Mass Resistance.org vs. Transgender Society

As I was surfing some trans retailers on the web, I noted a teaser of a news article on a protest held by transgender college students from U.Mass-Amherst and sympathetic community members. I am not one to promote spectacle hoping to shame one over to one's point of view, but where there is no awareness I suppose it is a start. What was interesting though was that the source of the article was a Blogger site dedicated to promoting homophobia and misunderstanding of gender variance--Mass Resistance.Org. So I popped back to read their article. It was vindictive and homophobic as usual and completely devoid of compassion. However, they did photograph much of the literature in addition to photos of offensive transgender persons in various degrees of dress up and undress. However, by opening up these photos, some of which were picked up by news services who were able to write more positive renditions of the protest and spread the word about discrimination against transgender persons. Ironically, a local Amherst Stonewall Center poster about transphobia was broadcast throughout the world. It read:

"What does transphobia look like?
-Assuming that everyone is either male or female.
-Continuing to use inappropriate gender pronouns for someone after being corrected
or calling someone it.
-Continuing to call an individual a name with which they no longer identify.
-Believing that transgender people cannot be "real" women or "real" men, or none of
the above.
-Considering transexuality to be a mental illness or disorder.
-Thinking that cross dressing is a sexual fetish or a perversion.
-Expecting all transgender people to be lesbian, gay or bisexual.
-Believing that transgender people will automatically feel included by adding a "T"
to "LGB"
-Feeling uncomfortable around someone who is androgynous or who challenges
traditional boundaries.
-Expecting all transgender people to be transsexual and want to transition
completely or not at all.
-Believing that women cannot be cross dressers.
-Thinking that people identify as transgender because it's "trendy."
-Assuming that genderqueer individuals are confused or undecided.
-Believing that transgender youths cannot be trusted to make decisions about their
gender identities.
-Thinking that transsexual women are really gay men who are so afraid to admit they
are gay that they would rather consider themselves heterosexual women.
-Believing that someone is using the "wrong" bathroom because they don't appear
gender typical.
-Treating hormone therapies and gender reassignment surgeries as elective medical
procedures.
-Asking someone what their genitals look like.
-Failing to rent an apartment, to give a job or promotion, or to provide a service
to a person because the individual is assumed to be transgender.
-Excluding a transgender person from activities, discussions, or decisions because
that person "doesn't fit in."1

The Mass Resistance Blog, by its opposition done more to disseminate the issues of transgender people than they could have done by supporting it. I recall the Civil Rights struggle when some well meaning but ignorant people, not just Southerners, fomented vicious rhetoric against African Americans in the news, in churches and in the political process. The family life would be threatened by proximity and interbreeding would produce children whose knuckles would drag on the ground. My own parents hid our own mixed heritage from me and my siblings. I am frequently seen as Indoeuropean, Native American, and Latino with perhaps a hint of Africa. DNA testing has revealed I am Celtic on a path that stretched from the Caucasus and picked up a Hebrew on the way. I have experienced the denial of service infrequently, but once is enough to anger anyone. I am proud of my non-European heritages, am proud of my nieces and nephews who are Japanese American, and my nieces whose father hails from Kenya. My grand kids are Russian, Jewish, Puertoricano, Mohawk, Cherokee, and a bit of European. My daughter is married to a Thai-Malay med student.

As a transgender person, the fear of uninvited violence punctuated my low visibility stance. As a veteran, it would have been more likely that the perpetrator would have been the loser in that instance, at least until I embraced life as a Quaker. I noticed that Mass Resistance promotes itself as a bastion of family values, Judeo-Christianity, the Culture of Life and free speech! What I hear of family values sounds like the Puritan ones than ran many subsequent European emigrants off to New York and Rhode Island. Jewish theology is a lot more accepting and affirming of strangers than Mass Resistance seems to be and does, it is not an example of loving one another as Jesus loved us. I consider my transgender and LGBQ friends and associates as much a part of the culture of life as anyone else. None of us are faultless. I believe that the ultimate choice in Free Will is the individuals alone, local mores not withstanding; and, we all have to deal with the consequences of our choices. Free speech is good too, but free speech was intended to be civil, lofty and truthful; the rhetoric I saw was more like the kid who took his football home because the teams did not want him to quarterback. None the less, kudos to Mass Resistance for giving a good example of what it is like to be demeaned for ones identity as well as the coverage of local events for the national media.

Gratefully yours,
Mx.Mystic

1 Sources: University of Massachusetts - Amherst, The Stonewall Center, Student Affairs and Campus Life, www.umass.edu/stonewall.

ENDA Discrimination…for Transgender Persons

This is a good bill. Why did Rep. Frank drop this version that includes transgender persons for a GLB version (H.B. 3685)? Is there a chance that a version of H.R. 2015 should be enacted for the signature of President Barack Obama? I personally have some concerns about the definition identity not being reflective of the complete field. In my opinion, it should include those that accept they have both male and female inclusive identities, those who do not accept gender identification at all, eunuchs, agender identities and those who have injured genitilia and are uncomfortable with any gender identifiers. It should also address police agencies and government identity card producers and give guidelines and training in the dynamics of transgender identity.

Read this and let me know what you think of this law. Does it need more development? Where? How? Email: Mx.Mystic@gmail.com

HR 2015 IH
110th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. R. 2015
To prohibit employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
April 24, 2007
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts (for himself, Ms. PRYCE of Ohio, Ms. BALDWIN, Mr. SHAYS, Mr. CROWLEY, Ms. KILPATRICK, Mrs. CAPPS, Mr. WYNN, Mr. CLAY, Mrs. MALONEY of New York, Mr. ACKERMAN, Mr. HONDA, Mr. PALLONE, Mr. LANGEVIN, Mr. PASTOR, Mr. WAXMAN, Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California, Mr. GONZALEZ, Mr. MEEHAN, Mr. ALLEN, Mr. FARR, Ms. MCCOLLUM of Minnesota, Mr. MCDERMOTT, Mr. EMANUEL, Mr. HINOJOSA, Mr. MORAN of Virginia, Mr. MOORE of Kansas, Mr. ABERCROMBIE, Mr. LEVIN, Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia, Mr. DOYLE, Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California, Mr. CUMMINGS, Mr. LOEBSACK, Mr. DINGELL, Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas, Mr. BERMAN, Mr. WEXLER, Mr. RANGEL, Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas, Mr. SCHIFF, Mr. WU, Mr. VAN HOLLEN, Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN, Mr. CLEAVER, Mr. DOGGETT, Mr. HINCHEY, Ms. HIRONO, Mr. MATHESON, Mr. ANDREWS, Mr. PASCRELL, Mr. HOLT, Mr. HASTINGS of Florida, Mr. FILNER, Mr. MICHAUD, Mr. NADLER, Mr. MCGOVERN, Mr. CAPUANO, Mr. ENGEL, Mr. DELAHUNT, Mr. MARKEY, Mr. OLVER, Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts, Mr. DEFAZIO, Ms. NORTON, Mr. SIRES, Mr. ELLISON, and Mrs. DAVIS of California) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Education and Labor, and in addition to the Committees on House Administration, Oversight and Government Reform, and Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned
A BILL
To prohibit employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2007'.
SEC. 2. PURPOSES.
The purposes of this Act are--
(1) to provide a comprehensive Federal prohibition of employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity;
(2) to provide meaningful and effective remedies for employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity; and
(3) to invoke congressional powers, including the powers to enforce the 14th amendment to the Constitution, and to regulate interstate commerce and provide for the general welfare pursuant to section 8 of article I of the Constitution, in order to prohibit employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.
(a) In General- In this Act:
(1) COMMISSION- The term `Commission' means the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
(2) COVERED ENTITY- The term `covered entity' means an employer, employment agency, labor organization, or joint labor-management committee.
(3) EMPLOYEE-
(A) IN GENERAL- the term `employee' means--
(i) an employee as defined in section 701(f) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000e(f);
(ii) a Presidential appointee or State employee to which section 302(a)(1) of the Government Employee Rights Act of 1991 (42 U.S.C. 2000e-16(a)(1)) applies;
(iii) a covered employee, as defined in section 101 of the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 (section 411(c) of title 3, United States Code; or
(iv) an employee or applicant to which section 717(a) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000e-16) applies.
(B) EXCEPTION- The provisions of this Act that apply to an employee or individual shall not apply to a volunteer who receives no compensation.
(4) EMPLOYER- The term `employer' means--
(A) a person engaged in an industry affecting commerce (as defined in section (701)(h) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000e(h)) who has 15 or more employees (as defined in subparagraphs (A)(i) and (B) of paragraph (3)) for each working day in each of 20 or more calendar weeks in the current or preceding calendar year, and any agent of such a person, but does not include a bona fide private membership club (other than a labor organization) that is exempt from taxation under section 501(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986;
(B) an employing authority to which section 302(a)(1) of the Government Employee Rights Act of 1991 applies;
(C) an employing office, as defined in section 101 of the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 or section 411(c) of title 3, United States Code, or; and
(D) an entity to which section 717(a) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 applies.
(5) EMPLOYMENT AGENCY- The term `employment agency' has the meaning given the term in section 701(c) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000e(c))
(6) GENDER IDENTITY- The term `gender identity' means the gender-related identity, appearance, or mannerisms or other gender-related characteristics of an individual, with or without regard to the individual's designated sex at birth.
(7) LABOR ORGANIZATION- The term `labor organization' has the meaning given the term in section 701(d) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000e(d)).
(8) PERSON- The term `person' has the meaning given the term in section 701(a) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000e(a)).
(9) SEXUAL ORIENTATION- The term `sexual orientation' means homosexuality, heterosexuality, or bisexuality.
(10) STATE- The term `State' has the meaning given the term in section 701(i) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000e(i)).
(b) Application of Definitions- For purposes of this section, a reference in section 701 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964--
(1) to an employee or an employer shall be considered to refer to an employee (as defined in paragraph (3)) or an employer (as defined in paragraph (4)), respectively, except as provided in paragraph (2) below; and
(2) to an employer in subsection (f) of that section shall be considered to refer to an employer (as defined in paragraph (4)(A)).
SEC. 4. EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION PROHIBITED.
(a) Employer Practices- It shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employer--
(1) to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise discriminate against any individual with respect to the compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment of the individual, because of such individual's actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity; or
(2) to limit, segregate, or classify the employees or applicants for employment of the employer in any way that would deprive or tend to deprive any individual of employment or otherwise adversely affect the status of the individual as an employee, because of such individual's actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity.
(b) Employment Agency Practices- It shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employment agency to fail or refuse to refer for employment, or otherwise to discriminate against, any individual because of the actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity of the individual or to classify or refer for employment any individual on the basis of the actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity of the individual.
(c) Labor Organization Practices- It shall be an unlawful employment practice for a labor organization--
(1) to exclude or to expel from its membership, or otherwise to discriminate against, any individual because of the actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity of the individual;
(2) to limit, segregate, or classify its membership or applicants for membership, or to classify or fail or refuse to refer for employment any individual, in any way that would deprive or tend to deprive any individual of employment, or would limit such employment or otherwise adversely affect the status of the individual as an employee or as an applicant for employment because of such individual's actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity; or
(3) to cause or attempt to cause an employer to discriminate against an individual in violation of this section.
(d) Training Programs- It shall be an unlawful employment practice for any employer, labor organization, or joint labor-management committee controlling apprenticeship or other training or retraining, including on-the-job training programs, to discriminate against any individual because of the actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity of the individual in admission to, or employment in, any program established to provide apprenticeship or other training.
(e) Association- An unlawful employment practice described in any of subsections (a) through (d) shall be considered to include an action described in that subsection, taken against an individual based on the actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity of a person with whom the individual associates or has associated.
(f) No Preferential Treatment or Quotas- Nothing in this Act shall be construed or interpreted to require or permit--
(1) any covered entity to grant preferential treatment to any individual or to any group because of the actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity of such individual or group on account of an imbalance which may exist with respect to the total number or percentage of persons of any actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity employed by any employer, referred or classified for employment by any employment agency or labor organization, admitted to membership or classified by any labor organization, or admitted to, or employed in, any apprenticeship or other training program, in comparison with the total number or percentage of persons of such actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity in any community, State, section, or other area, or in the available work force in any community, State, section, or other area; or
(2) the adoption or implementation by a covered entity of a quota on the basis of actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity.
(g) Disparate Impact- Only disparate treatment claims may be brought under this Act.
SEC. 5. RETALIATION PROHIBITED.
It shall be an unlawful employment practice for a covered entity to discriminate against an individual because such individual (1) opposed any practice made an unlawful employment practice by this Act; (2) opposed any practice that the individual reasonably believed is an unlawful employment practice under this Act; or (3) made a charge, testified, assisted, or participated in any manner in an investigation, proceeding, or hearing under this Act.
SEC. 6. EXEMPTION FOR RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATIONS.
(a) In General- This Act shall not apply to any of the employment practices of a religious corporation, association, educational institution, or society which has as its primary purpose religious ritual or worship or the teaching or spreading of religious doctrine or belief.
(b) Certain Employees- For any religious corporation, association, educational institution, or society that is not wholly exempt under subsection (a), this Act shall not apply with respect to the employment of individuals whose primary duties consist of teaching or spreading religious doctrine or belief, religious governance, supervision of a religious order, supervision of persons teaching or spreading religious doctrine or belief, or supervision or participation in religious ritual or worship.
(c) Conformity to Religious Tenets- Under this Act, a religious corporation, association, educational institution, or society may require that applicants for, and employees in, similar positions conform to those religious tenets that such corporation, association, institution, or society declares significant. Under this Act, such a declaration by a religious corporation, association, educational institution or society stating which of its religious tenets are significant shall not be subject to judicial or administrative review. Any such declaration made for purposes of this Act shall be admissible only for proceedings under this Act.
SEC. 7. NONAPPLICATION TO MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES; VETERANS' PREFERENCES.
(a) Armed Forces-
(1) EMPLOYMENT- In this Act, the term `employment' does not apply to the relationship between the United States and members of the Armed Forces.
(2) ARMED FORCES- In paragraph (1) the term `Armed Forces' means the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard.
(b) Veterans' Preferences- This title does not repeal or modify any Federal, State, territorial, or local law creating a special right or preference concerning employment for a veteran.
SEC. 8. CONSTRUCTION.
(a) Employer Rules and Policies-
(1) IN GENERAL- Nothing in this Act shall be construed to prohibit a covered entity from enforcing rules and policies that do not circumvent the purposes of this Act, if the rules or policies are designed for, and uniformly applied to, all individuals regardless of actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity.
(2) SEXUAL HARASSMENT- Nothing in this Act shall be construed to limit a covered entity from taking adverse action against an individual because of a charge of sexual harassment against that individual, provided that rules and policies on sexual harassment, including when adverse action is taken, are designed for, and uniformly applied to, all individuals regardless of actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity.
(3) CERTAIN SHARED FACILITIES- Nothing in this Act shall be construed to establish an unlawful employment practice based on actual or perceived gender identity due to the denial of access to shared shower or dressing facilities in which being seen fully unclothed is unavoidable, provided that the employer provides reasonable access to adequate facilities that are not inconsistent with the employee's gender identity as established with the employer at the time of employment or upon notification to the employer that the employee has undergone or is undergoing gender transition, whichever is later.
(4) DRESS AND GROOMING STANDARDS- Nothing in this Act shall prohibit an employer from requiring an employee, during the employee's hours at work, to adhere to reasonable dress or grooming standards not prohibited by other provisions of Federal, State, or local law, provided that the employer permits any employee who has undergone gender transition prior to the time of employment, and any employee who has notified the employer that the employee has undergone or is undergoing gender transition after the time of employment, to adhere to the same dress or grooming standards for the gender to which the employee has transitioned or is transitioning.
(5) ACTIONS CONDITIONED ON MARRIAGE- Notwithstanding section 4(g), an unlawful employment practice under section 4 shall include an action described in that section that is conditioned, in a State in which a person cannot marry a person of the same sex, either on being married or being eligible to marry.
(b) Employee Benefits- Nothing in this Act shall be construed to require a covered entity to treat a couple who are not married, including a same-sex couple who are not married, in the same manner as the covered entity treats a married couple for purposes of employee benefits. Notwithstanding this Act or any other provision of law, a State or political subdivision of a State may establish rights, remedies, or procedures for the provision of employee benefits to an individual for the benefit of the domestic partner of such individual.
SEC. 9. COLLECTION OF STATISTICS PROHIBITED.
The Commission shall not collect statistics on actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity from covered entities, or compel the collection of such statistics by covered entities.
SEC. 10. ENFORCEMENT.
(a) Enforcement Powers- With respect to the administration and enforcement of this Act in the case of a claim alleged by an individual for a violation of this Act--
(1) the Commission shall have the same powers as the Commission has to administer and enforce--
(A) title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000e et seq.); or
(B) sections 302 and 304 of the Government Employee Rights Act of 1991 (42 U.S.C. 2000e-16b and 2000e-16c), in the case of a claim alleged by such individual for a violation of such title, or of section 302(a)(1) of the Government Employee Rights Act of 1991 (42 U.S.C. 2000e-16b(a)(1)), respectively;
(2) the Librarian of Congress shall have the same powers as the Librarian of Congress has to administer and enforce title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000e et seq.) in the case of a claim alleged by such individual for a violation of such title;
(3) the Board (as defined in section 101 of the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 2 U.S.C. 1301) shall have the same powers as the Board has to administer and enforce the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1301 et seq.) in the case of a claim alleged by such individual for a violation of section 201(a)(1) of such Act (2 U.S.C. 1311(a)(1));
(4) the Attorney General shall have the same powers as the Attorney General has to administer and enforce--
(A) title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000e et seq.); or
(B) sections 302 and 304 of the Government Employee Rights Act of 1991 (42 U.S.C. 2000e-16b and 2000e-16c);
in the case of a claim alleged by such individual for a violation of such title, or of section 302(a)(1) of the Government Employee Rights Act of 1991 (42 U.S.C. 2000e-16b(a)(1)), respectively;
(5) the President, the Commission, and the Merit Systems Protection Board shall have the same powers as the President, the Commission, and the Board, respectively, have to administer and enforce chapter 5 of title 3, United States Code, in the case of a claim alleged by such individual for a violation of section 411 of such title;
(6) a court of the United States shall have the same jurisdiction and powers as the court has to enforce--
(A) title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000e et seq.) in the case of a claim alleged by such individual for a violation of such title;
(B) sections 302 and 304 of the Government Employee Rights Act of 1991 (42 U.S.C. 2000e-16b and 2000e-16c) in the case of a claim alleged by such individual for a violation of section 302(a)(1) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 2000e-16b(a)(1));
(C) the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1301 et seq.) in the case of a claim alleged by such individual for a violation of section 201(a)(1) of such Act (2 U.S.C. 1311(a)(1)); and
(D) chapter 5 of title 3, United States Code, in the case of a claim alleged by such individual for a violation of section 411 of such title.
(b) Procedures and Remedies- The procedures and remedies applicable to a claim alleged by an individual for a violation of this Act are--
(1) the procedures and remedies applicable for a violation of title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000e et seq.) in the case of a claim alleged by such individual for a violation of such title;
(2) the procedures and remedies applicable for a violation of section 302(a)(1) of the Government Employee Rights Act of 1991 (2 U.S.C. 1202(a)(1)) in the case of a claim alleged by such individual for a violation of such section;
(3) the procedures and remedies applicable for a violation of section 201(a)(1) of the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1311(a)(1)) in the case of a claim alleged by such individual for a violation of such section; and
(4) the procedures and remedies applicable for a violation of section 411 of title 3, United States Code, in the case of a claim alleged by such individual for a violation of such section.
(c) Other Applicable Provisions- With respect to a claim alleged by a covered employee (as defined in section 101 of the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1301)) for a violation of this Act, title III of the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1381 et seq.) shall apply in the same manner as such title applies with respect to a claim alleged by such a covered employee for a violation of section 201(a)(1) of such 2 U.S.C. 1311(a)(1)).
SEC. 11. STATE AND FEDERAL IMMUNITY.
(a) State Immunity- A State shall not be immune under the 11th amendment to the Constitution from a suit described in subsection (b) and brought in a Federal court of competent jurisdiction for a violation of this Act.
(b) Remedies for State Employees-
(1) IN GENERAL-
(A) WAIVER- A State's receipt or use of Federal financial assistance for any program or activity of a State shall constitute a waiver of sovereign immunity, under the 11th amendment to the Constitution or otherwise, to a suit brought by an employee or applicant for employment of that program or activity under this Act for a remedy authorized under subsection (c).
(B) DEFINITION- In this paragraph, the term `program or activity' has the meaning given the term in section 606 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000d-4a).
(2) OFFICIALS- An official of a State may be sued in the official capacity of the official by any employee or applicant for employment who has complied with the applicable procedures of section 10, for equitable relief that is authorized under this Act. In such a suit the court may award to the prevailing party those costs authorized by section 722 of the Revised Statutes of the United States (42 U.S.C. 1988).
(3) EFFECTIVE DATE- With respect to a particular program or activity, paragraphs (1) and (2) apply to conduct occurring on or after the day, after the date of enactment of this Act, on which a State first receives or uses Federal financial assistance for that program or activity.
(c) Remedies Against the United States and the States- Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, in an action or administrative proceeding against the United States or a State for a violation of this Act, remedies (including remedies at law and in equity, and interest) are available for the violation to the same extent as the remedies are available for a violation of title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000e et seq.) by a private entity, except that--
(1) punitive damages are not available; and
(2) compensatory damages are available to the extent specified in section 1977A(b) of the Revised Statutes (42 U.S.C. 1981a(b)).
SEC. 12. ATTORNEYS' FEES.
Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, in an action or administrative proceeding for a violation of this Act, an entity described in section 10(a) (other than paragraph (4) of such section), in the discretion of the entity, may allow the prevailing party, other than the Commission or the United States, a reasonable attorney's fee (including expert fees) as part of the costs. The Commission and the United States shall be liable for the costs to the same extent as a private person.
SEC. 13. POSTING NOTICES.
A covered entity who is required to post notices described in section 711 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000e-10) shall post notices for employees, applicants for employment, and members, to whom the provisions specified in section 10(b) apply, that describe the applicable provisions of this Act in the manner prescribed by, and subject to the penalty provided under, section 711 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
SEC. 14. REGULATIONS.
(a) In General- Except as provided in subsections (b), (c), and (d), the Commission shall have authority to issue regulations to carry out this Act.
(b) Librarian of Congress- The Librarian of Congress shall have authority to issue regulations to carry out this Act with respect to employees and applicants for employment of the Library of Congress.
(c) Board- The Board referred to in section 10(a)(3) shall have authority to issue regulations to carry out this Act, in accordance with section 304 of the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1384), with respect to covered employees, as defined in section 101 of such Act (2 U.S.C. 1301).
(d) President- The President shall have authority to issue regulations to carry out this Act with respect to covered employees, as defined in section 411(c) of title 3, United States Code.
SEC. 15. RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER LAWS.
This Act shall not invalidate or limit the rights, remedies, or procedures available to an individual claiming discrimination prohibited under any other Federal law or regulation or any law or regulation of a State or political subdivision of a State.
SEC. 16. SEVERABILITY.
If any provision of this Act, or the application of the provision to any person or circumstance, is held to be invalid, the remainder of this Act and the application of the provision to any other person or circumstances shall not be affected by the invalidity.
SEC. 17. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This Act shall take effect 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act and shall not apply to conduct occurring before the effective date.

2008 Transforming Faith Conference -- Divining Gender

HEY, YOU GUYS!!!

“Hey, you guys!” This phrase was in use generally by all my peers in California where I grew up and attended private schools. It was the lead in to the Electric Company, a PBS vocabulary-building program for elementary school children. However, when I graduated from the University of Oklahoma and entered the governmental work force, it quickly became plain that the phrase was not to be used to refer to adult “men” in Oklahoma, Texas, Arkansas or Missouri. I was told that “guy” was a “swishy” California term only used among gays and lesbians (I did not beg to differ under the circumstances). This was at a time before B[i] or T[ii] was even an afterthought in wider society. A GLBTQQIPPAA[iii] community was unimaginable except in behavioral scholastics and medicine. Opening up the Internet did more to build the gender-fluid and sexual preference communities than all the books and studies that have been sitting in the stacks at medical schools and facilities ever could. From this “alphabet soup” ideal community there is also a pervasive and other community—the community of faith. The examination of this many faceted faith community was the theme for the Community of Welcoming Congregations, the Center for Lesbian & Gay Studies in Religion and Ministry and the Religion and Faith Program of the Human Rights sponsored conference “Transforming Faith: Divining Gender,” the second such gathering since November of 2006.

Taking place at the Portland Unitarian Church, Portland, Oregon, USA, April 3-6, 2008, the attendees were devout, faithful, well served, well spoken and well fed. The 2006 Conference had an attendance in the hundreds, where, from my head count, the number this year was more in the forties. It made the worship and workshops more intimate and focused than the crowded ones of the previous Conference. In addition, the date was a toss up because many of the supporting faith groups had annual gatherings of their own on the same weekend. From my own tradition, the Northwest Quaker Women’s Conference was on the same weekend. The Energizing Small Churches Institute had a workshop all day on the fifth in Turner at the Oregon Christian Convention Conference Center and the Adventists had several gatherings elsewhere this weekend.

The conference was attended largely by transgender persons of various descriptions, all of whom were rather subdued in their rhetorical responses; most of these, like myself, were older adults. The youngest was a trans-boy of six. There were also many allies of these individuals who may have been struggling with faith issues in regard to their friend or loved one.

When one of the workshop facilitators at the workshop I had gone to attend had an emergency and was called away, I went and checked out the documentaries being screened. They all were recent and dealt with the positive experiences of religious transgender people. One, Red Without Blue managed to keep me in stitches as well as impart information of a more serious nature. The most impressive of the films I viewed was For the Bible Tells Me So. It asked the question, “Is the Bible an excuse to hate?” The commentators on the discussion of gay and lesbian issues that stem from a small minority of verses in the Bible were significant individuals: Richard Gephart, and Episcopal Bishop Gene Robinson, Anglican Bishop Desmond Tutu, Peter Gomes, Orthodox Rabbi Steve Greenberg and Reverend Jimmy Creech. Although I did not see them, two highly recommended documentaries are I Exist and The Believers; both award winning films.

I attended three workshops: “How to be an Ally to Sexual and Gender Minority Youth,” facilitated by Raina Daniels and Rej Joo of the Sexual Minority Youth Resource Center; “Divided We Fall: Understanding How Multiple Oppressions Impact Our Lives & Work,” presented by Alisa Simmons; and “Unearthing Transgressive Taboos and Transformative Texts in Scripture,” presented by Rev. Allyson Robinson and dramatist Peterson Toscano. It was interesting how these three workshops wove a tapestry of understanding through words. Words that hurt and words that help. Some words give scriptural evidence of gender minorities in a positive context. Also, we discussed how words that may attack one cast a shadow on us all. Having an operational vocabulary of words that frankly spell out the various facets of the gender diamond (either, or, both, some, all and none) and how they do or do not relate to the sexual preference garnet (either, or, both, some, all and none) is important for religious leaders to know. When we factor in individuality, we have a majority that think a diamond is an impenetrable film that stretches to infinity and is infinitely thin, two dimensional and without value. Some are cut in pyramids, cubes, dodecahedrons, are classic, or marquis, or are so impossibly multifaceted that they are round like marbles and never bond except to diamond lenses. Some are totally uncut.

The Plenary speakers were Dr. Virginia Ramey Mollenkott, a retired ivy-league professor who has written quite extensively on gender identity and sexual preference in a practical and theological context; Faisal Alam, founder and director of Al-Fatiha, a US based organization dedicated to supporting and empowering GLBTIQ[iv] Muslims; and, Jenn Burleton, a founder of Trans Youth Family Advocates. Their topics (in the same order) were: “Seven Major Reasons Why Religious Congregations Should Embrace Their Transgender Members,” “Hidden Voices: The Lives of LGBT Muslims,” and “Faith In Our Trans Children & Youth.”

Dr. Mollenkott’s seven major reasons are pending publication; however brief, the following queries reflect these reasons. Why would any faith tradition that embraces the love and mercy of God not likewise embrace the gender variant, especially since the New Testament has many examples of persons that broke gender norms and yet were integral to Jesus ministry? How can we learn to transcend gender stereotypes when we refuse to recognize or affirm those who are variant in their gender expression? Since we are told that there are neither male nor female in heaven (Mat 22:30) do not transgender persons remind us of the divine? Throughout time many cultures have recognized transgender people as sensitive and able to make connections between the seen and unseen worlds; what has changed? Similarly, can we accept the connections transgender persons make between people and groups of people (As did Hegai in Esther, Chapter 2)? Are too many Christians addicted to certainty? Because of the existence of transgender people, can we conclude that there is a gender continuum?

Faisel also provided poignant and insightful information and anecdotal narratives that put to rest many “urban legends” about Islam and the phenomena of transgender. I was surprised that the Ayatolla Khomeni was the first Shiite Muslim leader to issue a religious proclamation that protected people transitioning from one gender to another. If you think you are in the wrong body, we will get you the right one and you can continue from there, seemed to be the sentiment. Of course, for millenniums gender free persons held respectable positions in middle eastern cultures—enunchs, intergender, castrata, and people that chose celibacy as a life style. Many were without the ability to produce testosterone and their effeminate appearance often lent itself to feminine expression. Imams never gave them a second thought; they were, so what? In Islam, every person represents one of the names of Allah (Arabic for God).

Perhaps, the most extraordinary moment came during the address of Jenn Burleton when we were introduced to a vivacious six year old trans boy (nee female). His mother shared her story of grief leading to acceptance of her child who insisted upon being a boy nearly as soon as he learned to talk. Although it will be many years before more permanent changes can take place, the little fellow will enjoy the life of boyhood. His brother and sisters, one older, demonstrated their adjustment to the idea of Bubba’s (pseudonym) gender identity. Jenn spoke on the enemy of faith, not doubt, certainty. If we could be certain of God’s will there would be little need for faith. She also spoke animatedly about pelvic orthodoxy and the human karyotype[v] which obviously has not interpreted scripture literally. Does it not matter that the Bible uses transgender insights? If not, why not?

Each night ended with insightful programming that helped break any tensions that might have built up. UnCcommon Women gave us an “exciting and diverse musical experience” as described in the program on Thursday evening. Friday, we were entertained and taken on a faith journey visiting transgender expressions found in the Bible: Hegai, Joseph and Jacob, the man carrying a pitcher, Jael and the Judge Deborah to mention a few, with Peterson Toscano – a highly talented one man production company. Saturday was movie night where two of the films I spoke of earlier were screened.

Our Worship ranged from the Christian/Pagan, the Muslim, the Jewish and the Catholic traditions. Our prayers before meals were amply answered by our ultimate other, because the food was eclectic, tasty, nutritious, well prepared, with a fine bouquet and appearance. The fellowship and representation of various transgender expressions gave much weight to the ideals discussed and ideas proposed. The Conference was set against a backdrop of photo essays on transgender heroes in the Pioneering Voices Photo Exhibit and the colorful and poignant Shower of Stoles Project Exhibit featuring a plethora of textile art. I hope Transforming Faith becomes a more regular part of conference offerings in the Willamette Valley in the future. Seventeen months is too long to wait for the next one – “Hats off” to the sponsors and the leadership of Rev. Tara Wilkins, UCC.
____________________
[i] Bi-sexual
[ii] Trans: an amalgamation of “Transsexual” and “Transgender” the former seen as a subset of the latter.
[iii] Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Trans (includes T-gender and T-sexual), Queers, Queens, Intersex, Pansexual, Polyamorous, Asexual, and Allies
[iv] In LGBTIQ the “Q” stands for questioning.
[v] A characteristic chromosome complement, as in pairs, of a species of organism whose cells are organized into complex structures covered with membranes. In humans the most common gender karyotypes are XX or XY; the Y being short of a lot of genetic material found in the X chromosome. Less common are XXX, XXY, or XYY. Even less common are haploid individuals who only have 23 chromosomes instead of 23 pairs. There are other karyotypes in evidence although they are extremely rare. Likewise, the Human Genome Project found not all gender determinant genes reside in the X or Y chromosome..

About Transgender—Book Review

As Nature Made Him: The Boy Who Was Raised as a Girl; John Colpitano; Harper Collins Publishers(©2000)-ISBN 0-06-019211-9

I suppose that one’s prurient interest might draw one to read John Colpitano’s As Nature Made Him: The Boy Who Was Raised as a Girl, however, this is not a book that lends itself to that sort of thing. The title brings to mind shades of Christine Jorgenson but this is not about elective gender reassignment surgery, it is about gender, manipulation on a grand scale, secrets, imposition and the presumption that nurture trumps nature. It is about Bruce Reimer, a Canadian child of a working class family, who at the age of eight months is circumcised badly. His penis is destroyed. He is an identical twin. Since it is easier to remove body parts than it was to build them anew in 1966, Bruce’s parents, at the urging of the pop medical community, assent to gender reassignment for their baby. They raise Bruce as a girl--Brenda. They become caught in the middle of a decades old debate of nature being a mutable factor in personality development--if you raise a child as a female, it will be a female.

At the center of this controversy are two figures: Dr. John Money and Dr. Mickey Diamond. Money makes John’s Hopkins Hospital the vanguard of sexual reassignment surgery in America from 1965 to 1985. It is said that he coined the term “gender identity.” The presentation of Money’s career show him to be a consummate manipulator, arrogant and more interested in playing with sex and gender, at least on an academic level, than exercising due diligence on his experimentations. In this sense, Money was psychology’s poster boy for the Sexual Revolution of the 1960’s and 70’s. It is also the story of Money’s nemesis—Dr. Mickey Diamond who found fault with Money’s theories as early as 1959 with studies conducted by Dr. Harry Benjamin, the father of American surgical gender reassignment, who stated he “could find no evidence that childhood conditioning” was involved in the conviction of transsexuals that they were living with the wrong sex.

Throughout this poignant story, we see two twins affected by the attentions paid to the angry tomboy sister and the development of emotional distance by the mild mannered brother. It is a story of well meaning parents keeping a vital secret from their children and presuming that the doctor is always right. It is a true-life story, Colapinto does a great job of digging out the research and presenting the medical/psychiatric climate that drives it. It is a good read and a great science project, a must read for parents.

Mitt Romney and Gender

During his recent address and questions at Kirkwood Community College at Cedar Rapids, Iowa, he reiterated his desire to have a constitutional amendment defining marriage to that union "between one man and one woman." I would follow that statement with another question, how do you define the the legal concepts of man and woman? Would he institute a nearly Catholic sense that men and women must be viable for reproduction? Will this eliminate late life marriages and marriages between persons with some form of sterility in one of the parties? How will post operative males and females be affected, does Mitt expect these people to go through life with no intimate relationships? Since, Mitt connects his desire for a constitutional amendment to the strengthening of the traditional nuclear family, so that children will see a model of such a family, does this mean a constitutional amendment preventing single persons and same sex couples from raising their own children or adopted children is next? What kind of Pandora's box would such an amendment open? The German Nazi's had fixed ideas about how people should be without any regard for how people are. It seems that at issue is the forcing of a pluralistic society to live in a mode dictated by Christian fundementalism.

In many ways, Mitt has impressed me; however, he, as do many right to life proponents, seems to support life for life's sake without any consideration for the quality of that life. There should be no person that believes in right to life that has not adopted an American born child who has been abandoned by circumstance. There should be no poor pregnant teen who is without prenatal care, unconditional love and support making a decision to either keep or adopt out their newborn. Would the thinking of the preservation of the nuclear family require marriage for such a girl to keep a child?

Mitt, where is this going? Have you thought much about the impact of your ideals regarding family, life, or marriage limitations? It seems odd that a church that still struggles with polygamy issues in the Southwest, would want to deny marriage to millions of Muslims and tribally oriented folks of Africa, Asia and elsewhere. 200 years ago, my ancestor in the Louisiana purchase had three wives. Perhaps such folks could be allowed a civil union, like GLBT folks desire, to keep their nuclear family intact. Following Mitt's line of thinking maybe we need an amendment that defines who constitutes a family, too.

Movie Review -- Transgeneration: the Series - The Tip of the Iceburg

“Trans Generation”

I do not watch much broadcast television and my cable selections are purposefully limited, so I do not get the Sundance Channel. However, my Netflix account allows me to get DVD encapsulations of many series that I have never heard of but upon seeing them, have enjoyed. Transgeneration (TG) is one of those Sundance Channel syndicated documentaries that has so much truth to tell us about real people and complicated relationships.

T.J., Lucas, Raci and Gabbie each have unique perspectives; the discussion of which are usually avoided in politically conservative circles. They all struggle with the process, both conscious and physical, of transitioning from one gender to another. They want to be the person that they feel that they are. The tomboys who see themselves now as men and the driven “sissies” who now seek to have the bodies of women and recognition as a woman, without the possibility of having biological children from their own gene pool in a simple manner. People have such goings on in their lives. One of the things that comes up in polite conversation about trans gendered people is how genuine a loving relationship can be as a transgender person? As demonstrated by the relationship between T.J., a female to male transsexual, and his girlfriend, the dynamic is no different; individuals share who they are and their intimate journeys to where they are with compassion, affirmation, concern and love.

At one time, I had two parishioners who dated with the opposite gender but never developed long relationships. They were known in the GLBT community but were closeted tightly because they did not want their extended birth family or their church community to know they were gay and lesbian. Their public lives were carefully conceived shows for their extended families. They could not share their journey with their family, their pastor or their partners. These folks were well into middle age and still riddled with childhood fear of disappointing the parents and being on the receiving end of disapproval. As a non-transsexual transgendered person, who has had three honest and two successful relationships with the opposite gender, I, too, had those same feelings about disapproval. My late mother and her mother, in whom I confided my transgender dilemma, continued to care about me and treat me with dignity and respect as a person, however they died over a decade ago. Likewise, my sister and I are close; as are many of my close friends, the members of the religious congregation I belong to, on line and my spouse. Lucas, Raci, and Gabbie, on TG, all have good relations with their parents. T.J., whose parents are Armenians living in Cyprus, is experiencing some distancing from his parents. Though T.J.’s situation seems to reflect the response of parents imagined by transgender persons prior to disclosing, literature reflects that the reality is more even.

It is one thing to feel like a man and make a transition to manhood. That works regardless of sexual preference. The same for feeling like a woman and making that transition. Homophobia seems to grip fundamentalists of most religions; this is when an individual’s homosexuality is open and apparent. Like the male and female mutually exclusive dichotomy, gay and lesbian circles are mutually exclusive. It is a concept most people can wrap their heads around. Yet, the catch word for both is “exclusive.” The lack of dialogue arises in the grouping of sexual and gender inclusiveness. The general population of most of the world has no clue, even leaders of industry and religion. They cannot seem to conceive that people have relationships both sexual and gender-wise; yet, all of these inclusive folks are lumped into a mistaken understanding of homosexuality. Gender identity is not sexual, it is how we express ourselves without standing on a monolithic dichotomy.

Transexuals dearly desire to be physically a gender into which they are not born. Medicine can only accommodate an incomplete transition. Medicine falls short of some future gene therapy where gender could be changed at a cellular level. Yet, even here, sexual preference is not guaranteed. Transitioned women often want the full experience of womanhood including an intimate relationship with a biological man. This is where the social taboos on homosexuality get hazy. Then there are those who despise men, a concept which figured greatly into the decision to transition and prefer only a close relationship with another woman, transitioned or biological. Again, the appearance of a same gender relationship is on shaky ground. Conversely, the same logic can be safely applied to female to male transitioners.

Bisexuals are a complete different world and have different motivating factors ranging from hedonism to neediness to conquest to deep seated feelings that two genders exist in the individual in varying degrees. Since such individuals are not exclusive, they really do not belong in the category of homosexuality, some of their acts may be but exclusivity is non existent here. However, bisexuality should not be confused with those who express themselves as inter-gender or “Omnigender”[1] persons. This inter-gender group is also often connected to those who are asexual and see themselves without gender, “eunuchs” as it were, though the two groups are as different as night and day. The former can be very inclusive but the latter is monolithically exclusive and self-sustaining.

Gender fluidity is well explained in the following: “..Sex, gender, and sexuality represent analytically distinct categories, that the sex of the body does not determine either gender or sexual identity, that doctors can alter characteristics of bodily sex. Some disputed binary definitions of biological sex by adopting a newer version of the early twentieth-century concept of a spectrum of sexes, a vision of multiple sexes "from very male to very female, with countless variations in be­tween." Others focused on gender identities, not rigid identities, but "identities in progress . . . distinct from the material body." Some saw in transsexuals an evolving core sense of self and others a postmodern "fluidity ... a limitless number of genders, for any length of time, at any rate of change." Many combined the feminists' critique of the constraints of rigid gender dichotomies and the gay liberationists' goal of freedom of expression, and rendered healthy the variations that doctors had routinely cast as illness and disorder. "Transgender and transsexual," Jason Cromwell wrote, "are genders that exist outside the binary of two."[2]

With this in mind, in episode seven, Raci and her friend Apple go on a transgender bike-a-thon in Malibu. As they gather in groups to discuss the issue of sexual reassignment surgery (SRS), Apple tells of a transsexual friend who had completed SRS twenty years before. “I asked her if I should get the surgery and she said ‘If you are happy that way, stay that way’” It is so simple, being who you are without altering ones biology on the belief that your problems would be solved by SRS. There is much more to life than “passing” one way or another.

We, who are happy with who we are as we are, need to be more outspoken and less furtive in trying to appear at one extreme or the other of the gender spectrum. It has been sixty years since Kinsey first statistically demonstrated this spectrum, we have come a long way in medicine since then but as a larger society very few have accepted the concept of fluid gender. Even those of us who are out as fluid in our gender identity have done little to accept it in themselves, much less move toward social action in this area. Virginia Mollencott makes a good case for accepting the fluidity in ourselves and how it would minimize any rush to gender reassignment ant its connected expenses.

Transgeneration is an excellent introduction to the reality of life for young transgender individuals, though the desire for support and community is a driving force in all but Gabbie who seemed self-absorbed and single-minded in her approach to SRS. T.J., Lucas, and Raci seemed to be more open to being treated as the gender identity they presented though SRS did not seem to be their focus. I have yet to see a documentary about transgender individuals who are not locked into acceptance as a male or female. The subject has been a demeaning source of comedy in the Hollywood driven media. The need for community of like minded individuals is what drives us to seek out mates, friendships, spiritual community and camaraderie with strangers we might encounter in the dining car on a rail trip. We need each other more than one might think and we need to be included in our wider community. The greatest challenge is not gaining the acceptance of others but accepting ourselves as we are any given moment of the day. Some of us still have a long way to go. Being healthy in mind requires one to be true to oneself, regardless of the opinions of others or the monoliths that stand in the way.


[1] Mollenkott, Virginia; Omnigender; Pilgrim Press, 2002
[2] Meyerowitz, Joanne, How Sex Changed:A History of Transsexuality in the United States, Harvard University Press (2002) pg. 284

GENDER: The Isolated Non-Game Player

Honestly, when the shoe does not fit, do not wear it. From the time I was aware I was a person, a person with ideas, dreams and aspirations, not quite three years of age, I knew I did not fit in to the roles into which parents and society were trying to force me. I was born into fairly good circumstances, despite a lifelong growing dislike my father had for me since I was two.

Most of my early friends were girls. I really did not know there was a difference until I was in preschool. Where I lived nearly every child wore overalls in the winter and swim shorts in the summer except on Sunday. My first haircut was really traumatic. I learned quickly that I did not like anything about my male associates that smacked of the testosterone behavior they were learning for their dads. My own father was very intense in the few times we had together and I do not think he ever really bonded to me nor I to him.

I was about nine when I began cross-dressing, subsequent to my mother's attempted suicide . My mom and I were the same size. With Dad working and Mom in treatment, I had a lot of time alone with her wardrobe. By age 12, I resembled a youngish John Carridine, though in my heart I felt like the Bobsey Twins. I was seventy two inches tall and was shy of 200 pounds. I was still harboring anger toward schoolmates who preyed on my good nature as if it was some sort of weakness to be exploited by the strong. This while attending parochial school and being told to stand in defense of the weak and less fortunate. The odd thing was that I was bigger than nearly everyone else, including teachers, and still, as Chief Bromden said in Dale Wasserman's play, One Flew over the Cuckoo's Nest, I was little inside.

In self defense, I became a loner, and until I began acting on stage at age 15, I had no close friends. I had an undiagnosed learning disability that kept me from ever getting the whole picture during a lecture unless I wrote down every word and re-read it later. I was always trying to gain approval by playing football, working on the school newspaper and yearbook, but acting finally kicked in a sense of self-esteem heretofore lacking except in the presence of my maternal grandparents.

Girls seemed to take interest in me in my Senior year, but my interest was beyond the sexual attraction. Often rebuffed for being too intense or too philosophically intimate, I made a lot of bad decisions looking for Ms. Right. For a long time, between my second and third marriage, I would take every opportunity to socialize enfemme publicly, in addition to doing an occasional female impersonation on stage. Though outed at work as a transvestite, I just took it and kept my mouth shut. I also met a few others like me though less mature in their relationship building.

During this time I became a Quaker, kicking my position in the Army Reserve, where I was respected and sought after for my abilities training soldiers and drill instructors. I never shared my vulnerability with Uncle Sam because I did not like men for the most part. I was a refuge resource for several lesbians who read me like a book and were quite decent toward me. I could not embrace a spirituality that excluded caring seekers of God. God loves us regardless of race, color , creed, national origin, gender, gender identity, sexual preference, or economic circumstance, how could I do any less?

All of this came together in Seminary at age 53. I took on an interim pastoral assignment at a church that had room solely for "regular folks." There were two adult children in this family church that were deeply closeted. Though I preached the Gospel, I would back pedal on issues of spiritual justice that I felt strongly about supporting. I was becoming hypocritical in my own mind. My next position was a field assignment as an associate pastor who often shared some of the same thoughts I subscribed to, and that went well. I was barely into my first full time position as a pastor, when disability struck and I was led to quit.

The one thing I have noticed having male and female friends that vacillate between gender identities almost like someone with a multiple personality disorder, is that they are limited in their development of relationships where they are truly appreciated. It is hard to commit to a relationship where there are few signs of honesty and demonstrated trust. I have read many stories of transexuals who have identified themselves as lesbian because, like me, they do not feel men can have deep meaningful relationships, full of affection and affirmation, particularly where birth gender is different from the gender presentation. Judging from the divorce rate among American Christians and hate crimes against gender deviates, perhaps they are right.

I have had several agender advocates as friends and associates, and they, too, are isolated and lonely. I have come finally, after three score years, to a gender identity as a blended person. My friends are comfortable with this idea, my spiritual guides are comfortable, my spouse is comfortable and this is good.

In the future, I want to share further some of my studies on the subject of Gender Identity.

If you want to know more about this subject try reading Virginia Mollenkott's Omnigender, by Pilgrim Press.