligned. Over the course of those next three years, I’d learn Phyllis was correct.

After chatting for nearly a half hour, I realized the meeting was already 15 minutes late and I was the only Trans person there! When Tony Varona and Kevin Layton walked in and saw me, and I repeated that I was waiting for “the others”, we all sat there with a ‘what are we doing here?’ look on our faces. I kept a cool exterior, but was beginning to panic and excused myself to the restroom.

After walking out of the restroom, I was relieved to see Michael Gray walking up and asked where the others were. “They’re not coming” he whispered. “They weren’t ready and won’t be here.”

Panic began anew, as well as anger as we both walked into the conference. Michael would lead and present his white paper: The Primacy of Gender. I sat there feeling useless, not knowing what to do and wishing I was back home. During the presentation, Alex Fox also dropped in, which evened out the numbers at three HRC, three NTAC. The rest of Michael’s presentation went routinely, but ended without any real request or direction other than asking that they all agree that everything GLBT had to do with gender, not sexuality.

We all sat and looked at each other.

So Michael again took it from the top, restarting his presentation and shortly into it used it as a platform to exchange accusations with Buermeyer. Shades of what I’d missed at the Trans Roundtable a month earlier! That was when Alex and I decided to take over.

Nancy railed about NTAC’s story of HRC buying Riki Wilchins a condo (something we admitted had no verification and was removed already from the NTAC website) and also requested removal of Katrina Rose’s editorial comparing Elizabeth Birch’s words to Josef Goebbels.

We decried the lack of trans inclusion in legislation, wanted our own access to legislators in order to educate them on T issues and blasted the pre-lobbying of legislators by HRC and GPAC. On the last item, again Buermeyer insisted there were no such meetings – until I brought up the fact that I had a screen shot saved of GenderPAC’s website circa 1998 (thanks to Gwen Smith’s eagle eye), noting the specifics of the very meeting at Sen. Harkin’s office (the first we were aware of) including who visited … including Ms. Buermeyer herself.

At that she backpedaled and admitted the meeting did occur after all – but it wasn’t pre-lobbying.

In the end, I explained to Nancy, Tony and Kevin that I personally had no problems with them not including us (at that time, Trans was not even part of HRC’s mission statement). In fact, that was fine with us: HRC should continue focus on the sexual orientation issues in Congress, and NTAC should focus on the gender identity issues.

As HRC had their ability to get their message to Congress, we stated that NTAC needed our own voice to be heard similarly as we knew our issues experientially. We were also opposed to being shoehorned into a dicey inexplicit coverage under “gender” (which was the prevailing push at that time to get Trans folks to believe they were covered).

HRC threw much of the non-inclusion blame at Barney Frank’s feet, wanted NTAC’s editorial blasts stopped and all rhetoric about the pre-lobbying with GPAC ceased as well. We explained the pre-lobbying rhetoric would stop so long as they stopped the pre-lobbying visits that we felt poisoned the well before we even arrived.

All seemingly agreed the requests were reasonable and came to a tentative agreement to take them back to our respective leadership to achieve them. When Alex asked Tony Varona about a timeline on when we would hear back from HRC on their behalf, Tony replied that their upcoming Equality Rocks concert was their focus at the moment and gave a soft “couple months” answer.

That response from Tony should’ve been a sign.

In the interim we removed the offensive editorials, and stuck specifically to news communications as per our half of the agreement. Even when HRC took over and conducted the Millennium March later that year with its unresolved financial controversies, and when many other GLBT orgs were piling on, we didn’t capitalize on the situation while they were down.

Though I sent a few Emails to Nancy inquiring of it afterward, we never heard back from them again. They never followed through with us.

“Kick ‘em when they’re up.
Kick ‘em when they’re down.
Kick ‘em when they’re stiff.
Kick ‘em all around.” — Dirty Laundry, Don Henley

“Even Gandhi, with all his charisma, did not 'melt the hearts' of his oppressors, as he had hoped. After softening, hearts harden again.” — Theodore Zeldin, philosopher

Much has changed since those meetings in early 2000. At the beginning of 2001, HRC suddenly announced they were including transgender in their mission statement and shortly after began billing themselves as the largest gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender civil rights group in the nation. They were not going to allow us our own voice: they would declare oversight of it in order to manage our message themselves.

Responsively NTAC turned up the heat in the media in 2001-2002 and had a measure of progress, even beginning to crack through to mainstream press. HRC claimed they were working with “transgender leadership,” we responded that that were working with GPAC who had recently divested themselves from the T word, and that HRC was indeed not working with us.

We also worked diligently on developing good relations with all our allies apart from HRC. Things progressed well through 2002 and it seemed (save for a number of the former GPAC Trans members) that the community was coming together in a do-it-yourself, shoestring fashion. There was no funding and precious little assistance, but we were moving forward and doing it for ourselves despite it all.

New Years 2003 saw the advent of Mara Keisling, who went through numerous ad-hocs on the periphery before jumping in solo as the professed “hired gun” lobbyist in DC. Six months later, she changed her mind and appointed a board of directors and by year-end was a full-scale organization. As opposed to NTAC, NCTE would work collegially and collaboratively with HRC, not having the same history as the more tenured trans advocates. In fact, of all the trans leadership that were part of those meetings in 2000, the only one on the national-level radar at the moment would be Donna Cartwright who went from GPAC’s board to NCTE’s board of directors.

Over the next three years, NCTE effectively supplanted NTAC and all its members. It wasn’t for malfeasance or being in the wrong (we were actually correct, which ironically worked to our disadvantage). We were replaced strictly for not playing the Washington game: we didn’t feel that Trans folks should simply accept our “place” at the bottom of the pecking order.

While playing the game didn’t show results immediately, the progress has been coming. There’s been a jump in visibility in mainstream media, but it’s also a much more controlled, watered-down version than our gay and lesbian counterparts enjoy.

We finally got explicit inclusion in hate crimes legislation and got it passed. And after a couple of false starts, we’ve also seen legislation written with explicit inclusion as well. But again, in the tightly controlled environment, we still don’t know what the language or limitations of this potentially watered-down bill might be – even after so many have lobbied for it, sight unseen.

In early 2000 we seemed to be on a track of true GLBT community cohesion. From 2010’s vantage point, that view was quite delusional. The good relations NTAC had with other organizations through 2002 magically vanished almost overnight in 2003, coinciding with Mara’s arrival. Shortly thereafter, media relations vanished as well. Most everything began singularly funneling through Mara Keisling afterwards. This was no longer a community dialogue, but a top-down controlled environ.

The last half of this decade saw a decide distance develop between Trans and GLBt organizations as well (NCTE for the most part notwithstanding). The years have seen increasing grassroots Trans criticism and frustration with formerly closer allied groups such as NGLTF, GLAAD, PFLAG and ACLU. It’s becoming increasingly evident that the marriage between GLB and T was not made in heaven. It’s been a boost in visibility, media and funding for the former, and come at the expense of those in the latter who worked so hard to make T progress in the first place.

Indeed, the trans movement overall has become much more machine-like as a result of having one rep in the GLBT elite who’s part of the Washington game. For nearly all of the families and activists who worked so hard over the years for it, even the hate crimes victory had an anti-climactic feel to it. It wasn’t our victory: it was Washington’s. Even the sentiment that the community’s resigned to accepting whatever limited language in ENDA just to have something – anything – speaks to the lack of soul that we used to have.

Then again, it’s no major surprise. The Trans community always eschews our own history. What’s here today will be forgotten tomorrow by the next generation as we’re each compelled to create our own. Even those who lead today helped perpetuate that trend with their predecessors.

A local activist, Jackie Thorne, called me during Christmas holidays. During our conversation, she lamented how our community wasn’t “community” in feel any more –we’re just a “bunch of individuals now” seeking our individual stardom. The cohesion and cross-pollenation in our movement that began the last decade has been replaced by a classic Washington by-the-book, silo style of management complete with its hierarchies and insulated communication.

We’ve changed quite a bit over the last decade. I can’t say it’s worse. But I can’t say it’s better. It’s just certainly changed.

“All is flux. Nothing stays still.” — Heraclitus, from the book Diogenes Laertius

“The conquest of the Earth, which mostly means taking it away from those who have a different complexion or slightly flatter noses than ourselves, is not a pretty thing when you look into it.” — Joseph Conrad

Tricks, No Treats For Trans As Psychic Vampires Bleed Us Dry

“I ain't gonna work
For no soul sucking jerk.
I'm gonna take it all back
And I ain't saying jack.” — Soul Sucking Jerk, Beck

After a three month self-imposed hiatus, I’m back. A bout of depression and physical fatigue was wiping me out and gave me pause. After my friend Lisa Gilinger noted my recent inability to write about what I was feeling, and realizing my attempt to rid the blues cycle had little beneficial effect, it was obvious my pulling back wasn’t helping me.

So I restart on, of all days, Halloween. And tonight’s subject, something I’d recently learned about, is quite appropriate: Vampires.

Recently I’d watched an episode on the History Channel on the myths, legends and facts on vampirism. Everyone knows about vampires from popular culture. There are lifestyle vampires who are into the role-playing and the gothic fashion and even living it as a permanent style. There are also the most commonly known sanguine vampires – those who actually drink blood (though the attacks and neck-biting tend to be more the stuff of novels and movies.)

There is also a lesser-known category called psychic vampires (psi-vamps for short). Unlike sanguine vampires, they don’t suck blood. Instead, they feed off of others’ life energy – they suck souls. To my surprise, it made was eerily familiar to how I’d been feeling for quite a number of years.

Psychic vampires, when you come into contact with them, don’t stand out in any physical way. Rather, they usually have magnetic personalities but can otherwise appear rather ordinanry. They seek out vibrant, energetic, creative or hyper individuals or crowds of energetic people.

Per Michelle Belanger’s book “Codex: A Manual of Magick and Energy Work,” psychic vampires are unable to generate their own "life force," and must feed off of others, not just as an ability, but as a necessity. Feeding can cause an amphetamine like rush and most psychic vampires report to get greatly invigorated physically and psychologically. If unable to feed on others, symptoms of "energy deprivation" include extreme fatigue, depression, mood swings and immune system suppression.

While there are different types of psi-vamps such as elemental and symbiotic, emotional vampires only feed on certain emotions others elicit.

Usually, the negative psi-vamps will exert a strong mental control on the victim, and do as much as possible to provoke feelings of distress, shame, and sorrow. These types exhibit a seemingly insatiable need for conquest and, as such, an endless appetite for drawing energy from others – in essence, a Type A, uber-competitive version of a psychic vampire.

Sound familiar?

“Set all on ‘rave on,’ let’s see some action.
We’re gonna shine on, get satisfaction.
I am the singer. I take control.
I point the finger. I take your soul….
This is the only way to feel!” — Freedom No. 5, Scorpio Rising

While I’ve never given much belief in vampirism, it’s certainly coincidental that the trans community with all its initial energy and talent typically ends up burning out quickly, leaving us with husks of former leaders. While many gay and lesbian leaders have long, productive careers and lives, typically only the rare trans individual manages to survive similarly.

Historically, only two of the Trans community’s political leaders come to mind in a similar vein. And typically, most of the folks these two meet, work with briefly or for a period of time, end up feeling completely depleted (physically, financially or spiritually) after. Ironically, the older activist of the two is the inspiration and example for the protégée who only popped up in this decade, and who’s now overtaken and even fed upon and conquered her mentor.

It’s a rough world out there: feed or get fed upon.

Curses are something I don’t believe in either, yet the consistent pattern since my own reversal of fortunes beginning on Jan. 1, 2003, and the consistent string of horrific luck often makes me wonder if curses actually do exist, and are possible reason for my own situation. While I’ve personally hung in for over thirteen years, my situation is only agonizing refusal to give up. My tenacity’s come at a huge financial, spiritual, physical and emotional toll, though. Thus, the last-legs level depression. There’s virtually nothing left.

Incidentally it’s occurring on a constant and ever-widening basis throughout the community. Our community’s historical leadership appear to be dropping like flies, and its draining effects over time are pretty consistently noticeable.

Dr. Judith Orloff identifies several profiles of psychic, or in her terminology, “energy vampires”:

The Sob Sister who always considers her/himself the victim. The world is always against them and they’ll recount every horrible thing that has happened, wallowing in every perceived slight and whining all the time.

The Charmer, a constant talker or joke-teller who has to be the center of attention ad-nauseam.

The Blamer who cuts you down with criticism doling out endless servings of guilt.

The Drama Queen who lives in extremes of emotion with life being unbelievably good or horrifically bad and wearing you out while blabbing on and on and on.

Psychic vampires have various ways of sucking your energy. Sometimes it can merely be a casual contact, but they also have the ability to reach their victims long distance through anything from phone calls, to dreams, to even visualization (essentially meditating and seeing themselves drawing the energy from a vibrant individual into themselves and feeling the increase in power and invigoration.)

Effects on the people they drain might include: depression, fatigue, or loss of energy when people are around you, people sometimes avoiding you or withdrawing from you for no apparent reason, or people giving you harsh feedback about your alleged neediness, clingyness, intrusiveness or negativity.

Negative comments are very efficient at draining the life right out of you. ‘You can’t do that; you should do this; are you living in wonderland?” are all very effective at bringing you down. “What’s wrong with you? You are bad” – are (psychic) vampire tools that make you feel weak and small even if you are robust and tall.

Indeed I’m fully familiar with the chorus of steady criticisms beginning in 2000 on, beginning with the constant negative feedback from HRC folks to the latter trans community leader, post-GenderPAC schism. It was well-orchestrated and made for a nice echo chamber effect of cast suspicion and dubious intent on anyone in the ragtag activist element in the Trans Community.

It never abated and instead continues to crescendo even now from most of the very same parties and even some newer psi-vamp entries into the game. Just recently, none other than Mara Keisling passed along a typical comment to Ethan St. Pierre, declaring grassroots activism “dead.” It drew a rather emotionally rancorous response from Ethan, and he’s now paying a price most severe as the retribution is continuing to mutate and virally grow like an old 50’s era horror movie monster.

Yes folks, while Count Dracula may be figment of a novelist’s imagination it appears that at least psychic vampires are for real. And it appears the active members of the Trans community are all part of a mass psi-vamp feeding frenzy.

Google psychic vampires and read up on them, as well as how to keep them from depleting you and pulling you down. Break their cycle of usurpation.


Oh! And eat lots of garlic!

"It was enough to make an old world monster go back into the earth, this stunning irrelevance to the mighty scheme of things, enough to make him lie down and weep.” — The Vampire Lestat by Anne Rice

NTAC Hits Capitol Hill On Its Tenth Anniversary

The last couple weeks have been jam-packed so much that it's hard to find time to sit and write! This week has been nothing but back to back board meetings and homework for those organizations.

The prior week, though, was Transgender Lobby Days in Washington DC with NTAC – the National Transgender Advocacy Coalition. As I write, NTAC is now celebrating 10 year anniversary! A full decade of working on advocacy at the federal level, it's hard to believe we're still in it. With GenderPAC now morphed into another organization name and vision at the beginning of the year, it leaves NTAC as the longest running federal-level advocate for transgender or gender variant issues.


Anniversary aside, this was the smallest group we've had to date thanks to the crushing economy and competition from other newer interests in the game. However we still managed to pull in people from every section of the country except for the Northeast, ironically enough. We blanketed the entire Senate and hit over 100 offices in our day on the House side as well.

While we're dealing with a much friendlier congressional environ with inclusive bills (concerns with hate crimes' definitions aside), it was still a good year to make it up there for other reasons.

Due to the Obama victory, I was facing the loss of my fourth, solid staff contact on the Hill. I was starting to panic a bit! While LGB and T groups will obfuscate or keep us collectively in the dark, it's always been our staff contacts who have kept us enlightened. Certainly for NTAC, they've been a godsend. Without them, we'd have been buying into the oft-repeated Barney Frank or Human Rights Campaign-concocted story lines: e.g. "gender includes the trans community" [2003], "Christopher Shays is holding back trans inclusion" [2004], "Barney Frank and HRC have been our champions in fighting for inclusion" [2004 & 2005]. "ENDA won't be submitted this session" [2006], "Rep. George Miller is keeping trans inclusion from ENDA" [2007] and of course "HRC has promised and is committed to supporting nothing but an inclusive ENDA" [2007]. While others were encouraged to disbelieve us for what we heard from our Congress friends, we weren't wrong.


Clearly you can see why we'd not want to lose some of our contacts on the Hill!

Those contacts, plus three new ones we gained (including one of our best contacts from the past who's now on the Senate side!) proved incisive again. The only item of concern on legislation was from only one office, but did allude to the possibility of "different language" coming on ENDA regarding how they deal with gender identity. So far, it's the only one and was very basic – nothing urgent. All other offices are still in the dark on ENDA and its status.

We even managed a few face-to-face visits with our drop-in, buttonholing method – including very good meetings with both Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) and Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT), as well as personal visits with both Rep. Ike Skelton (D-MO) and Rep. Anh 'Joseph' Cao (R-LA).

That said, the ENDA debacle has changed the game slightly. A number of offices in the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) who were opposing trans inclusion in the previous session are now back on board this time. That said, there are at least a couple like Sanford Bishop and James Clyburn who are outright opposed even still. We're not going to be able to count on a bloc vote of CBC with us in the equation, which could still prove problematic for us. This has potential to be used by the incrementalists to "fan the flames" smoldering on the lifeline we're dangling from.


Most of our information this time wasn't so much about the legislation though. This time we got quite a bit of information about how others felt about the last session. Many House offices felt they were jerked around sincerely by the various parties who were heavily involved in last session's ENDA "debacle." As one of our office visits noted, "Congressmembers don't like being played for fools. They're not likely to forget [last session.]"


There's now no uniform view of the inside and outside players in GLBT civil rights!

The primary members of the LGBT Coalition are still very much on board with HRC, and their word is still golden. To them, NTAC is still nothing but trash, and it's obvious they just want to hurry up and be done with our meeting to get us out of there. But the big surprise this session is that the National Center for Transgender Equality (NCTE) has now lost favor with them, almost to a person. Whatever lustre they had, after what occurred earlier this session, has now disappeared.

Now the second tier supporters of GLBT rights are the big find. HRC is now persona non grata, as they have major trust issues with them (having been jerked around in the previous session). Again, Mara and NCTE are also quite out of favor, and their handout of nothing beyond two sheets of talking points was "too thin – there's nothing that those of us not familiar (with trans issues) can use beyond repeating someone's scripted soundbites." In short, they felt they were not being given info to use and learn from but rather being directed to stick to talking points.

These same folks were quite eager to work with us, and also happy with the data and specific stories to be referred to, both for counterpoints and also to help edify themselves on the full range of what "transgender" is. Many of them know us, but as one Senate staffer reminded, they don't "fully know" us yet. That was sweet sounds to sore ears!

What really surprised me was the Senate side having issues with both HRC and Mara. As one Senate office noted, they have to play with HRC (alluding that they were the only game around on GLBT), but they'd rather not. However, noting that all the hijinx on ENDA in 2007, and the Hate Crimes language early this year occurred in the House, it's important (and surprising) to note they have issues with these two parties.

As for Barney Frank, he's the Teflon Don. They know what he did, but they all have to work with him. Considering his Banking Committee position and the clout that holds, they don't want to rock the boat.


So in a nutshell, NCTE has credibility with the trans community, HRC and NTAC have very little. NTAC has credibility with the supportive, non-prime LGBT coalition congress-critters, NCTE and HRC have none. HRC has credibility with the prime LGBT Coalition critters in Congress, especially Barney Frank, NTAC and NCTE have none. It's quite an odd predicament.

Nevertheless, it doesn't change the game on the Hill too much. While the second-tier supporters feel burned by Ol' Barn' and especially HRC, they're also not going to circumvent the LGBT Coalition on an LGBT bill. It's tantamount to passing a bill on issues for the black community without the support of the CBC. They must deal with them, and as expected, HRC is in the catbird seat with the all important folks who will decide legislation, language and set the agenda on issues LGBT.

As always, we're still going to have to watch this from the outside and monitor it very closely.

But the good news is, especially with our new contacts, Ol' Barn' and HRC are officially on notice. Any funny business they pull will be discovered quickly (on both sides of the Hill). We will not take their manipulations lightly!

Again HRC To Support Only Trans-Inclusive Bills – And This Time Is Different How...?

"Fate comes a-knockin',
Doors start lockin',
Your old time connection,
Change your direction.
You ain't gonna change it.
Can't rearrange it.
Can't stand the pain
When it's all the same to you...." — Same Old Song & Dance, Aerosmith


Isn't it a bit late for Groundhog Day? I know it's March – I meant the movie starring Bill Murray. It seems we're caught in a loop where we wake up to what we believe is a new day, and everything instead plays out as an endless copy of the day before.

This came through today in an undated press blurb from the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) through one of my friends who used to work with the group:

It's the policy of HRC that the organization will only support an inclusive ENDA. In 2007 House leadership informed us that there were insufficient votes to pass an inclusive bill, so they decided to vote on a sexual orientation only bill. We made a one time exception to our policy in 2007 because we strongly believed that supporting this vote would do more to advance inclusive legislation. We will not support such a strategy again. We look forward to Congress sending President Obama a fully inclusive ENDA for his signature.

Yes, it seems it's time to trot out the "new and improved" version of HRC, yada yada yada. As one of the respondents to the Facebook post replied in "awesome snarkiness": "is it time for their annual trans appeal mailing already?"

Seasons change, but other things just don't. They play the same lines we've heard before and seek to convince at least a few trans folks to let the guard down, be a bit more docile and allow them to wedge us: keep the new believers pitted against those of us who've been through this exercise too many times to ignore.

"I don’t believe the American people should ever be told any lies, publicly or privately. I don’t believe that lies are practical." — author, Ayn Rand

Back before I even got into activism in the mid 90's, there was move on HRC's behalf to fix the problems of the 1993 Employment Non Discrimination Act (ENDA) after trans activists had banded together, even before the was a GenderPAC, to protest HRC's decision to leave trans out initially. HRC brought in attorney Chai Feldblum who, along with attorney Dana Priesing of GenderPAC and Jessi Xavier of It's Time, America to craft legislation with gender identity included in it. Supposedly in 1995 it was to be the direction HRC was undertaking to make things right.

Later that session we learned different. The ENDA bill actually came up to a close vote in the Senate late in that session: 50-49 was the official vote (back story notwithstanding – but that's for another story.)

Again transgenders were up in arms. HRC began working with GenderPAC, creating a bit of a wedge to factionalize the trans community. The International Conference for Transgender Law & Employment Practice (ICTLEP) dropped off the lobbying scene, two years later National Transgender Advocacy Coalition (NTAC) came into it. Less street protests, more press highlighting HRC's disparate treatment of trans people. After a few years of that, HRC had to change it up again.

Fall 2002 at Southern Comfort in Atlanta was where HRC announced a collaborative study with Mara Keisling, and where Mara would move to Washington DC, work in conjunction with HRC on what was to be trans-inclusive federal legislation. Piece by piece we discovered both the hate crimes and employment bills would not be inclusive.

We again learned different of this "support" for trans-inclusion in spring 2004 with Mara (now leading her newly-formed group NCTE) right in the room with us hearing it all.

So in August of 2004, the HRC Board of Directors held their annual meeting where Mara Keisling and others from NCTE and other places presented before their board. After the presentation, the board voted to "only support an inclusive ENDA." Done deal – this was official from the board, not even the staff this time. Or so we thought. Over the course of the next couple years, we heard the warnings from those of our Capitol Hill contacts. Still we waited. Word from all parties – not only HRC, but NCTE, NGLTF and others – were all saying HRC and even Barney Frank were on board, fully supporting an inclusive ENDA. There was even a revisit to Southern Comfort in 2007.

Yet again we learned different when the public ditching of trans language in ENDA became known in October, 2007.


Now we see the latest sequel of "Transgender Community's Largest Advocate," starring HRC. Doubtless they want us to throw concerns and history to the wind and be "one big happy family." Many of us have been through this numerous times. Considering they've never once trusted us (for whatever esoteric reason), if you were in my position, would you trust them?

"We ain't got no friends.
Our troubles never end.
No Christmas cards to send.
Daddy likes men.
We're a happy family." — We're A Happy Family, the Ramones

Post-Mortem On IFGE Conference

The IFGE Conference (www.ifge.org) was both an interesting and fun event this year. It was good to see some old faces, and also connect with some of my Facebook friends I hadn’t had chance to meet in the flesh. It was informative, though the presentations didn’t seem to draw many people this year. They screened a movie (unique touch) and did a grassroots organizing series as well (an important first). But due to the economy, attendance was down about 50% per reports (which makes me wonder about all our events). Not knowing the final numbers, they still pulled in around 150, maybe as many as 200 (since those not attending meals or presentations couldn’t be assessed.)

However, the last blog I posted on their board elects seemed to generate quite a buzz and overshadowed the event.

"If you're not controversial, you're not doing your job" — Clinton FCC chairman, Reed Hundt

For the record, my most recent blog wasn’t a post blasting IFGE – nor inviting such blasts from others. Other than my sudden shock at the announcement, monitoring this situation there would be in order, as I fear a repeat of the Southern Comfort Conference (SCC) debacle in 2007. This was intended to be more a bowshot to HRC to keep their greedy mitts out of our comparatively impoverished community’s events.

Nor was the post done to impugn the character of Allyson Robinson, nor invite others to do likewise. Before the IFGE Conference, I’d never met Allyson and could only speculate. During the conference, I met her while she was chatting with Bree Hartlage. Again, I expressed my concerns in my blog to the both of them. Allyson and I spoke at length and I reiterated to her that I didn’t question her motivations, integrity or morals. What I did let her know was there had been a long, consistent history with her employer, the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) – something she appeared to have no interest in – and that this was “pollyannaish” naïveté in the fervent hope that they will change. I explained to her that for the vast majority of the trans community, there is no reason to “hope” – that went out the window years ago. Our only options are to fight for change or give up.

She understood my position and hoped that I’d someday amend my views on HRC. I also understood her position and what she faced, and know that someday she’ll understand what Mara Keisling, Jamison Green, Donna Rose, Kylar Broadus and even Riki Wilchins learned before her. She got a bit condescending at one point, stating, “maybe someday I’ll have your wisdom and know all that you’ve learned over the past ten years.” However, I’m sure my “naïveté” comments were likely seen similarly, so fair game. Nevertheless, as with all the above mentioned, I don’t suspect I’ll be adopting their opinions on HRC, and it’ll be them coming around to mine. Allyson even encouraged me to keep speaking out as it makes her job easier (and draws me extra reviling).

Again, I don’t believe Allyson is in HRC for the wrong reasons (and yeah, I know, she gets a paycheck, etc. – spare me.) Nor do I think IFGE has gone to the dark side simply because of the board selection. What I am fully apprised of is HRC’s guile and ability to lull anyone not vigilant into their siren’s song, leading lambs to the slaughter. And I’m loath to see IFGE led there.

In 2007 I bit my tongue upon hearing what I was to happen with ENDA very early on, and yet I was personally blasted for not warning everyone beforehand! And those few that I did explain it to (those who questioned me on my “un-Equal” sticker at SCC) actually argued with me about Mara Keisling’s speech and Joe Solmonese’s promise. Two of them (one writing a check in front of me) even went in to give HRC an additional donation!

Those are things you don’t forget, and I don’t suppose anyone will understand me on that one. You had to be there.

"Stood still on a highway, I saw a woman by the side of the road
With a face that I knew like my own reflected in my window.
Well she walked up to my quarterlight and she bent down real slow;
A fearful pressure paralyzed me in my shadow.
She said “Son what are you doing here?
My fear for you has turned me in my grave.”
I said “Mama, I’ve come to the valley of the rich
Myself to sell.'
She said “Son, this is the road to hell.”" — The Road To Hell, Chris Rea

Nevertheless, one of the things I was bracing for from my post and which I warned Bree Hartlage (IFGE Chair) about was the distancing and character assassination I’d receive – typical to all situations exposing HRC. I lived it before in 2004, and it was no slice of heaven again in 2007. One thing I’ve learned is that our community as well as the gay and lesbian community will punish those who speak truth.

Bree assured me this was not going to be the case, and that they were trying to usher in a new sense of community union.

The last two days I spent on the road trip home, but upon returning got the following response from IFGE Exec. Dir, Denise LeClair.

It's a great story, but Vanessa knew about Allyson Robinson's nomination months ago. She was the first person we contacted when we vetted Allyson, but she waited until after our elections to raise an alarm. Vanessa was attending the IFGE conference as my guest when she posted this tantrum. Who blindsided whom?

This is absolute falsehood: I found out at that luncheon announcement – thus the reason I went to Ethan to verify this was the same Allyson Robinson. Even the logic – that they somehow vet board members through me first, especially since I’m on a completely separate org – hyperbolically stretches the imagination. They may have known this for three months, but I never heard a peep. I can see HRC doing things like that, but I don’t expect that kind of fabrication from IFGE.

It's ironic to be accused of collaborating with HRC, when IFGE is the ONLY national trans organization that has been refused a seat with Joe on the National Policy Roundtable (NPR). NTAC, NCTE, and NGLTF are all there. Why is that? None of the major GLB (or for that matter T) organizations in Washington DC will give IFGE the time of day, let alone funding.

A histrionic rant to be sure – where does she see my speaking of their collaboration with HRC? HRC is working with Mara on this year’s lobby day, and Bree Hartlage did mention “partnering” with NCTE and coordinating their next conference around NCTE’s next lobby day. But I did not prognosticate that HRC would work with NCTE next year, nor did I even mention the coordination with NCTE next year. That’s a little too flimsy to suggest a collaboration! And why the reference to “a seat with Joe on the National Policy Roundtable (NPR)”? I don’t know. The NPR was created in 2000 by NGLTF, not HRC. HRC as well as NTAC were two of the original invitees to the Roundtable, with NTCE joining in 2004. While NTAC used to “get the time of day” from GLB groups until 2002, that stopped once Mara hit town – and not due to anything on NTAC’s part. Funding? That doesn’t happen for any Trans groups except Mara’s.

If Denise is inferring that NTAC or I are responsible for IFGE not having the open door with GLB groups, or being on the NPR, then she’s barking up the wrong tree. In fact, the very same Mara Keisling they’ll partner with sits on the Members Committee of NPR – the group that establishes the policy for whom to allow in, and rules for members to follow. They should be inquiring of Mara why they’ve never been allowed on.

Denise even admitted later that “we were all aware from the onset that Allyson's nomination would be controversial, Allyson is not that naive and neither am I.” So why this reaction if they knew it would be a controversy, and insinuating that I created it?

In point of fact, Allyson was nominated by Ethan St. Pierre, one of HRC's most passionate critics. HRC had nothing to do with her nomination, or election. It happened despite them, not because of them. You can't throw a stone in DC without hitting someone from that organization, and any national organization that says they don't work with HRC is not being honest. The difference is that we don't lie about what we do.

If I read that first part correctly, that makes me more at ease knowing HRC was trying to stop Allyson from joining the board. Perhaps that’s what Ethan was seeing that none of the rest of us could see. I’d sensed we’d have another defection from HRC before year-end, and maybe this is it. Allyson didn’t give me that impression in our conversation, though. I’m skeptical of her leaving behind a job for the board position.

However, I don’t know why Denise put out the last part of the statement that “any national organization” not working with HRC is lying about it. IFGE is in DC. What is that saying?

And I think everyone knows better than to believe NTAC “gets the time of day” from HRC.

“To be misunderstood can be the writer's punishment for having disturbed the reader's peace. The greater the disturbance, the greater the possibility of misunderstanding.” — literary critic, Anatole Broyard

The Problems With The Mainstream GLBT Movement

After my post on “Trans Rights Movement Is Disappearing Before Our Eyes,” there was quite a bit of commentary, understandably on both sides. One respondent – Jkusters – on Daily Kos opined:

[T]he trans community cannot expect their supporters to be mind readers. They need leaders who commit to educating their gay and straight allies on their own issues and what is needed to fight for those issues. Trans visibility isn't just going to spring forth from the head of Zeus, it needs visible leaders who are unafraid to speak their truth and inspire people to fight alongside them. I learn about trans issues from friends who are trans, but not everyone has that option.

Would that it were that easy! We’ve had leaders who were not afraid to speak their minds, and who have been doing so on an organized basis since 1993 at least (Sylvia Rivera and the street level activists notwithstanding)!

Simply because individuals step up, and are considered national icons within the transgender community, it does not mean they will be heard. For starters, not everyone can walk in and get an audience with a legislator, most particularly the trans community. Quite frequently, even today, gay and lesbian leadership may not like what they hear and squelch those with who may touch upon issues that disturb the agenda as it began (strictly gay and lesbian). There tends to be a gatekeeper effect where those who’ve been deemed to urgent in pushing for trans rights, rather than waiting their turn (whenever that may be).

There have been any number of trans community leaders that have been available and willing to speak frankly: Sarah DePalma and Jessica Xavier of the previous It’s Time America, Phyllis Frye of the defunct International Conference for Transgender Law & Employment Practice (ICTLEP) and at it’s inception, even Riki Wilchins of GenderPAC (before she relented and was allowed to speak, but only in support of the consistent messaging as per the Human Rights Campaign – HRC).

The National Transgender Advocacy Coalition (NTAC) began at the time GenderPAC began moving toward the HRC model, and its leaders chose an independent stance and spoke out as well. We created our group due to need (and attempts by HRC to manipulate our movement to "gender" and not "gender identity"). For the first three years we took a loose group of divergent folks, hardcore protesters like Sylvia Rivera for instance, and more business-oriented negotiators like myself and forged an alliance. Indeed, I was one of those in NTAC leaders, a co-founder in 1999 and elected President of the org in 2002.

One of the things I did after my first trip to DC (and the "political reality" I was schooled with by Sen. Bumpers' Chief of Staff) was to find a way to begin outreach to the "groundswell of support" at home that we needed to begin. I began the local series of transgender panel discussions here in Houston and around the region in both churches, with our local PFLAG (which was the only in the nation that was non-inclusive of trans at that time), and with our universities around the region -- even Texas A & M in College Station (which was admittedly a little dicey).

In Washington, we began the process of leaving educational packets in all congressional offices we visited, making inroads with offices on the Hill, and even getting media to pay attention to us. It was all without any hat-in-hand begging or asking assistance from anyone in the G&L community, and we circumvented the obstacles HRC placed before us.

Standing forth and speaking out wasn’t ever a problem. The problem arose when we began being heard by those who then questioned and embarrassed the incrementalists, primarily Rep. Barney Frank and HRC.

Respondent Pico commented:

There are problems with the mainstream movement that have contributed to the marginalization of the trans community - heck, to anyone "queer" who doesn't fit in an increasingly normalized gay/lesbian mold. It's not a new problem, and it led to fractures in the coalition way back in the 70s.

We saw a particularly ugly side of during the debate over ENDA, which is what the diarist is alluding to as well. Based on the perception that we couldn't get the votes to cover gender protections, we went forward with protections on sexual preference alone. The trans community felt it'd been thrown under the proverbial bus, and some groups came to their defense - I remember GLAAD issuing an immediate statement saying it was unacceptable to fracture the coalition like that. HRC stayed silent.

As I’d noted earlier, those issues didn't sit well with the powers that be in HRC-land. They decided to supplant us with others they found more accommodating. As a result, we theretofore moderate types who refused to compromise principle were summarily dismissed, marginalized and censored. In time they eventually declared us irrelevant (though that wasn't completely accurate). This new HRC-trans amalgam worked well for a time, taking our foundation and adding a little more progress to it.

Respondent Pico then commented on my quote from the previous blog:

“Meanwhile Gross or HRC and whichever trans quislings they may employ to plaster over this will merrily work to bury any unaddressed inequalities from public view – all the better to cleanse their legacies.”

I don't think that's fair, especially considering how hostile the environment can be to trans folk in the first place. Some people feel like they can harness the power of HRC to bring attention to trans issues, so they're doing their best to work from the inside. (And when they sense things are going badly, they react: remember when Donna Rose resigned from HRC?)

Point being, HRC is the most high-profile lobby we have, and it's better to have trans activists working there than not. I don't think it's fair to slam them unequivocally.

The comment wasn’t necessarily directed at Donna Rose. And indeed, they do go in with the impression they can succeed where previous iterations of similar-minded trans folks failed. It must be said, though, with the exception of two of the most recent folks joining HRC, all others previously had been warned about what HRC would do – something I can attest to personally with all except Riki Wilchins or Jamison Green (who no doubt were notified by Phyllis Frye before me).

In time, HRC and other groups expect to see returns on their ‘investment’. They’ve developed an unscrupulous habit of co-opting our voice, our media, our victims and raising the lion's share of funds on trans issues. Rarely do they consult, much less physically bring on transgender community leaders. What hiring has been done in HRC at least, was tokenism done specifically with an eye toward circumventing trans leadership and still managing to retain the PR claim that “they worked with transgender leadership.”

Another benefit of their adopted "kingmaker" role is that by choosing brand new trans folks and making them automatic leaders, they indoctrinate them with the HRC version of trans history. It’s a clever effort to cleanse their own history and an attempt revise our own.

As time transpires, though, the very people they deign with "leadership" status end up becoming the newly burned and, once it becomes too obvious to stomach, they then become the newer voices repeating what we old-line leadership have known for the past fifteen years. Undaunted, they bring in even greener, more desperate or more starry-eyed folks who are in the process of learning what their other accommodating forebears learned.

We’re doing what we can to break this cycle.

The question must be asked and heard: why is it that gay and lesbian leadership take for granted such a vastly different reality, with more favorable treatment and an expected entitlement to deference and respect? It’s not something they’ve ever considered affording the trans community's leaders (not specifically the ones they appoint or have had hand in validating, but the leaders who've been at this over the decade plus all the while working on specific behalf of the transgender groups who have consistently been locked out, and shut up)?

In their parlance, we're nothing but "rabble," a bunch of “dumb” or "screaming trannies" who are “naïve” and “politically immature.” In the end this is one dumb transwoman that's not going away, regardless of how much diminution they foist upon me.

You can't fault the lack of leadership when leadership is consistently muzzled and smothered to death.

“Speak out in acts; the time for words has passed, and only deeds will suffice.” — John Greenleaf Whittier

As Blows The Wind, So Flies The Flag

“im a f*cking libra i change my mind like the wind changes direction” — blogger, Jake Childs on HoustonBeats blog.

Awaken to the new day and step outside to feel the wind and the direction it takes today. For most of us it’s something we acknowledge but mostly take for granted meaning more than it’s breezy. For a few, it means a whole new course in life, a new plan, a new face … today’s version of “absolute.”

Bay Windows put out an article on the upcoming (and ever changing) congressional hearings on transgender issues in Congress. [http://www.baywindows.com/index.php?ch=news&sc=glbt&sc2=news&sc3=&id=76161]

As I read the article, it was interesting to see two groups names prominent: NCTE (who originally was to have worked this with Barney Frank, but appeared to be getting eased out of it by…) HRC (who we’d heard in recent months was the extra-congressional controller of this effort.)

The congressional hearing is a good thing (possibly … as long as the congress critters don’t just treat this as a patronizing charade for the naïfs they deem us trans folk to be.) It’s also historic in a sense (though there was also a previous hearing put on by the same two parties – HRC and NCTE – for the Federal Employee Protection Act (FEPA) in the previous congressional session). I remember how that turned out.

In case you didn’t know about FEPA, it was submitted just weeks after Donna Schroer, a trans person, decorated and retired army officer with a special focus in mideast anti-terrorism, was denied a position at the U.S. Library of Congress as a terrorism analyst that was originally offered, then later rescinded because (then) he was preparing to transition to female. FEPA was originally submitted in 2005 without gender identity coverage. In this session, regardless of the hearing (window-dressing), there is still no inclusion of gender identity nor indication that it will be added. (See the first sentence of the previous paragraph again).

What makes this funny is the gymnastics of NCTE, and particularly their Exec. Dir. Mara Keisling in this whole positioning exercise.

Mara’s recently been doing the Riki Wilchins-style traveling show spanning the country over the past couple months. (Don’t ask me where she gets that kind of budget in this high-dollar traveling season) And apparently, an occasional HRC board member will sit in on some of these ‘get-to-know-me’ visits and leave … well, a little miffed because of the HRC-bashing.

It’s NCTE’s “I-Hate-HRC” tour and coming to a town near you (bring your checkbooks).

She even presented one recently in Phoenix where Donna Rose noted in her blog about the crowd, the diversity, etc. Unusual for Donna, there was nothing about raising funds for NCTE or the expected discussion of the good work they do, etc. Donna’s long been a active and vocal supporter of NCTE and their work. I noticed the omission (no doubt by Mara as well). It may be nothing or it may be something, but it was different.

However, before the most recent Mara tour began, stories were coming out of DC that Mara was meeting with Joe Solmonese again.

That was a big switch from the NCTE board members last fall coming out saying they felt viciously betrayed, would not work with HRC, and the NCTE board chair going so far as to demand the resignation of Joe Solmonese (among other things). Even Mara herself called them “immoral” and “liars.”

Even Joe Solmonese has been doing his best to cover his tracks after his speech at Southern Comfort Conference last fall, continuing to distance himself from his comments of support. His words have been anything but encouraging on the prospect of inclusion or egalitarianism.

So today we awaken, the wind changes and everything past has been swept away as if it were never there. “Immoral liars” and politically unrealistic “stupid asses” (to quote Rep. Barney Frank) are working together on another congressional hearing. The skies are blue, it’s a shiny, happy world and we in the trans community are supposed to – what? – believe this?

These two parties may feign having a short memory, but I guarantee you that’s not the case. Both of those parties have very long streaks of vindication, even still. Want proof? Ask either of them when they’ve even believed or trusted anyone from NTAC – or for that matter, folks in the general, non-elite segment of the trans community. Never. Nor will they.

And at some point after they declare “victory,” these two will then have us believe they’re “forgiving and forgetting?”

There’s something that smells to high heaven here. Maybe it’s just me, but I truly feel the trans community has been played this past year(s). Maybe this indignation we’ve been seeing has been a clever act, constructed to make us feel they’re on our side while keeping us relatively silent by portraying both the pro-HRC and the anti-HRC voice.

If my calculations are correct, we are seeing the beginnings of the next wave of “HRC is our friend, HRC is our hero.” And the lamb lies down with the lion once again. Haven’t we been here before …?

"The lion shall lay down with the lamb, but the lamb won't get much sleep." — Woody Allen

HRC's Overdrawn At The Bank Of Trust

"You say it's fine -- keep your place in line
Keep biding your time but you talk in a vacuum.
Because you've been bought
I don't know what I want
But I know I don't want to be anything like you." — Interference, Cop Shoot Cop

While I watch the returns coming in from Pennsylvania’s primary, I’m going to keep things short. It appears Hillary’s found a way to keep her campaign alive and a lot of it is dependent upon keeping the gay and lesbian vote in tact and activated.

Regardless of how little I care for her candidacy, sending Chelsea out was a good strategy and well-played: use your strength to cover the one area you might be weakest in to neutralize your opponent’s strength – in this case, Obama’s dominance of the urban centers. A little master-stroke for Harold Ickes. However, I still plan on making his and his candidate’s life hell for their taking for granted our community. Just the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) repudiation factor in Trans America alone will play well with our base and those who still support full equality rather than the watered-down imitation.

While on the subject of HRC, a rumor came a few weeks back from a prominent activist in the community with ties to HRC that another of our community leaders was meeting with Joe Solmonese. I just took it with a grain of salt to see if another shoe dropped.

Well, the other shoe did drop. This time it came from a surprise return of one of my old contacts on the Hill who noted HRC’s reporting to him of a lunch meeting between Joe himself and the “transgender community’s leader” to smooth things out. Initially he thought that was me! He’s been off the hill since about 2002 and I assured him it was no one from NTAC (barely able to contain my laugh). I can also say it was not Donna Rose either, something I confirmed.

For now we’ll just narrow it down and leave it at that point. Until then, it’s “Mystery Trans” ….



But it does beg one question from either party: what the hell are they thinking?!?

No matter how stupid HRC presumes trans folks are how do they calculate that we haven’t figured out their notably consistent behavior patterns yet? Even dumb animals pick up on patterns after so many replays. Speaking for myself, I’m no worse than a dumb animal and I’ll wager that the trans community isn’t either. (For the record, I was onto them in the late 90’s). Yeah, most all have figured out the cheap trick.

We in the transgender community have never been afforded credibility in gay and lesbian America even when we were fully honest. After HRC’s record of trust betrayal, and further the manipulation afterwards for political cover, how do they feel they’ll warrant any trust? As the saying goes “there’s no fool like an old fool.” Well, we’re done with this. Stick a fork in it. They’re inexpiable.

As for this “transgender community leader,” if you think you’re being seen as doing anything beyond self-serving motivations by playing into HRC’s hands and helping fracture our already-fractured community even further, dream on! Waking up to reality will be exceedingly tough.

Truly we’re a cash-poor community. HRC’s ability to flash a little green and put stars in peoples’ eyes and attract the occasional myopically self-ambitious tranny to help them sink us from inside is well established. But if HRC is thinking they’re going to have us following these Manchurian trannies now or in the future, they’re out of their overconfident minds. It’s this combination of temerity and arrogance that’s going to smash them and their historical legacy, along with any Transidict Arnold they get to cling to their back like a baby possum while mama possum crosses the ten-lane midtown interstate during rush hour.

Their history is etched in stone, never to be revised away. Forgiveness is easy – forgetting is not. They already know that. They’ve never forgotten us and what umbrage they took from us – and we’ve never taken money from or opportunized upon their issues nor urged gay-exclusive legislation. Yet they’re still vindictive. All things considered, what do they realistically expect from us?

As in banking, trust is doled out on their history. Debts can be forgiven, but future loans are only given again once they’ve demonstrated enough to make those they’ve burned previously sufficiently overlook those old burn scars. In the bank and trust of queer equality, HRC is the most severely and consistently overdrawn.

If HRC really thinks solutions are as simple as finding or creating their new tranny shill to assist in the obfuscation and deceit, they’ll learn in short order that we’re no longer playing those games. And it will be yet one more brick in the wall between us.

“I don't need no walls around me.
And I don't need no drugs to calm me.
I have seen the writing on the wall.
Don't think I need any thing at all.
All in all it was all just the bricks in the wall.” — Another Brick In The Wall - Part III, Pink Floyd



“You're a total blank and you're as funny as a bank.” — Interference, Cop Shoot Cop

What Fresh Hell Is This?

“So immoral, working on the thing can drive you mad. That's what happened to this friend of mine. So he had a lobotomy. Now he's well again.” — Fox Harris as J. Frank Parnell, from the movie Repo Man

There was an interesting article from New York’s Gay City News that made the rounds recently. They reported on Mara Keisling’s American Tour date in the Big Apple (following on the heels of the recent HRC banquet protest – opportune timing), beginning with a bit of what impressed them as “a Las Vegas comedy act from the '60s.”

The article then noted, “Keisling gave HRC and the House Democratic leadership their due.” From that it sounds as if they were treated to more of the same press she’s given the past few months.

They then reported that Keisling, “commended HRC and Congressman Barney Frank, a Massachusetts Democrat and ENDA champion, for advancing transgender issues. Last fall, Frank was widely criticized for "throwing trans people under the bus."

"Congressman Frank really, really wants to protect transgendered people," Keisling said per the Gay City News article.

I had to re-read that again to make sure I was reading it correctly.

It was just a couple weeks ago that the tit-for-tat press battle from just a couple weeks ago was reported in this same Gay City News. Now they’re being commended? What exactly changed recently? Regarding HRC, there’s been no change between them and the trans community specifically, unless there was something behind-the-scenes. Either way, this is a stark departure between the words of NCTE’s board members, specifically Steve Glassman and Donna Cartwright’s open letter and board chair Meredith Bacon’s stunning takedown of HRC.

Lest we forget, it was Barney Frank who bolted from the original inclusive bill and began pushing separate bills (obviously one bill much more eagerly than the other – you can imagine which one). Not only was Barney Frank pushing for separation and by extension abandonment of employment rights on the House ENDA bill, but also was its prime cheerleader in the gay press.

It makes all the more astonishing the comment from Keisling that Rep. Barney Frank “really, really wants to protect transgendered people.” Eternal skeptic that I am, there’s been far too much history to be so quick to forgive and easy to forget. When it comes to the rank-and-file ground-level trans folks who’ve kept a wary distance, there’s been no such forgiveness or amnesia from any of the above parties: HRC, Barney Frank or NCTE.

“First she’s up, then she’s down. Can’t decide … Merry-go-round.
First she’s in, then she’s out. Can’t decide ….” — Merry-Go-Round, the Producers

So why this sudden about face from Barney Frank?

Perhaps there’s been a bit of scrambling around for damage control on Ol’ Barn’s behalf: I’ll call it the Shame Factor. While Barney’s been giving a mighty push equality (for gays and lesbians only), but he hails from Massachusetts, one of the most liberal states in the union which has any amount of rights for gays and lesbians – even marriage! – and yet no protections whatsoever for transgenders.

To that end, the gay and lesbian orgs in the state of Mass. is trying to wipe egg off of face and play catch up, and Barney just recently deigned the state effort with his ever-important (at least in Mass. and GLBT circles) endorsement. That’s a huge departure for Barney. However, does this seem like something of Barney’s own volition, or more akin to Gov. George Wallace going back and apologizing for his all-too-obvious-and-glaringly-antipathic history? Having dealt with his pomposity once before and watching it unfold in recent months in the media against all our supporters in the gay and lesbian community outside of HRC, my money’s on the latter.

The recent scuttlebutt says that Barney’s coordinating a hearing before Congress on transgender employment issues with HRC leading the effort, and Mara Keisling serving as the transgender coordinator lining up the participants. So where does this leave us on the current marketing message that Barney’s suddenly our friend and hero again?

“The most intense of burning hells,
Blasting expectations into smithereens.” — 59 Times The Pain, Husker Du

On face value, it sounds positive. But something sounds too cosmetic, too quickly arranged, too contrived. It feels too much like buying a suspiciously clean looking vehicle from a dirt-lot used car dealer in poor-town offering E-Z Term financing (spelled with two letters to pander to those simple dupes they hope to draw in and capitalize upon). And like all the other working stiffs standing around looking at the gleaming paint job, kicking the tires and scratching my head, my gut is screaming “caveat emptor!”

We’ve been down the road with all three parties – Frank, Solmonese (et. al.) and Keisling (previously Wilchins) – and we in Trans America still remember the previous deals we bought. There were great expectations, a really attractive product pushed and a great sales pitch proffered with a wide smile. But the only thing that ever came from it was disappointment and the distinct feeling of being burned. When all came to light, Frank and Solmonese began pointing fingers at each other, and Keisling jumped out and pointing fingers at both with loud claims that she was burned and we shouldn’t trust them. In the article Mara even managed to insert: “"Some are still afraid of the gay thing" – a nice little Barney-esque dig. Maybe repayment for the “people with transgender” comments? Touché.

"We have to show Barney Frank 220 votes. If we show him 220 votes, nobody is going to work harder on this. The same with HRC... It's going to happen again next year." — Mara Keisling, Exec. Dir. of NCTE in Gay City News.com, 3/6/08

So here we find ourselves walking down the same road, and lo, here’s Keisling with the advertised message above on the NCTE billboard. Nobody is going to work harder than Barney Frank … apparently including folks like Rush Holt or Jerry Nadler, et. al. if this is to be believed. And the same goes for HRC, and it’ll happen again next year.

From my skeptic’s mind, I look at the wording and immediately wonder what “it” is that’s going to “happen again next year.” It comes from standing here on the outside looking at the “product” that’s packaged and sold to the masses from “inside.” Never knowing what’s being constructed in there means you’re always scrutinous if you’re experientially wise.

And if not, well … for every sheep there’s always a willing market for a fleece. Enjoy your shearing!

“There’s no fool like an old fool” — saying first published in John Heywood’s proverb collection, 1546

Reeling in the Years: Reflecting Changes And What Remains The Same

“Change is inevitable. Change is constant.” — Benjamin Disraeli

“[T]o take away from horrors of losing your job, you're meant to feel happy because "change is good". Not only that... you're meant to believe that questioning change is for losers – as if change just comes magically from above, and not as a result of corporate incompetence and greed at the highest levels.” — Larry Fignon

“Every time I thought I'd got it made
It seemed the taste
was not so sweet.
So I turned myself to face me
But I've never caught a glimpse
Of how the others must see the faker.
I'm much too fast to take that test.” — Changes, David Bowie

Being the New Year, it’s perhaps a time of reflection. Rather than reflecting over the whole of one year, I figured I’d reflect over the years plural, especially as it relates to transgenders striving for egalitarianism.

From the How Times Change department:

In Spring 1999, a number of transgenders who had heard of the collaboration of GenderPAC with the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) for a third year, and noted the new push for “gender” by itself being deemed adequate legislative wording, bolted and formed a new organization: the National Transgender Advocacy Coalition (NTAC).

NTAC’s founders, and those who populated the group had anything from a measure of skepticism to a healthy mistrust of HRC. Wide mistrust of Rep. Barney Frank existed. We didn’t want to work the inside and have our message restricted or squelched. Staying outside of it meant we could always keep track of trans rights without potential obligatory compromises.

During the course of that year and throughout a portion of 2000, NTAC was cited by the GenderPAC trans segment as being divisive.

In Spring 2000 a few NTAC board members had a meeting with staffers at HRC’s home turf. It was stated that there was no big deal that HRC didn’t have us in their mission statement, and that the trans community needed our own voice, just as the gay community needed focus on their own voice.

In late 2000, GenderPAC began trying to ease transgenders out of the “gender” movement there, and in early 2001 purged it’s trans board members. Shortly thereafter, NTAC began challenging HRC for claiming work with “trans leaders” by using GPAC. They never worked with NTAC.

Shortly thereafter, HRC changed their mission statement to include transgenders, oddly not the doing of either NTAC nor GPAC and well before Mara Keisling and the ad-hoc groups began working with HRC.

About that same time, the ex-GPAC folks, including Mara Keisling, began the first of their list-serves to now begin discussing creating a new group themselves. There were no more claims of NTAC being divisive now, with the new message being “horizontal hostility” by NTAC talking about GPAC and HRC. Their goal was to try to forge a movement incorporating HRC and GenderPAC with the NTAC element.

Later in 2001 HRC included trans in the mission statement, NTAC’s fears came to fruition as it was nothing more than mission change – legislation would still be without “gender identity.”

As 2002 progressed, and Mara Keisling and an ad-hoc group worked in conjunction with HRC on a study, she gained prominence with HRC and the community and planned on opening an office as a single lobbyist, working with HRC and others.

At SCC in 2002, NTAC noted the approach to forge alliances with all other groups and isolate and conquer HRC, and hopefully work around Barney Frank. This was dismissed by Keisling as being “adversarial,” and that we needed to be “congenial” and “collaborative” and bring HRC into the community to work with us all, as well as Barney Frank.

Indeed, as 2003 and 2004 passed, NCTE formed and it became NTAC that was being isolated while all other groups began working with new allies, HRC. Indeed both they and Barney Frank were now trumpeted as trusted allies, and indeed being proficient voices for trans issues in Congress and to the public.

Meanwhile, NTAC’s contacts on the Hill were providing us a different story. Who to believe? NTAC remained skeptics, and for that began being tagged as “HRC-haters” (friends who were members, employees and board notwithstanding, apparently).

In 2004, after the first crack in the HRC happened at a visit with Rep. Christopher Shays (R-CT) when they noted Barney Frank and HRC being the only ones not on board. In attendance at the meeting were Mara Keisling of NCTE, Rachel Goldberg (pres. of GPAC board), myself (pres. of NTAC board) and Dana Beyer. Keisling and HRC made a presentation at HRC’s annual board, and they voted through support for “only inclusive language” in legislation.

In Summer 2005, Donna Schroer was offered a job in the Library Congress, but the next day denied due to her declared desire to transition on the job from male to female. NCTE introduced her to HRC who prominently noted her discrimination in the press. A couple weeks later, HRC pushed a bill for federal employment non-discrimination that was non-inclusive. Per reports to this author from three individual leaders (two trans, one gay/lesbian) Keisling phone privately asking them for their support of the same bill, without trans inclusion.

After the 2005 flap, 2006 looked up with bills being submitted initially with inclusive language. Barney Frank and HRC are now strongly proffered as heroes. 2007 ostensibly started the same way, but NTAC’s Hill contacts were now sounding rather urgent alarms to the contrary, speaking of bills being stripped of gender identity.

Later, after NTAC’s lobby event but before anyone made it back home, preemptive damage control was already being done, noting “attacks” of referring to NCTE as “Mara’s group, and NTAC “rumors” on HRC and alleged non-support.” We’d heard those claims, but the “damage” had been “pre-controlled” so we watched and waited.

Sept. 2007, HRC’s Exec. Dir, Joe Solmonese speaks at SCC, joining Dave Noble of NGLTF and Mara Keisling of NCTE. Solmonese noted that HRC would “not support non-inclusive legislation.” Keisling reportedly claimed credit for “single-handedly changing the course of transgender history.”

A week later, word came out of attempts to strip gender identity from ENDA. The minute it becomes apparent that Barney Frank is intransigent, the United ENDA Coalition forms with HRC being the only partner not willing to sign on. Eventually HRC decides it cannot support the inclusive ENDA, and Barney Frank later claims this will be the exact bill submitted in 2009 with intentions to pass.

Once this occurs, NCTE’s Keisling goes in gay print and radio claiming HRC and Joe Solmonese are liars (something even NTAC never uttered in press). While the CSPAN interview was tame, the next radio show again noted HRC as being “immoral” trying to speak for the trans community.

NCTE Board Chair Meredith Bacon even came out stating it “only takes one time being stabbed in the back” and demanding resignations of all HRC staff leadership and board of directors before they ever work with HRC again.

To date, Keisling has not responded to the chair’s comments, stating only that it would be “inappropriate to comment at this time.”

Meanwhile NTAC? None of this surprised us. Though it was disappointing, we resigned ourselves to what we’d heard was coming. We’re still being skeptics, even though we’ve also avoided such strong public wording in the press. And we’re still on the outside, still lobby on the odd years and doing what groups like NCTE, now … want to be like as well – at least if you listen to their board chair.

I’m reminded of that old saw: “the more things change, the more they stay the same.” Sort of no … and sort of yes, too.

“Just gonna have to be a different man.
Time may change me,
But I can't trace time.” — Changes, David Bowie

Punishing Friends Over Equality That's Unequal

“In politics it is necessary either to betray one's country or the electorate. I prefer to betray the electorate.” — Charles De Gaulle, former French President from 1959-1969

DeGaulle’s quote above did provide a glimpse of the paradox of politics. It also shows what “friends” we have in Congress, and how far that really extends. They find the job of providing real solutions to pressing problems as too taxing. As the French President also quipped, “how can you govern a country that has 246 kinds of cheese?” It's an apt metaphor for what we're going through in Democratic politics at the moment.

So opting for the path of least resistance or the most self-expediency (preferably both) is always the easy choice. It’s also why we find America in the predicament we’re in today, with pressing problems of all stripe, and no one willing to do the task of solving them.

On the recent Employment Non Discrimination Act, Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) put out a press blurb, which pointedly accused those in the GLBT community decrying lack of equality for all in the current legislation as exploiting "a chance to cry betrayal at your friends."

In the article from Boston’s Bay Windows, author Ethan Jacobs pulled this quote from ol’ Barn’: "I'm talking about an attitude that says we want this and we are indifferent to how to get it. We will demand that you give it to us, and if you don't give it to us we will punish our friends.”

We’re the one’s punishing our friends? By noticing and speaking up when we’re treated as unequal humans, when we’re considered not even good enough for the same protections that Barney and his community wish to enjoy, we’re “punishing them”? Interesting concept. And those who write legislation that betrays equal treatment, and who leaves other segments of the population out … why, that’s being friends!

After all, that’s what friends do, right?!?

So say, if in the future, the trans community wishes to get marriage rights, then we should remember how to be true “friends” and get ours first and let the gay and lesbian community get theirs in their own due time? Follow Barney Frank and HRC’s precedent? Why, the gay and lesbian community will understand, and certainly wouldn’t punish their friends for that, now would they? In fact, they wouldn’t even notice it – much less bring it up, right Barney?

Excuse me while I barf!

Whew … sorry … this whole country has gone so topsy-turvy, inside out and spun so tornadically out of control that I lost my lunch! Careful where you step! So let me shake the dizziness out of my head here: anyone who points out unequal treatment is a punisher! And only friends write laws where inequality is to be cherished! And this is coming from those arch-conservative … Democratic leaders?

And I suppose the bleeding heart liberal Republican groups like Concerned Women for America will agree with the majority of the GLBT groups and oppose Barney’s bill. Guess what!?! It’s true. Oh God, talk about strange bedfellows! [cue the Tubes’ “Don’t Touch Me There.”]

Furthermore, Barney Frank added that, “this is what’s troubling me about this burst of activity now: Where was the lobbying for transgender inclusion when in December Nancy Pelosi announced we were going to do it and we knew we had this fight?"

Well, I know why the the majority of organized trans members from around the country were not there "in December." It was right before the newly elected Congress was seated! Lots of folks were about to be out of office on the GOP side, and the new Dems weren't even there yet! Why would we travel all the way up to Capitol Hill then for what was certainly a lame duck Congress? Didn’t consider that, did ya Barn’?

As for why the organizations that reside in Washington were not there ... well, that’s not a question NTAC or any of the non-DC organizations can answer.

However, it is a good question -- where was HRC in their pre-abandonment, still-a-hero days? They always advertise being the largest “gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender organization” in the nation. Of course, we all know about advertising and caveat emptor. Trans is so insignificant to HRC that we very easily get lost in the muddle – kinda like some beer-soaked, pot-bellied slob who isn’t aware of where his shih-tzu went until he peels himself off the couch to realize he’s been sitting on her the whole time.

For that matter, where was NGLTF in their newfound role of national lobbying group? They’ve always been very good with being vocal proponents of inclusive legislation – a perfect foil to HRC – throughout the past decade plus. They even have a transgender legal policy person on staff, Lisa Mottet, and Dave Noble as their newly-hired lobbyist. Why were they out of the loop?

More to the point, where was Mara Keisling? Her transgender organization’s been there for 4½ years now: more than enough time to get some roots and develop some contacts up on the Hill. In fact, she’s long-touted the great relationship she has with Rep. Barney Frank himself. It seemed incredulous, but this writer’s actually watched them interact friendly. They’re quite the couple. So much for being the Washington insider, huh? One wonders why NTCE wasn’t part of the good-friend-and-hero Barney Frank’s advocacy effort back in December?

Maybe Barney in his “still-a-hero” days decided to keep it secret from all the above organizations. If so, why be so clandestine? Perhaps ol’ Barn’ didn’t give a flying fig how much of a hero he was touted as in the Trans community. Maybe he really didn’t like Mara Keisling after all, and was simply being two-faced. Or maybe, some of the other groups on the Hill were aware in the early stages of this effort.

One slight problem: HRC seemed to be pretty on top of the game, and was johnny-on-the-spot even back in Feb. when they were lobbying offices. Both of my Hill staff contacts noted their “equivocating” approach to this inclusive legislation being conceived.

Fast forwarding to the current, they still remain johnny-on-the-spot and fully the insider with Barney and Speaker Nancy Pelosi, et. al. Say? Wasn’t Mara Keisling long advertising that we needed a transgendered “Washington insider?” Thus was the need to work “collaboratively” with HRC – to keep in those good graces.

One wonders what happened to HRC’s "collaboration" in kind with trans groups (or at least their trans-leader designee Mara Keisling)? After all of HRC and Mara’s tag-team efforts to build up their PR image to the trans community and beyond, and to lambaste the contrarians as negative naysayers, why would HRC do such a 180 now?

As the Queerty Blog recently opined, “HRC achieved [founder] Steve Endean’s ultimate goal: to become a powerful, politically active non-profit championing for gay rights. And, along the way, they fell into the old civil society trap. They’ve garnered unseen, unprecedented and unelected political power. They can use it as they wish, but only within the limits of preexisting institutions.

“HRC’s as big a part of the system as Barney Frank and Nancy Pelosi.

“Joe Solmonese and HRC’s actions over the past few weeks have been politics. Pure and simple. Yes, we can criticize what we see as an immoral compromise, but the group’s ultimately impotent. There’s no way to severe [sic] the ties between HRC and its political allies [In Congress]”

Actually, I believe Queerty nailed it on the head. Politics is not the solution – it’s the problem. My God, did that come out of me? Was Ronald Reagan right (besides being far right)?

Well, there are political solutions for those with the money substantial enough to pay the piper. That’s why Gay & Lesbian rights are at the fore right now. They have the money and power and the media momentum going for them. They’re the next non-needy group to be endowed with officially-sanctioned protections they barely even recognize, much less need any more. That’s the way politics works: rights are for those who aren’t desperate for them.

Why do you think the wealthiest get the lion’s share of tax breaks, or no bid contracts, or other special considerations? They don’t need them. They just casually want them. That’s also why the working class and the impoverished will never have them – we’re in need of them. Nothing like pretzel logic, eh? Give to the wealthy -- keep the needy bereft.

But cheer up you cash-poor, under and unemployed trannies! Since you’re not desperate for them, you’ll be the first to be extended marriage rights! That’s how politics works. Caveat emptor!

Political solutions are officially dead. Time to do the funeral procession, plant the corpse and then move on ….

“Me, I'm a part of your circle of friends
and We notice you don't come around
Me, I think it all depends
on You touching ground with us.
But, I quit.
I give up.
Nothing's good enough for anybody else …
It seems.” — Circle, Edie Brickell & New Bohemians