ENDA

I've only been mildly following the ENDA (Employment Non-Discrimination Act) proceedings. The bill, in some form or another, has been around since the 70's, but not officially called ENDA until the mid-90's. Basically, it is a federal bill that would provide protection to people based on their sexual orientation. This year, they finally added gender identity to the bill. Unfortunately, with Republicans controlling a large portion of our government during the 2000's, this bill has stalled out. (Luckily, many states, mainly blue states, of course, have moved forward with their own protections over the past several years.) Now that Democrats control a bit more in the House and Senate, this bill is approaching a point where it will pass....IF, it doesn't include the transgender portion.

This is where the support starts to divide. Many LGBT groups have stood by their transgender allies and said they want both sexual orientation and gender identity on the bill, or they won't support it. I'm all for that. There are also groups that say "let's get the bill passed without the gender identity on there so that we have the basic protection in place on a federal level." Many in the transgender world feel this second approach is a slap in the face. Perhaps they are right.

I understand where they are coming from, but I'm also looking at the grander scheme of things. If a bill were passed giving federal protection for everyone based on their sexual orientation, it would be a huge step for the United States. A lot of LGBT organizations exist in blue states or larger cities, but if anyone has looked at the map lately, there is a large portion of the US that is red...not blue or purple, but red. Also, many states first passed their laws associated with sexual orientation before moving on to cover gender identity.

A lot of people may think that because we're being excluded, that we are "less worthy than gay people...considered second class citizens...and that we don't deserve protections." The truth of the matter is, not many people really understand or are aware of us...or the issues we deal with. There are many people and organizations out there, though, that are trying to make a difference. They will, with time, be able to add gender identity to the federal bill. And to be honest, it's quite easy to find protection for transgender people under the LGB banner. Perception. That's all it takes. If someone perceives you to be gay or lesbian, you have that protection. It doesn't matter if you are or not, but if you were discriminated against based on that perception, there is the potential that you can be protected.

Anyway, what I am trying to say here is...removing the transgender clause from ENDA may be the best option for the long run. I am probably a minority voice in the transgender world and I'll probably take criticism for it, but I think it's the best current option. Yes, I realize it may have been a big bargaining chip that the Democrats used in getting this passed, but, if you look at the benefits for the whole LGBT world, it may be worth it. If we step aside for the short-term, hopefully the transgender option can be added down the road once ENDA is implemented. (Unfortunately, with Bush still in the White House, the bill is likely to be vetoed no matter which version makes it though.)

Sometimes you have to take a step back in order to take two steps forward.