Trans-Form the Occupation

Pauline Park

at

Occupy Wall Street

13 November 2011

Thank you for the opportunity to speak here. I’m Pauline Park, chair of NYAGRA, the New York Association for Gender Rights Advocacy, and president of the board of directors of Queens Pride House, an LGBT community center in the borough of Queens.

I’m honored by the invitation to speak here at Occupy Wall Street, which I think is one of the most exciting recent developments in American politics. People are finally standing up to corporate greed and the powers that be. And that includes transgendered people. I’m a transgendered woman who was born in Korea. I’ve lived in New York since 1995 and I’d like to talk about the people who make up my community.

1) The diversity of the transgender community.

We need to recognize the full diversity of the transgender community. There are as many different ways of being transgendered as there are transgendered people. Do not assume that sex reassignment is the end point for every transgender transition; most transgendered people do not want sex reassignment surgery, and most people who do never get it.

2) ‘Transgender’ as an umbrella term.

There are literally hundreds of descriptors and self-descriptors that people use to identify or self-identify. But don’t confuse the label with the person. ‘Transgender’ is an ‘umbrella’ term that is widely used to bring together a wide variety of different subgroups within the community, including transsexuals, crossdressers and genderqueers. The term ‘transgender’ can be used in three different ways: as a term of self-identification, as an analytic term, or as a political term. There are many people who don’t identify with the term ‘transgender,’ including a lot of immigrants and transgendered people of color.

3) Sexual orientation vs. gender identity.

It’s important to understand the difference between sexual orientation and gender identity. Sexual orientation refers to who you’re attracted to; gender identity refers to how you identify and express your gender. Sexual orientation has nothing to do with gender identity per se. There are transgendered people who identify as heterosexual as well as those who identify as lesbian, gay and bisexual. Don’t assume someone’s sexual orientation from their gender identity or presentation. What do you know about someone’s sexual orientation if you know that they’re transgendered? Nothing~!

4) Discrimination.

In this society, transgendered and gender-variant people face pervasive discrimination, harassment, abuse & violence. Even with a transgender rights law in place since 2002, transgendered people regularly report discrimination in this city. Fortunately, the transgender rights law enacted by the New York City Council in 2002 prohibits discrimination based on gender identity and expression in employment, housing, public accommodations, education and credit. If you experience discrimination, contact NYAGRA through nyagra.com or the Transgender Legal Defense & Education Fund through the TLDEF website at transgenderlegal.org.

5) Bullying, harassment & violence.

Transgendered and gender-variant youth face pervasive bullying and bias-based harassment in our public schools; and the rate of teen suicide among trans and genderqueer youth is astronomically high. Many trans and genderqueer youth drop out of school because of such bullying; and without even a high school diploma, the chances of finding a well-paying job are very slim. Last year, the New York state legislature enacted the Dignity for All Students Act (DASA), which prohibits bullying and bias-based harassment in public schools throughout the state.

6) Housing & homelessness; health care.

Many transgendered people find themselves homeless because of discrimination and abuse, including domestic and intimate partner violence. Many are forced into sex work, with heightened risk of HIV infection, police brutality, and street violence. Many transgendered people lack health insurance and even access to basic health care.

7) GID.

Many transgendered people access hormones and surgery through the diagnosis of gender identity disorder (GID). But the GID diagnosis pathologizes everyone who is gender-variant as a gender deviant. As I like to say, I do not have a gender identity disorder; it is society that has a gender identity disorder. We need to eliminate the pathologizing of transgender and gender variance.

We need to create a society in which no one is denied employment or housing or health care because of their gender identity or expression. We need to recognize the multiple oppressions that face transgendered people of color, including immigrants of color. We need to recognize that the root of our oppression as transgendered and gender-variant people is the sex/gender binary — the policing of rigid gender norms by the police and public authorities, corporations and other employers, and conventionally gendered people in our society. We need to bring feminist consciousness to the project of challenging, deconstructing and dismantling the sex/gender binary.

We need to create a society characterized by social and economic justice, not governed by rigid gender norms and corporate profits. And as a step towards that goal, we need to make sure that this space is safe for everyone, including our transgendered brothers and sisters. As the Mahatma Gandhi said, we need to be the change that we want to see in the world.

Thank you.

]]> http://www.paulinepark.com/index.php/2011/11/trans-form-the-occupation-occupy-wall-street-11-13-11/feed/ 0 http://www.paulinepark.com/index.php/2011/11/transgender-health-care-10-simple-rules-for-providers-to-consider/ http://www.paulinepark.com/index.php/2011/11/transgender-health-care-10-simple-rules-for-providers-to-consider/#comments Wed, 02 Nov 2011 17:19:49 +0000 Pauline http://www.paulinepark.com/?p=2908 Transgender Health Care
10 Simple Rules for Providers to Consider

Pauline Park, Ph.D.
Chair
New York Association for Gender Rights Advocacy
(NYAGRA)

Transgendered and gender-variant people face pervasive discrimination in attempting to access health care in the United States. Some of the impediments to accessing quality health care are obvious and some are not.

Based on my own experience as an activist, advocate and consumer of health care, here are a few simple rules that health care providers who are committed to full transgender inclusion in the provision of health care may wish to consider:

Rule #1: Effective health care provision requires the construction of a relationship of trust and confidence between the provider and the patient/client/’consumer.’ It is the responsibility of providers to educate themselves on issues of gender identity and gender expression in order to serve their patients, clients, and consumers sensitively and effectively. Conversely, it is also the responsibility of transgendered and gender-variant people to do what they can to educate and empower themselves and work with health care providers in order to obtain the best health care that they can.

Rule #2: Effective health care provision requires that providers take into account the diversity of the transgender community, which is extraordinarily diverse — in terms of gender identity and expression as well as race, ethnicity, religion, dis/ability, and sexual orientation. There are as many ways of being transgendered as there are transgendered people.

Rule #3: Health care providers need to understand that sex reassignment surgery (SRS) is not the end point for most gender transitions.  Most transgendered people do not want SRS and most who do never get it. There are as many ways of transitioning as there are transgendered people.

Rule #4: Transgendered and gender-variant people are denied care in many areas not directly or even indirectly related to their gender identity; any attempt to address health care provision for members of the community must address those areas not related to gender transition as well as those areas that are transition-related. Some transgendered people are denied coverage for treatments or procedures that relate to their anatomical or biological sex assigned at birth, such as prostate cancer for transgendered women or cervical or ovarian cancer for transmen. Only in a relationship of mutual trust and respect can physicians and other health care providers be sensitive and informed enough to provide effective care in such areas.

Rule #5: The impediments to health care access are both medical and non-medical and effective health care provision requires that providers take into account and address both sets of impediments. Transgender sensitivity training should focus primarily on the psychosocial aspects of the interaction between providers and consumers, and that training should extend to physicians and nurses as well as everyone in a health care facility.

Rule #6: Health care providers need to avoid pathologizing transgendered people through the false diagnosis of gender identity disorder (GID) while at the same time understanding that such diagnoses are used by some transgendered people to access hormone replacement therapy (HRT), sex reassignment surgery (SRS) and other desired medical interventions.

Rule #7: Transgender sensitivity training needs to be mandatory for all staff in hospitals and health care-providing facilities, including technical people, security guards, and intake staff as well as medical and mental health professionals; physicians should undergo psychosocial sensitivity training, regardless of participation in ‘grand rounds’ and other cognate medical trainings and discussions. Transgender sensitivity trainings should be no less than two hours in duration and ideally should be four hours long. Real training involves an intensive interaction between the trainer and the trained. Webinars and handouts may be used to supplement such trainings but can be no substitute for trainings themselves. Trainings should be conducted by those who have specific expertise in transgender issues, not merely those who do general ‘diversity’ trainings or even those who do LGBT trainings but who lack expertise on transgender issues specifically. Given staff turnover, trainings must be conducted at regular intervals.

Rule #8: All health care providers and health care-providing facilities should adopt policies and protocols that specifically prohibit discrimination based on gender identity and gender expression in the provision of health care, and such policies and protocols should be regularly and effectively communicated to all relevant constituencies.

Rule #9: Health care providers should participate in larger efforts to achieve legal and public policy change in order to provide effective and universal health care for all, including all transgendered and gender-variant people; providers need to understand that the denial of health care to transgendered and gender-variant people is part of a larger denial of health care access to and insurance coverage and payment for health care to LGBT people, low-income people, poor people, and people with disabilities in the United States.

Rule #10: There are no rules, only ‘best practices’ — or at least, better practices and worse practices; and such practices must be informed by the lived experiences of transgendered and gender-variant people.

* * * * *

Pauline Park, Ph.D. (paulinepark.com) is chair of the New York Association for Gender Rights Advocacy (NYAGRA) (nyagra.com), president of the board of directors of Queens Pride House (queenspridehouse.org), and vice-president of the board of directors of the Transgender Legal Defense & Education Fund (transgenderlegal.org). Park named and helped create the Transgender Health Initiative of New York (THINY) and oversaw the creation and publication in July 2009 of the NYAGRA transgender health care provider directory, the first directory of transgender-sensitive health care providers in the New York City metropolitan area. She led the campaign for passage of the transgender rights law enacted by the New York City Council in 2002 and served on the working group that helped to draft guidelines for implementation of the statute.

Moving Beyond Shock on Transgender Health

By Paul Schindler

Even for those with some knowledge of the economic, social, and health disparities facing the transgender community, an August New York Times Magazine story, “The High Price of Looking Like a Woman,”likely shocked the conscience.

The story explored an underground and little known practice by which so-called “pumpers” inject silicone into the breasts, buttocks, hips, and faces of transgender women aiming to feminize their appearance. The practice exists outside the medical care industry and without its safeguards –– or, usually, even anesthesia.

Among many medical risks associated with the practice is the customary use of loose silicone rather than enclosed implants, a procedure that can lead to the migration of silicone throughout the body and, in turn, disfigurement and scarring. The Times story, in gruesome detail, spelled out a host of other negative outcomes, including chronic infection, blood system poisoning, respiratory impairment, autoimmune reactions, pulmonary embolisms, and death.

The story cites a conclusion by the New York City health department that just over one-fifth of the estimated 12,500 transgender people in the city have undergone silicone injections. Given the high proportion of that population that is uninsured and the widespread exclusion of gender transition procedures in both private and public health care plans, it is likely that the vast majority of those silicone procedures were carried out in the unsafe underground pumping economy.

It’s all too easy to come away from the Times’ account with nothing more constructive than the view that these pumpers must be stopped. Although the story quotes a practitioner identified only as S. saying, “I try to help the girls because they want to look feminine,” advocates for the transgender community familiar with the phenomenon make clear that pumpers are culpable for the significant harm they cause.

Jillian Weiss, a legal scholar who teaches at New Jersey’s Ramapo College and works with corporations on transgender workplace diversity issues, told Gay City News, “The people who are doing this have to know the risks and are not informing those who come to them.”

Pauline Park, who heads up the New York Association for Gender Rights Advocacy (NYAGRA), said, “Pumpers prey on naïve trans people.”

Weiss and Park agree that pumpers should face criminal prosecution, but neither is under any illusion that going after the “supply” side will curb the unmet demand the transgender community has for procedures and hormone therapies needed to facilitate their gender transition.

Mara Keisling, the executive director of the National Center for Transgender Equality, emphasized that it is simplistic and demeaning to suggest that efforts by transgender women to feminize their appearance are all about cosmetics. In her view, feminizing is, above all else, about “passing” –– and not getting killed.

“It’s about survival in getting a job, about not getting beat up on the subway, or maybe about finding a guy who will let them have a bed for the night,” she said.

Weiss and Park emphasized that true liberation for transgender people likely involves self-acceptance on matters including appearance. But, to get from one day to the next usually forces other considerations. “I don’t feel that passing should be necessary for a transgender identity,” Weiss said, “but in the real world, it is.”

The goal, then, must be to expand private and public health insurance access to the full range of services transgender people need to lead full and productive lives –– including mental health counseling, hormone treatments, and surgical interventions, ranging from genital reconstruction to breast augmentation to facial feminization.

In most health insurance programs, that is a steep climb. Gender reassignment surgery, in particular, is widely disallowed.

Prohibitions and limitations on covering treatment related to gender transition –– even those that might be viewed as primarily “cosmetic” –– are based in prejudice. Breast augmentation is now viewed by society as a legitimate medical expense following a mastectomy, yet vital services are denied transgender people, despite the fact, as Keisling put it, that “science has rendered its judgment –– these are medically necessary.”

According to the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), Medicare does not cover gender reassignment surgery, though “there is no exclusion under the federal Medicaid statute.” As a result, the National Center for Lesbian Rights reports, “Almost every court that has ever considered the issue has concluded that states cannot categorically exclude sex reassignment surgeries for Medicaid coverage.”

Last month, for example, a three-judge federal court panel threw out a Wisconsin law banning hormone therapy or sex reassignment surgery for transsexual prison inmates. Cutting three transgender patients off from hormone treatment, the court found, amounted to “cruel and unusual punishment,” banned by the 8th Amendment to the US Constitution.

The 2005 Wisconsin statute that gave rise to the case, however, illustrates the political realities cutting against the posture federal courts have taken. When prison officials in the state first authorized hormone treatment for the three plaintiffs, a spate of news stories about taxpayer-funded “sex changes” led the Legislature to rush through a prohibition.

According to Park, NYAGRA, the Empire State Pride Agenda, and other groups have been working toward ending policies put in place during the Pataki administration that placed hurdles in the way of Medicaid funding for gender transition.

At the federal level, Park, Weiss, and Keisling all pointed to opportunities under the new health care law –– both in terms of banning discrimination based on gender identity/ expression in providing services and in defining the benefits available under expanded Medicaid eligibility and the health care exchanges the law establishes.

Discussions of these issues between advocates and staff at the Department of Health and Human Services have begun, but have not reached any definitive results. Keisling is upbeat about the possibilities: “The good thing about this administration is not that they do everything everyone wants, but that they are reasonable. We can go in, and if we show problems that can be fixed, I think we can get things done.”

Significant progress has made on comprehensive transgender health care at the nation’s largest corporate employees, due in good measure to pressure put on them by HRC through its Corporate Equality Index. According to the group, 25 percent of Fortune 100 and fully 40 percent of Fortune 1000 companies now offer transgender-inclusive health insurance. Speaking at the World Diversity Leadership Summit in Manhattan last week, Deena Fidas, deputy director of HRC’s Workplace Project, said corporate employees have found that such benefits do not materially increase their healthcare costs.

Many transgender Americans, of course, do not work for the nation’s largest employers. Some work at jobs where they get no health care benefits; others scrape by in the underground economy, including sex work. This situation is largely the legacy of pervasive discrimination. Only determined efforts at education and advocacy will change this picture.

As Keisling pointed out, “Young trans folks are often mentored. If a mentor says, ‘Go get silicone,” many will follow that advice.” Outreach to transgender youth, many of them invisible or living on the streets, is required.

But the bigger education challenge involves the broader society, and that demands that the larger gay and lesbian community join with our trans brothers and sisters in tearing down stereotypes about gender and demanding equal employment and healthcare access. As the LGBT community fights high profile battles like marriage equality, it cannot –– in good conscience –– forsake this critical responsibility.

This editorial first appeared on Gay City News.com on 14 September 2011.

Pauline Park, Ph.D.

paper presented at the
TransSomatechnics Conference
Vancouver
2 May 2008

Introduction: BIID & ‘Transableism’

If ‘soma’ refers to the body and ‘techne’ includes the various technologies by which we can transform human anatomy and biology, one of the most unusual if not disturbing phenomena to develop within the transgender community has been that of ‘transableism.’ There is a growing literature both in print and on the Internet focused on the phenomenon of the ‘transabled,’ and the narratives of those who identify as such contribute to a discourse of ‘transableism’ that is the topic of this paper.

What I will seek to do here is to sketch out the linaments of the phenomenon as  those who identify as ‘transabled’ themselves present it and then attempt an analysis of the phenomenon that examines the question of the body and the extent to which the discourse of ‘transableism’ embodies, as it were, an accurate

understanding of the disabled body in particular. I will draw in particular on an analogy with racial identity that I believe may be productive for attempting to  assess the phenomenon of ‘transableism.’

According to the website biid-info.org (biid-info.org/Transabled), the term ‘transabled’ was coined by Sean O’Connor in 2004, who “wanted to have a term that was more generic, more easily accepted than ‘wannabe,’ and representative of the condition.”

On the website transabled.org, O’Connor defines ‘transabled’ simply

as “someone who ‘wants’ to be disabled.” According to the creator

of transabled.org, the focus of the website is “strongly on my thoughts about being transabled, wheelchairs, wannabe, disability, body identity integrity disorder (BIID) and related topics.”

As transabled.org notes, the concept of transableism is inextricably linked to that of BIID, which in turn is defined on the biid-info.org website as:

“…a condition characterised by an overwhelming need to align one’s physical body with one’s body image. The body image includes an impairment (some say disability), most often an amputation of one or more limbs, or paralysis, deafness, blindness, or other conditions. In other words, people suffering from BIID don’t feel complete unless they become amputees, paraplegic, deaf, blind, or have other

‘disabling’ conditions.”

According to the biid-info.org website, O’Connor is also the co-founder of biid-info.org, along with Claire Conreaux. On the profile page for O’Connor, he describes himself as someone “who needs to be paraplegic himself” and “has been actively advocating for the inclusion of other impairments than amputation within the condition known as BIID since the mid 1990s.”

The website biid-info.org makes a distinction (presumably articulated by O’Connor himself) between an ‘impairment’ and a ‘disability’:

“Many people who have BIID say they want to be disabled. Many other say they don’t want to be disabled,’ they ‘just’ want to be amputees. We argue that the two are not necessarily contradictory. Anecdotal evidence shows that a majority of transabled individuals do want an impairment, but do not wish to have a ‘disability.’ that is, they want to be amputees, paraplegic, etc. but they do not want the perceived loss of independence, nor the disabling experience.”

On the page on which this distinction is made, the writer (presumably O’Connor himself) puts ‘disabling experience’ in italics for emphasis. It would seem to me that the distinction is a crucial one, and I shall return to it later.

The phenomenon of transableism has received increasing attention from the media, as in a recent article in the San Francisco Chronicle entitled, “Gender Identity and Phantom Genitalia” (13 April 2008) by Sandra Blakeslee (www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/04/12/IN55103FLF.DTL).

“Some transgender men claim to possess phantom penises,” Blakeslee writes. “From the time they were little girls, they say they had vivid sensations of a penis between their legs,” she continues. In the article, Blakeslee goes onto describe the research of V. S Ramachandran, a neuyrologist and psychologist at the University of California, San Diego, whom she calls “a leading authority on phantom limb sensations.” As Blakeslee writes, Ramachandran suggests that

“an intact body image– the maps of the body laid down in the brain before and after birth — can develop without actual limbs. So-called mirror neurons that map the actions and intentions of others into one’s own brain may help bring the phantoms to life, Ramachandran says. But phantoms might also exist from the beginning of life. For transgender men and women, he says, the body image laid down prenatally could similarly differ from the external body anatomy.”

But the problem, according to Simon LeVay, is that “Emotions are left out,” and Blakeslee goes onto quote LeVay (author of “The Sexual Brain”) as saying that Ramachandran is making a false comparison here.

This account of transableism raises a number of questions, not the least of which is this: to what extent is the discourse of transableism dependent on a conception of transgender as a form of disability? It might be useful at this point to reference the debate over gender identity disorder (GID) introduced into the fourth edition of the Diagnostic & Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV), published by the American Psychiatric Association (APA) in 1974.

And there have been for many decades individuals who identify with the diagnosis of gender identity disorder (GID). To that extent, the concept of transgender identity as a form of disability is not a new one.

While some view the GID diagnosis pragmatically, seeking it only as a ‘gateway’ diagnosis to access to hormone replacement therapy (HRT) and sex reassignment surgery (SRS), others have internalized the pathologization of transgender identities and behaviors as a form of mental illness to be treated.

I addressed the issue of GID in my closing keynote speech to the Trans-Health Conference in Philadelphia (7 April 2007) and so I shall briefly summarize the argument that I made on that occasion. In my speech on GID, I argued that GID was a false pathology, and that there was no evidence that non-clinical transgendered people were necessarily any more prone to mental illness than non-clinical non-transgendered people. Instead, I argued, transgender should simply be viewed as naturally occurring variance in gender identity and expression. I concluded by calling for the removal of GID from the DSM and the establishment of new means to secure access to HRT and SRS for those who sought them.

It is my belief that we must reject the disease model of transsexuality and instead embrace a wellness concept in which transsexual and transgendered people should  have access to technologies for altering their bodies if they choose to do so, but based on a concept of enhancing individual wellness rather than ‘curing’ a disease that does not exist.

And so to return to the phenomenon of transableism. It seems to me that the concept of being ‘transabled’ is based on a desire on the part of those who so identify to conceptualize their gender identity as a form of disability, but not only a form of disability, but one that they did not choose. The elimination of choice would seem to be crucial here, because the assumption would seem to be that a disabled

person cannot be criticized for having a disability that occurred through no ‘fault’ of one’s own.

The discourse of the ‘transabled’ thus constructs transgender and transsexuality

in particular as simply an affirmation of the ‘real’ body. But of course

the ‘real’ body is an imagined body in the sense that it is not the body

into which the ‘transabled’ person was born. There is certainly a failure here to recognize the reality of the sexed body, however socially constructed sex may be. But there is also a contradiction insofar as the ‘transabled’ individual acts out his/her BIID by consciously choosing to alter his/her body in order in  effect to re-sex it.

The paradox here is that those who identify as ‘transabled’ both celebrate choice and deny it. The ‘transabled’ celebrate the choice to render their bodies ‘disabled’ in some sense, in order to deny the choice represented by the affirmation of their gender identity. Here I underline the word ‘affirmation’ in order to avoid misinterpretation. No LGBT person I know thinks that s/he ‘chose’ to be lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgendered. And yet, it is certainly true that

some of us choose to affirm our sexual orientations and gender identities by coming out as openly ‘queer,’ however we configure that queer identity.

The strange incoherence at the heart of the ‘transableism’ phenomenon is that the ‘transabled’ seem to base their identity on a biological essentialism of the crudest type that seems to posit a pre-discursive body while simultaneously celebrating the choice to ‘return’ to that desired body through anatomical and/or biological alteration. The ‘transabled’ render the desired body naturalized through the discourse of biological essentialism, insisting that the desired body

is the real body and relocating it to a prediscursive realm in which sensation — the sensation of a missing penis or a desired vagina or breasts — precedes utterance, conscious choice, and even embodiment through birth.

In other words, the ‘transabled’ transman who has always ‘sensed’

his penis articulates a pre-existing and pre-discursive male body that is his ‘real’ body, even while constructing it from the imaginary of ‘transableist’ discourse. Similarly, the transwoman who identifies as ‘transabled’ constructs from the imaginary of transableist discourse the ‘real’ body that is simply an idealized form of the female body that she desires, but renders it ‘disabled’ by making the choice to ‘amputate’ her penis.

Individuals diagnosed with or said to have BIID desire a wide range of disabilities, but there seems to be a very significant number who focus on amputation; indeed, it is not too much of an exaggeration to say that contributors to both BIID.org and transabled.org seem obsessed with amputation.

But the focus on amputation is a strange one for transgendered people for a variety of reasons. First, ‘amputation’ is a term most often associated with the removal of limbs, and genitalia are not in any meaningful sense limbs. Rather, the penis plays a role in male sexual function as well as urination, and the vagina plays a role in female sexual function, menstruation and childbirth. If the penis does not closely resemble the limbs — except perhaps when erect — the vagina does not resemble the limbs at all; and neither do the breasts, which are sexualized to a fairly high degree in most cultures. The application of the notion of a ‘phantom limb’ is therefore especially problematic when applied to the MTF transsexual, as there is no ‘limb’ to which to appeal as ‘phantom.’

The term ‘amputation’ as used by the self-identified ‘transabled’ is particularly curious for the male-to-female (MTF) transsexual, as many MTF transsexuals adamantly insist that SRS is not ‘amputation’ of the penis but rather reconfiguration of the genitalia through a complex and sophisticated set of surgical procedures. In fact, since the material from the penis is used to construct a clitoris, vagina and labia, ‘amputation’ is a particularly unfortunate word to reintroduce into transgender discourse.

In any case, claims of the experience of a ‘phantom limb’ – whether a ‘phantom’ penis or ‘phantom’ vagina or perhaps ‘phantom’ breasts – would seem to admit of no easy ‘objective’ verification. Indeed, it is difficult to imagine what sort of evidentiary support would constitute proof of such experiences.

More generally, the response of any good social construction theorist to the ‘transableism’ phenomenon would be to suggest that the ‘transabled’ fail to recognize the social construction of sex as well as of gender. Those who find inspiration in the work of Michel Foucault and other post-structuralist theorists point out that ‘male’ and ‘female’ — and even more so, ‘man’ and ‘woman’ — are relatively arbitrary standards of sex that do not capture the full anatomical and biological, let alone psychological and social, diversity of the human species. Unfortunately, the ‘transableist’ discourse articulated on transabled.org and elsewhere simply reifies the sex/gender binary that is the very source of the oppression of transgendered people, including those who identify as ‘transabled’; but that irony is loston those who construct their transgender identities in relation to a desire for disability.

What is crucial here is the absence of any evidence of a disability unrelated to the gender identity of the ‘transabled.’ It can hardly come as a surprise to anyone actually living with a disability that the transabled.org site itself makes reference to ‘wannabes.’ And as with contributors to BIID-info.org, many contributors to transabled.org readily admit to a desired to be disabled; even, in some cases, to actively disable parts of their bodies.

The question that many would ask is, why? Why would an otherwise able-bodied person actively seek to become disabled?

And the desire to have a disability, in the absence of any other disabling condition, forces one back into the murky world of psychology and psychiatry. One is thrown back on the notion of a ‘paraphilia’ — a desire for something deemed pathological or at least thoroughly unhealthy — to explain transableism and the larger phenomenon of BIID.

Ironically, the very invocation of paraphilia renders the transgender identities of the ‘transabled’ mental pathology — in other words, disability. To put it in the vernacular, if they think they’re crazy, then they must really be crazy. But I think to label transableism a paraphilia is to let the transabled off too easily. Certainly, scanning the transabled.org website, it becomes apparent that there are strong elements of fantasy apparent in the narratives of the self-identified

‘transabled,’ It is not simply fantasy in the sense of imagining oneself

with a disability; it is fantastical in utter the lack of consciousness of what living with a real disability is like. There is little if any awareness of what the challenges of daily life are like for people living with (real) disabilities.

Reading the personal narratives of those who identify as ‘transabled,’ it becomes clear that notions of ‘transableism’ do not come from actual lived experience of disability but rather from a personal imaginary. It may be useful here to return to Sean O’Connor’s definition of the ‘transabled’ as those who “want to be amputees, paraplegic, etc. but they do not want the perceived loss of independence, nor the disabling experience.”

But the lived experience of people with impediments is for the most part that of a disabling experience – one might say, a variety of different disabling experiences, varying in degree of disability as well as in kind. And it is in this respect that the ‘transableism’ phenomenon appears to be something akin to fantasy, and doubly so, based as it is in the psychology of BIID and creating as it does a kind of fantastical body to justify forms of bodily modification – including sex reassignment surgery – that require no such justification.

The imaginary of transableism is one that focuses on a strange and negative conception of transgender identity, constructed through a discourse of the transgendered body as in some significant sense deformed. In that regard, phantasmagoria is not too strong a word, I think, to characterize the Lebenswelt of BIID and the ‘transabled.’

The phantasmagoric is characterized by a fevered imagination and a distinct lack of reality, both of which are on full display at transabled.org.

The personal imaginary of the ‘transabled’ individual is rendered social by the emergence of this apparently still relatively small community of like-minded individuals. Indeed, the very concept of a category of such individuals necessarily renders the phenomenon a social one, even if there may be individuals with ideations typical of the ‘transabled’ who may not be aware of the term or of the community of like-minded individuals who constitute this curious social imaginary.

But of course, the element of BIID is only part of the phenomenon of ‘transableism.’ The other component is a strong desire to have the body of the ‘opposite’ sex (i.e., that sex to which one was not assigned at birth; I put ‘opposite’ in quotes in order to recognize the fact that not all bodies are entirely male or female at birth).

And here, it seems to me the appropriation of the discourse of disability by the ‘transabled’ represents an attempt both to explain and to legitimize their identities as well as their choices. To explain, because the strangely twisted application of the ‘phantom limb’ phenomenon would account for why they feel themselves to be male (in the case of transmen) or female (in the case of transwomen). To legitimize, because the identification with the sex and gender other than the one assigned to them at birth is rendered by the operations of these discursive practices simply an acceptance of the ‘true’ sex of the ‘transabled.’

In the absence of such a disability, the appropriation of the identity of ‘disabled person’ must be accounted a misappropriation. Let me explain by way of analogy with race.

Transableism as Misappropriation: The Analogy with Race

When I was at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign working on my Ph.D., the campus was embroiled in a controversy over Chief Illiniwek, the Indian mascot of the university’s sports teams. Like most Native American ethnic groups, the tribe known as the Illini were all but eliminated in the genocide that decimated tribe after tribe as white Europeans and European Americans swept across the continent

in the fulfillment of a self-declared ‘Manifest Destiny.’ And so unlike

some Native American ethnic groups west of the Mississippi, there are few if any contemporary Illini to protest the appropriation of the identity.

But the fact that the Illini no longer exist in any coherent grouping in east central Illinois does not render the appropriation of their identity by the university’s sports teams any less egregious. I am happy to say that after a very long campaign, with fierce resistance coming from mostly white male alumni, Chief Illini was removed as an active mascot for the UIUC sports teams. Many alumni were saddened by the decision, claiming that the re-enactment of Chief Illini’s war dance at football and basketball games in Champaign-Urbana and other cities and towns where the ‘Illini’ played represented a tribute to Native American traditions.

But there are few if any Native Americans I know who feel honored by such re-enactments; to them, the Indian mascot hi-jinks acted out by mostly white students and team members feels like a misappropriation. Imagine for example if Al-Qaeda managed t eliminate the entire population of the United States — fortunately, an exceedingly unlikely prospect — and then chose to adopt Americans as their mascot, with an Al-Qaeda operative playing Uncle Sam at Al-Qaeda basketball games.

Conclusion

I do not mean to suggest that those who self-identify as ‘transabled’ are either terrorists or guilty of great crimes against humanity such genocide. The ‘transabled’ seem to be small in number, even within the transgender community. In fact, I know no one personally who so self-identifies. But the appropriation of the identity and/or status of another is nonetheless a serious matter, even if few participate in it and the consequences of their actions are minimal.

I also do not mean to suggest that all people with disabilities are necessarily going to share my analysis of the phenomenon of ‘transableism.’ In the absence of survey data, we cannot know for sure what people with disabilities would think of the phenomenon of transableism and the larger phenomenon of BIID with which it is inextricably linked.

But I find it difficult to believe that at least some disabled people would not be more than a little bit surprised at the notion that an otherwise able-bodied person would want to be disabled or would actively seek to alter the body so radically through amputation of limbs or other such acts. And I imagine that at least some people with disabilities — those without any prejudice against the transgendered, in any case — would respond to the ‘transabled’ by asking why they would feel either the need or the desire to explain their gender identity by way of a notion of transgender as disability.

And that is in fact my question: why not simply seek the anatomical and/or biologically change one desires? Why articulate what is so clearly a confused and contradictory notion of ‘transability’ in order to justify or explain one’s desired bodily modifications?

There is nothing in the ‘transableism’ literature (such as it is) that I

have found that would justify the conclusion that being transgendered is a disability. Rather, the articulation of transgender identity as a disability, as I suggested earlier, would seem to me to be at least in part an attempt to justify an identity that needs no justification.

It would be tempting to predict that the entire phenomenon will be swept away as more and more transgendered people come to feminist consciousness and recognize transgender identity (in all of its manifestations) as simply a naturally occurring form of gender variance. But the recognition of the full diversity of humankind also compels us to recognize that there will always be some people who for whatever reason — whether psychological, psychiatric, psychosocial or otherwise – misconstrue their own identity and misunderstand or simply disregard the social and political context in which identities are constructed.

Pauline Park

(www.paulinepark.com)

Pauline Park is chair of the New York Association for Gender Rights

Advocacy (NYAGRA), the first statewide transgender advocacy organization in New York (www.nyagra.com), which she co-founded in June 1998. She also serves on the board of directors of the Transgender Legal Defense & Education Fund (TLDEF).

Park led the campaign for the transgender rights law enacted by the New York City Council (Int. No. 24, enacted as Local Law 3 of 2002). She served on the working group that helped to draft guidelines — adopted by the Commission on Human Rights in December 2004 — for implementation of the new statute.  Park negotiated inclusion of gender identity and expression in the Dignity for All Students Act (DASA), a safe schools bill currently pending in the New York state legislature, and the first fully transgender-inclusive legislation introduced in that body.  She also serves on the steering committee of the coalition that secured enactment of the Dignity in All Schools Act by the New York City Council in September 2004. Park has written widely on LGBT issues and has cnducted transgender sensitivity training sessions for a wide range of social service providers and community-based organizations. She has a Ph.D. in political science from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Abstract

‘Transabled’ individuals not only claim to have a disability, but identify

as people with disabilities, largely because of the desire to have a disabled body. The phenomenon of ‘transableism’ is inextricably linked with the notion of ‘body image identity disorder’ (BIID) which — unlike ‘transableism’ itself — is recognized by the psychiatric profession and listed in the DSM-IV. BIID is defined as the desire to create a physical disability through amputation or some other means. But the notion of ‘amputation’ in particular is at odds with attempts by transsexuals to characterize SRS as a sophisticated procedure entirely different from mere amputation. Moreover, the phenomenon of the ‘phantom limb’ is not obviously applicable to someone who has never had a limb, nor to an organ that is not limb-like. While psychiatrists would characterize transableism, like BIID, as a paraphilia, it can best be understood as a form of social imaginary based on a crude biological essentialism that posits the desired body as prediscursive to the desire itself. To that extent, the discourse of transableism is based on a misappropriation of disability status in a fashion curiously reminiscent of the misappropriation of racial identity exemplified by the Indian mascot phenomenon.

Transgendered People of Color Take Center Stage
by Pauline Park
The Missive of the Audre Lorde Project (ALP)
winter 1998
(the following are excerpts from a longer article that appeared in LGNY’s November 19th issue)

The first conference specifically by and for transgendered people of color ever held in New York City, and to my knowledged, anywhere, was a historic moment in the life of the TG POC community. Sponsored by The Audre Lorde Project and the Gender Identity Project (GIP) of the Lesbian & Gay Community Services Center, Transworld — the Fourth Annual Transgender/Transsexual Health Empowerment Conference — took place at ALP in Brooklyn on October 24. Only a week before, ALP’s Arms Akimbo, the first confeence for lesiban, bisexual, two-spirit and transgendered women of color, featured the first workshop specifically devoted to transgendered women of color, facilitated by Carmen Vazquez and me.

Transworld was the fourth in a series of conferences that are the biggest annual event of their kind on the transgender calendar in New York City. As in past years, the conference was well attended, with over 200 people from throughout the metropolitan area and beyond in attendance. Some came from upstate locales such as Ithaca, others from as far away as Boston, Philadelphia, and Washington, D.C.

In addition to a focus on TG POCs, what made TransWorld distinct was the decentering of service provider as all-knowing authority figure — for the first time in the history of the annual TG/TS health empowerment conference, health professionals did not dominate the proceedings.

The all-day conference began with an opening plenary on transgender history and culture moderated by Javid Syed. I spoke on the role of the transgendered Korean shaman — the paksu mudang; Arlene Hoffman reviewed African American history; Christian O’Neill offered insights from the perspective of a transsexual black man; and Carmen Vazquez talked about her identity as a buth Puerto Rican lesbian of transgender identity. The early afternoon featured a series of workshops on transgenderphobic violence, facilitated by Victoria Cruz and Alex Gilliam; substance abuse, by Leona Williams and Caprice Carthans; transgendered youth, by Pagen and Reyana Quinones; government entitlements and immigration, by Isiris Isaac; and medical issues.

Perhaps the most innovative feature of the conference was the speak-out sensitively and expertly facilitated by Maura Bairley of Project Reach, who elicited personal experiences of discrimination and violence as well as suggestions for addressing the multiple oppressions that transgendered people of color face in this society…

Also noteworthy was the fact that medical issues of transsexual transition (especially access to hormones and SRS), the focus of one workshop, were not central to the conference, as is often the case at transgender conferences. It may be a mark of the growing maturity of the transgender community that these issues, while important, did not dominate the proceedings. Instead, the question of how to organizaed TG POC’s politically closed the conference’s formal discussion.

One would think that a conference whose aim — the health and empowerment of TG POCs — would win the embrace of all lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered (LGBT) people. Remarkably, some white queers stayed away based on the misconception that the conference ‘excluded’ white people. (In fact, the conference was open to all and about a quarter of the attendees were white.) The conference even prompted one nationally prominent transgender activist to denounce it as ‘racist’ for having limited the roster of presenters to people of color, despite the fact that POC-only spaces have become increasingly commonplace in LGB communities. Perhaps it is a measure of the need of the transgender community to address issues of race, ethnicity, nationality, and citizenship status more forthrightly that a conference featuring only people of color as presenters would create any controversy at all.

Pauline Park is coordinator of Iban/Queer Koreans of New York, policy coordinator of the New York Association for Gender Rights Advocacy; she also served on the Transworld organizing committee.  The views expressed here are not necessarily those of these organizations.

This article originally appeared in the winter 1998 issue of The Missive (Vol. 2, Issue 4) of the Audre Lorde Project (ALP), and before that, in the 19 November 1998 issue of Lesbian & Gay New York (LGNY).

Woodside clinic offers legal aid to HIV patients

By Dustin Brown

Times-Ledger
10.24.2002

For people in Queens who are living with HIV, the options for finding legal guidance are limited.

Although they could find free services by going into Manhattan, job and family commitments often stand in the way. While legal clinics in their neighborhoods may cater to their communities, HIV can be a taboo subject they are afraid to broach because of possible discrimination.

Now a small storefront that is off the beaten path in Woodside — yet still within a thriving immigrant community — has introduced the borough’s first legal clinic to help people who are infected with the virus that causes AIDS.

Queens Pride House is partnering with the Gay Men’s Health Crisis, the oldest AIDS organization in the country, to provide free legal assistance every Friday out of its offices at 67-03 Woodside Ave.

“The partnership will enable us to better serve the needs of LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered) people in Queens, including people who are HIV positive, many of whom are recent immigrants or people of color,” said Pauline Park, the secretary of Queens Pride House. “That’s a population that is generally reluctant to seek legal services within their communities of origin because of fears of discrimination.”

The legal clinic, which has been operating since Sept. 15, will officially open Tuesday night at 7 p.m. in a ribbon-cutting ceremony and reception with City Councilwoman Helen Sears (D-Jackson Heights).

The center is designed to cater to the people who are most difficult to reach. A typical client would be a closeted bisexual or gay man with limited English proficiency “who is afraid to seek social services, who is afraid to have an HIV test, who is afraid to get legal counseling about the implications of that,” Park said.

“They’re the ones who need the services most and they’re the most reluctant to come forward,” she continued. “That’s really who we hope to reach.”

People can set up appointments to visit Queens Pride House and consult with an attorney from GMHC, which investigates the situation and helps the client navigate through the legal issues.

“If you’re HIV-positive and you’re, let’s say, an immigrant or undocumented, or you have a housing problem or you have a family issue, there are certain things that the law will help you with,” said Evelyn Tossas Tucker, the legal director at GMHC.

Although the agency already offers such services in its Manhattan offices, the legal clinic in Queens provides access to a broader range of people.

“If you’re closer to the people in the community, it makes it a little easier for them, more convenient,” Tucker said.

Because many people still view AIDS as a disease that exclusively afflicts gay white men — the population that was hardest hit when the epidemic first surfaced more than two decades ago — minorities and immigrants often fail to recognize that they are at risk themselves, Park said.

“They may say … ‘I just don’t hang out with people who are likely to have AIDS,’” Park said. “That’s really extremely dangerous because anyone can be HIV-positive or become infected or transmit the virus.”

Although the service is provided in an LGBT community center, Park believes the site affords the anonymity many people desire because it is not in a heavily trafficked area.

“It’s a convenient location, but it’s a little bit removed,” Park said. “The fact that it’s not part of a visible commercial strip, that is in effect the Main Street for one of the immigrant communities, is helpful.”

This article originally appeared in the 24 October 2002 issue of the Times-Ledger papers.

]]> http://www.paulinepark.com/index.php/2010/07/woodside-clinic-offers-legal-aid-to-hiv-patients/feed/ 0 http://www.paulinepark.com/index.php/2010/07/gmhc-expands-legal-reach-to-queens-gcn-11-1-02/ http://www.paulinepark.com/index.php/2010/07/gmhc-expands-legal-reach-to-queens-gcn-11-1-02/#comments Mon, 12 Jul 2010 13:37:51 +0000 Pauline http://www.paulinepark.com/?p=1696

GMHC Expands Legal Reach to Queens

Pride House in Woodside home to effort focused on new Americans

By Matthew Coleman

Gay City News
1-7 November 2002

Gay Men’s Health Crisis (GHMC) opened a new legal services program this week in Queens in cooperation with Queens Pride House and the City University of New York School of Law. The clinic, named GMHC@Queens Pride House, is positioned to help the borough’s under-served communities. The Woodside-based clinic, which offers a variety of services, specializes in providing free legal assistance for people living with “a triple whammy,” according to Ana Oliveira, executive director of GMHC.

“The triple whammy refers to people who are LGBT, HIV positive, and undocumented immigrants,” Oliveira said. “These are all obstacles to becoming a legal immigrant. Unfortunately, immigrants who are HIV-positive are at greater risk of deportation. This program will help advise people of their rights and assist with legal issues, such as deportation and naturalization.”

The legal clinic, which has been operating for the past two months, officially opened October 29 with a ribbon-cutting ceremony at Pride House. City Councilmember Helen Sears cut the ribbon and spoke of the need for these services in Queens. “It’s important to have such a program here at Pride House,” Sears said. “The storefront location lends itself to the sense of community these services will attract.”

The clinic is staffed with a paralegal, an intern from the CUNY Law School, and an attorney from GMHC’s Legal Services and Client Advocacy. The program provides legal assistance for a wide variety of services, including immigrant cases, discrimination cases, landlord/tenant issues, estate planning, and family law. The location at 67-03 Woodside Avenue will serve the large, immigrant LGBT population in Woodside, Corona, and Jackson Heights. Translators of Spanish, Chinese, and other foreign languages are provided for clients.

“Many of the clients we serve live right here in Queens,” Evelyn Tossas-Tucker, director of GMHC Legal Services and Client Advocacy, said. “Many of them are not comfortable going into Manhattan for GMHC’s legal services. This location is really an extension of our services already offered by GMHC.”

Pauline Park, a secretary at Queens Pride House and a representative of the New York Association for Gender Rights Advocacy, agreed that the program is important to the area. “We’re delighted to expand much-needed legal services for a marginalized population,” she said. “These services are desperately needed here. In addition to legal assistance, the clinic will help promote greater awareness and acceptance of people living with HIV/AIDS in the area.”

Like Oliveira’s “triple whammy,” Park also spoke of the added stigma of LGBT immigrants living with HIV/AIDS feel in accessing services from mainstream providers. “Often, people are so fearful of this stigma that it prevents them from venturing beyond their local communities for much help,” Park said. “The free clinic will address those concerns by offering an alternative right where the people

reside.”

Queens Pride House was formed in 1996 to provide a safe space for LGBT individuals and to meet the special needs of populations, such as youth, women, and immigrants, who are often insufficiently supplied with services. Pride House and GMHC officials agreed that the clinic was a logical and important step toward reaching that goal. “As GMHC widened its scope over the years, we have gotten more involved with immigrant rights,” Marty Algaze, director of communications for GMHC, said. “Queens has a large ethnically diverse immigrant community. There is a real need in this neighborhood for these services.”

Funding for these free services comes from GMHC, the nation’s first AIDS services association, and the Stonewall Community Foundation, an LGBT advocacy organization.

In addition to on-site legal assistance, the program anticipates working with other local organizations, such as AIDS Center Queens County and Safe Haven, in providing services in Queens through cooperation and referrals.

The legal clinic at Queens Pride House is open Fridays from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. Call 718.651.4945 or 212.367.1040 or visit www.queenspridehouse.org or www.gmhc.org.

This article originally appeared in the 1-7 November 2002 issue of Gay City News.

]]> http://www.paulinepark.com/index.php/2010/07/gmhc-expands-legal-reach-to-queens-gcn-11-1-02/feed/ 0 http://www.paulinepark.com/index.php/2010/07/queens-pride-house-faces-funding-shortfall-7-6-10/ http://www.paulinepark.com/index.php/2010/07/queens-pride-house-faces-funding-shortfall-7-6-10/#comments Tue, 06 Jul 2010 20:59:31 +0000 Pauline http://www.paulinepark.com/?p=1659

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

For more info., contact:

Daniel Castellanos
Executive Director
(718) 429-5309
(646) 285-6931
dcastellanos@queenspridehouse.org

Pauline Park
Vice-President, Board of Directors
(718) 424-4003
paulinepark@earthlink.net

Queens Pride House
76-11 37th Avenue, Suite 206
Jackson Heights, NY 11372
(718) 429-5309

http://www.queenspridehouse.org/

New York, 6 July 2010 — Queens Pride House is appealing to members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community for support in the face of possibly devastating state funding cuts. The only LGBT community center in Queens, Pride House has not yet received a definitive response from Gov. David Paterson as to the disposition of approximately $80,000 in grants from the State of New York that are hanging in the balance as the governor threatens to veto funding appropriated by the state legislature for scores of community-based organizations throughout the state.

“As you may already know, many non-profit organizations are struggling with funding, and Queens Pride House has been as vulnerable as any to the negative impact of the downturn of the economy in general and the State of New York’s budget crisis in particular,” executive director Daniel Castellanos wrote to members of the Queens Pride House mailing list in a message posted to the list on June 30.

“In addition to the uncertainty over our current funding from the State of New York, we have received some very disappointing news regarding funding from the New York City Council and New York State Assembly,” Castellanos continued. “Due to these funding constrains, we have been forced to make some very painful decisions in order to keep our doors open. Most painful of all was the difficult decision to lay off two valued members of our QPH staff,” said Castellanos. “We have had to reduce our drop-in hours, eliminate some program activities, and postpone some upcoming events. Our services to Spanish-speaking immigrants have been also impacted by the loss of bilingual staff.”

“The consequences of a veto by the governor will be the most dire for the most vulnerable people we serve, including those with health and social service issues, especially for clients who are homeless or unemployed,” said Pauline Park, vice-president of the board of directors.

“Of the three state contracts totalling approximately $80,000, we have expended about $50,000 on the contracts, including payroll and other expenses,” noted Castellanos. “Loss of these contracts could force us to cut back on as much as one-third of our client services and dismiss one full-time and three part-time employees,” he added.  Queens Pride House has been awarded an Assembly grant through the LGBT Health & Human Services Network consecutively for eight years, with the current amount of that grant standing at $25,000.  QPH has also received a Senate grant in the amount of $40,000 and an grant of $15,000 from outgoing Senator George Onorato of Queens, who is retiring this year. “Our proposed workplans, contract period, and budget were approved by the New York State Department of Health and those contracts were issued,” Castellanos pointed out.

Queens Pride House was founded in 1997 and is based in Jackson Heights, which is part of Council District 25. In previous years, Queens Pride House had received funding from former Council Member Helen Sears, who was defeated in September 2009 by openly gay Council Member Daniel Dromm. The election of the first openly gay elected officials in the borough of Queens in November 2009 seemed to some members of the LGBT community to herald a new era in the history of the community, but both Council Member Daniel Dromm (D-25) and Council Member Jimmy Van Bramer (D-26) declined funding requests from Queens Pride House for fiscal year 2010-2011. In previous years, Queens Pride House had received funding from former Council Member Helen Sears (who was defeated in September 2009 by Dromm) as well as from her predecessor, John Sabini.

“The loss of any of our state or city grants would seriously compromise our ability to support partnerships with some groups serving underserved individuals and their families,” added Rosa Bramble Weed, a member of the Queens Pride House board who also runs the Positive Life program, a program for Latino HIV positive individuals supported by Queens Pride House. In fact, the community center also provides subsidized space to two substance use groups, two arts organizations, and several non-profit organizations serving immigrants.

However, Queens Pride House has received a small grant from Council Member Julissa Ferreras (D-21) to continue Charla!, a support group for Latina lesbians offered in partnership with Las Buenas Amigas (a group for Latina lesbians in New York City). “Charla is a monthly discussion group that meets every 3rd Tuesday of the month at Queens Pride House and focuses on health and emotional issues of interest to Latina lesbians in New York,” noted Bramble Weed.

“We hope that our funding stabilizes,” Castellanos added. “However, these steps we have taken might not be enough to cover potential cuts to our funding.” Castellanos concluded the June 30 appeal with the recognition that “We know that this is a difficult time for many members of the community as well as for our community center, and we ask for your patience, understanding, and support during this difficult time of adjustment. We are more than ever in need of donations and the active participation of volunteers, who will play an important role in keeping our community center open so that we can continue to serve the LGBT community of Queens.”

# # # #

Gay City News
9 December 2004

On the day that The New York Times ran a front-page story reporting that the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) was moderating its push for same-sex marriage rights and willing to entertain a discussion of supporting Social Security privatization in return for recognition of gay and lesbian partners in the program, dozens of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered (LGBT) leaders sent the following letter to every member of Congress. Matt Foreman, the executive director of the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force (NGLTF), initiated the letter and HRC was invited to sign on, but declined.

December 9, 2004

Dear Member of Congress (or Senator):

First, know that we appreciate and value the thoughtful and visionary leadership so many of you have provided. As a community, we are proud to have allies in both parties.

There has been much speculation over the last month about the meaning of the results of the last election and its impact on the future of American politics. Some have even suggested that same-sex marriage was a major factor in the outcome. Upon reflection, thoughtful analysts have come to dismiss that notion and realize that terrorism and the War in Iraq were uppermost on people’s minds.

The powerful and revealing fact is that that over 60 percent of voters in November 2 exit polls said they supported either marriage or civil unions for gay and lesbian couples. What remarkable progress we have made over these last years.

The New York Times today reported that some in the LGBT community are ready to pull back on our struggle for freedom to make everyone more comfortable politically, or willing to bargain away the rights of others to make a deal for themselves. Specifically, the notion was advanced that we could make gains at the expense of senior citizens by privatizing Social Security.

For our part, we want to be absolutely clear and on the record: We specifically reject any attempts to trade equal rights for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people, a group that includes many elders, for the rights of senior citizens under Social Security or, for that matter, the rights of any other group of Americans.

Finally, although the struggle for freedom can be difficult and painful for those without full equality, it would be an historic mistake to grow tired of the battle or surrender basic rights and equality in order to make the road easier. We have made it through some extremely harsh and challenging times, including losing thousands and thousands of our friends and family to HIV/AIDS. This is a community that has heroically walked its own path of tribulations and travail, determined to be free and proud American citizens.

We will not sacrifice our rights—or the rights of others like senior citizens on the altar of political expediency. Most of us, if confronted with that choice, would not even know where to begin. Which right would we give up?

The right to adopt children? The right to serve our country proudly and with honor? The right to be at our partner’s bedside in death? And how much would we be willing to hurt others like seniors as part of a cynical deal to help ourselves? We are not for sale to those who would undermine Social Security and we are not prepared to walk away from political leaders who have stood with us.

Nothing short of full equality and protection granted to all other American citizens is acceptable. We know that these are times that require wise and brave people who believe and love justice and freedom.

Given recent events, we wanted to restate our determination to do what’s right—for our community, for senior citizens, and for America. With the greatest respect,

Sincerely,

Diane Abbitt, Co-Chair, Equality California

David Barr

Roberta Bennett

Betty Berzon, Ph.D.

Steve Black, Political Director, The Pennsylvania Gay And Lesbian Alliance

David Bohnett

Craig A. Bowman, Executive Director, National Youth Advocacy Coalition

Howard Bragman

Kent Burbank, Executive Director, Wingspan (Southern Arizona’s LGBT Community Center)

Richard D. Burns, Executive Director, Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual & Transgender Community Center – New York

Alan Van Capelle, Executive Director, Empire State Pride Agenda

Kevin Cathcart, Executive Director, Lambda Legal

Josh Cazares and Nancy Wohlforth, Board Co-Presidents, Pride At Work, AFL-CIO

George Chauncey, Ph.D., Professor of History, University of Chicago

Bruce Cohen

Darrel Cummings, Chief of Staff, Los Angeles Gay & Lesbian Center

James Dale

Teresa DeCrescenzo, Executive Director Gay and Lesbian Adolescent Social Services

Ann DeGroot, Executive Director. Out Front Minnesota

John D’Emilio, Professor of History. University of Illinois at Chicago

Sue Doerfer, Executive Director, Lesbian-Gay Community Service Center of Greater Cleveland

Hon. John J. Duran, Mayor, City of West Hollywood, California

Randall Ellis, Executive Director, Lesbian/Gay Rights Lobby of Texas

Paula Ettelbrick, Executive Director, International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission

Laurent Fischer

Patrick Flaherty, Director of Community Relations, Milwaukee Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender Community Center

Michael Fleming, Executive Director, David Bohnett Foundation

Matt Foreman, Executive Director, National Gay and Lesbian Task Force

Matthew J. Gallagher, Executive Director, DignityUSA

Rick Garcia, Director, Equality Illinois

Penny Gardner, Ph.D., Program Director, Michigan Equality

Aimee Gelnaw, Executive Director, Family Pride Coalition

Steven Goldstein, Chair, Garden State Equality, New Jersey

Richard Gollance

Herb Hamsher

Richard S. Haymes, Executive Director, New York City Gay & Lesbian Anti-Violence Project

Sheila Healy, Executive Director, National Association of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Community Centers

Rick Jacobs, California Co-Chair, Dean for President

Terry Kaelber, Executive Director, Seniors in a Gay Environment (SAGE)

Michael Kearns

Mara Keisling, Executive Director, National Center for Transgender Equality

Kate Kendell, Esq., Executive Director, National Center for Lesbian Rights

Geoffrey Kors, Executive Director, Equality California

Anamaria Loya, Executive Director, La Raza Centro Legal

Bill Melamed, Board Member, American Foundation for AIDS Research

David Mixner

Jeffrey Montgomery, Executive Director, Triangle Foundation

Dave Noble, Executive Director, National Stonewall Democrats

Torie Osborn

C. Dixon Osburn, Executive Director, Servicemembers Legal Defense Network

Pauline Park, Co-Chair, New York Association for Gender Rights Advocacy

Clarence Patton, Interim Executive Director, National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs

Christopher J. Price

Jennifer Rakowski, Associate Director, Community United Against Violence

Warren Redman-Gress, Executive Director, Alliance For Full Acceptance

Doug Riley, Executive Director, Kansas City Anti-Violence Project

H. Alexander Robinson, National Black Justice Coalition

Eric Rofes

Mark M. Sexton and W. Kirk Wallace

Stacey L. Sobel, Executive Director, Center for Lesbian and Gay Civil Rights

Jeff Soref

Jeff Soukup

Jonathan Stoller

Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches

Olga Vives, Vice-President, National Organization for Women

Bernard Whitman

Phill Wilson, Executive Director, Black AIDS Institute

Evan Wolfson, Executive Director, Freedom to Marry

This open letter to the community was published in the 16 December 2004 issue of Gay City News.

More than 2,000 people rallied for equal rights in front of the capitol building in Albany.

New Yorkers Lobby Albany for Equality and Justice Day in Record Numbers
Constituents urge lawmakers to pass three key bills this session
By Kat Long
New York Blade
5.1.2009

Riding the momentum of recent victories for gay equality in Iowa, Vermont, Washington D.C. and other states, Empire State Pride Agenda sponsored its annual Equality and Justice Day in Albany on April 28. Pride Agenda, the statewide LGBT civil rights advocacy group, organized the daylong series of meetings with state legislators as well as a noontime rally at the foot of the capitol building. More than 2,000 New Yorkers from all corners of the state took part—the largest turnout in the event’s history. The number presented a huge increase from the first E&J Day, when 400 people participated.

“We were very strategic in identifying the districts where we wanted to make sure we had a good attendance, and we had conference calls prior to E&J Day with the individuals who had signed up to come, so we could talk to them about just how important their stories were going to be,” said Alan Van Capelle, Pride Agenda’s executive director. “Those districts included places on Long Island and in the North Country and western and central New York, so that [support] literally came from around the state.”

The day’s program was focused on having small groups of constituents meet with their elected Senators and Assemblymembers to tell their personal stories, with an emphasis on the difference pro-gay laws could make in their lives.

Three major pieces of legislation of concern to LGBT New Yorkers have a chance of passage in this legislative session, which ends June 22: the marriage equality bill re-introduced by Gov. David Paterson last month; the Gender Expression Non-Discrimination Act (GENDA); and the Dignity for All Students Act. (See related articles in this issue for analyses of each bill).

“Anytime we’ve won something from Albany it’s because we’ve told our stories to legislators,” Van Capelle said. “The biggest goal we had to was to get as many people together to tell their stories to our elected officials.”

The groups of amateur lobbyists included heads of major labor unions, CEOs of Fortune 500 companies, and everyone in between, Van Capelle said, which showed a depth and breadth of participation that hadn’t been seen in previous years.

For some E&J Day participants, it was their first chance to meet face-to-face with their elected representatives and make a personal investment in the democratic process. For others, this year offered a chance to lobby with the wind at their backs.

Pauline Park, chair of the New York Association for Gender Rights Advocacy (NYAGRA), told the Blade this was her eleventh year of lobbying in the capitol. She personally met with legislative directors for Senators Carl Kruger (D-Brooklyn), Joseph Addabbo, Jr. (D-Queens) and Hiram Monserrate (D-Queens), the latter from her own district.

“I felt it was especially important, as the chair of a statewide transgender advocacy organization, to meet with centrist Democrats who have not yet taken a clear position on legislation important to our community,” Park said. “It is precisely with Addabbo, Kruger and a few other moderate Democrats and moderate Republicans that we will find the votes to bring marriage, GENDA, and Dignity bills to the floor of the Senate and get them passed.”

Based on her meetings, Park felt that the Dignity for All Students Act would be the easiest of the three to pass, “as it is difficult for even the most homophobic or transgenderphobic politician to argue that kids should be subject to bullying in school.” She also had high hopes for GENDA based on polls that suggested most New Yorkers support laws banning discrimination, but felt marriage equality could be the biggest hurdle, based on feedback from legislators.

Van Capelle said that while we as voters have no control over which bills come up for votes first, it’s our responsibility to work the legislation we want to see made into law.

“This is a unique moment in our movement that did not happen by accident. We’ve worked for this moment, and we saw the fruits of it on Tuesday.”

He added, however, that E&J Day 2009 was the “starting point, not the finish line.”

This article originally appeared in the New York Blade on 1 May 2009; the Blade is now defunct.

New Yorkers Join National Fight for Trans Equality
By Brett Krutzsch
NY Blade
Friday, May 18, 2007

Personal stories of harassment and discrimination were a uniting theme Tuesday night at the LGBT Center in Chelsea during a panel titled “Clock In/Speak Out: Gaining Momentum for Workplace Equality in New York and the U.S.”

Almost 50 people attended the discussion on transgender rights, sponsored by the LGBT legal advocacy group Lambda Legal. The debut program was one of seven flagship events across the country that took place on Tuesday to raise awareness for the  Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA). Introduced in Congress on April 24, ENDA could make it illegal to fire, prevent promotion, or refuse to hire anyone based on sexual orientation or gender identity.

At Tuesday’s event, the panel discussed key issues facing the transgender community, including problems with the healthcare system, workplace discrimination, and harassment of transgender youth in New York City schools.

“As an American citizen, I can work just like anyone else,” said panelist Elizabeth Rivera, Program Coordinator of TransJustice at the Audre Lorde Project. Rivera, who is transgender, said it can be very difficult to get a job when you are in an “in-between state” of male and female.

New York is one of 17 states that ban discrimination based on sexual orientation. However, explicit statewide employment protection for transgender individuals does not exist.

Transgender youths are also at risk, and are not protected under New York State  law. Truman High School student Andy Santana, who identifies as “gender queer,” has been verbally and physically assaulted by other students, and said complaints to school officials have fallen on deaf ears. Santana said that when he was jumped by another student in a stairwell, “There was a security guard who saw me screaming, and walked away.”

“Fear of going to school harms people,” said Michael Silverman, executive director of the Transgender Legal Defense and Education Fund. “You are less likely to be hired if you don’t have the skill set you need.”

Panel moderator and chair of the New York Association for Gender Rights and Advocacy (NYAGRA), Pauline Park, said that, “Since so many transgender people are forced out of high school, they don’t go to college. It’s no surprise that so many transgender people are forced into sex work or extremely low-paying work.”

Santana’s experience at Truman High School in the Bronx captured the attention of the audience and became a focal point for much of the evening.

“Gay bashing definitely happens,” Santana said. “Gay and transgender students in my school get their names posted on a wall by other kids. After a student gets jumped, their name gets crossed off.”

Park said her group has sponsored trainings related to transgender issues at Truman High School, but, “The principal has been hostile since day one,” and that the “Department of Education doesn’t do anything to take these issues seriously.”

Hayley Gorenberg, the deputy legal director of Lambda Legal, wanted the audience to know that transgender people can still take cases to court in states such as New York where there aren’t specific laws to protect transgender individuals.

“People are discriminated against all the time without knowing we have tools to fight,” she said.

The evening ended with a call to action. People were encouraged to sign a petition in support of ENDA. Everyone was also given information about New York State’s Gender Expression Non-Discrimination Act (GENDA) that would protect against discrimination based on gender identity and gender expression in employment, housing, credit, public accommodations and education. Those present were given phone numbers of State Assembly members on the Codes Committee who will be voting on the issue.

Marcy Farrell, who volunteers with the Transgender Legal Defense and Education Fund, said that panel gave “all of us enough courage to be public about our transgenderness and to advocate for understanding, to be seen as human beings, despite our gender issues.”

Maurice Harrison, who was also in the audience, wished that the event could have been held somewhere other than the LGBT Center. “We have problems with the heterosexual community,” Harrison said. “And they have no idea about these meetings.”

Leslie Gabel-Brett, director of education and public Affairs at Lambda Legal, said she hopes Santana’s and others’ stories “raise visibility of transgender issues, and generate more activism on the state and national level.”

As Santana said before the panel ended, “If I had transferred out of the school, I would have shown my bashers that they had won.”

Now Santana’s story is inspiring others to fight for transgender individuals.

This article originally appeared in the New York Blade on 18 May 2007; the Blade is now defunct.

Trans Health Fair Debuts at Center

By Brett Krutzsch
New York Blade
Friday, June 01, 2007

Robert Eads, a female to male transsexual, died from ovarian cancer after being turned away by more than two dozen physicians who worried that taking him on as a patient might harm their practices. A documentary released in 2001, “Southern Comfort,” chronicles Eads’ struggles to navigate the health care system as a transgender individual.

“Transgender people, like Robert, face a tremendous amount of discrimination in the mainstream health care system,” said Michael Silverman, executive director of the Transgender Legal Defense and Education Fund (TLDEF). “And, as a result, many of them have checked out of the system.” In an effort to meet the health care needs of transgender individuals, various community organizations have joined together with St. Vincent’s Hospital to sponsor New York’s first-ever Transgender Health Fair.

From 5:30–8 p.m., Wednesday, June 6, at the LGBT Center in Manhattan, transgender men and women will have the opportunity to get free health screenings for cholesterol, diabetes, blood pressure, and more.  Information will be provided about hormone therapy, smoking cessation, nutrition and mental health. Individuals will also learn about health insurance opportunities and how to enroll in Medicaid.

“This is a historic event,” said Pauline Park, chair of the New York Association for Gender Rights and Advocacy (NYAGRA). Park, who is one of the key organizers of the event, hopes the health fair will “signal to the transgender community that our partnership with St. Vincent’s is a trans-affirming one.” According to Park, “Many transgender people don’t have health insurance, and many don’t go to the doctor because they fear discrimination because of past incidents.” Park hopes the health fair will show that resources are available to transgender men and women, and that crucial partnerships are being formed with St. Vincent’s health care providers.

“Transgender people are one of the most marginalized communities in the health care system,” said Dr. Dennis Greenbaum, chair of St. Vincent’s Department of Medicine. “It is essential that they have access to the same respectful, high quality care that all people expect.”

Park said that transgender individuals face three major impediments when trying to obtain medical care: intentional discrimination (i.e. being told “we don’t serve people like you”), inadvertent/unintentional discrimination (i.e. not having the proper resources to serve the transgender population) and institutional discrimination (i.e. only asking for male/female on in-take forms or not providing gender-neutral bathrooms).

Silverman, who is also instrumental in organizing the health fair, said, “We have transgender people all of the time who complain they are called the wrong name, or pronoun, or just made fun of” when seeking medical attention.  “I’m currently working with two transgender people who went to a local emergency room, and some security and maintenance workers referred to them as faggots,” Silverman said. “It shocks the conscience that this is what transgender people face.” Silverman and Park both maintain that the medical establishment needs to become better informed of the existence and needs of transgender people. Male-to-female transsexuals have a high rate of HIV infection, according to Silverman. And all transgender individuals have unique health issues.

“The health fair will provide information that transgender people often don’t get,” Park said. For example, information will be given to individuals who identify as female but who also should be getting routine prostate exams.  Advice and information about hormone therapy will also be available at the health fair. The issues can become tricky, as Park notes: “If you get estrogen-based hormones and your legal sex is male, most insurance companies won’t cover it even though they cover estrogen for post-menopausal women.” The health fair may not be able to change the insurance industry, but it will provide people with more options and access to transgender-friendly care.  Hopefully, the transgender health fair will connect a traditionally disenfranchised group with necessary services and treatments. “The real point of the health fair,” Silverman said, “is to show people that there are providers for the transgender community.”  The Transgender Health Fair 5:30–8 pm., Wednesday, June 6, at the LGBT Center, 208 W. 13th St., in Manhattan.

This article originally appeared in the New York Blade on 1 June 2007; the Blade is now defunct.