New York State Assembly passes transgender rights bill; Connecticut Senate votes for marriage bill
HRC Back Story
By Christopher Edelson
April 23, 2009


http://www.hrcbackstory.org/2009/04/new-york-state-assembly-passes-transgender-rights-bill-connecticut-senate-votes-for-marriage-bill/


The New York State Assembly on Tuesday voted 97-38 to pass the Gender Expression Non-discrimination Act (GENDA A.5710), which would add gender identity and expression as protected categories under the state's human rights law. GENDA would prohibit discrimination based on gender identity and expression in employment, housing, public accommodations, access to credit, and other key areas.

well good for new york, now we just need everything at the federal level.

now we just need everything at the federal level.

Yeah, so they can protect trans rights like they enforced the SEC rules?

Honey, working at WallMart you will never - ever - have the money to file a federal lawsuit and sustain it.  They are fantastically expensive.  You don't need a lawyer, you need a legal team.  I'm sure an hour of billable time on a federal lawsuit is more than you or I make in a day.  And they take years, and years, and years.

Federal law is also subject to federal elections.  You really want Bush and Cheney, or Sara Palin to be the executive in charge of protecting your rights?  Me either.

I think that the closer to local you can keep anything, the more it can be applied in a fair and even manner.   And it a lot easier to get in touch with local leaders.  Don't believe me?  Try to talk to one of your Senators today, hell, even your Congresscritter.  You won't make it past the phone answer person who will sort of hash mark tally your issue, and that's that.  But I can get in to see members of the City Council.  And, while the laws being written now in New York or Vermont, or places that have them in place like Cali are pretty liberal, (they are after all liberal places) anything coming through Congress is going to be weighted heavy to the conservative side - a law that can pass muster in Alabama.  In fact, a federal law might be worse in that it could supercede more liberal local laws, thus putting the movement back, not forwards.

so living in Ohio, i should just pretty much move cuz that isn't ever going to happen in TransphOhio.

That works sometimes.  Its called 'voting with your feet.'

The problem is it's not the UNITED states if I'm treated significantly differently by being in a different place.

I like to use Texas as an example.  Let's say I'm married to a man, and let's say that whichever county I happen to be in in Texas, the authorities are aware of my trans history.  Some counties will recognise the transition/surgery/court order and treat me as a legal female -- we can remain married, but I can't marry a woman.  Some counties will not recognise me as female, and my marriage to my husband is not recognised, even if it was legal where we got hitched, since federal DOMA negates federal Full Faith and Credit (FF&C in the case of marriage means that, say, Georgia will recognise a marriage performed in Nevada, even if they wouldn't allow it in Georgia.  Loving v Virginia made FF&C apply to all states at the same time it struck down states' anti-miscergenation laws)

If I go to the Home Depot in the next county for the afternoon, am I married to my husband there or not?  Depends.  If they see me as a man, well then we're two fruits living in sin.

And marriage is just one thing.  There are places I could go where the locals could make it intolerable to live and work if they came to find out my trans status.  And there are places that, should they find out I was born male, will not recognise me as female -- California court order be damned (again, FF&C), and I get a drivers' licence with a big, fat "M" that fairly glows...

Compared to a white cisgendered male, my freedom to move about and choose where to live and be employed is severely curtailed.

Yes, Tekla, federal rules might supercede state/local protections with more restrictive laws.  The trade-off may be that places that are now truly toxic to trans may be made tolerable to live/work in -- or even to pass through -- without being in danger of assault where the law enforcement doesn't care and won't step in because they're steeped in the same bigotry and prejudice that engendered the assault in the first place.

As happy as I am that Andrade is going to be eligible for parole 60 years after he dies, I have to see the verdict not as a turning point but an anomaly.  And with our patchwork of protections, there will be yet more trials where the panic defence prevails.

And trans people 'punished' for the bad luck of living or just being in the wrong place.

=K

Quote from: Karen on May 10, 2009, 02:00:42 AM
The problem is it's not the UNITED states if I'm treated significantly differently by being in a different place.

I like to use Texas as an example.  Let's say I'm married to a man, and let's say that whichever county I happen to be in in Texas, the authorities are aware of my trans history.  Some counties will recognise the transition/surgery/court order and treat me as a legal female -- we can remain married, but I can't marry a woman.  Some counties will not recognise me as female, and my marriage to my husband is not recognised, even if it was legal where we got hitched, since federal DOMA negates federal Full Faith and Credit (FF&C in the case of marriage means that, say, Georgia will recognise a marriage performed in Nevada, even if they wouldn't allow it in Georgia.  Loving v Virginia made FF&C apply to all states at the same time it struck down states' anti-miscergenation laws)


thanks Karen for explaining more in detail what i was trying to say.
If I go to the Home Depot in the next county for the afternoon, am I married to my husband there or not?  Depends.  If they see me as a man, well then we're two fruits living in sin.

And marriage is just one thing.  There are places I could go where the locals could make it intolerable to live and work if they came to find out my trans status.  And there are places that, should they find out I was born male, will not recognise me as female -- California court order be damned (again, FF&C), and I get a drivers' licence with a big, fat "M" that fairly glows...

Compared to a white cisgendered male, my freedom to move about and choose where to live and be employed is severely curtailed.

Yes, Tekla, federal rules might supercede state/local protections with more restrictive laws.  The trade-off may be that places that are now truly toxic to trans may be made tolerable to live/work in -- or even to pass through -- without being in danger of assault where the law enforcement doesn't care and won't step in because they're steeped in the same bigotry and prejudice that engendered the assault in the first place.

As happy as I am that Andrade is going to be eligible for parole 60 years after he dies, I have to see the verdict not as a turning point but an anomaly.  And with our patchwork of protections, there will be yet more trials where the panic defence prevails.

And trans people 'punished' for the bad luck of living or just being in the wrong place.

=K

Karen -- Many thanks for your inciteful May 10 post on this topic.  It has opened up an entirely new aspect of living as a transsexual that I had not considered before. 

While I have been aware of differences between states in how they legally view transsexuals for some time, until I read this post, it never occurred to me that there could be significant differences in legal status between counties within a state. 

This raises a fresh concern in my mind.  I am considering the idea of taking off by Greyhound next spring on an extended trip to visit the cities I'm interested in as relocation targets.  In light of the differences in transsexuals' legal status and general social treatment in different states, your valuable, fresh perspective now has me wondering: is there a way to plan such a trip so it is as safe as humanly possible?

Quote from: LadyArwen on May 17, 2009, 07:55:59 PM
Karen -- Many thanks for your inciteful May 10 post on this topic.  It has opened up an entirely new aspect of living as a transsexual that I had not considered before. 

While I have been aware of differences between states in how they legally view transsexuals for some time, until I read this post, it never occurred to me that there could be significant differences in legal status between counties within a state. 

This raises a fresh concern in my mind.  I am considering the idea of taking off by Greyhound next spring on an extended trip to visit the cities I'm interested in as relocation targets.  In light of the differences in transsexuals' legal status and general social treatment in different states, your valuable, fresh perspective now has me wondering: is there a way to plan such a trip so it is as safe as humanly possible?

i very severely doubt it, sometimes the places yu feel safest end up being the worst place to ever be.

and if a place that is safe for us to travel to please feel free to let the rest of us know!!!