by Ethan Jacobs
Bay Windows
(EDGE Boston, MA,USA)
Thursday Jul 31, 2008
http://www.edgeboston.com/index.php?ch=news&sc=glbt&sc2=news&sc3=&id=78283
With the Massachusetts legislative session ending July 31, advocates
expect the transgender non-discrimination and hate crimes bill,
House Bill 1722, is effectively dead for the year.
In March the Joint Committee on the Judiciary held a hearing on the
bill but voted to send it to study, a maneuver often used to kill
legislation quietly. Gunner Scott, executive director of the
Massachusetts Transgender Political Coalition (MTPC), said he does
not expect the bill to escape from study before the end of the
session, but he does not believe the bill's failure gives any
indication of the level of support for the bill on the committee.
"I think they just ran out of time," said Scott, who said since the
hearing on H.B. 1722 the committee has wrestled with a number of
complex and contentious issues, such as CORI reform.
Scott said MTPC plans to continue lobbying lawmakers to build
support for the bill, and they expect to refile it next January.
This fall Scott said MTPC would meet with its strategic partners to
plot a strategy for the next year.
One potential obstacle to advocating for the bill in 2009 is
funding. This year marks the first time that MTPC has had enough
funding to hire Scott as a full time paid staffer, but he said
currently the organization has enough money to keep him on only
through the end of this year. The organization plans to continue
fundraising to keep Scott onboard in his current capacity by
continuing to apply for grants, solicit donations and secure
sponsorships from community organizations.
And this Halloween MTPC will launch a new costume ball fundraiser,
the first major fundraiser in the organization's history. Scott
hopes the event will draw a crowd of about 150 to 200 people to
support the organization.
"Trans people are taking back Halloween," Scott quipped.
Copyright C 2003-2008
EDGE Publications, Inc. / All Rights Reserved
~~~~~~~~~~
Copyright Statement: Material appearing in this e-mail is
distributed without profit or monetary gain to those who have
expressed an interest in receiving the article material for research
and educational purposes. This is in accordance with Title 17 U. S.
C. section 107. Please note that distribution of articles doesn't
constitute endorsement of the articles' content; "opposition"
articles are distributed to educate interested readership about
contrary and unfavorable standpoints.

God's speed Randy and God bless.

a donation page is located at: http://www.firstgiving.com/randypausch

Allyson Robinson Named Human Rights Campaign Foundation Associate Director of Diversity Longtime activist, ordained minister Robinson to lead organization’s work on transgender issues

WASHINGTON-The Human Rights Campaign Foundation, the nation’s largest gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender civil rights group, today announced that Allyson Robinson has been named Associate Director of Diversity of the organization. Robinson, a longtime activist and ordained minister , will lead HRC and its volunteer base in promoting awareness of transgender issues and ensuring that all program areas demonstrate measurable commitment to transgender equality and inclusion.

Allyson is a 1994 graduate of the United States Military Academy at West Point, where she majored in physics. She received her Master of Divinity degree in theology, with a capstone emphasis in Social Justice, from Baylor University’s George W. Truett Theological Seminary in 2007. Prior to her transition, she pastored congregations on two continents for nine years.

Robinson’s hiring has been applauded by leaders of the transgender community.

“Allyson is a committed activist for trans people and the people who love them,” said best-selling author Jenny Boylan. “A lot of work needs to be done to mend fences between HRC and the trans community, and Allyson, by dint of her dedication, compassion, and articulate insight, is the one to do it. I am sure her wisdom, poise, and humor will do well for all the members of our community, and I wish her all the best.

“Allyson is a great addition, and as someone who works closely with HRC nationally and locally, I’m delighted to add her energy to expand the quantity, quality and awareness of fully inclusive workplaces and to support our diversity initiatives in Boston,” said HRC Business Council and Steering Committee member Diego Sanchez.

“Allyson comes to the position with my full support. Her ministerial teachings and learning, combined with her West Point training will be a great asset to HRC and the LGBT community where she will be able to listen to hearts and emotions of all people”, said Meghan Stabler, HRC Business Council and HRC Houston Steering Committee member. Stabler continued, “As a transgender person, she will be able to educate internally within HRC and externally with the community and allies on key issues, including HRC’s call for an inclusive ENDA.”

Transwoman Hired At The HRC?
July 21st, 2008 by Autumn Sandeen
My peer blogger Marti Abernathey, who like me identifies as
transgender, asked for a quote for her Bilerico post HRC's Project Win
Back, Part II. So before I hit the road for the San Diego Pride
Festival yesterday morning, I sent her a comment on the news (as
reported in a Usenet group) that the HRC has hired Allyson Robinson —
an out, transgender woman — as the HRC's new Associate Director of
Diversity:
The HRC changed their position on ENDA last fall regarding how
inclusive an ENDA bill needed to be to receive their support. The
organization hasn't since changed it back to requiring parity for
sexual orientation and gender identity and expression.
Hiring a transgender woman without a corresponding change in the
HRC's political policies regarding full inclusion for all legislation
the organization supports…Well, I think this hiring is going to be
perceived by most transgender people as the HRC engaging in tokenism.
If the HRC isn't going to treat gender identity and expression as
having the same level of legislative priority with sexual orientation,
then how is a transgender employee at the HRC going to be perceived
externally as an equal to the gay and lesbian employees at the HRC?
I personally don't see how.
Marti characterized my quote as follows:
But some have not been as positive about the hiring. Blogger and
activist, Autumn Sandeen said…
Well first of all, after getting home from Sunday night I looked on
the web, but didn't find any official media releases announcing the
hire. I personally don't have any inside information regarding Allyson
Robinson's possible hiring by the HRC. That said, Marti likely didn't
report the hire in a vacuum — I'm going make the assumption that Marti
verified the Usenet story with at least one other source.
Secondly, I wouldn't characterize my quote in Marti's post as either
positive or negative of the HRC, despite Marti characterizing it as a
negative comment. I'd characterize my quote as more of an
observational comment.
Don't get me wrong — I would like the HRC to change their strategy
regarding employment protections for the entire LGBT community; I
would like to see a strategy towards passing one fully inclusive ENDA,
vice passing a sexual orientation only ENDA in the relatively near
future, and passing an ENDA for gender identity and expression in some
future legislative year. However, my observation on their recent hire
of a transgender woman new Associate Director of Diversity is
independent of my feelings regarding the HRC's political strategy.
Basically, I was observing that the HRC's very first hire of a
transgender woman to their staff, had it been done in summertime of
last year, and had the HRC not changed their position on ENDA in
autumn of last year, would have signaled the HRC's real embracing of
the T of LGBT.
The timing of Allyson Robinson's hiring doesn't send that same message
now. Instead, assuming the news of her hiring is accurate, this new
hire now sends a "damage control "message that Marti alludes to in her
piece. The hire also is likely to be perceived by many members of the
trans community as an exercise in transgender tokenism.
Allyson Robinson has a hard row to hoe. Again assuming the news of her
hiring is accurate, her credibility with the trans community was
compromised on the day she accepted the job with the HRC. This is
specifically because how the HRC's long history with the trans
community is perceived, and because of the HRC's relatively recent
history regarding their position changing on ENDA.
I hope Allyson has some thick skin — my educated guess is that she'll
likely experience a great deal of criticism from our transgender peers
during her tenure at the HRC.
Posted in HRC, LGBT, transgender
http://transadvocate.com/autumnsandeen/archives/1866

Chinese restaurant called TRANSLATE SERVER ERROR

Posted by Cory Doctorow, July 15, 2008 10:15 PM | permalink

I'm not sure what Chinese string this restaurateur fed to the translation software used to to generate the giant sign hanging over the entrance, but I'm pretty sure it wasn't: TRANSLATE SERVER ERROR. Ah, the special problems of translations into other alphabets. Link (Thanks, Mark!)

Update: In the comments, Insect Hooves adds, "OM NOM NOM. I love their Segfault Chicken. And their Short Stack Overflow is to die for. Ooooh, and their 404 Not Pound Cake (foghorn)"

Map stats is reporting that Software & Sex Changes has had 327,553 unique visitors from around the world since I started it in November of 2005.  If this is even close to accurate then I'm just floored and I suppose all I can say is 'thank you for reading my idiobabble"

You may now resume you regularly scheduled day...

Always,

Dana

WASHINGTON — The Senate gave final approval on Wednesday to a major expansion of the government’s surveillance powers, handing President Bush one more victory in a series of hard-fought clashes with Democrats over national security issues. 

The measure, approved by a vote of 69 to 28, is the biggest revamping of federal surveillance law in 30 years. It includes a divisive element that Mr. Bush had deemed essential: legal immunity for the phone companies that cooperated in the National Security Agency wiretapping program he approved after the Sept. 11 attacks.

The vote came two and a half years after public disclosure of the wiretapping program set off a fierce national debate over the balance between protecting the country from another terrorist strike and ensuring civil liberties. The final outcome in Congress, which opponents of the surveillance measure had conceded for weeks, seemed almost anticlimactic in contrast.

Mr. Bush, appearing in the Rose Garden just after his return from Japan, called the vote “long overdue.” He promised to sign the measure into law quickly, saying it was critical to national security and showed that “even in an election year, we can come together and get important pieces of legislation passed.”

Even as his political stature has waned, Mr. Bush has managed to maintain his dominance on national security issues in a Democratic-led Congress. He has beat back efforts to cut troops and financing in Iraq, and he has won important victories on issues like interrogation tactics and military tribunals in the fight against terrorism.

Debate over the surveillance law was the one area where Democrats had held firm in opposition. House Democrats went so far as to allow a temporary surveillance measure to expire in February, leading to a five-month impasse and prompting accusations from Mr. Bush that the nation’s defenses against another strike by Al Qaeda had been weakened.

But in the end Mr. Bush won out, as administration officials helped forge a deal between Republican and Democratic leaders that included almost all the major elements the White House wanted. The measure gives the executive branch broader latitude in eavesdropping on people abroad and at home who it believes are tied to terrorism, and it reduces the role of a secret intelligence court in overseeing some operations.

Supporters maintained that the plan includes enough safeguards to protect Americans’ civil liberties, including reviews by several inspectors general. There is nothing to fear in the bill, said Senator Christopher S. Bond, the Missouri Republican who was a lead negotiator, “unless you have Al Qaeda on your speed dial.”

But some Democratic opponents saw the deal as “capitulation” to White House pressure by fellow Democrats.

“I urge my colleagues to stand up for the rule of law and defeat this bill,” Senator Russ Feingold, Democrat of Wisconsin, said Wednesday as the outcome was all but assured.

The final plan, which overhauls the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act passed by Congress in 1978 in the wake of Watergate, reflected both political reality and legal practicality, supporters said.

Wiretapping orders approved by secret orders under the previous version of the surveillance law were set to begin expiring in August unless Congress acted. Heading into their political convention in Denver next month and on to the November Congressional elections, many Democrats were wary of handing the Republicans a potent political weapon.

The issue put Senator Barack Obama, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, in a particularly precarious spot. He had long opposed giving legal immunity to the phone companies that took part in the N.S.A.’s wiretapping program, even threatening a filibuster during his run for the nomination. But on Wednesday, he ended up voting for what he called “an improved but imperfect bill” after backing a failed attempt earlier in the day to strip the immunity provision from the bill through an amendment.

Mr. Obama’s decision last month to reverse course angered some ardent supporters, who organized an Internet drive to influence his vote. And his position came to symbolize the continuing difficulties that Democrats have faced in striking a position on national security issues even against a weakened president. Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, Democrat of New York, who had battled Mr. Obama for the nomination, voted against the bill.

Senator John McCain, the likely Republican presidential nominee, was campaigning in Ohio and did not vote, though he has consistently supported the immunity plan.

Support from key Democrats ensured passage of the measure.

Senator John D. Rockefeller IV, the West Virginia Democrat who leads the intelligence committee and helped broker the deal, said modernizing the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act was essential to give intelligence officials the technology tools they need to deter another attack. But he said the plan “was made even more complicated by the president’s decision, in the aftermath of Sept. 11, 2001, to go outside of FISA rather than work with Congress to fix it.”

He was referring to the secret program approved by Mr. Bush weeks after the Sept. 11 attacks that allowed the N.S.A, in a sharp legal and operational shift, to wiretap the international communications of Americans suspected of links to Al Qaeda without first getting court orders. The program was disclosed in December 2005 by The New York Times.

As Congress repeatedly tried to find a legislative solution, the main stumbling block was Mr. Bush’s insistence on legal immunity for the phone companies. The program itself ended in January 2007, when the White House agreed to bring it under the auspices of the FISA court, but more than 40 lawsuits continued churning through federal courts, charging AT&T, Verizon and other major carriers with violating customers’ privacy by conducting wiretaps at the White House’s direction without court orders.

The final deal, which passed the House on June 20, effectively ends those lawsuits. It includes a narrow review by a district court to determine whether the companies being sued received formal requests or directives from the administration to take part in the program. The administration has already acknowledged those directives exist. Once such a finding is made, the lawsuits “shall be promptly dismissed,” the bill says. Republican leaders say they regard the process as a mere formality to protect the phone carriers from liability.

Lawyers involved in the suits against the phone companies promised to challenge the immunity provision in federal court.

“The law itself is a massive intrusion into the due process rights of all of the phone subscribers who would be a part of the suit,” said Bruce Afran, a New Jersey lawyer representing several hundred plaintiffs suing Verizon and other companies. “It is a violation of the separation of powers. It’s presidential election-year cowardice. The Democrats are afraid of looking weak on national security.”

The legislation also expands the government’s power to invoke emergency wiretapping procedures. While the N.S.A. would be allowed to seek court orders for broad groups of foreign targets, the law creates a new seven-day period for directing wiretaps at foreigners without a court order in “exigent” circumstances if government officials assert that important national security information would be lost. The law also expands to seven days, from three, the period for emergency wiretaps on Americans without a court order if the attorney general certifies there is probable cause to believe the target is linked to terrorism.

Democrats pointed to some concessions they had won. The final bill includes a reaffirmation that the FISA law is the “exclusive” means of conducting intelligence wiretaps — a provision that Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, the House speaker, and other Democrats insisted would prevent Mr. Bush or any future president from evading court scrutiny in the way they say that the N.S.A. program did.

David Stout contributed reporting.

Jim Carrey celebrated the Fourth of July by parading around a Malibu
beach in girlfriend Jenny McCarthy's sexy bikini. And he wore it well,
we must admit.
First the smiling couple strolled hand-in-hand with Jenny in the
revealing black suit and Jim in some cool cargo shorts. Then they gave
the paparazzi a payday by popping back to their beach house, doing a
quick swap, and returning poker-faced to the sand 'n' surf with former
Playmate of the Year Jenny sizzling in a strapless blue coverup — and
Jim seriously rocking her black bikini.

Huge love to Jim and Jenny for giving us a good giggle on the Fourth.
(P.S. Are they hot or what?)
[Screenshots: The Daily Mail via Splash]
http://www.examiner.com/x-264-Celebrity-Examiner~y2008m7d5-Jim-Carrey--Jenny-McCarthy-Crossdressing-bikini-swap

July 4, 2008

repost from http://boycotthrc.wordpress.com/

On September 7, 2007, President of the Human Rights Campaign, Joe Solomnese attended the Southern Comfort conference and stood before a group of nearly one thousand transgender people and allies and proclaimed that not only would HRC not support legislation but in fact oppose legislation that was not fully inclusive and they have taken that message loud and clear to the Hill. see video:

This is IFGE’s Summary:
2007 April 24: ENDA (H.R. 2015) is introduced in House of Representatives, Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity are included.

May 3: Hate Crimes Bill (LLEEA) passes in House of Representatives, Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity are included.

May 11: The Washington Blade’s Peter Rosenstein reports that Gender Identity might be stripped out of the Hate Crimes bill in the Senate, and HRC is debating support of non-inclusive version despite their 2004 resolution.

May 14 - 18: NCTE, NTAC, & GPAC hold “Lobby Days” in Washington DC.

May 17: Blogger Marti Abernathy cites lobbying reports that Gender Identity will be removed from ENDA in the Senate.

September 17: Human Rights Campaign (HRC) Executive Director, Joe Solomonese, giving an address at the Southern Comfort Conference states HRC will oppose any legislation that does not include protections for Transgender people.

September 27: Barney Frank Introduces 2 more versions of ENDA: HR 3685 (Sexual Orientation only) & HR 3686 (Gender Identity only). HRC does not oppose the non-inclusive bill, but issues a misleading press release implying that it does. Hate Crimes Bill (LLEEA) passes in Senate.

September 28: Leaders from IFGE, NCTE, NGLTF, GLAD, NCLR and a rapidly growing coalition of organizations sign onto a letter requesting HRC oppose the non-inclusive ENDA. Many of them are attending the Out & Equal Conference in DC, and immediately start organizing a cohesive strategy.

October 3: Donna Rose, the only transgender person on HRC’s Board of Directors, resigns effective as of October 8th.

October 7: NTAC organizes a protest outside the HRC banquet in Washington DC.

October 16: Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) announces an amendment to H.R. 3685 that would restore gender identity protections to ENDA.

October 18: Non-Inclusive ENDA (3685) passed by Markup Committee. Several Democrats vote against it, protesting the lack of protections for Gender Identity.

November 7: The Baldwin amendment is introduced and then withdrawn. HR 3685 passed 235 to 184, 14 not voting. 35 Republicans vote for the bill, 7 Democrats voted against bill because Gender Identity was removed. Now: ENDA has not been introduced in the current Senate in any form.

(For a more in depth look at the history of our community and HRC )

HRC Gala Protest, Washington, D.C.

Since the D.C. Protest event, other protests have taken place in Philadelphia, New York City, Houston and Austin TX, New Orleans LA and even more protests are being planned in San Fransisco, Boston and Dallas.

We need to keep the momentum going! Look for more information on protest tips and organizing as well as information on a protest/Boycott event in your area.

Please post to this blog with any information and useful comments. All negative comments will be deleted. We are only interested in moving our community forward! Thanks to you, our LGBT community has continued our fight on the grass roots level and are making a difference!

“If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor.”
–Archbishop Desmond Tutu

Remember, I just report 'em - Dana

Charlie Butts - OneNewsNow - 7/2/2008 1:40:00 PM
The American Medical Association meeting in Chicago has taken action
that was not totally unexpected. The organization has adopted a
resolution encouraging insurance companies to provide coverage,
including surgery, for transgendered people – that is, people who
believe they should be the opposite gender. The surgery reworks part
of the body. Dr. David Stevens of the Christian Medical & Dental
Associations (CMDA) says it is not only immoral, but also doesn't
treat the real problem.
"Well, the Bible does tell us very clearly that mutilation of the body
is wrong, and it's sad that these people have this psychological
disorder -- but it should be treated from a psychological
perspective," Stevens contends.
The CMDA spokesman has taken a look at the recent resolution. "They're
calling on insurance companies to provide treatment for
gender-identity disorder, which actually is a sex-change operation.
Those are very expensive and obviously treat something in a way that
really isn't going to solve the problem, just perpetuate it. [It is]
sad that this has happened, but we're increasingly seeing this happen
at the American Medical Association and other professional
organizations across the country," Stevens explains.
The ball has now been tossed to the insurance companies, which Stevens
believes ought to listen to their clients. "Increasingly we're
beginning to see insurance organizations starting to get on board that
are taking moral and ethical positions, because people do not want to
fund surgery that they consider to be immoral, or help with abortions,
or whatever. I think we're going to see a great move in that direction
as we go forth," he adds.
Stevens says the ball is now in the court of insurance companies which
need to hear from clients who have moral objections to financing, in
their medical insurance policies, surgery for gender-identity
disorders.
Copyright 2006-2008 American Family News Network - All Rights Reserved.
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=161948