WASHINGTON — The United States and the European Union are nearing completion of an agreement allowing law enforcement and security agencies to obtain private information — like credit card transactions, travel histories and Internet browsing habits — about people on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean.

The potential agreement, as outlined in an internal report obtained by The New York Times, would represent a diplomatic breakthrough for American counterterrorism officials, who have clashed with the European Union over demands for personal data. Europe generally has more stringent laws restricting how governments and businesses can collect and transfer such information.

Negotiators, who have been meeting since February 2007, have largely agreed on draft language for 12 major issues central to a “binding international agreement,” the report said. The pact would make clear that it is lawful for European governments and companies to transfer personal information to the United States, and vice versa.

But the two sides are still at odds on several other matters, including whether European citizens should be able to sue the United States government over its handling of their personal data, the report said.

The report, which lays out the progress of the talks and lists the completed draft language, was jointly written by the negotiators from the United States Homeland Security, Justice and State Departments, and by their European Union counterparts. The talks grew out of two conflicts over information-sharing after the September 2001 terrorist attacks. The United States government demanded access to customer data held by airlines flying out of Europe and by a consortium, known as Swift, which tracks global bank transfers.

American investigators wanted the data so they could look for suspicious activity. But several European countries objected, citing violations of their privacy laws. Each dispute frayed diplomatic relations and required difficult negotiations to resolve.

American and European Union officials are trying to head off future confrontations “by finding common ground on privacy and by agreeing not to impose conflicting obligations on private companies,” said Stewart A. Baker, the assistant secretary for policy at the Department of Homeland Security, who is involved in the talks. “Globalization means that more and more companies are going to get caught between U.S. and European law,” he said.

Paul M. Schwartz, a law professor at the University of California, Berkeley, said such a blanket agreement could transform international privacy law by eliminating a problem that has led to negotiations of “staggering” complexity between Europe and the United States.

“The reason it’s a big deal is that it is going to lower the whole transaction cost for the U.S. government to get information from Europe,” Mr. Schwartz said. “Most of the negotiations will already be completed. They will just be able to say, ‘Look, we provide adequate protection, so you’re required to turn it over.’ ”

But the prospect that the agreement might lower barriers to sending personal information to the United States government has alarmed some privacy rights advocates in Europe. While some praised the principles laid out in the draft text, they warned that it was difficult to tell whether the agreement would allow broad exceptions to such limits.

For example, the two sides have agreed that information that reveals race, religion, political opinion, health or “sexual life” may not be used by a government “unless domestic law provides appropriate safeguards.” But the accord does not spell out what would be considered an appropriate safeguard, suggesting that each government may decide for itself whether it is complying with the rule.

“I am very worried that once this will be adopted, it will serve as a pretext to freely share our personal data with anyone, so I want it to be very clear about exactly what it means and how it will work,” said Sophia in ’t Veld, a member of the European Parliament from the Netherlands who has been an outspoken advocate of privacy rights.

The Bush administration and the European Commission have not publicized their talks, but they referred to their progress in a little-noticed paragraph deep in a joint statement after a summit meeting between President Bush and European leaders in Slovenia this month.

Issued June 10, the statement declared that “the fight against transnational crime and terrorism requires the ability to share personal data for law enforcement,” and called for the creation of a “binding international agreement” to aid such transfers while also ensuring that citizens’ privacy is “fully” protected.

The negotiators are trying to agree on minimum standards to protect privacy rights, such as limiting access to the information to “authorized individuals with an identified purpose” for looking at it. If a government’s policies are “effective” in meeting all standards, any transfer of personal data to that government would be presumed lawful.

For example, European law sets up independent government agencies to police whether personal data is being used lawfully and to help citizens who are concerned about invasions of their privacy. The United States has no such independent agency. But in a concession, the Europeans have agreed that the American government’s internal oversight system may be good enough to provide accountability for how Europeans’ data is used.

About a half-dozen issues remain unresolved, the report said. One sticking point is what rights European citizens will have if the United States government violates data privacy rules or takes an adverse action against them — like denying them entry into the country or placing them on a no-fly list — based on incorrect personal information.

European law generally allows people who think the government has mishandled their personal information to file a lawsuit to seek damages and to have the data corrected or expunged. American citizens and permanent residents can generally do the same under the Privacy Act of 1974, but that statute does not extend to foreigners.

The Bush administration is trying to persuade the Europeans that other options for correcting problems are satisfactory, including asking an agency to correct any misinformation through administrative procedures. For now, the European Union is holding to the position that its citizens “require the ability to bring suit in U.S. courts specifically under the Privacy Act for an agreement to be reached on redress,” the report said.

But the Bush administration does not want to make such a concession, in part because it would require new legislation. The administration is trying to achieve an agreement that would not require Congressional action, Mr. Baker said.

David Sobel, a senior counsel with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a nonprofit organization dedicated to data-privacy rights, said the administration’s depiction of the process of correcting mishandled data through agency procedures sounds “very rosy,” but the reality is that it is often impossible, even for American citizens, to win such a fight.

Officials said it remains unclear when the agreement can be completed. But there are several pressures encouraging negotiators to sprint to the finish.

Bush administration officials say they would like to resolve the problem before they leave office next January. If the agreement does not require legislative action, Mr. Bush could complete it with a signature.

European officials may have an easier time securing its approval now, before the European Union completes proposed changes. Member nations now ratify such accords, but the changes would hand ratification power to the European Parliament, which has been skeptical of American antiterrorism policies. The report says Europeans intended to wait until 2009 after the planned completion of the reforms to finish it. But the changes are now facing likely delay after Irish voters rejected them in a referendum this month.

In addition, businesses that operate on both sides of the Atlantic are pushing to make sure they are not caught between conflicting legal obligations.

“This will require compromise,” said Peter Fleischer, the global privacy counsel for Google. “It will require people to agree on a framework that balances two conflicting issues: privacy and security. But the need to develop that kind of framework is becoming more important as more data moves onto the Internet and circles across the global architecture.”

Congressional Hearing Highlights Need for Data on Transgender Communities
June 27, 2008 – Transgender Law Center (TLC) played a key role in exposing
discrimination against transgender employees at the United States Congress’
first ever hearing on transgender issues. The unprecedented hearing, “An
Examination of Discrimination Against Transgender Americans in the
Workplace,” was held by the U.S. House of Representatives on June 26th.
In addition to first-hand testimony from U.S. House of Representative Tammy
Baldwin (D-WI), Representative Barney Frank (D-MA), NCLR Legal Director
Shannon Minter, and transgender professionals who experienced employment
discrimination, members of the Health, Employment, Labor and Pensions
Subcommittee reviewed written testimony submitted by organizations such as
the Transgender Law Center.
“TLC’s testimony included our seminal report ‘Good Jobs Now! San Francisco’
which provides sorely needed data on the economic reality experienced by
transgender people and our families,” said Masen Davis, Executive Director
of the Transgender Law Center.
“This was a historic and important step in advancing transgender equality
and saving transgender lives,” said Mara Keisling, executive director of the
National Center for Transgender Equality, one of the key organizers of
Thursday’s hearing. “The data that the Transgender Law Center has collected
about transgender people in the San Francisco Bay Area was extremely
important in making the case for federal employment protections,” said
Keisling.
Representative Linda Sánchez (D-CA) from California’s 39th District
referenced information from ‘Good Jobs Now!’ during the hearing, noting
“I’ve learned that the Transgender Law Center in San Francisco seems to keep
pretty busy in trying to protect Californians from improper terminations as
well as on the job abuse and harassment. One of the examples that was
given…a 13-year employee of a San Francisco night club was verbally
harassed, demoted and even subjected to physical assault, all because he
informed his employers that he would be transitioning to male.”
Rep. Sanchez’s statement reflects the chronic pattern of employment
discrimination reported in the Transgender Law Center’s “Good Jobs NOW! San
Francisco” report – a wakeup call of the harsh reality of underemployment
and employment issues transgender individuals face. The report found that
nearly 60% earned under $15,300 annually and only 8% earned over $45,900.
Only 25% were working full-time, with 16% working part-time, and nearly 9%
reporting no source of income. Over 57% percent reported experiencing
employment discrimination, but as few as 12% took any kind of action and
only 3% filed an administrative or civil complaint. The survey was supported
by the Women’s Foundation of California and conducted by TLC and the San
Francisco Bay Guardian. The report has educated individuals and companies,
and shaped inclusive public policy for gender non-conforming individuals
since its 2006 publication.
“TLC was honored to be referenced by Representative Sanchez. Her comments
rang true – we ARE incredibly busy,” said Davis. “This week TLC formally
launched the California Transgender Economic Health Survey to gather
statewide information about the workforce, health and housing needs of
transgender adults. As we saw at yesterday’s hearing, accurate information
about the economic needs of our community is incredibly important to shaping
policy. We urge all transgender Californians to complete the survey so that
we have accurate data to create a ‘Good Jobs Now! California’ report and
advocate for increased attention to transgender workforce issues throughout
the state.
The California Economic Health Survey is available online at
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=Y0uplviwbkoT9xl3MSFTew_3d_3d (English)
and http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=WG6AfkVUVzX6gkiKNMr5EQ_3d_3d
(Spanish).
To view TLC’s written testimony, visit
http://www.nctequality.org/Resources/TLCwrittentestimony062408.pdf
Information about the “An Examination of Discrimination Against Transgender
Americans in the Workplace” can be viewed at
http://www.nctequality.org/hearing.html.
The Transgender Law Center (TLC) is a civil rights organization advocating
for transgender communities. TLC uses direct legal services, education,
community organizing, and advocacy to transform California into a state that
recognizes and supports the needs of transgender people and their families.
www.transgenderlawcenter.org.
###
All content copyright © 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
Transgender Law Center
870 Market Street
Room 823
San Francisco, CA 94102
info@transgenderlawcenter.org

Activists focus attention on Congress
Published Thursday, 26-Jun-2008 in issue 1070
<http://www.gaylesbiantimes.com/?issue=1070>

NEW YORK CITY (AP) €  ’¶ As more state and local governments extend
anti-bias protections to transgender people, fierce opposition is
surfacing. In Colorado, conservatives contend a new state law will
enable sexual predators to frequent women's bathrooms; in Maryland a
"Not My Shower" campaign seeks to overturn a comparable county law.
Though frustrated by the resistance, and insistent that the alarms are
unfounded, transgender rights activists are heartened by an overall
trend toward greater protection under the law. In the past 15 years,
13 states and more than 90 cities and counties €  ’¶ home to roughly 40
percent of the U.S. population €  ’¶ have passed measures banning various
types of discrimination against transgender people.
Among those jurisdictions is Maryland's affluent Montgomery County,
where the county council voted 8-0 last year to extend civil rights
protections for housing, employment and public accommodations on the
basis of gender identity.
Opponents, contending the law threatens privacy in public restrooms
and health-club showers, launched a petition campaign to put the issue
to voters in the Nov. 4 general election. Election officials ruled
that enough valid signatures were gathered, but gay rights groups were
in court Thursday seeking to quash the ballot measure because of
alleged irregularities.
If the ballot measure survives, activists on both sides say Nov. 4
would mark the first time that voters anywhere in the U.S. pass
judgment specifically on a transgender rights measure. Dan Furmansky,
head of the statewide gay-rights group Equality Maryland, hopes the
showdown is averted.
"I think we could win, but it would be a very expensive, defensive
proposition," he said. "We don't want to subject our transgender
brothers and sisters to a campaign of fear-mongering where their civil
rights are up for a popular vote."
A spokeswoman for opponents of the new law, Michelle Turner of
Maryland Citizens for Responsible Government, blamed the county
council for the controversy €  ’¶ saying it enacted the bill despite an
outpouring of calls and letters opposing it.
"We want the citizens of Montgomery County to have their voices
heard," Turner said. "They were ignored once and now it's their turn."
Turner's group, with a Web site called NotMyShower.net
<http://notmyshower.net/> , has focused on access to public bathrooms
and locker rooms. They contend the new law entitles someone who is
biologically male but self-identifies as female to use the women's
bathroom €  ’¶ leaving open the chance that molesters would take advantage
of the measure to intrude into such facilities.
In Colorado, conservative groups waged a similar campaign last month
to block a bill that bans discrimination against gay and transgender
people in housing and public accommodations. Radio ads urged listeners
to tell Gov. Bill Ritter he shouldn't sign the bill, though he
proceeded to do so on May 29.
Transgender activists say there is no record of any problem with
predators, or any other type of bathroom or shower harassment arising
from the transgender-rights laws already in place in scores of
jurisdictions.
A Focus on the Family spokesman, Gary Schneeberger, suggested problems
might surface in the future.
"It's rather early in the genesis of these types of laws for there to
be a lot of concrete evidence that predators will abuse them," he
wrote in an e-mail. "But the law does, indeed, make it possible €  ’¶ and
we would hardly be surprised if anecdotal evidence starts pouring
forth indicating that."
Dana Beyer, a transgender activist in Montgomery County, said many of
the conservative activists seeking to overturn the anti-bias law had
previously campaigned against school curriculum addressing sex
education and sexual orientation.
"These are people living in the 19th century," Beyer said. "They don't
want to have to think of people like me. ... They're willing to spend
time and money and effort to prevent any sort of accommodation for
transgender women."
Though she would relish victory for her side on Nov. 4, Beyer supports
the fight to keep the repeal measure off the ballot.
"To win, we'd have to run a campaign costing hundreds of thousands of
dollars," she said, noting that the top funding priority for national
gay-rights groups will be California's ballot measure on gay marriage.
Transgender activists also are focusing attention on Congress, where
liberal Democrats are seeking a federal ban on workplace
discrimination against gays. Thus far, to the dismay of many
activists, there is hesitancy to include transgender people in the
proposed bill, for fear of jeopardizing its prospects.
New York State also is zone of contention; the Democratic-dominated
Assembly voted last week for a transgender-rights bill, but it's given
no chance of clearing the Republican-controlled state Senate.
Keisling said opposition to transgender rights runs counter to the
national trend.
"Policies are changing so fast in colleges, cities, businesses that we
can barely keep up," she said. "The arc of history is clear €  ’¶ we will
get our rights."
Copyright (c) 2003-2008 Uptown Publications

Seattle Post Intelligencer - WA,USA
Last updated June 23, 2008 1:20 p.m. PT
By DIONNE WALKER
ASSOCIATED PRESS WRITER
RICHMOND, Va. -- The couple walked into a Norfolk courthouse on a
spring day, exchanged a few words, and within 10 minutes, were
seemingly husband and wife.
It was an unremarkable ceremony - except that several weeks later,
officials realized the shapely bride might not have been a woman.
Now authorities in Virginia, where same-sex marriages are illegal, are
weighing whether to file misdemeanor charges against the couple,
Antonio E. Blount, 31, and Justin L. McCain, 18. An announcement is
expected this week.
A prosecutor says the decision to press charges could turn on whether
the pair knowingly misled officials when they applied for a license
and later, traveled to a courthouse for a ceremony. If the bride was
transgender, and identified as a woman, it is unclear whether the
marriage would be considered illegal.
The pair went to Newport News Circuit Court on March 24 to obtain a
marriage license - McCain appearing as a woman and saying the name
"Justine" before a deputy, said Newport News Circuit Court clerk Rex
Davis.
McCain produced a Virginia driver's license, but a design quirk - the
'm' or 'f' for male or female appears directly against a darkened
state seal - meant nobody noticed McCain's gender, Davis said.
"When things are rolling along and you don't have any reason to
suspect that somebody is not being completely forthright with you, you
might not take the time to check," said Davis, who issues about 2,200
licenses a year.
The same day, the couple traveled 19 miles south to Norfolk, where
local marriage commissioner Al Coward performed the ceremony.
"They pawned themselves off as a man and a woman, and they did a very
good job," he said.
Davis said officials became suspicious around May 12, when McCain
returned to court to apply for a name change. The new name, Penelopsky
Aaryonna Goldberry, "raised a red flag," said Davis.
Paperwork later revealed McCain's legal name of record was Justin, not
Justine. Davis said vital statistics officials in McCain's home state
of North Carolina later confirmed McCain was born male, though they
would not provide actual records.
When McCain called to check on the name change application last month,
Davis said the teen confirmed the birth gender.
The couple has not commented publicly since the ceremony, and The
Associated Press was not able to locate either person. Davis said the
marriage is considered illegal because both individuals are legally
considered to be men.
A man who answered a door at a Norfolk address linked to McCain late
last month identified himself as McCain's grandfather. But he said the
teen had moved and wasn't in touch with the family. Calls to a phone
number listed for the teen went unanswered.
Activists say the case highlights the difficulty in trying to fit
transgender individuals into rigid legal definitions of what makes one
male or female. Less than one percent of Americans is transgender, a
fluid term that can apply as much to a person who has had gender
reassignment surgery as to those who take hormones or wear clothing to
resemble another sex.
Most state courts have been silent on the issue of whether marriages
involving a transgender person are valid, transgender rights advocates
say. Most case law involving transgender rights, meanwhile, surrounds
discrimination, not marriage.
Transgender people are increasingly recognized by courts as matching
their "gender identity," or internal sense of gender, said Cole
Thaler, an attorney with gay rights legal group Lambda Legal, a gay
and transgender civil rights group.
That means "it's not deceptive for a transgender person who lives
their life as a gender different from the gender they were assigned,"
said Thaler.
Complicating the issue is a confusing system for how a transgender
individual changes gender on legal documents. All but Tennessee, Ohio
and Idaho typically change one's gender on their birth certificate
following gender reassignment surgery, according to the National
Center for Transgender Equality. But local, state and federal agencies
have their own standards for defining male or female, according to
Paisley Currah, founder of the Transgender Law and Policy Institute.
The result: One person's sex may vary from birth certificate, to
passport, to doctor's office.
"You could have a driver's license in New York state that says you're
a male and have a birth certificate from New York City that says
you're female - there's no simple answer to the question of someone's
legal gender," Currah said.
How a court might view the case isn't clear. In 1999, a Texas court
threw out a wrongful death lawsuit a transgender woman filed after the
death of her husband, ruling that while the plaintiff had undergone a
sex-change operation, she was actually a man and her marriage invalid.
But in 2004, a Kansas court ruled in favor of a male-to-female
transsexual who identified as a woman to apply for marriage.
Newport News investigators will decide whether there was false
information on the marriage license application, said Newport News
Commonwealth's Attorney Howard Gwynn. Though Davis said applicants
must swear to the truth of the information on their marriage license,
the application mentioned "groom" and "bride," not male and female.
That has been changed to say "male applicant," and "female applicant,"
Davis said.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/1110ap_marriage_investigation.html

KEITH BEATY/TORONTO STAR

Martine Stonehouse, a caretaker at Eastdale Collegiate Institute, challenged the government when it delisted sex reassignment surgery. (June 10, 2008)

While her transformation from man to woman is a dramatic tale in itself – interrupted by the sudden delisting of the surgical procedure – the story of her journey, from being an outcast with only one friend and never a date, to an activist and leader, is inspirational, too.

Her experience has elevated the profile of this city's tiny transgendered population and illuminated the human rights transgressions against those who are different in our society.

Born Martin Stonehouse in Toronto in 1956, the only child of housewife Dorothy and career police officer Harvey Stonehouse, she was different from the beginning.

"I couldn't speak until I was 3 years old. I had poor motor skills, couldn't dress myself until I was 5. When I went to school, I couldn't relate to other kids."

Stonehouse threw yardsticks and books and hit the other kids until she was expelled from school in Grade 2. Home schooling was followed by three years at a children's psychiatric facility.

When her behaviour improved, she was allowed to attend a regular high school. It was hell.

"I started having dreams I was a housewife married to a man. My mother was concerned I was acting girlish.

"I was the leper of the school."

Stonehouse quit school at the end of Grade 11 and began the long, lonely journey that would result in the discovery that she had a form of autism called Asperger's syndrome – a communication disorder marked by obsessive behaviours and the inability to read body language. She also realized she was a woman trapped in a man's body in what is known as gender identity syndrome.

Her only friend was Lotte Katona, who'd defended her in school from bullies. As Katona married and had children, Stonehouse was like an uncle to the family. But there were no romances, not a single date.

After years of odd jobs, Stonehouse landed a job at age 28 as a school caretaker with the former North York Board of Education. A year later, she decided to try living as a woman. Feeling uncomfortable on the job, Stonehouse went back to being a man at work.

She fell into a depression. Sometimes, while cleaning the roof of the board's administration office on Yonge St., she contemplated suicide.

After getting treatment for her depression, she decided to transition again, leaving one school board job on Friday as a man and appearing for her new posting on Monday as a woman. There were no hassles.

Today, while being interviewed in the lunchroom at Eastdale Collegiate Institute, where she now works, Stonehouse is treated in a casual, friendly manner by students and staff.

At age 38, she changed her name to Martine Caroline Stonehouse – honouring the three police officers she was named for by making only minor changes to her birth name.

Sex reassignment can take years. There are multiple surgical procedures, although individuals don't always opt for all of them, interspersed with periods of recovery.

In male-to-female transition, the penis and testicles are removed and a vagina is fashioned from the skin. In a female-to-male transition, a mastectomy and hysterectomy can be performed and a penis can be constructed.

In Stonehouse's case, only the psychological transition had taken place. She was living as a woman in what is known as the "real life" test but physically she was still a man. Surgery to make the final transition to female was the next step.

But that's when the Ontario government threw in a monkey wrench. In 1998, after almost 30 years of paying for the surgery, the Ontario Health Insurance Plan said it would no longer cover it.

Stonehouse was 42 and seeking final approval for surgery when the province delisted the procedure.

Angry at being stopped in her tracks, she discovered her fighting spirit, which sparked the second transformation in her life. She became an activist.

She filed a complaint with the Ontario Human Rights Commission and, with the help of lawyer Susan Ursel, won a decision in November 2006. (Ursel, a partner in Green and Chercover, provided more than $250,000 worth of legal work pro bono.)

Stonehouse won the right to complete her sex-change surgery, as did two others whose approvals had been cast into limbo. However, the surgery remained delisted. Only last month did Health Minister George Smitherman announce OHIP would cover it again.

The decade-long fight vindicated Stonehouse's decision to take her case to the rights commission. During that time, she emerged as a community activist, union leader and spokesperson. "I had a lot of fun fighting this case," she says.

Her parents would have been proud. "If my parents were alive, they could see what I've done in the past 10 years."

She also wishes that they had known about the Asperger's so "they wouldn't have so much guilt."

And she can hardly believe this good fortune – she is engaged to bus driver John Gelmon and plans to wed early next year.

"My whole life changed around that span of time. Prior to this, I was a quiet person. I never expected my life to turn around like this."

She has become the public face of the transgendered population. "I'm proud of what I've accomplished – not just for me, for a lot of people. It (the case) has changed the way people look at us. I wanted people to understand and not be afraid of who we are."

I've been waiting for this software release for almost a year - you know this will be in my studio on re-opening day.

Which BTW has almost arrived!

By ANNE EISENBERG

Published: June 22, 2008

MUSICIANS who want to create note-perfect digital recordings of their performances may soon have a powerful tool to help them: a computer program designed to correct mistakes in their piano riffs or guitar accompaniments as easily as software now fixes the red eyes in digital photographs.

Link to full article in the Times

I wanted to design a new tagline for my emails that summarized some of my person aspects.  This is what this space is for right?  Lot's of folks create a mini-vcard with tons of contact information.  Chances are if we're corresponding via email, you either already have my personal contact information or quite frankly, I don't want you to have it.  :)

In the past I would write some obtuse poetry that represented my overbearing optimism and my insane technical appetite.  The other day while spending way too much time in my email responding to the myriad of messages that somehow snuck up on me, inspiration struck me right on the head.  A simple phrase that in itself defines 'me'

Thanks for putting up with my babble.

Always,

Dana

You had me at "Hello world!"

St. Petersburg Times, FL, USA
By Will Van Sant
Times Staff Writer
In print: Wednesday, June 4, 2008
Pinellas County commissioners have dropped the idea of expanding their
human rights law to protect transgendered people.
In April, the commission stopped short of including the transgendered
when it added gays, lesbians and bisexuals to the groups protected by
the county's antidiscrimination ordinance.
Commissioners directed the county attorney to study the issue before
deciding whether to hold a public hearing on an expanded ordinance. On
Tuesday, a motion by Commissioner Susan Latvala to hold the hearing
failed on a 3-3 tie.
Commissioners Latvala, Ken Welch and Ronnie Duncan voted for the
hearing. Commissioners Karen Seel, John Morroni and Robert Stewart
voted against it.
Commissioner Calvin Harris, who expressed unease with including
transgendered people in the ordinance, was absent.
Pinellas' human rights ordinance bans discrimination in employment,
housing and public accommodation. Welch said he especially wanted the
discussion to move forward regarding housing.
"Regardless of what our own individual faith or beliefs are, everybody
in Pinellas County should have a place to live," Welch said.
But Seel said the ordinance went too far and would be a burden to
businesses. Asked after the vote whether it was immoral to be
transgendered, Seel said no, it's a medical and biological issue.
"My empathies are with them," she said. "I think they have legitimate
problems and need to be helped."
Latvala expressed regret after the vote that she was unable to muster
a majority.
"Whether we understand everybody in our community or not," she said,
"I don't think anybody should be discriminated against for any
reason."
The idea of expanding the human rights ordinance was put in play after
last year's controversy over then-Largo City Manager Steve Stanton's
plans for a sex-change operation. Stanton, who changed her name to
Susan and moved to Sarasota, could not be reached for comment Tuesday.
After the vote, Janice Josephine Carney, a 58-year-old transgendered
woman from Seminole, described the decision as "incredibly
disappointing."
"I totally feel that they don't feel that I'm a human being," Carney said.
(c) 2008 · All Rights Reserved · St. Petersburg Times
http://www.tampabay.com/news/localgovernment/article605765.ece

What do you think Mom? - Dana

Nashua Telegraph, NH, USA
Letters
Published: Wednesday, June 4, 2008
Why are some people so anti-transgender?
This letter is in response to Jeffrey Winslow's letter to the editor
on May 25 ("Transgender debate not rooted in discrimination").
After reading so many of Mr. Winslow's oppositional comments to the
plight of transgendered individuals and the work of people like myself
who fight for the inherent rights of all people, including
gender-variant people, I have to wonder why he has such a zealous
interest in opposing the transgender community.
There's no secret about my motivation; it's personal.
But what is Mr. Winslow's motivation? Why is he so vehemently against
us? If he doesn't offer an explanation, then I can only assume it's
related to personal experience, insecurity or self-righteousness.
The concept of brain sex with organizational and activational
imprinting of sexual behavior during embryonic development is well
established now in experiments with other species.
It would be unethical to do those experiments in people, but why would
anyone believe we're exempt from these laws of nature?
Given that the sexual organs develop near the first trimester of
pregnancy and the brain in the third, how difficult is it to imagine a
mismatch occurring?
In regards to references he made about Jerry Leach, a person who
claims to have been transgendered at one point in life and now is not,
I see no point in contesting this, as it would be a circuitous
discussion with no beginning, no end, and a lot of religious
undertones.
I am a spiritual person and I believe in the interconnected web of all
life forms on earth.
I challenge Mr. Winslow, and all those who believe as he does, to a
public discussion on this topic at an agreeable location with a
moderator.
Jennifer Madden, M.D.
Nashua
EDITOR'S NOTE: Dr. Jennifer Madden was one of the individuals
interviewed for The Telegraph's "In Transition" series.
(c)Telegraph Publishing Company, All Rights Reserved

(CNN) -- Bo Diddley, the musical pioneer whose songs, such as "Who Do You Love?" and "Bo Diddley," melded rhythm and blues and rock 'n' roll through a distinctive thumping beat, has died. He was 79.

Rock 'n' roll pioneer Bo Diddley influenced generations of guitarists.

Read all about it here on CNN