On November 7 the
U.S. House of Representatives passed the Employment
Non-Discrimination Act -- a formerly LGBT rights bill that
was stripped of the T in the belief that that would
make it an easier sell. Transgender activist and
former Human Rights Campaign board member Donna Rose
assesses the cost of that strategy and
talks about picking up the pieces.
As a leader in
the transgender community I feel it appropriate to
acknowledge the historic passage of the Employment
Non-Discrimination Act in the U.S. House of
Representatives on November 7. By a vote of 235–184
it sends a clear message that discrimination in our
workplaces will not be tolerated.
For many,
however, this is bittersweet news. Rights for some gained at
the expense of rights for others is not something to be
celebrated. Indeed, to acknowledge that those who need
these protections most are left on the outside looking
in is to accept that some part of our humanity has
been sacrificed.
In a very real
sense the soul of the LGBT community is crying today. It
has been torn from the inside out. It laments that people
whom others identify as not being
“masculine” or “feminine” enough
for whatever reason again stand on the outside looking
in. It recognizes that others don’t make the
same alphabet-soup distinctions of G, L, B, or T that we
do -- that we’re all one and the same -- and it sees
the connection between workplace discrimination,
schoolyard bullying, personal harassment, and physical
violence that so many of us face day in and day out.
It’s fearful at the message this partial protection
sends -- that some are worthy while others are not.
Some call that incremental gain. I call it selective
injustice. To tolerate injustice in any form is to
believe there are degrees of equality. There are not.
There are those
who have approached ENDA with a "win at all costs"
agenda for any number of reasons. The fact that our
community is left fragmented, that people are hurting
right now, that “friends” have betrayed
friends, that trust is gone, that credibility is in short
supply -- all for the sake of a symbolic victory -- raises
serious questions about the “moral
character” of supposed civil rights leaders in
our community. It didn't need to happen this way.
Still, I choose to cherish my naiveté, and I
continue to believe that how you get to your
destination is more important than the destination itself.
By that count this mad dash to the finish line has
been a miserable failure, as the trail of debris has
undone years of effort. In many ways we are back to
square one again. That is not progress.
Click here to follow The Advocate on Twitter.
Page 1 of 3