SAVE THE DATE~!

How often do you turn 50…? Only once (at least in my case). Back when I was born, Ike & Mamie were still in the White House; now Barack & Michelle live there. The times they are a-changing~!

So I’m throwing the birthday party of the century — well, at least the birthday party celebrating my first half century. The party will be at the beautiful William Bennett Gallery in Soho on Thursday, November 4 from 7-9 p.m.

Of that 50 years, at least 14 have been devoted to LGBT activism, including advocacy work through the New York Association for Gender Rights Advocacy (NYAGRA) and the Transgender Legal Defense & Education Fund (TLDEF). In lieu of birthday gifts, a contribution to help support the work of these two organizations that have been so much a part of my life for the last decade would be most appreciated. Donations can be made through the New York Charities Bureau of the New York State Attorney General’s Office to either Transgender Legal or NYAGRA.

I hope you’ll make my birthday celebration complete by joining me on November 4~!

William Bennett Gallery
65 Greene Street
New York, NY 10012-4336

SONDA and Transgender Inclusion in Pending State Legislation
by Pauline Park
Member, NYAGRA Board of Directors
January 2002

Recently, there has been much discussion within the transgender community in New York City about the Sexual Orientation Non-Discrimination Act (SONDA), the ‘gay rights bill’ currently pending in the New York state legislature. I would like to take this opportunity to inform NYAGRA members about NYAGRA’s position on this important piece of legislation.

As most of you know, SONDA does not include any transgender-specific language, and without such definitional language – for example, defining
sexual orientation to include ‘gender identity or expression,’ it is extremely unlikely that any court in this state would interpret such legislation (once enacted) as including transsexual or transgendered people, per se. SONDA defines ‘sexual orientation’ as “heterosexuality, homosexuality, or bisexuality, and so a transgendered person could only use the law (once enacted) to sue for discrimination if s/he also identified as lesbian, gay, or bisexual (LGB) and if the s/he could provide clear evidence that the discrimination involved related to his/her identification as LGB, regardless of any discriminatory intent based on gender identity or expression. In practical terms, then, SONDA cannot plausibly be regarded as even remotely transgender-inclusive.

There has been some confusion and misinformation concerning NYAGRA’s position on SONDA. When NYAGRA was formed in June 1998, getting transgender-specific and transgender-inclusive legislation enacted was among our primary goals. The full inclusion of all transsexual, transgendered, and gender-variant people in state human rights law was and remains a fundamental commitment of this organization. The question has been how to achieve that objective. At no time did the NYAGRA board of directors ever accept the proposition that SONDA was acceptable as written. Rather, the question at hand was one of strategy and tactics – how to move the ‘gay establishment’ and the state legislature to support transgender inclusion in state discrimination legislation.

The first decision that the NYAGRA board (then known as ‘the working group’) made was to meet with the the leading lesbian and gay political organization in the state. Tim Sweeney (then deputy director) and Paula Ettelbrick (then legislative counsel) recommended that NYAGRA and ESPA work together first on local legislation and then tackle the state legislature, and we accepted that recommendation.

Those who may be critical of the decision we made back in the fall of 1998 must understand the context in which it was made. NYAGRA was an entirely new organization, with no membership to speak of and no resources. The seven of us who met in David Valentine’s apartment on that hot afternoon on June 28 dreamt of creating an organization that would advocate for all transsexual, transgendered, and gender-variant people in this state; but we were also realistic enough to know that we were not in a position to dictate terms to a well-funded statewide organization that had a dozen full-time paid staff members, a membership of 14,000 or more, and an annual budget of over $1 million and that was – significantly – in a position to serve as gatekeeper on any LGBT-related legislation in the state legislature.

The transgender community (however defined) is a marginalized one with few resources and little political clout, and lags far behind the organized lesbian and gay community in terms of political organization. We in NYAGRA recognized that we could gain far more by working with ESPA than by demanding full transgender inclusion in a state discrimination bill that we were in no position politically to demand. By forming a strategic partnership with the Pride Agenda, we have been able to advance the legislative and political agenda of the transgender community far more effectively than if we had chosen to ‘tilt at windmills.’ ESPA’s support for the New York City transgender rights bill (Int. No. 754) was crucial for us to gain entree to Councilmembers and to give us credibility in the legislative arena.

At the time of NYAGRA’s formation in June 1998, there was not a single transgender political organization in New York City or state working directly and consistently on legislation. It is through NYAGRA’s campaign for Intro 754 that the transgender community has gained credibility in the legislative arena. At the time of the founding of NYAGRA, transgender inclusion in pending city or state legislation was not even seriously discussed in political circles. No lesbian/gay political organization in this city actively supported such inclusion, and no member of the City Council or the state legislature (to our knowledge) had even been approached about inclusion in discrimination or hate crimes legislation.

As we enter 2002, the political landscape has been transformed. Every major political club in New York City – including Gay & Lesbian Independent Democrats (GLID), Lambda Independent Democrats of Brooklyn, the Stonewall Democratic Club, and the Out People of Color Political Action Club (OutPOCPAC), as well as ESPA – has endorsed Intro 754 as well as including a question on Intro 754 on their candidate questionnaires (in most cases, the very first question on those questionnaires) in the 2001 election cycle. As a consequence of the support of these political clubs and crucially of the Pride Agenda, Intro 754 became widely viewed as a barometer of a candidate’s support not only of the transgender community but of the LGBT community as a whole. Remarkably, three of the four leading candidates for the Democratic mayoral nomination (Fernando Ferrer, Mark Green, and Alan Hevesi) endorsed Intro 754 a year before the November 2001 election, and even the one candidate who did not endorse the bill (Peter Vallone) did
not publicly oppose it. The Republican mayoral nominee (Michael Bloomberg) also committed himself to signing the bill, an important endorsement, given his election in November 2001. Both candidates for City comptroller and all five of the leading candidates for public advocate endorsed the bill. And some of the more progressive and LGBT-supportive candidates for City Council even approached NYAGRA proactively to ask that their names be put on the Intro 754 endorsement list.

The transgender community has made progress outside of New York City as well. Gender identity language was been included in the amendment to the Suffolk County anti-discrimination bill signed into law in 2001 as well as in the City of Rochester’s human rights law also enacted last year. And the City of Ithaca passed a hate crimes law that included ‘gender identity or presentation,’ making it the first jurisdiction in the state to explicitly recognize transgender in a hate crimes statute. And when the Dignity for All Students Act (DASA) was reintroduced in the state legislature in January 2001, it became the first piece of legislation ever introduced in that body to include transgender-specific language.

None of this was even conceivable back in June 1998. And so when we consider the issue of SONDA, we must realize how much NYAGRA’s work on Intro 754, DASA, and other pending legislation has raised expectations within the transgender community to a level far above that in 1998, when we (rightly) expected little or nothing of legislators or candidates for public office.

NYAGRA’s position on SONDA is this: state human rights law should and must include all transsexual, transgendered, and gender-variant people, whether through an amendment to pending legislation (such as SONDA), existing statute law (such as an enacted SONDA), or some other mechanism. SONDA is in many ways the ideal vehicle, as it is still pending and given that many legislators simply assume that ‘sexual orientation’ includes transgendered people. However, while we are committed to full transgender inclusion in state anti-discrimination law, we are also committed to working with ESPA where possible while challenging them when necessary. We recognize (as some in the community do not) that there is a two-step process to amending SONDA. First, we (and that ‘we’ includes not only NYAGRA but other transgender organizations and allies) must persuade the Pride Agenda that transgendered people deserve the same protections from discrimination as LGB people; and second, we must persuade the co-sponsors of SONDA in the state legislature to amend the bill.

What some may not recognize is that working at the state level presents greater challenges than working at the local level. While the Assembly is controlled by (generally progressive) LGBT-supportive Democrats, the state Senate is controlled by conservative Republicans who blocked the state hate crimes bill for 12 years because of its inclusion of sexual orientation. (That bill passed the Senate only in June 2000 and was signed into law in July 2001, without transgender-inclusive language.)

It is certainly not NYAGRA that has been blocking transgender inclusion in SONDA. And it is not solely the responsibility of NYAGRA board and staff members to secure full transgender inclusion in state law. Rather, it is the responsibility of all transgendered people and transgender-supportive LGBs and other allies to secure full transgender inclusion in state law. NYAGRA has grown tremendously over the last few years, but it remains a relatively small organization relative to well-established lesbian/gay statewide political organizations; and NYAGRA is a relatively under-funded organization as well, in relation to its mission and its needs (especially when one considers that there is little funding for lobbying or legislative work, which we do entirely on an unpaid volunteer basis). In the last few years since our founding, we in NYAGRA have focused on legislative objectives that we believe are realistically attainable (especially the passage of Intro 754) in order to build a foundation for pursuit of legislative goals whose realization are probably more distant – such as an amendment to SONDA (either pre- or post-enactment).

Members of the transgender community must begin to take responsibility for themselves and realize that they can play a role in the passage of legislation. If they are concerned about inclusion in state law, they can write their representatives in the Assembly and the Senate or visit them in Albany or in their district offices. There is nothing preventing any individual (whether transgender-identified or not) from raising the issue of transgender inclusion in SONDA or any other bill currently pending in the state legislature. Those who have expressed frustration with SONDA’s lack of transgender-specific language need to ask themselves if they have done what they could to secure full transgender inclusion in that bill or other pending legislation.

There is no one organization (let alone any one individual) who can claim to speak for the entire transgender community, and NYAGRA has never claimed to be such an organization. Instead, we in NYAGRA have advocated on behalf of the transgender community (a subtle but important distinction). We have been especially active in those areas where we believed there was a realistic opportunity for legislative action – most particularly with Intro 754, where there is a very good chance of getting the bill passed in the incoming City Council.

The strategic partnership that NYAGRA formed with the Pride Agenda back in the fall of 1998 has paid rich rewards in terms of our ability to advance a transgender legislative agenda. While we have not always succeeded in persuading ESPA to support full transgender inclusion in pending legislation (such as with the state hate crimes bill or SONDA), we have garnered their support for important bills (such as Intro 754)without which it would not have been possible to move that legislation forward.

Politics is ultimately about human relationships, and the relationships that we forged with senior staff – Tim Sweeney (the former deputy director who left ESPA in October 2000) and Matt Foreman (the outgoing executive director who left ESPA in December 2001), in particular – may change as new leadership takes over at ESPA. But we remain committed to working with ESPA staff to the extent possible while also remaining willing to challenge them – even publicly – when necessary. And we remain committed to full transgender inclusion in state law.

An Interview with Pauline Park
Chapter 8 in Embodying Asian/American Sexualities, edited by Gina Masequesmay & Sean Metzger

Based on interviews conducted August 22, 2004 and January 3, 2005

1.      What does transgender mean? Can you distinguish between transgender and gay/lesbian/bisexual for the reader?

‘Transgender’ is an umbrella term that refers to a diverse population.  The transgender community includes a number of different subgroups, such as transsexuals, crossdressers, and genderqueers (gender-variant individuals who may not identify with either gender).  Some (including many but not all transsexuals) will seek sex reassignment surgery while others will not; some will present fully in the gender opposite their birth sex at least part of the time (transgendered people) while others will not; but in its most general sense, ‘transgender’ refers to those individuals who ‘transgress’ gender boundaries in some sense and to some degree.  The most important point is that gender identity and sexual orientation are two entirely different phenomena; the common misconception that all transgendered people are gay is belied by the fact that many (perhaps most) transgendered people are heterosexual, though many are lesbian, gay, or bisexual as well.  Gender identity has to do with how one feels about one’s gender (whether one feels oneself to be a boy or girl, man or woman), while sexual orientation has to do with whom one is attracted to.

1a.     Given that this anthology addresses issues of “embodiments,” could you comment on what “embodiments” means for you as a transgender person?

Like every other human being, I am ‘embodied’ in that I occupy a physical body.  Many transgendered people are uncomfortable in their bodies or even alienated from them.  Some who identify as transsexual seek to alter their body through hormones and surgery.  Unlike some other transgendered women, I am comfortable occupying a male body, and I see no contradiction between being male-bodied and identifying as a woman.  For me, sex and gender are two very different things.

2.      Please narrate your “coming out” as a transgender person? Did religion impact your coming out process? If so, how?

I was born in Korean and adopted by American parents of European descent who were Christian fundamentalists and who had homophobic attitudes and very conservative views on gender roles.  Transgender issues were never discussed.  To that extent, my coming out as gay (at the age of 17) coincided with my rebellion against my mother’s religious and political views (my father died when I was 12 going on 13).  I had my second coming out at the age of 36 and have been living as an openly transgendered woman since then.  But while my public coming out as a gay boy preceded that as a transgendered woman by nearly 20 years, in fact, I realized I was transgendered at the age of four, long before I began to identify as gay, and I always knew that the gay male identity that I adopted was a tentative and incomplete one that did not fully address my gender identity.  I first began to ‘cross-dress’ regularly in public at the age of 21, but I went back in the ‘tranny closet’ two years later and so my gender transition was far less linear and far more complicated than my gay ‘coming out’ narrative.

2a.     Could you elaborate on what a “tranny closet” is? How is it different from the “gay closet”?  Were there differences being in the “tranny closet” within gay versus straight communities? For example, what were the reasons for staying in the closet among those different groups?

The ‘tranny closet’ is somewhat different from the ‘gay closet’ insofar as transgender identity generally has more implications for one’s public presentation.  After all, a gay man is probably going to still present as a man, and a lesbian as a woman, even though they may be somewhat gender-variant.  But a transgendered man or woman may significantly or even profoundly alter his/her gender presentation.  So to that extent, ‘tranny closet’ may literally involve what is in one’s clothes closet.  But in a less literal and a deeper sense, the alteration of identity may be more profound and life-altering for many transgendered people than for non-transgendered LGB people.  Because of this, the process of ‘coming out’ of that ‘closet’ may be more complex for the transgendered.  In my case, for example, my coming out as a gay male was much simpler and more linear than my coming out as a transgendered woman.  There are some differences between coming out in the LGB community vs. coming out in straight society; while there is still some prejudice within the LGB people, the transgenderphobia in straight society is much more pervasive and much more intense.  It was partly for those reasons that I remained in the ‘tranny closet’ as long as I did.  I was particularly concerned about the potentially deleterious impact on my professional career.

2b. Could you elaborate on the different issues of “coming out” versus “passing”? How are such issues different for a transsexual person versus a gay/lesbian person versus a queergender person versus a crossdresser?

The term ‘passing’ originates in the experience of light-skinned African Americans who could ‘pass’ for white and would live as if they were born white, concealing their black racial and cultural origins.  ‘Passing’ for a transgendered person refers to the experience of being perceived as gender-normative.  In other words, a transgendered woman ‘passes’ when everyone around her regards her as a female-born woman without realizing that she is transgendered (i.e., was born male).

‘Coming out’ and ‘passing’ are very different experiences, and in some circumstances, may even be opposed to each other.  For example, there is a certain proportion of post-op transsexuals who live ’stealth,’ concealing their transgender identity and living in their chosen gender as if they were born into that sex.  In other words, a post-op MTF may pretend that she was born female and conceal from neighbors, co-workers, and others the fact that she was really born male; or an FTM transsexual may live as a man without revealing to others that he was actually born female.

For me, ‘coming out’ means living as an openly transgendered woman, not in any way attempting to conceal my male birth and anatomy.  That does not mean, of course, that I always alert strangers to my transgender identity; on the street, I do not wear a button saying, “I’m really male,” or anything of that sort.  Safety is important to me, as it is to everyone; but as long as my personal security is not at risk, I am very open about my being transgendered.

For part-time crossdressers, by definition, it is not a question of living as transgendered women.  But there is still an issue of disclosure, as spouses, family members, friends and colleagues usually would not know unless told.  Many if not most crossdressers are closeted, and some are completely closeted (i.e., they only crossdress alone, in the privacy of their own homes).

‘Passing’ for lesbians and gay men would mean passing as ’straight.’  Some lesbians are sufficiently feminine, and some gay men sufficiently masculine, so that they can pass relatively easily; others may be sufficiently gender-variant that it would be difficult for them to pass, and others may assume that they are gay based on their gender variance.

3.      What led you to create the New York Association for Gender Rights Advocacy and what is its function?

NYAGRA is the first statewide transgender advocacy organization in New York.  We founded NYAGRA in June 1998, because at the time, there was no such organization and none that was involved in the legislative arena at the state or local level.  NYAGRA’s mission is to advocate for freedom of gender identity and expression for all; we do so through public education and public policy advocacy.  Our public education efforts include public forums on transgender and intersex issues and transgender sensitivity training for social service providers, AIDS agencies, government agencies, and community-based organizations.  But we are best known for our legislative work, in particular, for having led the successful campaign for Int. No. 24 (Local Law 3 of 2002), the transgender rights bill that passed the New York City Council in April 2002. NYAGRA was also instrumental in negotiating inclusion of gender identity and expression in the text of the Dignity for All Students Act, a safe schools bill currently pending in the New York state legislature that would prohibit discrimination and harassment in public schools throughout the state.  In 2004, NYAGRA partnered with other LGBT organizations in mounting a series of public forums on discrimination and harassment in schools based on gender identity and expression, held in cities throughout the state (Nyack, Albany, Syracuse, Ithaca, Poughkeepsie).  NYAGRA was a founding member of the New York State DASA Coalition as well as the coalition supporting the Dignity in All Schools Act, a safe schools bill passed by the New York City Council in June 2004 and enacted when the Council overrode Mayor Bloomberg’s veto of the bill in September 2004.  The NYC law prohibits harassment in public and (non-religious) private schools in the five boroughs, and features a definition of gender that includes gender identity and expression.

3a.     California passed Assembly Bill (AB) 537, the California Student Safety and Violence Act, in 2000. One of the continuing struggles for the coalition that worked to pass and now to enforce this legislation is the inclusion of transgender issues. Please elaborate on NYAGRA’s work with the DASA coalition. What, if anything, did you learn from other local LGBT activist organizations around the country such as Seattle’s Safe Schools Coalition (which started in the late-80s) and the Los Angeles Unified School District’s Project 10, which started in the mid-80s, who have dealt with similar struggles? How did national efforts such as the Human Rights Watch “Hatred in the Hallways” study or the work of GLSEN (Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network) inform activist activities in New York?

We in NYAGRA try to keep abreast of developments in other states, including California, but the only thing that I can recall influencing our thinking working on the New York state DASA bill was our recognition that the California state legislature was able to include gender identity and expression in their safe schools legislation without mentioning that language explicitly simply by referencing protected categories already included in California state law through its state hate crimes statute; we were not able to consider that possibility in New York because the New York State Hate Crimes Bill Coalition was not willing to hold up that hate crimes bill to include gender identity and expression in that legislation.  GLSEN is one of the member organizations in the NYS DASA Coalition, and NYAGRA has worked in partnership with GLSEN on our series of public forums on the issue of gender identity and expression in the NYS DASA Bill.  But GLSEN’s support for the safe schools bill introduced in Congress in late 2004 by U.S. Rep. John Shimkus of Illinois (R-19th) has raised questions within the LGBT community about GLSEN’s commitment to full transgender inclusion in safe schools legislation at the state and federal levels.

Regarding the NYS DASA bill, it was NYAGRA that negotiated inclusion of gender identity and expression in that legislation so that it became the first fully transgender-inclusive bill ever introduced into the New York state legislature when it was reintroduced in 2000.  Persuading the NYS DASA Coalition to support a transgender-inclusive bill was not easy.  Both the Empire State Pride Agenda and GLSEN (which co-coordinated the coalition through 2004) initially resisted inclusion of the definition of gender in the bill.  But we were eventually able to persuade the Pride Agenda and then GLSEN and through the Pride Agenda, we were able to persuade the prime sponsor of the bill in the Assembly, Assembly Member Steve Sanders, chair of the Assembly education committee.  Ever since then, the coalition has stood by full transgender inclusion, though in the spring of 2004, there was some interest on the part of ESPA and
GLSEN in exploring compromise language similar to that in the Florida DASA bill, which we in NYAGRA do not regard as being sufficiently transgender inclusive.  That bill puts the phrase ‘identity or expression of’ before the list of protected categories (including gender) but does not include a definition of gender or any other transgender-explicit language.

3b. Do you foresee joining forces with other transgender groups to form a national organization for transgender people?

There already is a national organization: the National Center for Transgender Equality (NCTE).  While we don’t have a formal coalitional relationship with NCTE (NCTE is not a coalition or a national organization with state chapters), NYAGRA has co-sponsored events with NCTE, including a forum in New York City in December 2002 (co-sponsored by NGLTF).

3c. Do you work with gay/lesbian organizations in NY? What about national gay/lesbian organizations like HRC (Human Rights Campaign) or NGLTF (National Gay and Lesbian Task Force)? In other words, where do you see your organization fit into other queer movements and efforts?  Is the trend toward a merging of queer movements to fight for freedom on gender and sexual expressions? Or, do trans and gay/lesbian have such different issues that they will remain separate organizations?

We work with a wide range of lesbian/gay and LGBT organizations in New York City and state.  Our primary partner to date has been the Empire State Pride Agenda and (on education issues, including safe schools legislation) GLSEN.  We have also had some limited opportunities to work with both HRC and NGLTF, both of which supported our campaign for Int. No. 24 (the transgender rights bill passed by the NYC Council in April
2002, enacted as Local Law 3 of 2002).  But we also signed onto a letter from the Task Force in December 2004 that was highly critical of HRC for suggesting that it might support Social Security privatization in exchange for support from the Bush administration and Republican majorities in Congress for movement on LGBT rights legislation.

We in NYAGRA see ourselves as part of a larger LGBT community, and we have played a significant role in the shift toward greater transgender inclusion here in New York.  For example, NYAGRA is a key part of the Coalition for Unity & Inclusion, which successfully lobbied the Lesbian & Gay Community Services Center to change its name to LGBT Community Center (aided significantly by the internal work on transgender inclusion by Center staff).  NYAGRA & CUI also successfully persuaded Heritage of
Pride to change the name of the NYC Lesbian & Gay Pride March to ‘LGBT Pride March.’  And we were successful in persuading the NewFest to change the name of the New York Gay & Lesbian Film Festival to ‘LGBT Film Festival.’  Beyond nomenclature, since its founding in 1998, NYAGRA has contributed significantly to the shift in consciousness in New York City and state toward transgender inclusion.  When we were founded in June 1998, few lesbian & gay organizations in New York City included the ‘T’ in their names, much less included transgender in their mission statements, their programming, or their thinking more generally; now, most do in name as well as in practice.

But we in NYAGRA also see ourselves as part of a larger progressive movement for social justice and social change; not all LGBT organizations share that philosophy.

4.      What are the particular challenges facing transgender Asian/ Americans and Pacific Islander/ Americans?

Transgendered Asians and Pacific Islanders (APIs), like many other transgendered people of color, face multiple oppressions based on race, ethnicity, citizenship status, and language.  Many transgendered APIs are recent immigrants and have limited English-language proficiency and cultural competence.  Some are undocumented and face problems related to their immigration status.  Others would like to marry U.S. citizens of the same sex as their birth sex but cannot because of laws and state constitutional amendments prohibiting same-sex marriage.  Others face problems changing their legal sex designation on documents issued either by U.S. government agencies or by government agencies in their country of birth (such as birth certificates issued by their municipalities of origin).  Some transgendered API women — especially those who are undocumented — are forced into sex work and face heightened risk of HIV infection and other sexually transmitted diseases.  Many transgendered  APIs lack health insurance and/or full access to quality health care.  Many transgendered APIs are reluctant to approach social service providers in their ethnic communities for fear of discrimination or being ‘outed,’ but those with limited English-language proficiency and cultural competence may find it difficult to access services through LGBT community centers and other LGBT social service providers.  Given the centrality of the family in API communities, one of the biggest challenges for transgender APIs is gaining acceptance from their families of origin.  Religious institutions also figure prominently in many API communities, but few are transgender-affirming.  Christian churches in the Korean American community tend to be socially conservative and are often homophobic and transgenderphobic.  The Roman Catholic Church is also a central institution in the Filipino community, with implications for transgendered Filipinos.  For transgendered immigrants from predominantly Muslim countries (Pakistan, Bangladesh, Malaysia, Indonesia), the increasing influence of Islamic fundamentalism has further complicated their lives, already difficult because of the sex segregation and gender oppression of their immigrant communities and cultures of origin.

4a.     The API transgender issues are diverse.  Is there a common issue that the majority of API transgenders share that distinguishes them from non-API transgenders?  We see, in Los Angeles for example, gay/lesbian groups splintering into smaller racial , gender and ethnic groups.  Is the trend similar in the transgender communities (between FTMs and MTFs; TS who identify as straight versus gay/lesbian or bi; etc.)?

I think this question raises the larger issue of what is often referred to as ‘identity politics.’  There is certainly a trend throughout the LGBT community toward narrower and narrower focus in organization-building based on identity formations.  The right wing is enamored of the term ‘Balkanization.’  I think the use of this term shows an ignorance of the need of marginalized groups to address the specificity of their oppression.  Clearly, transgendered APIs have in common both being transgendered and being API; but transgendered API women in particular also have the commonality of being ‘fetishized’ as ‘exotic’ objects of sexual interest by straight ‘tranny chasers’; they also share the other multiple oppressions of queer APIs that relate to race, ethnicity, and citizenship status; and they share heightened risk for HIV/AIDS and other STDs.  And yet, of course, transgendered APIs are individuals who are very different in other respects as well.

4b. How do you feel about the disidentification that many Pacific Islanders feel with the term API? Such divisions are reflected, in fact, in our own final decision to use Asian/ American and Pacific Islander/ American in this book. In what ways are such divisions either useful or not?

‘API’ and ‘APA’ are obviously social constructs, but then again, so are ‘Asian American’ and all identity formations, to a greater or lesser extent.  Clearly, the attempt to include Pacific Islanders within the API/APA construct reflects a concern over inclusion, but it can be disingenuous or even tokenizing if not accompanied by a real effort to include Pacific Islanders in organizations that are ostensibly ‘API.’  But the parallel here with ‘LGBT’ is striking: if it is simply a question of adding the ‘T’ for purposes of inclusive nomenclature, then adding the ‘PI’ is insufficient; it is important to make the ‘P’ or ‘PI’ in ‘APA’ or ‘API’ meaningful through meaningful inclusion of Pacific Islanders in whichever organizations and initiatives use one of those designations.

5.      What resources are available for transgender Asian/ Americans and Pacific Islander/ Americans?

The resources available for transgendered APIs (as distinct from resources available to the transgender community as a whole) are virtually all housed in AIDS agencies serving API communities, including:

Asian & Pacific Islander Wellness Center (San Francisco)
http://www.apiwellness.org/

Asian Pacific Islander Coalition on HIV/AIDS (APICHA, New York)
http://www.apicha.org/

Asian Pacific AIDS Intervention Team (APAIT, Los Angeles)
http://www.apaitonline.org/

AIDS Services in Asian Communities (ASIAC, Philadelphia)
http://www.asiac.org/

Asian Pacific Islanders for Human Rights (APIHR, Los Angeles)
http://www.apihr.org/

APIHR is the first non-AIDS organization for LGBT/queer APIs to receive significant funding and also has a TG program.

5a. Which texts (books, films, etc.) do you find particularly useful for educational purposes?

There are all too few resources on transgender and queer API issues currently available.  Among the few that I find useful are:

David L. Eng and Alice Hom, eds., Q&A: Queer in Asian America
(Philadelphia, 1998: Temple University Press).
Kevin K. Kumashiro, ed., Restoried Selves: Autobiographies of Queer
Asian/Pacific American Activists (New York, London, Oxford, 2003:
Harrington Park Press).
Franklin Odo, ed., The Columbia Documentary History of the Asian
American Experience (New York, 2002: Columbia University Press).

Ann Thomson Cook, Made in God’s Image: A Resource for Dialogue about
the Church and Gender Differences (Washington, D.C., 2003: Dumbarton
United Methodist Church).
“Georgie Girl” (P.O.V. documentary about the life of Georgina Beyer)
“Boys Don’t Cry” (feature film)

Embodying Asian/American Sexualities, edited by Gina Masequesmay & Sean Metzger, was published by Lexington Books (a division of The Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group, Inc.) in 2009. “An Interview with Pauline Park” (pp. 105-114) is chapter 8 out of 13 chapters, and was based on interviews conducted by Sean Metzger on August 22, 2004 and January 3, 2005.

As coordinator of a legislative work group that includes city council members, transgender-supportive allies, and other members of  the New York Association for Gender Rights Advocacy, Pauline Park is one of the key players in the initiative to amend New York City’s Human Rights Law to include transgendered and gender variant people. (In February 2000, city council members announced their co-sponsorship of a trans-protective bill; it has not yet passed.) Park’s participation in transgender activism began with GenderPAC’s annual national gender lobby days in Washington, D.C., in May 1997 and 1998.  She and other New York-based trans activists decided to focus their efforts at the state and local levels, and in June, 1998, they  founded the  New York Association for Gender Rights Advocacy (NYAGRA), the first statewide transgender political organization in New York.

Park, who has a Ph.D. in political science from the University of Illinois, found working on this project in the highly-charged political environment of New York City to be a real education in lobbying.  Her first piece of advice: “While the support of legislative staff is important, it’s crucial to get at least a few of the members themselves actively engaged in the process. We’ve been very fortunate to have the direct and active participation of two legislators of color — Margarita Lopez, an openly lesbian Latina city council member; and Bill Perkins, a GLBT-supportive African American city council member.” The legislative work group meets in person or via a conference call every two or three weeks.

“It’s also vital to have the support of the lesbian, gay, and bisexual community. We’ve formed a working partnership with Tim Sweeney and Ralph Wilson at the Empire State Pride Agenda, and we’ve been able to build on the credibility with legislators that they already enjoy,” Park said.

Park also emphasizes the importance of forming a broad coalition of allies in support of the bill. “In a city as diverse as New York, it’s important to counter the perception that transgender-based discrimination is only a white queer lower Manhattan issue.”  Park said. “With Pride Agenda staff and the six council members in our legislative work group, we’ve produced what looks to be a winning strategy, forging a broad-based coalition that includes communities of color and people in the outer boroughs.”  Members of the legislative work group have reached out to a range organizations for their support, including the Audre Lorde Project, the National Organization for Women-New York City Chapter, the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund, Puerto Rican Legal Defense & Education Fund, District Council 37 (the largest union in the city),  the GLB political clubs, and people of faith.

Park has been involved with organizing in GLBT communities since 1994, when she launched Gay Asians & Pacific Islanders of Chicago, an organization for gay, bisexual, and transgendered Asian and Pacific Islanders. Since then, she has continued to be involved in Asian and Pacific Islander communities, working with the Gay Asian & Pacific Islander Men of New York and co-founding Iban/Queer Koreans of New York in February 1997. The initial spark for Iban/QKNY was the Korean LGBT Forum organized by the Korean Gay Organization/ Chingusai and hosted by the Korean American Association of Greater New York on November 2, 1996.  Park was one of the four speakers in that panel discussion, the first forum on GLBT issues ever sponsored by a non-queer Korean American organization. For Park, ensuring that people of color have an equal voice in the transgender political movement is critical. “As a transgendered woman of color, I do not have the luxury of completely separating what are ostensibly ‘transgender’ issues from issues of race, ethnicity, nationality, and citizenship status.”

Transgender Equality: A Handbook for Activists & Policymakers, by Paisley Currah & Shannon Minter, was published on 19 June 2000 by the National Center for Lesbian Rights and the Policy Institute of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force.

]]> http://www.paulinepark.com/index.php/2010/07/transgender-equality-a-profile-of-pauline-park-6-19-00/feed/ 0 http://www.paulinepark.com/index.php/2010/07/transworld-conference-1998-alp-missive-fall-1998/ http://www.paulinepark.com/index.php/2010/07/transworld-conference-1998-alp-missive-fall-1998/#comments Mon, 12 Jul 2010 21:06:33 +0000 Pauline http://www.paulinepark.com/?p=1721

TransWorld Conference 1998
by Pauline Park
The Missive
fall 1998

The Audre Lorde Project (ALP) will be hosting TransWorld: New York’s first conference specifically for People of Color of Transgender experience. On Saturday, October 24, this full-day conference will feature a variety of panels and workshops. Speakers will address a range of issues, spanning from Survival Skills to Non-Western Concepts of ‘Transgender.’ Break-out sessions will help attendees grapple with concerns such as employment, violence, homelessness, medical issues of transsexual transition and health care for transgendered individuals.

BransWorld is the fourth annual Transgender and Transsexual Health Empowerment conference sponsored by the Gender Identity Project (GIP) of the Lesbian and Gay Community Services Center in Manhattan, and the first conference in that series with ALP as a primary co-sponsor. The event’s other co-sponsors include: the NYC Gay and Lesbian Anti-Violence Project, the Asian & Pacific Islander Coalition on HIV/AIDS, Gay Asian and Pacific Islander Men of New York, Harlem United Community AIDS Center, Iban/Queer Koreans of New York, the New York Association for Gender Rights Advocacy, PRoject Reach, and Queens Pride House.

Contact Nguru Karugu from ALP at 718-596-0342, ext. 11 or GIP at 212-620-7310 for registration and other information. This promises to be an exciting event!

This article originally appeared in fall 1998 issue of The Missive (Vol. 2, Issue 3) of the Audre Lorde Project (ALP ).

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/new-law-stands-up-for-lgbt-youth-queens-tribune-7-1-10/ http://www.paulinepark.com/index.php/2010/07/new-law-stands-up-for-lgbt-youth-queens-tribune-7-1-10/#comments Wed, 07 Jul 2010 17:16:26 +0000 Pauline http://www.paulinepark.com/?p=1669

Jackson Heights This Week
New Law Stands Up For LGBT Youth
Queens Tribune
1-7 July 2010

The New York State Senate passed sweeping anti-bullying legislation on June 22 that will be the first in the nation to include protection for transgender individuals.

The Dignity for All Students Act passed the Senate by an overwhelming 58-3 margin, winning support from Democrats and Republicans. Gov. David Paterson has vowed to sign the bill, which has already passed the Assembly.

“I’m thrilled that the Senate finally took action after 10 years,” said Pauline Park, chair of the New York Association for Gender Rights Advocacy and Vice President of the Board of Directors of Queens Pride House. “Both Democrats and Republicans saw there was a need to protect students in public schools from harassment.” Park had been involved in pushing for passage of the bill for over adecade.

The bill requires school staff to report bullying and bias-based discrimination and harassment based on a comprehensive list of characteristics, including disability, ethnicity, race, religion and sexual orientation, as well as gender, and it requires training to deal with instances of bullying and bias-based discrimination and harassment. Park noted the definition of gender is a crucial component of the legislation, as surveys show that bullying and harassment based on gender identity and expression have become a major problem in schools.

The New York City Council passed a similar law in June 2004 called the Dignity in All Schools Act. Mayor Mike Bloomberg vetoed it shortly after, but the mayor’s veto was overridden. The Bloomberg administration and DOE refused to implement the law, claiming the City Council didn’t have authority to pass legislation dealing with schools since the state legislature authorized Mayoral Control of schools. Park disagreed.

“We didn’t see anything in the law [allowing Mayoral Control] that would preclude City Council from legislating in these matters,” she said. She noted that the state law now supersedes the city law and requires the DOE to enforce it. Park said she and other LGBT activists would be fully involved in seeing that the law is implemented in city schools.

The two laws are similar. The local law applies only to harassment and not discrimination, which state law includes, but the state law only applies to public schools while the city law also includes private schools.

Park, who lives in Jackson Heights, said the new law was especially important for Queens because of the borough’s diverse demographics.

“Biased-based harassment and discrimination is a huge issue in the diverse student population of Queens,” she said. “This law will certainly be relevant here.”

Reach Reporter Domenic Rafter at drafter@queenstribune.com or (718) 357-7400, Ext. 125.

– Domenick Rafter

This article originally appeared in the print edition of the 1-7 July 2010 issue of the Queens Tribune.

To the Editor:

In your article, “Absorbing Gay Pain & Praise, Clinton Says She’s Evolved” (Paul Schindler, Oct. 26-Nov. 1), you report on Senator Hillary Clinton’s response to a question from a member of the Greater Voices Coalition about whether she would support inclusion of gender identity and expression in the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA). You write, “Clinton noted that the federal hate crimes measure also lacks such language, but said
only, ‘We are very aware of that and we are raising that.’” In fact, while the Senate version (sponsored by Ted Kennedy) of the Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act (LLEEA) does not include gender identity and expression, the most recent House version (sponsored by Barney Frank) does. But would she press Senator Kennedy to add gender identity and expression to the Senate version of the federal hate crimes bill-as well as to ENDA-when they are reintroduced in the next Congress? That is the follow-up question that Senator Clinton should have been asked, but was not.

Pauline Park
Chair
New York Association for Gender Rights Advocacy (NYAGRA)
Manhattan

This letter to the editor was published in the 9 November 2006 issue of Gay City News.

Bronx Borough President Fernando Ferrer came to the forum at NYU and spoke briefly about transgender rights.

Turning Law Into Action
Panel at NYU discusses obstacles, opportunities of gender rights law
By Winnie McCroy
Gay City News
April 21-27, 2005
Vol. IV, Issue 16

A crowd of about 50 transgendered people, advocates and political leaders gathered at New York University’s Kimmel Center on April 19 for a panel discussion on the new city guidelines established to implement the 2002 law that protects trans people and other New York City residents from discrimination in housing, employment and public accommodations based on their gender identity and expression.

Panelists included Pauline Park, co-chair of the New York Association for Gender Rights Advocacy (NYAGRA); Matt Foreman, executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force; Avery Mehlman, deputy director of the New York City Commission on Human Rights; Michael Silverman, executive director of the Transgender Legal Defense & Education Fund (TLDEF) and City Councilman Bill Perkins.

Organizers had invited all mayoral candidates to attend, but only Democratic hopeful Fernando Ferrer, the former Bronx borough president, turned out.

The gender rights measure was enacted in April 2002, passing with a City Council vote of 45 to 5. In December 2004, the city’s human rights commission completed worked done in collaboration with advocates from NYAGRA and other organizations and issued guidelines for its implementation. Now, the mission is to educate the public about these guidelines.

“We’re here to educate both the transgender community and the general public about the scope and reach of the law and what protections it offers so that people like landlords, employers and providers of public accommodations know how they’re supposed to interact with the transgender community in a way that is within the bounds of the law,” TLDEF’s Silverman told Gay City News. “It’s also for the transgender community to learn what its rights and responsibilities are with respect to the law.”

The law’s protections include the right to access to restrooms of the individual’s choice, to homeless services, and to protections in prisons, as well as against general harassment such as stalking, anti-trans slurs, and retaliation for reporting these complaints.

Park told Gay City News, “We at NYAGRA feel it’s sufficient not just to simply pass a law or to adopt guidelines for its implementation, it’s equally important to continually educate the public-policy makers, employers, landlords, and providers of public accommodations – about the law and about discrimination that transgendered and gender variant people face on a daily basis.”

Perkins, lead sponsor of the legislation on the Council, noted that the issue was first introduced under the leadership of former City Council Speaker Peter Vallone. It did not move forward, however, until Gifford Miller assumed the speakership, and Perkins, joined by colleagues including the three gay and lesbian members — Christine Quinn, Margarita Lopez and Phil Reed — began to push for its advancement. Although clearly pleased that
the legislation passed so handily, Perkins warned the crowd that the fight was long from finished.

“One of the most important things we’ve learned about this legislation is this: laws don’t change attitudes. They may punish behaviors, but you know, I still can’t get a cab at all times in this city, even though that’s against the law,” said Perkins, an African American who represents Harlem.

Several speakers and audience members argued that in the past, complaints made to the human rights commission were lost in the shuffle. Mehlman admitted that the commission had been plagued by years of backlogged cases before Mayor Michael Bloomberg took office and appointed a team of attorneys to handle the 75,000 open cases. Now, Mehlman said, complaints are investigated quickly.

He pointed as an example Park’s success in winning a settlement in a case against Advantage Security who asked her for identification after she used the women’s restroom in the Manhattan Mall in Herald Square last April. The company paid both her and another transgendered woman who faced similar harassment $2,500 each. Several speakers, however, noted the anti-trans tenor of the New York Post coverage on March 31 of another bathroom access case in an article titled, “Judges Uphold Bathroom Ban on Girlie-Men.”

The Task Force’s Foreman noted the importance of making the gender rights guarantees work in New York City. “When you do something like this in New York, you’re affecting eight million people — 16 times more people than live in the entire state of Wyoming, for example,” he said. “Other cities across the country look to New York, saying if New York can do this, with its complex legal system, other places can do it.

“That said, we have a very long way to go to translate the law and the guidelines into livability for trans people in New York City. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to know that discrimination against trans people is rampant, everywhere, and pervasive. And it’s incumbent upon those of us who don’t identify as trans to really understand that and take a stand about it.”

This point was stressed toward the end of the panel discussion in galvanizing comments from Melissa Sklarz, a transgender activist who is co-chair of LGBT issues for Community Board 2, which covers Greenwich Village, SoHo and Little Italy.

“Now that we have legal protection, what are we going to do to make a difference?” Sklarz asked. “Wouldn’t it be great if those of us who are empowered actually stayed to fight? So that the next generation that comes along won’t have to worry about the hateful, disgusting press coverage that we get in the New York Post.”

For additional information about this legislation and the guidelines under which violations can be reported, visit ci.nyc.ny.us/html/cchr/html/trans_guide.html. If you feel you are the victim of discrimination based on your gender identity or expression,
contact the NYC Commission on Human Rights at 212-306-7450.

photo caption: (L. to r.) Pauline Park, Matt Foreman, Avery Mehlman, Michael Silverman and City Councilman Bill Perkins participated Tuesday night for a discussion on how New York is implementing its municipal gender rights law.

This article originally appeared in the 21-27 April 2005 issue (Vol. IV, Issue 16) of Gay City News.

As a transsexual, Justine Nicholas said she often feels like Nora in the last act of Ibsen’s “A Doll’s House.” This sense of isolation was only compounded after a security guard in Midtown demanded that she prove her gender after she walked out of a women’s restroom.

“I was born as an insider,” Nicholas, 46, said. “I lived the first 43 years of my life as a white heterosexual male and while I wasn’t fabulously wealthy, nobody questioned what restroom I used when I walked in.”

Nicholas, a teacher at the City University of New York, was among more than 60 activists, officials and legal experts at a forum at New York University on Tuesday, April 19, that discussed the implementation of law that amended the city’s Human Rights Law to include gender identity and expression as a protected category. The New York City Council overwhelmingly passed Local Law 3, which protects transgendered New Yorkers from housing, employment and public accommodation discrimination, in April 2002; Mayor Michael Bloomberg quickly signed it into law. The city’s Commission on Human Rights adopted these guidelines in December.

Michael Silverman, executive director of the Transgender Legal Defense & Education Fund, said these guidelines and amendments establish an important legal precedent. “There haven’t been many guidelines for gender identity and expression,” he said. “But when we added gender identity and expression to the city Human Rights Law, it was somewhat of a novelty under civil rights law.”

The TLDEF announced earlier this month that it had reached a settlement under the amended HRL after Nicholas and Pauline Park, co-chair of the New York Association for Gender Rights Advocacy, filed complaints with the CHR. They alleged security guards did not allow them to access public restrooms. The settlements (the first since Local Law 3 took effect) constitute an important success, Silverman said: “Having success in cases like those is pressing some hot buttons.”

Matt Foreman, executive director of the National Lesbian & Gay Task Force, described the impact of Local Law 3 as “tremendous” and added that other municipalities across the country are looking at it as a model. “This is a monumental step forward,” Foreman said. “When you do something like this it affects 8 million people. And other cities look to New York and say, “If New York can do it then we can do it also.”

Councilmember Bill Perkins (D-Harlem), who sponsored the bill, said it was part of an ongoing civil rights struggle for the transgendered. “We are not talking just about human rights but a civil rights movement,” he said. “One of the most important things we have learned is that laws don’t change attitudes.”

Sen. Tom Duane (D-West Side) and Assemblymember Dick Gottfried (D-Hell’s Kitchen) have reintroduced a bill in Albany last week that seeks to extend legal protections to transgendered people statewide. NYAGRA, the Empire State Pride Agenda and a number of other gay advocacy groups have endorsed the Gender Expression Non-Discrimination Act. Gottfried said he hopes the bill will expand protections outlined in the Sexual Orientation Non-Discrimination Act. “The experience of transgender individuals and the discrimination they face is unique,” Gottfried said. “It should be specifically identified and unambiguously rejected in our state’s civil rights laws.”

Despite these ongoing legislative and legal efforts, CHR Deputy Commissioner Avery Mehlman said he is concerned that many transgendered New Yorkers are simply unaware that they are protected under the law. “When we speak with the transgender community we see discrimination everywhere,” he said. “But we don’t see the numbers coming down to the agency to file a complaint.”

But Nicholas said this was a first step: “The fact that such a law was passed caused people to realize that their own consciousness needs to be raised.”

This article originally appeared in the 22 April 2005 issue of the New York Blade News, which is now defunct.

After months of speculation, Gov. George Pataki made it official last week and announced he would not seek a fourth term. Instead, many political experts expect Pataki to make a run for the Republican Party’s nomination for president in 2008.

“In New York, there is no better opportunity to serve than to serve as your governor,” Pataki said. “You have given me that privilege three times over, a job that I love, a responsibility I have embraced, and an office that I have been honored to hold for the last 10 1/2 years. Your help, your dedication, your trust has given me the tremendous honor and privilege to serve as your governor. I thank you for that honor, and I thank you for that privilege.”

Pataki, who previously served in the Legislature and was the mayor of Peekskill, N.Y., came to prominence in 1994 when the Republican beat Democratic incumbent Mario Cuomo. Since winning the office Pataki has had an easy go when he ran for reelection in 1998 and 2002.

“George Pataki did what many considered to be impossible, not once but three times. Despite running in a state that has millions more Democrats than Republicans, he defeated Mario Cuomo in 1994, and was returned to office in 1998 and 2002 by historic margins,” said state GOP chairman Stephen Minarik in a written statement.

“Gov. George Pataki is a very brilliant tactician when it comes to politics,” said Bill Schmidt, second term gay Republican City Councilman from Peekskill and a long-time friend of the governor’s. “From mayor of Peekskill all the way up to governor he has unseated an incumbent.”

Deciding not to run for a fourth term might be another example of political acumen because if the polls are correct, Pataki’s numbers are down. This past May, even after a state budget was passed on time, Pataki’s approval ratings according to a Quinnipiac University poll was only at 36 percent.

Pataki did not say what was next for him, but one of the worst-kept secrets in New York is he’s considering a run in 2008 for the GOP presidential nomination. Pataki recently delivered a number of speeches in Iowa and elsewhere outside New York to raise his national profile.

However, a national run presents challenges because Pataki is viewed by many as an ally on gay equality. Alan Van Capelle, executive director of the Empire State Pride Agenda, was unequivocal in his defense of Pataki.

“It is fair to say the George Pataki is the best governor gays and lesbians have had on their issues,” Van Capelle said. “If anybody was looking at specific accomplishments Gov. Pataki has delivered and matched those when compared with anyone else who has been there in Albany before him. He has the best record on LGBT issues when compared to any other New York governor.”

Van Capelle pointed to Pataki’s signing of the Sexual Orientation Nondiscrimination Act (SONDA) in 2002 and his support of other legislation, such as the hate crime bill and domestic partner rights, as examples of the Pataki record.

Tom Wahl, director of the Log Cabin Republicans in New York State, agrees and thinks Pataki should get credit for being a leader in pushing the gay rights agenda.

“I think his tenure has been extraordinary for those of us in the state,” Wahl said. “He has been extremely progressive and inclusive in his administration.”

“I think he has come a long way during his tenure on this issue. His crowning achievement will always be the passage of SONDA,” said Patrick Murphy, presently an openly gay GOP candidate for District 4 (Upper Eastside).

Despite this, Pataki has not announced any support for same-sex marriage. Schmidt does not believe that should be held against him. “He has not been a leader on marriage, but very few governors, Democratic or Republican have used political capital on marriage so I can’t fault him there,” Schmidt said.

“I think people look at the issue of marriage and get hung up on that issue,” Van Capelle said. “Maybe that is going to be the legacy of Pataki. He is an enigma. He is a conservative in some issues, but on others he is a progressive. However, at the end of the day, he has done things for gays and lesbians and we’re better for it. He has pushed the envelope and has allowed others to go farther.”

It would be unfair to say all New Yorkers give Pataki glowing reviews.

“I think Pataki’s reputation on LGBT concerns rests on two bills he signed into law: the hate crimes bill and SONDA. Unfortunately neither had explicitly transgendered language,” said Pauline Park, chair of the New York Association for Gender Rights Advocacy.

While Pataki might have earned some political capital here in New York it remains to be seen how his gay-friendly vision will work in a party where social conservatives carry most of the clout when it comes to the national scene.

“It would be difficult for our governor to be nominated as presidential candidate because the current structure of the party is a bit more conservative than his moderate and reasonable views,” Wahl said.

Pataki’s decision not to run leaves the state GOP at a slight disadvantage with no one stepping foward to challenge State Attorney General Elliot Spitzer, whom has announced his decision to seek the office and is favored to win the Democratic nomination. Wahl wants someone just like Pataki to get the nod.

“We are hopeful the Republican Party will endorse someone who will be as big tent-oriented as George Pataki has been,” Wahl said.

photo caption:

Gov. George Pataki announced last week that he would not be a candidate for reelection. Pataki hasn’t announced his future intentions, but indications are he is considering a presidential run in 2008. His gay-friendly record could help him on the national stage with moderates, but may hurt him in the primaries with social conservatives.

This article originally appeared in the 5 August 2005 issue of the New York Blade News, which is now defunct.

Jane Garra, a tall, leggy blues guitarist with hair flopping into her eyes, is often interrupted during performances at Brooklyn’s Buttermilk bar and the Ace Café in Manhattan, accosted by young women with a simple question not about her unusual instrument — a dobro guitar, which is used in Hawaiian music and is familiar enough to music aficionados at the CasHank Hootenanny Jamboree, a regular jam session held every month at Buttermilk.

No, Galla said, “The girls tell me, `We love the way you dress! How do you do it?’” I tell them every time: “If you want to look like this, go shop at Loehmann’s!”

For more than two years, Galla has been a regular at the 86-year-old discount clothing store on Seventh Ave. and 17th St. In fact, many of Loehmann’s employees know her well enough to ask where she has been when they don’t see her for a while.

Now, Loehmann’s employees also know Garra as a plaintiff.

That is because she was denied access to Loehmann’s public restrooms and fitting rooms on two occasions last year, leading her to file a complaint with the New York City Human Rights Commission.

Perhaps it was her height, her angular face, her gravelly voice that caused someone to suspect that Garra was born a boy. Garra may never know for certain. What is clear is that it was illegal for the store to order her out.

Last week, Garra and her lawyer, Michael Silverman of the Transgender Legal Defense & Education Fund, announced that the case had been settled. Loehmann’s agreed to train their employees to act with sensitivity toward transgender women and men, and to grant them full access to public facilities as required by New York City’s Human Rights Law, which was amended in March 2002 to “eliminate discrimination based on an individual’s actual or perceived gender.”

In the five years since that groundbreaking legislation was passed by the City Council, a steady stream of cases has come to the Commission’s attention, as more and more transgender women and men have felt free to speak up about what they are experiencing.

Many of the cases have involved public employees. Last summer, a 70-year-old Verizon worker won a landmark settlement against the Metropolitan Transit Authority after she was repeatedly arrested and cursed at by transit police for using restrooms at Grand Central Station, where she worked. Last fall, a handful of transgender teens were arrested in Port Authority for the same reason, and last month, a young transgender employee of Housing Works filed suit against the MTA, charging harassment by numerous workers she’d asked to help her.

The Loehmann’s case is in some ways typical of the harassment endured by transgender people, said advocates and the Human Rights Commission, as they applauded both Loehmann’s agreement to settle and Garra’s bravery in coming forward about the issue. They differed on whether the relatively small number of cases surfacing each year is a sign of progress, indifference or changes occurring haphazardly, just under the surface.

New York’s Human Rights Law, also known as Title 8 of the Administrative Code, has contained anti-discrimination provisions for many years. But it wasn’t until 2002, after years of hearings before overlapping committees, that “gender identity” was added to the statute, banning discrimination when an individual’s “gender identity, self-image, appearance, behavior or expression is different from that traditionally associated with the legal sex assigned to an individual at birth.”

It took nearly two years for the changes in the law to become translated into policies and recommendations for city agencies, during which time Michael Silverman, a longtime attorney with Lambda Legal Defense Fund with a 10-year history of working on behalf of LGBT civil rights, decided to found TLDEF, a legal advocacy group specifically for transgendered people.

TLDEF then advised the city on how to educate employees about transgender issues and helped them create new guidelines on employment, harassment and access to public facilities — like the restrooms and fitting rooms denied to Jane Garra.

Garra’s own personal journey has been rather rapid. A former English teacher in a Brooklyn public high school, she told Chelsea Now that it wasn’t until she left the Board of Education, about five years ago, that she came clear about what she’d only suspected: that she was a woman in a man’s body. A few years of deep work with therapists and doctors helped her settle into her new identity. Sometime in 2004, she began shopping at Loehmann’s, finding their clothes the perfect fit for her life as Jane.

“They have a fabulous selection of clothes,” Garra said, “and you can’t beat the prices.” She favors “Western wear,” as befits a country-western musician, and confesses, “I’m a clearance-rack girl.” She started going two to three times a month, she said, becoming such a regular patron that employees noticed when a week went by without her.

It was a shock, then, in spring 2006 when a young employee came up to her in the women’s room, saying nervously, “We got a report you were here…you have to go use the men’s room.” Garra was stunned but decided to let it go, since the woman wasn’t an employee she knew. But a few months later, when Garra was about to try on some casual wear in a private fitting room in the women’s department, a middle-aged store manager came up to her and told her, “Management says that you can’t be in this fitting room.”

“I said, `I’ve been using this particular facility for several years,’” said Garra with a deep chuckle. After that second incident, Galla called Silverman and TLDEF, and Galla v. Loehmann’s was born.

Silverman was already working with Helena Stone, the 70-year-old telephone technician who had been arrested three times for using the restroom at Grand Central during her breaks from working on the station’s phone system. One officer called her “a freak, a weirdo and the ugliest woman in the world,” according to Stone. In October, MTA settled with Stone, paying her legal fees and agreeing to mandatory staff train regarding their legal obligations toward the transgendered.

But just as Silverman was telling the press that the settlement was a “milestone,” Port Authority police were arresting three transgendered teenagers. Meanwhile, Tracy Bumpurs, an employee of the social service agency Housing Works, was still fighting to get MTA to simply apologize for her treatment in July 2006, when her request for help with her MetroCard was met, she said, with a homophobic tirade.

David Thorpe of Housing Works said that he and Bumpurs met repeatedly with MTA officials and were told that the employees involved would be subject to a disciplinary hearing, but there has been no word on her other requests. The suit, filed on Jan. 30, requests not just compliance but financial redress to compensate Bumpur’s sleepless nights and lost work since the incident.

Thorpe added that Housing Works, which runs a residential facility for homeless people with HIV, has a long and successful track record when it has pursued litigation against the city, and that “this was an employee of ours, as well as a civil rights issue. We had to do it.” And while the MTA has scheduled transgender sensitivity training for its employees, Thorpe and Bumpurs say they have yet to see tangible result.

TLDEF’s Michael Silverman said he is working with both the MTA and the Port Authority police on employee training, but many agree with Housing Works that the pace is painfully slow. Even the very city officials charged with enforcing and publicizing the human rights law admit that progress is painfully slow.

Avery Melman, of the New York City Human Rights Commission, who helped broker the Loehmann’s settlement, said that “the more publicity cases like this get, the more information people have about their rights under the human rights law.” He said that half the battle is getting the word out to people who may not realize they are being discriminated against.

“I’ve spoken at numerous forums regarding the rights of transgendered individuals under the human rights law,” said Melman, “and I’ve had relatively few people approach me in those five years.”

Melman pointed to the Guidelines on Gender Identity (available on his agency’s Website at http://nyc.gov/html/cchr/html/trans_guide.html developed with Silverman and other advocates, and said that there is now “ongoing training at all city agencies” based on the guidelines. He pointed to the relative handful of cases as a hopeful sign: Perhaps most people were getting the message.

Silverman respectfully disagrees with that assessment. “I think it remains more the case that people don’t know their rights,” he said. Even so, his office is subject to a stream of calls — more than his attorneys can take on. “We can only take on a small handful.” Public education is a growing, ongoing need, he said.

Pauline Park, director of the New York Association of Gender Rights Advocacy, pointed out that most of the materials printed by the Human Rights Commission are still sitting in that agency’s office, waiting to be distributed. “This law has been on the books since April 2002. To the extent people don’t know about it, I lay this at the feet of the Bloomberg administration,” she said.

If Loehmann’s failed to understand they were breaking the law by excluding Jane Garra from public accommodations, Park added, that is a clear indication that this mayoral administration is not doing its job.

“They should be educating employers, landlords,” said Park. “They don’t really take action until they’re pressured.”

None of the slow overall progress detracted from the sort of wary glee with which Garra last approached Loehmann’s recently, when she returned for the first time since the lawsuit began.

Garra had said earlier that her case was “just so important for people, for how they perceive us. New York’s a diverse place. We’re here, and we don’t want to be in the closet any more, so to speak.”

But last Wednesday, she just wanted to fill her own closet as she perused the latest circulars. “I can’t wait to cash in on the sales,” she grinned.

photo caption:

Michael Silverman, lawyer for the Transgender Legal Defense & Education Fund, with his client Jane Galla outside Loehmann’s department store earlier this week.

photo by Jefferson Siegel

This article originally appeared in the 23 February -1 March 2007 issue (Volume One, Issue 23) of Chelsea Now.