Why an Non-Inclusive ENDA is Worthless
Rep. Barney Frank and the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) led the misguided effort to pass a non-inclusive ENDA (Employment Non-Discrimination Act) in the House of Representatives saying that it was better to get something than nothing. What they got was nothing.
A non-inclusive ENDA (a bill that does not include “gender identity and gender expression” in the protected categories) A.) will have a rough time in the Senate, B.) never be signed into law by this president, and most significantly C.) offer no protection for gay and lesbian persons. Any smart employer would simply say to a gay or lesbian worker, “I’m not firing you for being gay [or lesbian], but because your mannerisms and clothing are too femme [or butch]. Your gender identity and expression do not fit our company standards.” The House version of ENDA is worthless.
So let’s be honest about what this was all about. It was about Benedict Barney and HRC feeling that it was more important for them to get credit for passing something than to pass something that really matters. Their faux glory was accomplished by throwing transgender people out the window. They tried to say they would come back for us later but would Rosa Parks have accepted the actions of civil rights leaders who might have said, “We’ll get equal rights for men first and then come back for you.”?
I’m with Rosa.
Rep. Barney Frank and the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) led the misguided effort to pass a non-inclusive ENDA (Employment Non-Discrimination Act) in the House of Representatives saying that it was better to get something than nothing. What they got was nothing.
A non-inclusive ENDA (a bill that does not include “gender identity and gender expression” in the protected categories) A.) will have a rough time in the Senate, B.) never be signed into law by this president, and most significantly C.) offer no protection for gay and lesbian persons. Any smart employer would simply say to a gay or lesbian worker, “I’m not firing you for being gay [or lesbian], but because your mannerisms and clothing are too femme [or butch]. Your gender identity and expression do not fit our company standards.” The House version of ENDA is worthless.
So let’s be honest about what this was all about. It was about Benedict Barney and HRC feeling that it was more important for them to get credit for passing something than to pass something that really matters. Their faux glory was accomplished by throwing transgender people out the window. They tried to say they would come back for us later but would Rosa Parks have accepted the actions of civil rights leaders who might have said, “We’ll get equal rights for men first and then come back for you.”?
I’m with Rosa.
3 comments:
Barney Frank's logic is skewered. a lousy bill is lousy no matter what. People who being harassed, villified, and killed certainly aren't going to wait for more disaster to happen. There's comimg a day when transgender people aren't going to take anymore. the politicians who marginalize and screw them over will rue the day.
Genevieve
i would love to see gender identity added but unfortunately civil rights does not come in one bundle. we gotta take whatever we can get. if we can only get protection for bisexuals and not LGT why should we wait on one form of protection? we gotta take it in strides.
http://www.queersunited.blogspot.com
I am with you Julie. what they did sent a horrible signal to everyone, that we were expendable.
It was great meeting you at SCC. Good luck to you and your family. If you ever get to Nashville let me know. :-)
Hugs,
Vickie
Post a Comment