Letters posted here are associated with the following Salon Premium Member:

LaurieNY

Published Letters: 272
Editor's Choice: 23

Thursday, October 11, 2007 10:41 AM

Thank you, Susan

From all human beings. Gender freedom is important to all of us, whether or not we have or are a horse in the race. You have made an eloquent and succinct case for humanity, and it is much appreciated. I too am horrifyingly disappointed in the stance of HRC in this, but deep down, not really surprised.

I wrote a letter in response to the Aravosis piece, and he immediately attacked me, saying "I" was holding ENDA hostage and then playing the bereaved victim. "My" hands were dirty over the whole thing because "my" rights were more important than the rest of the community's.

That's funny, John. Because I already *have* all the rights being discussed. I am a straight, biological female. Yet you assumed I was a transgender (and it IS "transgender," despite what you've seen) person simply because I wrote with compassion and conviction for my fellow human beings. Like I couldn't possibly care deeply about transgender people unless I was one myself. No, John... that brand of selfishness is *your* issue, don't transfer it to me. It's also the whole problem with your position. Transgender people are a separate "category" from you and should draft their own legislation if they want rights... you don't want people who you feel aren't exactly like you to jump on your bandwagon and slow it down.

It's a crying shame that we even need such legislation to ensure equal rights for all. Let's not make things worse by throwing our most discriminated-against brothers and sisters out of the lifeboat. You were once one of those brothers, John. And as a woman, I was once one of those sisters. We are ALL in this together. You may be happy to turn your back on those still struggling for equality, but thank God there are more of us who are not.

Thursday, October 11, 2007 10:58 AM

To Anon 10:47

Transgender doesn't equal gay unless the person is attracted to his or own gender. Being transgender is about gender identity. Not the gender you were biologically born with, but the gender you feel you were meant to be. You can be either gay or straight--sexual orientation is a separate issue.

So if you were born biologically female, but identify as male, you are straight if you sleep with women. If you are attracted to men, you are gay. Likewise if you were born biologically male but identify as female, you are gay if you are attracted to other women; straight if you are attracted to men.

As a transgender person, you are emotionally and mentally--if not necessarily physically--the gender you feel you are. Not the gender dictated by your body parts. Your sexual orientation is separate and is determined by your *own* gender identity.

I hope this did not confuse you even more!

Thursday, October 11, 2007 01:07 PM

Dear HollyCapote...

Thank you. And right back atcha. I may have mine, but my conscience, heart and soul will never allow me to leave behind or step over those still struggling to get theirs. And no amount of bullying and insulting will ever change that.

Friday, October 12, 2007 01:17 PM

I think...

Much of the problem I (and possibly many others here) have with Aravosis' essay was not as much the "we need to compromise on something in order to get this passed at all" aspect as it isthe "WTF do these people have to do with us, and how did they become *our* problem?" aspect. They're two different issues.

Maybe that's a tad simplistic, but as the letters increase, that's the main division I'm seeing. And I've already made my other points more than once, so I'd rather keep it simple this time.

Friday, October 12, 2007 02:20 PM

@StellaMaris:

"Also, for all those gay men in here who say that because most people don't understand or get trans people, that we should be willing to wait on civil rights - what would be your response if you were in our position?"

They were.

"If someone told you that gay rights had to wait because lots of people think you're icky?"

They did.

"Would you sit back and say "Okay?"

They didn't.

And that's what I wish they'd all keep in mind.

Sunday, October 14, 2007 09:15 AM

They do have a purpose

I wear my flag pin whenever I'm going to be among conservatives (like my family) who know I'm a "godless, troops/America-hating, war-protesting, hippie liberal." Kind of shuts them up. I refuse to let them co-opt the flag and perpetuate this ridiculous myth that they've cornered the market on love of country because they buy into the lies and support the war. We love this country too, but in a different way. And we support the troops... that's WHY we protest a war that's getting them all killed for no good reason.

So next time you see someone wearing a flag pin, think twice before you assume the wearer is a Bush supporter. Could be one of US, just reminding everyone that liberals are "good Americans" too.

Tuesday, October 16, 2007 10:57 AM
Original article: King Kaufman's Sports Daily

"Go Rockies" chant

They've been doing that since the very beginning of their existence. The first time I heard it, I was utterly perplexed. I only noticed it at the second word, so I was hearing "Roooooockies... Gooooooo..." Huh?! Plus, they did it so slowly that it sounded like they were in a trance. I thought it was the stupidest thing I'd ever heard, until I realized (like two years later) that it was both sides of the stadium trading off. I'd thought it was all of them intoning "Roooooockies... Gooooooo..." like a bunch of zombies. Boy, was my face red...

Anyway, please don't wake the Zelasko beast. I might not be able to control which items, and how many, I throw at my TV screen.

Most Active Letters Threads

426

A key British official reminds us of the forgotten anthrax attack

A vast array of establishment and expert sources do not believe this episode was really resolved.
412

The crazy, irrational beliefs of Muslims

Tom Friedman explains the real problem: stupid Muslims think the U.S. is about war and aggression.
210

Is Obama's civil liberties record understandable?

Was it unreasonable to expect him to adhere to his commitments regarding the Constitution?
111

How dare you criticize wasteful defense spending!

So you think it's only terrorist-appeasing lefties who are down on Pentagon profligacy? Think again
61

Police to talk to Woods

Early morning crash raises questions, and revives tabloid speculation

View all »

Letters Help

Currently in Salon