for failing to understand why defending your rights and defending Michael/Michelle's is basically the same thing. It's very sad that you don't get it, and I actually agree with you that it would be better to pass Enda, get a foot in the door and then get the T back on it.

But again, it's sad that you don't get it. Want to explain how you're fundamentally similar to all the different types of gay men when it comes to the prejudice of others, and yet so different from "the guy who wants to cut off his penis and become a woman.". How is he less deserving than you of protection from bigotry against his choice regarding his place in the gender game?

Again, I think expedience dictates that we progressives get the bill we can right now and correct it later. However, "how did they get in our tent" is pretty distasteful. In fact, I would say gays and lesbians have much more in common, life struggle-wise, with transsexuals than with bisexual people.

The Congress has NEVER ratified the Euqal Rights Amendment, for women, however many of the rights for women included in the the orginal eaual rights amendment have been passed incrementally over the years.

Dana, I have a neighbor who doesn't even believe that gay men exist, that they'd dare do the "icky," sticky thing that they do do. But he loves lesbians, as do bluhzillions of straight men, and would vote for their protection, since they're sexy. So, let's drop gay men from federal protection! *^

* Satire.

^ 'Cause, like Dana Runs, I'm for equality.

It's "transgender," not "transgendered." The word is an adjective, just like "gay." Transgender people, transgender community.

Anyway, this "I'm alright, Jack" attitude is incredibly disheartening. I'm sad just having read it. It's suddenly OK to marginalize an entire community based on gender identity and/or sexual orientation? So since you feel *you* have more in common with bisexuals--who are also often cast out of the gay community as cowardly fence-sitters--the B (even though only "half-gay") is acceptable for inclusion but the T is not? It's your "half a loaf" and you don't want to share it with anyone who isn't exactly like you?

Transgender people *are* often gay. For example, a MTF (male-to-female) transgender woman who is sexually attracted to other women identifies as a lesbian. Why exactly should she not enjoy all the same rights you do as a gay person? Because she was not as fortunate as you were, to be born with all the right parts?

Shame on you.

Are you kidding, the chance to pass any gay rights bill would be historic. And if we got it passed for lesbians, it still kills the religious right's main argument, that we're somehow sub-human and not "really" a "real" civil rights movement. So yeah, I would be willing to pass just the lesbian portion if it had the votes and the gay portion didn't. Having said that, I'd like to poll the community before doing it, and not just have a few activists and national organizations decide for everyone. But I'd make the sacrifice, and we'd all be better off as a result. Would you?

i can't remember the time i found more pleasure in Reading than in Writing. the fact is, you are all correct - only your perceptions differ. some see the whole (or part) group as a beleaguered and hated minority, others as a powerful and influential group. as an outsider, i lean toward the latter, and applaud those who wish to wield that Power with Generosity. there are too many of that latter to mention, but here's a few, Todd Merrell, and who can not admire the calm courage of danabeyer(22)? and in the beginning of this thread Aemaeth and NuclearMind. but, topping them all, GaYtheist (the Brave) of so many months ago. i can admire you but i can understand the others as well. i see myself(jews) as a hated embattled minority, others see israel as an oppressive powerful state. perceptions matter.

there's another idea here as well. the question of inclusion. since i am excluded from all the categories (being a old straight white male) i see you as all grouped together; the common thread being that your Impulses are seen as Wrong. those in the "bouncer position" (at your very own Club 54) say i'm ok, but they are WEIRD! what is totally unacceptable? only, it seems NAMBLA. well there are cultures (micronesia, new guinea) where such relationships are Normative! an S&M lesbian would be stoned in gaza (i pick that locale only because in Salon they get the "oppressed victim" free pass), while the ideal "marriage" there is between an underage female and her rich older first cousin (on both sides). acceptability is all cultural.

finally, something i know something about - the difficulty of getting work. you MUST know that the harder you make it for private employers to fire, the more difficult it is to get a job in the first place. internships are now practically de riguer for most good placements. it allows them to "fire". and to get those good internships you need connections - either alumni, country club or family. i remember when you just walked in, got a job, and if it didn't "work out" you got fired - and got another one just as easily. not so now. unless you are the lucky few who either are online or were the (donated egg) child of someone important. other than that, you either stack cans or fight with mexicans.

I have to admit to getting a little tired of reading posts from people who didn't even read my article, claiming that I don't think transgendered people, or transgender people (I've read both in official listings), deserve the same rights as me or anyone else. I do think they deserve the same rights. And that's not the topic of the discussion. The topic of discussion is whether the transgender community has the right to, along with elite gay activists, kill gay rights progress for the next twenty years because their movement is years behind ours. You took ENDA hostage, and now are playing the bereaved party. I'm sorry, but you don't have the right to claim the moral high ground when your bill wasn't go to pass and ours was until you demanded that we get no rights until you can get yours. 25m gays and lesbians were to be protected by that legislation. But you'd rather have no one be protected if you can't be protected (yet). Again, now who has dirty hands?