Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Assembly Passes Bill to Protect Transsexuals
SACRAMENTO — With no votes to spare, the Assembly passed a bill Monday to make it illegal for landlords and employers to discriminate against people who have changed their gender or whose gender is not exclusively male or female.
AB 196 by Assemblyman Mark Leno (D-San Francisco) passed after a lengthy debate in which Democrats argued that the bill was about basic civil rights, and Republicans attacked it as a "job-killer" that would drive California employers out of state.
If the bill passes the Senate as expected and is signed by the governor, it will make California the fourth state in the nation to ban discrimination against transgender people. Minnesota, Rhode Island and New Mexico have already done so, and more than a dozen local governments in California have passed ordinances with similar objectives.
Gov. Gray Davis has not taken a position on the bill, said spokesman Russ Lopez.
Leno's legislation would amend the state Fair Employment and Housing Act, which already bans discrimination based on a person's religion, race, ancestry, sex and sexual orientation, among other attributes. Leno would expand that list to include "gender."
His bill uses the definition of gender in the state education and penal codes, where gender is described as a person's identity, appearance or behavior, whether or not that identity, appearance or behavior is different from that traditionally associated with the person's sex at birth.
Leno's bill, which he said would affect more than 100,000 Californians, allows employers to set standards of appearance, grooming and dress, as long as a worker is allowed to dress consistently with his or her preferred gender.
The Department of Fair Employment and Housing can issue a wide range of penalties for violations.
Punishments range from restoration of back pay and promotions to damages and civil fines of as much as $10,000 for housing discrimination and $150,000 for job discrimination.
Supporters said that discrimination against those who do not dress and behave like the male or female they were born as is a widespread and serious problem.
"Across California, people are fired, denied promotions, denied adequate housing because of gender discrimination," said Assemblyman Paul Koretz (D-West Hollywood)."Unemployment rates are egregiously high among transgender people due to workplace discrimination. Estimates run as high as 70% unemployment. As a result, many transgender people wind up homeless."
But Republicans called the bill an unfair burden on employers, especially those who may be morally opposed to transgender behavior.
Assemblyman Rick Keene, (R-Chico), argued that Leno's legislation would prevent a business owner from controlling the image projected by his or her business.
"Everyone would feel that individuals ought to have the right to dress the way they feel is appropriate on their own time," Keene said, "but we have also guarded the right for businesses to decide what kind of images they want to put forwardThis would fly in the face of that."
The bill passed 41 to 34, with five Assembly members not voting. It failed to win all 48 Democratic votes in the 80-member lower house of the Legislature.
Fourteen members rose to speak about the bill, including Assemblyman John Longville (D-Rialto). He compared the bill with the civil rights legislation of the 1960s to ban discrimination against people based on skin color.
"Think about how you're going to explain your vote two or three decades down the road to your grandchildren," Longville warned Republicans.
Assemblyman Tony Strickland (R-Moorpark) said he would easily explain his no vote to grandchildren as a rejection of the state's attempt to impose its views on employers and landlords.
AB 196 is the first bill backed by the Assembly's new five-member Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Caucus to clear the Assembly.
I think the public does not really understand the ramification of this if it passes. Minnesota has a similar law. A male highschool librarian began dressing as a woman and started using the women's restroom. A female teacher took it to court and of course, ACLU went to bat for the the crossdresser. He won. What he won was the right to enter any female restroom in the highschool including the girls' restroom.
Crossing lines Court upholds the "right" of a transgendered teacher to use women's restroom.
For those who aren't familiar with crossdressing, it is a fetish and entering women's private domains (restrooms, gym dressing areas) provides sexual gratification (voyeurism). The public is not being educated on this and as a matter of fact, most of those writing this legislation are ignorant about the issue of transgenderism and are too afraid to oppose legislation which will likely result in harassment from the transgendered and gay communities. Women/girls are assaulted, raped and sometimes killed in public restrooms by male assailants because these places provide out-of-the-way access to vulnerable females. If this bill passes, women/girls will be forced to share women's restrooms with heterosexual men dressed as women in public, at work, school, gyms etc. Women/girls are often at their most vulnerable in restrooms and many sexual predators know this.
Once the cat is out of the bag, it's impossible to put it back. I think the transgendered should be able to find jobs but I don't think their sexual gratification should come at the expense of the safety and privacy of the public including children. Separate restrooms/gym facilities should be required before this legislation is passed.
If the bill passes the Senate as expected and is signed by the governor, it will make California the fourth state in the nation to ban discrimination against transgender people. Minnesota, Rhode Island and New Mexico have already done so, and more than a dozen local governments in California have passed ordinances with similar objectives.
Gov. Gray Davis has not taken a position on the bill, said spokesman Russ Lopez.
Leno's legislation would amend the state Fair Employment and Housing Act, which already bans discrimination based on a person's religion, race, ancestry, sex and sexual orientation, among other attributes. Leno would expand that list to include "gender."
His bill uses the definition of gender in the state education and penal codes, where gender is described as a person's identity, appearance or behavior, whether or not that identity, appearance or behavior is different from that traditionally associated with the person's sex at birth.
Leno's bill, which he said would affect more than 100,000 Californians, allows employers to set standards of appearance, grooming and dress, as long as a worker is allowed to dress consistently with his or her preferred gender.
The Department of Fair Employment and Housing can issue a wide range of penalties for violations.
Punishments range from restoration of back pay and promotions to damages and civil fines of as much as $10,000 for housing discrimination and $150,000 for job discrimination.
Supporters said that discrimination against those who do not dress and behave like the male or female they were born as is a widespread and serious problem.
"Across California, people are fired, denied promotions, denied adequate housing because of gender discrimination," said Assemblyman Paul Koretz (D-West Hollywood)."Unemployment rates are egregiously high among transgender people due to workplace discrimination. Estimates run as high as 70% unemployment. As a result, many transgender people wind up homeless."
But Republicans called the bill an unfair burden on employers, especially those who may be morally opposed to transgender behavior.
Assemblyman Rick Keene, (R-Chico), argued that Leno's legislation would prevent a business owner from controlling the image projected by his or her business.
"Everyone would feel that individuals ought to have the right to dress the way they feel is appropriate on their own time," Keene said, "but we have also guarded the right for businesses to decide what kind of images they want to put forwardThis would fly in the face of that."
The bill passed 41 to 34, with five Assembly members not voting. It failed to win all 48 Democratic votes in the 80-member lower house of the Legislature.
Fourteen members rose to speak about the bill, including Assemblyman John Longville (D-Rialto). He compared the bill with the civil rights legislation of the 1960s to ban discrimination against people based on skin color.
"Think about how you're going to explain your vote two or three decades down the road to your grandchildren," Longville warned Republicans.
Assemblyman Tony Strickland (R-Moorpark) said he would easily explain his no vote to grandchildren as a rejection of the state's attempt to impose its views on employers and landlords.
AB 196 is the first bill backed by the Assembly's new five-member Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Caucus to clear the Assembly.
I think the public does not really understand the ramification of this if it passes. Minnesota has a similar law. A male highschool librarian began dressing as a woman and started using the women's restroom. A female teacher took it to court and of course, ACLU went to bat for the the crossdresser. He won. What he won was the right to enter any female restroom in the highschool including the girls' restroom.
Crossing lines Court upholds the "right" of a transgendered teacher to use women's restroom.
For those who aren't familiar with crossdressing, it is a fetish and entering women's private domains (restrooms, gym dressing areas) provides sexual gratification (voyeurism). The public is not being educated on this and as a matter of fact, most of those writing this legislation are ignorant about the issue of transgenderism and are too afraid to oppose legislation which will likely result in harassment from the transgendered and gay communities. Women/girls are assaulted, raped and sometimes killed in public restrooms by male assailants because these places provide out-of-the-way access to vulnerable females. If this bill passes, women/girls will be forced to share women's restrooms with heterosexual men dressed as women in public, at work, school, gyms etc. Women/girls are often at their most vulnerable in restrooms and many sexual predators know this.
Once the cat is out of the bag, it's impossible to put it back. I think the transgendered should be able to find jobs but I don't think their sexual gratification should come at the expense of the safety and privacy of the public including children. Separate restrooms/gym facilities should be required before this legislation is passed.
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
Nancy,
All due respect, have you ever tried dialoguing with the transgender community on this? "Transgender" is frequently used as an umbrella term to emcompass many groups, including genderqueers, butch and femme lesbians, and (despite protestations from us to the contrary -- some of us identify as TG, many of us don't) intersexed peoples. Are you honestly saying that the conditions that caused the deaths of Brandon Teena and Gwen Arahjo should be tolerated? Further, the fears as to public restrooms could be addressed by making single stall, unisex, locked bathrooms California law. Please don't contribute to the MAN-made conditions that attempt to make our lives a living hell.
Sincerely,
solidad decosta
intersexed activist and spoken word artist
All due respect, have you ever tried dialoguing with the transgender community on this? "Transgender" is frequently used as an umbrella term to emcompass many groups, including genderqueers, butch and femme lesbians, and (despite protestations from us to the contrary -- some of us identify as TG, many of us don't) intersexed peoples. Are you honestly saying that the conditions that caused the deaths of Brandon Teena and Gwen Arahjo should be tolerated? Further, the fears as to public restrooms could be addressed by making single stall, unisex, locked bathrooms California law. Please don't contribute to the MAN-made conditions that attempt to make our lives a living hell.
Sincerely,
solidad decosta
intersexed activist and spoken word artist
I think it is intriguing that Nancy Vogel closes her column with a strawman (or should I say strawtrans) argument about crossdressers assaulting innocent girls. This is the same tactic that the Religious Right has used in opposition of AB 196, and is a fallacy at heart.
First, and perhaps most importantly, the bill does *not* "forced" anyone to share restroom facilities with "heterosexual men dressed as women." any more that current existing restroom policies in the state. In fact, AB 196 is not the "transgender restroom bill of 2003," as she seems to think it is. In it an anti-discrimination bill.
AB 196 is exclusive of casual cross-dressing. To wit, it requires a transgendered employee to appear in a manner consistent with their gender identity. It is not about cross-dressing in the manner to which Ms. Vogel describes it.
For that matter, for those like Ms. Vogel who aren't familiar with crossdressing (as opposed to transsexuality or other forms of transgendered expression, which lie much closer to the heart of AB 196), it is not so much the fetish that other make it out to be, and it is not always -- perhaps even not often -- done for a form of sexual gratification.
I do agree with Ms. Vogel that women and girls are often raped and sometimes killed in public restrooms. As a transgendered woman, I too have been sexually assaulted in a restroom, and know the threat can be all too real. Yet Ms. Vogel is still focusing undue attention onto some issue she has with transgendered people in bathrooms, and is incorrect in conflating the majority of transgendered people with male sexual predators.
I hope that she will sit down and read the text of AB 196, and ask appropriate and legitimate questions before she again attempts to reframe a rational bill as carte blanche for rapists.
Cheers,
Gwen Smith
First, and perhaps most importantly, the bill does *not* "forced" anyone to share restroom facilities with "heterosexual men dressed as women." any more that current existing restroom policies in the state. In fact, AB 196 is not the "transgender restroom bill of 2003," as she seems to think it is. In it an anti-discrimination bill.
AB 196 is exclusive of casual cross-dressing. To wit, it requires a transgendered employee to appear in a manner consistent with their gender identity. It is not about cross-dressing in the manner to which Ms. Vogel describes it.
For that matter, for those like Ms. Vogel who aren't familiar with crossdressing (as opposed to transsexuality or other forms of transgendered expression, which lie much closer to the heart of AB 196), it is not so much the fetish that other make it out to be, and it is not always -- perhaps even not often -- done for a form of sexual gratification.
I do agree with Ms. Vogel that women and girls are often raped and sometimes killed in public restrooms. As a transgendered woman, I too have been sexually assaulted in a restroom, and know the threat can be all too real. Yet Ms. Vogel is still focusing undue attention onto some issue she has with transgendered people in bathrooms, and is incorrect in conflating the majority of transgendered people with male sexual predators.
I hope that she will sit down and read the text of AB 196, and ask appropriate and legitimate questions before she again attempts to reframe a rational bill as carte blanche for rapists.
Cheers,
Gwen Smith
For more information:
http://www.gwensmith.com
::waves to gwen::
>>I do agree with Ms. Vogel that women and girls are often raped and sometimes killed in public restrooms. As a transgendered woman, I too have been sexually assaulted in a restroom, and know the threat can be all too real. Yet Ms. Vogel is still focusing undue attention onto some issue she has with transgendered people in bathrooms, and is incorrect in conflating the majority of transgendered people with male sexual predators<<
Yes, exactly. As an intersexed woman, my short list includes being rubbed up against and asked "whether I was coming or going," being told that "I deserved to get it" and that I "should be (sic) bitched on all fours" when I refused a completely unasked for advance on a public street, and being threatened with a shotgun blast because (sic) "I was a fucking drag queen". All of these CRIMES were committed by men. Conflation, indeed.
For the record, I'd also like to point out that, as an intersexed person, I'd had things like this happen, only to walk down the street and have a woman or man whom I had never met before call me ma'am. I've also had two people address me with different pronouns in the same conversation (go figure). My life is lived out as a woman, people accept me as a woman, and those who know me (and many who don't), get to share in my experiences. I'm lucky that way. Very lucky -- and nevertheless, things do happen, just as they did when I was 15 and someone nearly strangled me to death because I was (to quote my attempted murderer) "different." Differently gendered, differently sexed, differently raced (I'm mixed race), all of the above -- who knows? All I know is that I don't fit into this wicked white supremacist capitalist patriarchal system (to borrow from bell hook's erudite precision). Do you fit in, Nancy?
So lastly? My question to you, Nancy, is: given all that, which bathroom should I use? Or should I just pee standing in place and wait for the police to come get me to throw me in isolation?
solidad decosta
>>I do agree with Ms. Vogel that women and girls are often raped and sometimes killed in public restrooms. As a transgendered woman, I too have been sexually assaulted in a restroom, and know the threat can be all too real. Yet Ms. Vogel is still focusing undue attention onto some issue she has with transgendered people in bathrooms, and is incorrect in conflating the majority of transgendered people with male sexual predators<<
Yes, exactly. As an intersexed woman, my short list includes being rubbed up against and asked "whether I was coming or going," being told that "I deserved to get it" and that I "should be (sic) bitched on all fours" when I refused a completely unasked for advance on a public street, and being threatened with a shotgun blast because (sic) "I was a fucking drag queen". All of these CRIMES were committed by men. Conflation, indeed.
For the record, I'd also like to point out that, as an intersexed person, I'd had things like this happen, only to walk down the street and have a woman or man whom I had never met before call me ma'am. I've also had two people address me with different pronouns in the same conversation (go figure). My life is lived out as a woman, people accept me as a woman, and those who know me (and many who don't), get to share in my experiences. I'm lucky that way. Very lucky -- and nevertheless, things do happen, just as they did when I was 15 and someone nearly strangled me to death because I was (to quote my attempted murderer) "different." Differently gendered, differently sexed, differently raced (I'm mixed race), all of the above -- who knows? All I know is that I don't fit into this wicked white supremacist capitalist patriarchal system (to borrow from bell hook's erudite precision). Do you fit in, Nancy?
So lastly? My question to you, Nancy, is: given all that, which bathroom should I use? Or should I just pee standing in place and wait for the police to come get me to throw me in isolation?
solidad decosta
The comments added to the bottom of the arrticle so far show a remarkable lack of education.
The word "transgender" is an umbrella term that encompasses a large range of people with varying levels of inability to cope with their birth-assigned social role.
Yes, it's true that there are crossdressers under that umbrella, as well as transvestites, and transsexuals. That is a rough ranking of the order of severity of the seriousness of the conflict between one's birth-assigned role and one's personal sense of identity, with transsexuals as the most seriously conflicted.
Of them all, it tends to be only crossdressers who usually have any form of sexual gratification associated with their role reversal. And crossdressers are usually quite content to keep their activities out of the workplace. It is also a great disservice to lump in other fetishes such as voyeurism with the behavior of any transgendered person.
The word "transgender" is an umbrella term that encompasses a large range of people with varying levels of inability to cope with their birth-assigned social role.
Yes, it's true that there are crossdressers under that umbrella, as well as transvestites, and transsexuals. That is a rough ranking of the order of severity of the seriousness of the conflict between one's birth-assigned role and one's personal sense of identity, with transsexuals as the most seriously conflicted.
Of them all, it tends to be only crossdressers who usually have any form of sexual gratification associated with their role reversal. And crossdressers are usually quite content to keep their activities out of the workplace. It is also a great disservice to lump in other fetishes such as voyeurism with the behavior of any transgendered person.
Nancy Vogel wrote, "I think the public does not really understand the ramification of this if it
passes."
Ms. Vogel does not understand the difference between cross dressing and transsexuality. The woman she referred to in Minnessota is a transsexual woman; she is not a cross dressing man.
Further, she misrepresents the bill; there is nothing in the bill that prevents employers from prescribing appropriate dress codes for employees.
Her argument about rest rooms is nothing but hysteria and scare tactics.
Shame on you, Nancy Vogel.
passes."
Ms. Vogel does not understand the difference between cross dressing and transsexuality. The woman she referred to in Minnessota is a transsexual woman; she is not a cross dressing man.
Further, she misrepresents the bill; there is nothing in the bill that prevents employers from prescribing appropriate dress codes for employees.
Her argument about rest rooms is nothing but hysteria and scare tactics.
Shame on you, Nancy Vogel.
actually, cross-dressing men (and for that matter, transvestites) don't fit as a rule into the category of men that Nancy is discussing (male predators). all being a crossdresser means is that you wear clothing opposite of the one that you identify with -- and having a fetish about certain attire doesn't mean that you're a sexual predator. if that were the case, everybody who has a leather fetish would be stalking leather bars, waiting to attack...
further, most male predators are straight, non-trans identified men who would probably attempt to beat the crap of anyone who dared to associate them with something as "feminine" as wearing women's clothing.
misogyny is a serious problem in this country, and in the world as a whole. it's amazing to me, with all the hatred of women that is perpetuated daily, that people are so intimidated by us trans/genderqueer/intersexed folk that they assume that we're the enemy. ::shrugs:: it's rather, well, weird. the very idea that we would be a backward vanguard of some woman-hating conspiracy, when the very same people who perpetuate violence against women of all kinds hate us as well -- i mean, whatever. What-EVER. *sigh* frustrating.
solidad
ps: thanks for the kind words, nessie -- actually, the bay has plenty of fine poets (and some, well, who try, just like anywhere or anything). i'm blessed to be here.
further, most male predators are straight, non-trans identified men who would probably attempt to beat the crap of anyone who dared to associate them with something as "feminine" as wearing women's clothing.
misogyny is a serious problem in this country, and in the world as a whole. it's amazing to me, with all the hatred of women that is perpetuated daily, that people are so intimidated by us trans/genderqueer/intersexed folk that they assume that we're the enemy. ::shrugs:: it's rather, well, weird. the very idea that we would be a backward vanguard of some woman-hating conspiracy, when the very same people who perpetuate violence against women of all kinds hate us as well -- i mean, whatever. What-EVER. *sigh* frustrating.
solidad
ps: thanks for the kind words, nessie -- actually, the bay has plenty of fine poets (and some, well, who try, just like anywhere or anything). i'm blessed to be here.
is your last name really halliburton
ok, i'm more than tired of this silliness. once again, some transphobic nitwit makes a statement, and then like the cowards they are, they retreat the moment that their little long knives-fest doesn't work.
so, i am turning my swords into ploughshares, and invoking the power of oral tradition and communal discourse.
Nancy? I would like to debate you, at a place of our choosing. I would prefer it to be in Oakland or SF, and in a public place, such as humanist hall. please understand, when i say "debate," i mean "DEBATE" -- the audience would NOT be silenced, and could speak up whenever they want. you bring your folks (tired old reformists who only want a white, middle class "feminism" that reeks of priviledge, i presume) and i'll bring mine. it'll be fun. we could even fundraise for Women in Black, SF IMC, NION, Freedom Uprising, like that.
Of course, you could always just hide and wait for the next moment you think we're not watching. But why wait? Operators are standing by...
Not fond of cowards,
solidad decosta
so, i am turning my swords into ploughshares, and invoking the power of oral tradition and communal discourse.
Nancy? I would like to debate you, at a place of our choosing. I would prefer it to be in Oakland or SF, and in a public place, such as humanist hall. please understand, when i say "debate," i mean "DEBATE" -- the audience would NOT be silenced, and could speak up whenever they want. you bring your folks (tired old reformists who only want a white, middle class "feminism" that reeks of priviledge, i presume) and i'll bring mine. it'll be fun. we could even fundraise for Women in Black, SF IMC, NION, Freedom Uprising, like that.
Of course, you could always just hide and wait for the next moment you think we're not watching. But why wait? Operators are standing by...
Not fond of cowards,
solidad decosta
>zog zionist vast conspiracy yadda yadda
so, how do you feel about violence against transgender, intersexed and genderqueer people?
solidad
so, how do you feel about violence against transgender, intersexed and genderqueer people?
solidad
>down solidad,
This refers to a piece of spam that was removed.
In the future, please don't respond to this stuff. Just email us and we'll remove it. Anytime you see any racist, sexist, homophobic, pro-war crap on this site that we missed, don't respond. Email us and we'll remove it. Thanks in advance.
This refers to a piece of spam that was removed.
In the future, please don't respond to this stuff. Just email us and we'll remove it. Anytime you see any racist, sexist, homophobic, pro-war crap on this site that we missed, don't respond. Email us and we'll remove it. Thanks in advance.
my apologies, i know better. thanks.
solidad
solidad
I can understand removing racist, homophobic, sexist, etc. comments, but why any pro-war comments?
I didn't support the war, but I accept that sometimes it is necessary. Why would you censor someone from being able to provide their views...even if only for us to try to change their minds?
I didn't support the war, but I accept that sometimes it is necessary. Why would you censor someone from being able to provide their views...even if only for us to try to change their minds?
They are perfectly free to post that crap elsewhere on the net. We wont try to stop them. But we are not going to use our time, money, energy, skills and talent to provide them with a soap box, either.
"They are perfectly free to post that crap elsewhere on the net. We wont try to stop them. But we are not going to use our time, money, energy, skills and talent to provide them with a soap box, either."
I know I'm just being nit-picky here, but aren't you using time, money, energy, skills, and talent to remove their posts?
I know I'm just being nit-picky here, but aren't you using time, money, energy, skills, and talent to remove their posts?
It's time, money, energy, skills and talent well spent. It makes this site pleasing to. and usable by, the people whose opinions we care about.
It would displease our friends and allies if we allowed that crap to get in the way of their being able to use this site to read news and communicate communicate with each other. That’s what they tell us. We believe them. It is for them we run this site, not for a bunch of racists, sexists, homophobes, fascists and warmongers. The opinions of racists, sexists, homophobes, fascists and warmongers, we do not care about.
Do you?
Why?
It would displease our friends and allies if we allowed that crap to get in the way of their being able to use this site to read news and communicate communicate with each other. That’s what they tell us. We believe them. It is for them we run this site, not for a bunch of racists, sexists, homophobes, fascists and warmongers. The opinions of racists, sexists, homophobes, fascists and warmongers, we do not care about.
Do you?
Why?
speaking as one long-term indybay reader? i'm fine with pro-war comments, but people who are clearly trying to spam pro-war, anti-palestine, etc, etc, posts are not welcome. not only does it clog up the works when someone says "get a life. take a bath" multiple times, it's also clearly an attack on indymedia. i don't see anything wrong with saying no to hostile intent in your own back yard, ya know?
solidad
solidad
"The opinions of racists, sexists, homophobes, fascists and warmongers, we do not care about.
Do you?
Why?"
Actually, I do care about the opinions of others, provided that they can provide that opinion in a calm and reasonable way.
The free exchange of ideas is almost more important than the ideas themselves.
Granted, people shouting "Get a Job" or "Love it or Leave it" are deserving of getting yanked, but sometimes people who offer opposing views have something very useful to contribute.
At the very least, when dealing with a semi-rational neo-con, it gives us a chance to sharpen our skills against them. Who knows? We might actually convert a few of them to our cause.
I'll listen to what others have to say with an open mind. If I beleive what they have to say, I'll believe it. If I don't, I'll offer up my own thoughts.
I believe in diplomacy and that war is wrong. Consequently, I also believe diplomacy is the right path in a war of ideas.
You can't win by silencing the opposition by force, as we demonstrate after every police crack-down. You win by using better arguments and by being the better person.
Do you?
Why?"
Actually, I do care about the opinions of others, provided that they can provide that opinion in a calm and reasonable way.
The free exchange of ideas is almost more important than the ideas themselves.
Granted, people shouting "Get a Job" or "Love it or Leave it" are deserving of getting yanked, but sometimes people who offer opposing views have something very useful to contribute.
At the very least, when dealing with a semi-rational neo-con, it gives us a chance to sharpen our skills against them. Who knows? We might actually convert a few of them to our cause.
I'll listen to what others have to say with an open mind. If I beleive what they have to say, I'll believe it. If I don't, I'll offer up my own thoughts.
I believe in diplomacy and that war is wrong. Consequently, I also believe diplomacy is the right path in a war of ideas.
You can't win by silencing the opposition by force, as we demonstrate after every police crack-down. You win by using better arguments and by being the better person.
I am sorry to inform you that crossdressing is not just a fetish. I am a crossdresser. It is not something I chose to do. I also do not do it for sexual gratifacation. I crossdress because I like womens clothes. They are more varied then mens which are rather dull. I would not wish being a crossdresser on any one as it is hard to grow up felling guilt that you are doing something wrong but cannot stop it. Next time you go to write a story do a little research past what you think. There are good books out on crossdressing. Also there are tons of online references. I will state that for some crossdressing is purely sexual. I am also among a minority of crossdressers as I do not care to try to look female when I dress. Thank you for your time.
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$180.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network