In 2002, a large gay rights organization was hosting a luncheon that featured a transgender speaker. During the Q&A, there was discussion on the merits of adding "gender identity" to the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) - which, if passed, would protect people from being fired because of their sexual orientation.
In the middle of a serious debate, a new staffer, who was just hired from the bluest city in a blue state, earnestly rose to his feet. He proclaimed that he "couldn't comprehend" anti-trans attitudes and was dumbfounded that average people still held deep-seated prejudices against such non-conforming individuals.
"Why was this out-of-touch person hired for a GLBT movement job?" I thought to myself, upon hearing his assertion. It was one thing to believe that transgender Americans deserve equality - which I do - and quite another to be "perplexed" that some conservatives are still freaked out by transgender (and, yes, gay) people.
If we are really interested in change, employees of GLBT groups should be as comfortable in the Waffle House as they are in the U.S. House of Representatives. If you can't speak the language of the American people, then you aren't much help to the cause.
Workers at our major GLBT organizations should be encouraged to get out of their sterile cubicles and visit places where discrimination is still a daily part of life. It is easy to lose touch with the very people we are trying to persuade, and get a false sense of security when living inside an insular world.
Read more:
As someone who works and advocates outside of the bubble that Wayne refers to, I must say that I am glad he recognizes the battle we wage out here. It is important that we be able to answer those questions and to be comfortable existing in those environments which may be hostile. That is where the change is taking place. Talking and working with the choir may be fun but it isn't creating the change we need. Thanks, Wayne for recognizing where the front lines are and those of us who are fighting on them. (O.M.)
Deb Price: Legal unions still have shortfalls for gays
The couple's move from New Jersey to Idaho was to help Robert Ryan break free of the dark depression he'd sunk into after narrowly escaping the collapse of the World Trade Center tower where he'd worked until the Sept. 11 terror attacks.
Ryan was on the health insurance of his partner, Ralph Martinelli, a district sales manager for Konica Minolta Business Solutions. They'd fallen in love in 2004 and entered into a domestic partnership in Mount Laurel, N.J., the next year.
But after they moved, a letter from Martinelli's employer informed them last October that Ryan had been bounced off the company's health plan because "Idaho does not provide for Domestic Partner registration, nor are domestic partnerships recognized under Idaho law."
The couple was stunned.
"We are the same people. Ralph is the same really good employee. It just made no sense," Ryan says.
Ryan bought COBRA temporary coverage, making his monthly premium jump from about $100 to $630. Because his prescription drugs to treat his post-traumatic stress syndrome cost far more than he could afford without insurance -- about $3,500 a month -- he's worried he could fall back into an emotional tailspin when COBRA ends.
Company officials declined my repeated interview requests. The American Civil Liberties Union is urging the company to change its policy, so coverage doesn't depend on whether a gay employee happens to live somewhere that offers partner registration.
But the upsetting case shows the shortcomings of various legal unions that gay couples can enter. Two other recent ACLU cases spotlight the kinds of difficulties gay couples can encounter in spite of taking the available steps to get official recognition:
Read more:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment