Comments on: Transgender View of DNC Platform on LGBT Issues

By: Zan

Zan — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 01:39:47 +0000

right on: if the platform can even say the words, how can we trust them to really include us?
I am not a delegate, but I am going and going to the National Stonewall Dems (pre-DNC conference)

I want includion not to say all, but to spell it out. what are they afraid of? and why did the LGBT community accept this? I noticed several national emails bragging about this “great’ platform ( i read it, it aint so great)

By: Amy

Amy — Fri, 15 Aug 2008 00:50:34 +0000

It’s all fine and dandy to be placed within the Democratic partys platform but what about the Republican one? Is there anyone with a bipartisan enough spirit to wade out into their political arena?I would hope our need to be treated fairly at work and within the law would be seen as bigger than party politics or organized Religion. Personally I believe attaching our political needs to any one party is a mistake and reduces our needs to party politics instead of rights as Americans.Americans come in all kinds of political beliefs and so do TS women.

By: Zoe Brain

Zoe Brain — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 12:08:14 +0000

I freely admit that Marisa Richmond, by any metric, is an outstanding woman. I wish I was in the same league, but I’m not.

A Platform is meant to be a “Motherhood” statement, full of vague commitments to principles, with no guarantees they’ll ever be reified. The principle here is not to make waves, but to wait till there’s bi-partisan agreement before proceeding. Frankly, it’s exactly the kind of thing I’d expect from the GOP so they can talk out of both sides of their mouth, one story for the Log Cabiners, another for the Fundies. I speak as someone who’s had exactly this kind of guff from the local pollies on the Right.

Perhaps this will illustrate my concern.

“Comprehensive Bipartisan Health Reform”
“Comprehensive Bipartisan Social Security Reform”
“Compregensive Bipartisan policy on Iraq”
“Comprehensive Bipartisan.Minority Housing Policy”

Get my drift? Would any of the above be acceptable in the DNC policy platform? Or would this be seen as diluting principle to homeopathic levels?

Ms Richmond wrote “At this point, I do not know if we will have a minority report requesting stronger language on a fully inclusive ENDA” so she obviously shares some .. dusquiet… and by making this post, is trying to determine what to do by canvassing opinion.

I’ve given mine – with again the warning that I may be prejudiced to think the worst. It’s as honest an opinion as I can give, and I hope it’s of help. I’m glad I’m not in her shoes, and it’s because the DNC puts good people like her in this kind of an impossible situation that I’m not on their side.

By: Polar

Polar — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 07:38:06 +0000

Yes, it is vague, and party platforms are nonbinding documents that don’t really mean much. But the symbolism is positive here. Ultimately, the platform is what Barack Obama wants it to be.

As for Marisa Richmond, I’ve been proud to know her for over a decade now. Her work matters, has made a difference, has been done quietly, and unlike many in the T community, she seeks no notoriety or fame for it, just results.
I listen when she speaks. Others should, as well.

By: Zoe Brain

Zoe Brain — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 05:46:25 +0000

My copy of the Draft – which may not be current, as I’m both Australian, and on the Right, says:

“We will enact a comprehensive bipartisan employment non-discrimination act.”

Now as someone on the Right, no doubt I am cynical, and apt to believe the worst about the DNC. As an Australian, we also tend to be mistrustful of politicians on either side of the fence.

Comprehensive *BIPARTISAN* employment non-discrimination act.

Right…. now call my a Cynic, but I read that as what we in Australia would call Weasel Words for “Non Inclusive”.

It will be comprehensive in the Blues Brothers sense – “We like both kinds of music, Country AND Western”, or in this case, Gay AND Lesbian. Isn’t that the same exercise we’ve just gone through recently?

Wouldn’t that cynical interpretation be in exact accord with Barney Frank’s remarks on the same subject – a “comprehensive bipartisan ENDA”, an inclusive Hate Crimes Act, repeal of DADT, then working on repealing DOMA and only then, maybe, in a decade or three, working on a non-bipartisan ENDA that is inclusive?

Again, please take into account my own biases and prejudices. But maybe it’s just that I lack the required rose-coloured eyeware.