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.

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).

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 ).

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.”

# # # #

April 20, 2005 –  In her op-ed (”Tranny Time,” Opinion, April 18), Nicole Gelinas inaccurately claims that the guidelines for implementation of the 2002 New York City transgender rights law say that “people can pick whichever gender they want to be.”

Not true. The guidelines recognize that transgendered people face pervasive discrimination and violence in this city, even after enactment of that landmark law.

These sensible and practical regulations will enhance public safety at minimal cost, including the safety of transgendered women who, if forced to use the men’s room, would be vulnerable to humiliation as well as harassment and assault.

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

To little fanfare, the United States Golf Association this week adopted a policy to allow post-op transgender male-to-female golfers to participate in women’s tournaments.

Nary a whisper of it hit the airwaves. Not a peep was uttered about it on the Outsports.com discussion board. Even the guys on “Pardon The Interruption” missed it.

Sure, we’re talking about an incredibly miniscule number of people who might be affected. The number of transsexuals is a small fraction of the population; the number of transsexual golfers – well, I surely have more toes on one foot.

But, for heaven’s sake, the USGA is going to welcome transgender players on the women’s tour! This is the same organization that outwardly seems to try to quiet the lesbian talk surrounding its tours and still hasn’t seen a male pro come out. And they’re allowing former men to play on the women’s tour?

I can imagine the tears Danielle Swope shed when she heard the decision. Last summer, Swope, a hermaphrodite born with both male and female sexual organs, was denied her request to play in a women’s event. Raised as Daniel, a boy, Swope underwent sex-reassignment surgery from 1995 to 1997 and has since lived as a woman.The problem was that the USGA’s policy stated that, to play on the women’s tour, a golfer had to be “female at birth,” and that her birth certificate had to reflect that. Because Swope was outwardly male at birth, her birth certificate reflected that.

While the women’s tournament denied her request last July, she was invited to play in a men’s qualifier for the Fort Wayne Men’s City Tournament. She was 5-foot-4 and weighed 160 pounds.

“I have respect for the men for at least giving me the opportunity to play,” she told the Associated Press at the time. “The women I don’t have any respect for.”

With the new policy, Swope, whose sex-reassignment surgery was now 10 years ago, and others like her will be able to compete on the women’s tour.

The USGA is certainly not the first. Golf has lead the rest of the sporting world in acceptance of transgender athletes. Australia’s Mianne Bagger has become the poster child for the cause. The female transgender golfer has participated in the Australian Women’s Open and just last month she made her European Tour debut. The International Olympic Committee has already opened the doors for transgender golfers.

On the surface, it’s surprising that the conservative sport of golf would be the first to open its country-club doors to transgender people. How could a sport that just recently began allowing black people in its clubs, still won’t let women join some clubs and keeps gay couples at bay be so progressive as to allow a former man to play on the woman’s tour?

While it may not make sense on the surface, there is logic to the madness.

A former man competing on a woman’s tour could be physiologically unfair. When testosterone is pumping through a person’s body for 20 or 30 years, that body is stronger than one that hasn’t had the luxury of that hormone. Of course, the USGA isn’t opening the door for every cross-dresser who likes to swing a golf club to enter women’s tour events; instead, the person must have had sex-reassignment surgery and must have been taking estrogen for at least two years.

According to Pauline Park, co-chair of the New York Association for Gender Rights Advocacy, the estrogen actually reduces some of the muscle the testosterone has built over the years.

“It’s hard to generalize because it differs dramatically from individual to individual,” Park said. “But if someone is living as a post-op, male-to-female transsexual woman, who has significantly enhanced her levels of estrogen, then what advantages there are will be significantly diminished, if not, over time, eliminated.”

While that might not be enough to open the doors to sports that are governed by speed and jumping ability, like basketball, soccer, track and field, volleyball and football, golf is the perfect place for sport to take its first step. In golf, the level of play between men and women is a lot more even than in these other sports. Speed and jumping are taken out of the equation. Even a certain lack of strength can be overcome with the right technique. As women have shown us in the last couple of years, they may not be able to win a men’s tournament yet, but they can compete in one.

Just think: While dozens or hundreds of men are injecting themselves with hormones to help improve their play in baseball, you have transgender females taking hormones to decrease their physical advantage.

And while many men are taking those steroids in a constant attempt to win that batting title or that elusive championship, the USGA need not worry about opening the flood gates.

“I can’t imagine we’ll see a lot of men rushing to have sex-assignment surgery so they can be champions on the women’s tour,” Park said.

Or, as Outsports discussion-board member George_Twinsfan said, maybe Sergio Garcia has found the way for him to win a Major. Unless Danielle Swope stands in his way – she’s got to be even more hungry than he is.

This article originally appeared on the OutSports.com website.

]]> http://www.paulinepark.com/index.php/2010/06/usga-welcomes-trans-golfers-outsports-com-3-25-05/feed/ 0 http://www.paulinepark.com/index.php/2010/06/transgender-group-reaches-agreement-on-restrooms-new-york-times-4-2-05/ http://www.paulinepark.com/index.php/2010/06/transgender-group-reaches-agreement-on-restrooms-new-york-times-4-2-05/#comments Sun, 20 Jun 2010 20:13:00 +0000 Pauline http://www.paulinepark.com/?p=1377

Pauline Park, a co-chairwoman of the New York Association for Gender Rights Advocacy, at the Manhattan Mall, Herald Square, Friday.
(photo: Hiroko Masuike for The New York Times)

Transgender Group Reaches Agreement on Restrooms

By Nicholas Confessore
New York Times
2 April 2005

When Pauline Park watched Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg sign an amendment toughening the city’s anti-discrimination laws two years ago, she never expected to become one of its first beneficiaries.

But yesterday, a complaint filed by Ms. Park – a co-chairwoman of the New York Association for Gender Rights Advocacy, which helped lobby for the amendment to the New York City Human Rights Law – became part of the first settlement issued under it. The amendment forbids discrimination based on sexual identity whether or not it differs from a person’s biological sex.

The settlement,

administered by the city’s Commission on Human Rights, found that people working for Advantage Security, a New York security guard company, discriminated against Ms. Park when they demanded to see her identification after she used a women’s restroom at the Manhattan Mall in Herald Square last April.

She said that she had been having lunch with friends and was “taken aback” when five guards – four men and a woman – stopped her after she used the restroom a second time that day. The first time occurred without incident, she said.

“They encircled me in a very menacing and hostile stance,” Ms. Park said.

“The female security guard demanded to know, ‘Are you a man or a woman?’ ” Ms. Park said. “I said to her that I identify as a woman. And she said, ‘One of my colleagues thought you were a man.’ ”

The settlement also covered a second incident involving the same company at a different location.

Last March, an Advantage Security guard asked Justine Nicholas for identification after she came out of a women’s restroom in a Manhattan office building where she was taking the Graduate Record Examination.

Like Ms. Park, Ms. Nicholas was born male but identifies herself and lives as a woman.

Under the terms of the settlement, Advantage Security will adopt and enforce a policy allowing people to use bathrooms “consistent with their gender identity,” said Michael D. Silverman, executive director and general counsel for the Transgender Legal Defense and Education Fund, which represented the two complainants before the commission. The company will also pay $2,500 to each complainant.

Ms. Park said she was pleased with the settlement.

In a statement released by the Transgender Legal Defense and Education Fund, Ms. Nicholas said that she had been “humiliated” by the incident and that the case would “increase the public’s awareness of transgender people’s needs.”

Officials at Advantage Security did not return several telephone calls seeking comment.

The commission’s chairwoman, Patricia L. Gatling, said that the settlement “sends a message that discrimination in any form will not be tolerated in our city.”

This article originally appeared in the 2 April 2005 issue of the New York Times.

City Needs to Start Enforcing Transgender Rights Bill
By Pauline Park
Gay City News
29 April 2004

Two years ago this month, the New York City Council passed Int. No. 24, amending the city’s human rights law to add gender identity and expression, thereby extending protection from discrimination to transsexual, transgendered, and gender-variant people throughout the five boroughs.

I still remember vividly the euphoria we felt as we sat in the gallery of the City Council chambers on April 24 as the Council passed the bill by an overwhelming margin of 45-5.

After Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg signed the bill into law on April 30, the New York City Commission on Human Rights convened a working group––made up of members of its staff as well as transgender activists including me and my co-chair at the New York Association for Gender Rights Advocacy (NYAGRA), Moonhawk River Stone––to draft guidelines for implementing this civil rights statute.

By the time of our most recent meeting––in May 2003––we had reached consensus on broadly conceived yet meticulously detailed guidelines that could well be a model for other cities to emulate. But a year after completion of the draft, the Commission has yet to approve it.

I was reminded of the importance of implementing the law by a disturbing personal incident I suffered on April 19. That morning, I joined John Won, Jih-Fei Cheng, and Alain Dang from Gay Asian & Pacific Islander Men of New York and Riley Snorton from the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation in a meeting with Details magazine about the “Gay or Asian?” feature that caused a storm of public protest due to its insensitivity about race and sexuality. After the meeting, we lunched in the food court on the lower level of the Manhattan Mall on Sixth Avenue and 33rd Street. Before sitting down to lunch, I availed myself of the women’s room, without incident. But after eating, upon emerging from the women’s room a second time, I was stopped by a female security guard demanding to know, “Are you a woman or a man?” Advantage Security, a private firm hired by the mall, has an office only yards from both restrooms, and the security guards were apparently using the big glass window on the security station to engage in surveillance of the restrooms.

Startled by the question, I was alarmed as a pack of security guards––all powerfully built men towering over me––circled me in a physically threatening manner. What I found disturbing was their use of physical intimidation as part of their attempt to interrogate me about my gender identity, their menacing posture suggesting the potential for violence. From the lead security guard’s comments, I strongly suspected that this incident might have been part of a persistent pattern of harassment of gender-variant individuals using the restrooms at the mall.

It is important to recognize that bathrooms are not just an issue for transitioning and post-operative transsexuals; they are an issue for all transgendered and gender-variant people. There are women with butch haircuts who are challenged every time they go into the women’s room, and gender-queer folk who find it difficult to use either restroom without being hassled or harassed.

The only difference between me and any other transgendered person being harassed by this private security outfit was that I was well aware of my rights, having coordinated the campaign for the very transgender rights law that they very well may have violated. Despite the risk to my personal safety, I decided to challenge what appeared to be their discriminatory intent regarding access to a public accommodation. But neither the female security guard nor the head of security, whom I asked to see, seemed aware that this incident may have constituted a violation of city human rights law.

I was struck that the incident at the Manhattan Mall occurred only five days before the second anniversary of the passage of Int. No. 24, reinforcing what I already knew––that the law’s enactment would be a hollow victory for the transgender community unless the Commission began implementing it seriously and enforcing it rigorously.

The working group’s last meeting at the Commission took place nearly a full year ago, last May 12. Commission staff informed us that the Commissioner for Human Rights, Patricia Gatling, had “concerns” about the draft guidelines, but I cannot understand why, a full year after the working group completed them, she still has yet to schedule a meeting with us to discuss those concerns. Since last May, I have made repeated calls to the Commission inquiring about the status of the guidelines without having received any substantive response.

When I joined the working group two years ago, I assumed that the Commission was committed to implementation of the law; but the pattern of delay suggests that the Commission is not serious about implementing the transgender rights law. It may even be possible that Commissioner Gatling is deliberately delaying implementation so as to impede effective enforcement of the statute.

Meanwhile, there may well be countless incidents of discrimination occurring that might have been prevented had these guidelines been issued in a timely manner. As the incident at the Manhattan Mall clearly illustrates, employers, landlords, and other providers of public accommodations are woefully ignorant of the transgender rights law. Many may not even be aware that it is now illegal to discriminate on the basis of gender identity or expression, and I strongly suspect that most have no idea how to modify their own operations––through staff training and other initiatives––in order to comply with the law’s provisions.

It is now time –– well past time, in fact –– for the Commission to approve and adopt broadly conceived guidelines to implement the transgender rights law and to undertake an aggressive campaign to inform and educate New York City agencies as well as private employers, landlords, and others about the provisions of the statute.

I would encourage all those who support implementation of this legislation to demand action from the Commission. You can phone the Commissioner Gatling at 212 306 5070 or e-mail her via the web at http://nyc.gov/html/mail/html/mailchr.html.

To protest the gender-policing of restrooms and the harassment of transgendered and gender-variant people at the Manhattan Mall, call the management at 212 465 0500.

Transgendered and gender-variant people in this city continue to face pervasive discrimination, and those thrown out of jobs or apartments––or simply restrooms in shopping malls––do not have the luxury of time while waiting for implementation of this non-discrimination statute. Only the most rigorous enforcement of this law will help reduce such discrimination, but responsibility for such enforcement rests with the Commission, as does responsibility for the unconscionable delay in the law’s implementation.

Pauline Park is co-chair of the New York Association for Gender Rights Advocacy (nyagra.com). In her capacity as coordinator of the work group on gender-based discrimination that included the six City Councilmembers who took the lead on Int. No. 24, Park led the campaign for passage of the measure. She also serves on the board of directors of the Transgender Legal Defense & Education Fund (transgenderlegal.org).

This op-ed originally appeared in the 29 April 2004 issue of Gay City News. In December 2004, the New York City Commission on Human Rights adopted guidelines for implementation of the transgender rights law, with language drawn in part from the settlement of my discrimination case against Advantage Security.

Birth Certificate Policy Must Reflect Reality of Trans Lives
By Pauline Park and Michael Silverman
Gay City News
16 November 2006

Most people don’t think about their birth certificates. But for transgendered people, changing the sex designation on their birth certificates from M to F or F to M can be a crucial step in getting a job, traveling, and even accessing public restrooms. When a transgendered person’s gender presentation differs from the legal sex designation (the gender marker of M or F) on his or her personal ID, that can result in job discrimination or the denial of social services or even access to public accommodations such as restrooms and government and corporate office buildings.

On October 30, the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene held a public hearing on a proposal to allow transgendered people who meet certain stringent requirements to change the sex listed on their birth certificates. When we testified on behalf of our own organizations and the members of the Transgender Health Initiative of New York, we expressed support for the city’s efforts to allow transgendered people to change their birth certificates. But we also expressed our deep concern with certain aspects of the proposed policy.

Our primary concern is this: the proposed requirements for obtaining an amended birth certificate are so onerous and burdensome that most transgendered people will not qualify. The new policy requires a transgendered person to provide an affidavit from a doctor and a mental health professional. Each of these individuals must attest to the treatments that a transgendered person has undergone toward gender transition. While that may sound like a minor requirement, it is not.

Many people lack access to even basic health care, let alone the expensive medical and mental health treatments the policy would require. Poor people and people of color are far less likely to be able to access health care than middle-class white people. Transgendered people are overwhelmingly poor and unemployed or under-employed. Many are people of color. How will these transgendered people access the expensive medical and mental health
care required by the city’s proposed policy?

Middle-class white transgendered New Yorkers will benefit from the proposed policy, which is a good thing. But we believe that the policy should be changed so that all transgendered people will be able to benefit from an amended birth certificate, regardless of race or class.

We also find problematic the requirement that an applicant demonstrate that he or she has undergone medical treatment for gender transition. Throughout history-and before the development of hormone therapy and sex reassignment surgery-there have been people we would call transgendered who lived in the gender opposite their birth sex. Many transgendered people live full and complete lives without any medical intervention whatsoever. Some choose not to have surgery or take hormones for personal reasons. For others, such medical treatments are medically contraindicated and would harm their health. By making medical intervention a requirement for an amended birth certificate, the city encourages medical treatment that individuals may not want or that may endanger their health.

The policy also requires that an applicant demonstrate that he or she has undergone psychological counseling. There’s no doubt that such counseling may be of benefit to some, but requiring it suggests that a transgendered person is unable to actualize his or her identity without mental health counseling, or that transgender identity itself is a mental illness. No gay person is required to demonstrate that he or she has undergone psychological counseling before coming out. No transgendered person should have to do so either.

We have sent three letters to the Department urgently requesting a meeting to discuss the proposed policy, but we have received no response. We urge the Department to meet with us in order to discuss its proposed policy and our recommendations. We stand ready to work with Department officials to draft a more inclusive policy that will help all transgendered New Yorkers obtain amended birth certificates if they need them to live full and productive lives.

Pauline Park is chair of the New York Association for Gender Rights Advocacy (NYAGRA). Michael Silverman is executive director and general counsel of the Transgender Legal Defense & Education Fund (TLDEF).

This article originally appeared as an op-ed in the 16 November 2006 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.