I teach law, so I'm expert on giving examples for pedagogical and argumentative purposes, and the writer's example of passing an empty bill simply titled Gay Rights is superb!

Good morning, people-

So much to write and think about here. Before I go on, please dont mis-interpret my headline as meaning that I don't care about employment discrimination issues. It's just that I have reached an age and have seen enough in my life where I find it hard to see the value in any kind of ENDA legislation. I am trying to write with an open mind, and since I greatly value the wisdom and insight of many of Salon's letter writers, I am hoping that someone can present me with a new perspective.

I have always worked for the private sector. Through the years, I have seen an explosion in CYA language in my employer's Policy Manual. Absolutely everything in there appears to be designed with this goal in mind:

Disclosing, as thoroughly as possible, EVERYTHING that is expected of the employee, so nobody can ever say, "Well you never TOLD me I had to do THAT!" It makes possible a private form of the Doctrine of Universal Criminality. The goal, obviously, is to generate the largest possible pool of potential excuses for firing "Inconvenient Employees."

Anyone who has ever Worked for the Man knows that the enforcement of such rules is wildly uneven (but near-impossible to prove). Top producers, Club Members, Good ol' Boys, and personal friends of management will not be fired for "being late twice in 20 years" or flaunting the company dress code. People with B.O, are too fat, sloppy dressers, creepy personalities, slackers, or absolutely anyone that doesn't fit into the Company Culture (a VERY real thing) can be easily pilloried with some petty bullshit Personnel Manual Transgression and shown the door. If someone with enough power doesn't like you for whatever reason, you will be fired, and for all practicality, there's not a damn thing you can do about it

That's. Just. How. It. Is.

Now, from a purely practical point of view, I personally don't wish to work or go anywhere I am not welcome, and more importantly, where I cannot live my values. Even if you are not actually fired, Assholes with Power can always find a way to make your life hell until you quit. Why anyone would ever want to work in such a hostile environment is beyond me. I'd rather put my energy into looking for a better job than to fight for a pyrrhic victory ... Just flip 'em the bird on the way out and move on. There are always choices, and when you have the courage to make different ones- even difficult or inconvenient ones, you will eventually be led to a happier place if the choices you make are consistent with your values.

I am a very lucky person. I have met many, many Trans people because my minister (UU) is a very open progressive leader of a welcoming congregation. We regularly host Trans people in our worship space for special events (including a gut-wrenching Day of Remembrance service) Some have returned every Sunday to worship with us. Some I call friends. I also know lots of GLB people. I happen to be "B" myself. In similar ways, I have been lucky to meet Muslims, American Blacks, displaced workers, Hispanic immigrants, and many, many other marginalized people who are in need of support, but whose voices are too small and scattered to be heard.

As a UU, I try to take a bigger picture point of view. Justice begins with awareness of a person's story. Ten years ago, I knew nothing of Trans people. I never harbored any ill feelings, it's just that I never got to know them as people. I am proud of all of our congregants who are "normal" Mom+Dad+kids families for being open minded and supportive. I love to see them marching in the local Pride Parade every June.

As well-intentioned as some might be, legislation has serious practical limits in terms of improving conditions for marginalized people, which should really be the end-goal here. In fact, i would go as far as to say that the enemies of progressive movements just LOVE to see us exhausting ourselves with our ID politics, instead of doing the real person-to-person work necessary to build bridges and change minds one person at a time.

The way I see it, a full-fledged, all inclusive ENDA on the books would be of marginal utility, and the effort required to pass it would probably be better spent elsewhere.

You're right John. The political aims of transgendered people and the GLB group are totally different.

Transsexuals want to become, as much as possible, the opposite sex. GLB people want to have sex with the same sex.

You know, in Iran (whose leader has proudly proclaimed no homosexual population like what we have here) transsexuals are accepted and even encouraged for reasons that amount to 'at least he's not gay'. Heck, even our own Ayatollah Pat Robertson supports transsexuals, for pretty much the same idea.

You are so right, John, there is no overlap between the GLB communities and transgender communities.

The wording of the bill is 'gender identity'. I agree that the term 'transgender' is overly broad. Transgender includes people who simply crossdress in private and people (such as myself) who take steps to physically change their sex. The term 'gender identity' includes diesel dykes who are more manly than most men I know, and fairy boys who are bitchier than any women I know.

It's easy to question the need for a bill like ENDA as long as you personally don't suffer the effects of its absence. As a transsexual woman who passes well on a daily basis - to my knowledge, only the HR department knows my history- I know how easy it is to take for granted the privilege of normalcy. However, there was a time when I was not clearly one gender or another, and I worried every day about my prospects for employment and housing. There are a lot of non-transgendered gays and lesbians who are not gender normative who will still face discrimination without 'gender identity' included in the language.

No one wants men in the ladies' room. I certainly don't. But no one should be fired or denied housing because they don't fit in to gender stereotypes, or because they like to dress up at night and go to a club, or because no matter how well they pass or how much surgery they've had, their home state won't amend a birth certificate to reflect their new gender. No one should have to worry about these things if they haven't quite finished electrolysis or saved enough money for chest surgery.

I agree that there should be dialogue on what transgender means and why gender identity is an issue of importance to the gay and lesbian community. I've been watching this debate play out for sixteen years and I know its roots in gay civil rights and in lesbian identity politics. The straight world doesn't understand the breadth of the nuances in our wonderfully varied community. Even within the gay and lesbian world, there are a lot of gays and lesbians who don't get us, and really, once someone transitions (or decides they're just a straight cross-dresser) there's not a lot of reason to get them either.

This bill goes beyond protecting privacy - gay sex at home, cross-dressing in private. in the workplace, it protects people who 'act gay' but also who may be in the process of transition, which is never overnight. When it comes to transgender people, it's all the more confusing because transition is, by definition, an interstitial state, though some states (Texas, Kansas) refuse to recognize the new gender even after the person in question has made the change and lives as a woman.

The argument for inclusion comes down to the words of Jenny Boylan: we get beat up by the same people. Or maybe we don't, please see above. There should be protections for transgender people, perhaps on a piecemeal basis: a bill for transvestites, a bill for transsexuals, a bill for the intersexed, whatever. But tell me John, if I support ENDA when it excludes us, will you support my ENDA when the time comes?