Tossed Under the Bus By the "LGBT Community" Yet Again

[Persephone]

"Being lesbian, gay, or bisexual is not a disease, disorder, illness, deficiency, or shortcoming" according to California Senate Bill 1172, due to be voted upon this week.

Gee, who is missing from that list???

The bill concerns the manner in which "physicians and surgeons, psychologists, marriage and family therapists, educational psychologists, clinical social workers, and licensed professional clinical counselors" are allowed to counsel patients under 18 years of age.

The "bill would prohibit a mental health provider, as defined, from engaging in sexual orientation change efforts, as defined, with a patient under 18 years of age."

How's that tire feel on your face?

Hugs,
Persephone.

[Laura912]

Agree is not fair, but one can only hope that if this bill passes, the "T" part will be addressed and perhaps pass easier. Avoiding the transgendered portion was easier for the politicians because that group is less vocal and hence less impact on voting than the first three in the LGBT grouping.

[Angela Campbell]

might be because most people who are not crossdressers or know one well just think we are gay.

[Miranda-E]

a small victory can be added to later, a complete loss means starting over from scratch.
EVERY transgender rights law was built on an existing anti-discrimination law.

I don't see any problem with
"The "bill would prohibit a mental health provider, as defined, from engaging in sexual orientation change efforts, as defined, with a patient under 18 years of age."

if you want you can always join the fight publicly.

How's that tire feel on your face?

It feels pretty darn good. If you were out or full time and had to interact with society on a constant basis without the benefits of hiding part time when it is convenient, you'd realize that any step toward more anti-discrimination laws is a good thing.

[kimdl93]

Well, There are a number of ways to take this. Being offended is one, but IMHO offended us? The GLBT community? The bill's sponsor? Or the legislative aid that drafted the language. Perhaps the appropriate response might be to contact your representative or the sponsor and ask that the word 'transgendered' be included in the language of the bill. They will probably appreciate your input.

[sterling12]

I'm a bit surprised that some of "The Change Agents," The People from various Organizations who represent among others The Transgendered, haven't spoken up and said, "wait a second!" "Let us reconsider, and include our Sisters."

If that doesn't happen, there ought to be Hell to Pay! I have read Autobiography's from Transsexual Women where their "Near and Dear" have had them thrown into Mental Hospitals and held against their wills. That's not right for anyone, and it stigmatizes The Transgendered as people with a mental illness. If we got the interpretation of That Bill correct, it INFERS that we are all mentally ill, because we aren't included when the other groups are. Everybody knows it's LGB (T). So, there must be a reason for our non-inclusion.

I don't want to described as Mentally Ill, because I'm transgendered. That makes me mad! Enough of that kind of crap! Change The Wording, call your State Rep. I urge all California Sisters to do so.

Peace and Love, Joanie

[xdressed]

To be fair, we are different to the LGB community as a whole because our sexuality is not the important bit in regards to our own self expression. We are often overlooked as a result though, which can be upsetting but the upside is that anything that helps equality and anti-discrimination for LGB community usually helps us as well.

[Marie-Elise]

might be because most people who are not crossdressers or know one well just think we are gay.

Yeah...I think it's just because most people think all crossdressers are gay so they are covered in this.

I guess a good question is whether crossdressers or TG folks mind being lumped in with the LGB community and not being identified as a separate identity. I mean, some crossdressers are gay, some bi and most hetero.

By being a crossdresser, I support the gay, bi and lesbian identities just because I believe everyone deserves equal rights. To the casual person on the street, I would be lumped in with them though I am none of them.

[kathtx]

Under current standards of care, isn't a diagnosis of "gender identity disorder" needed to be prescribed hormones or SRS? So perhaps the drafters of the California bill weren't throwing us under the bus, but were instead trying to allow transitions to continue within the existing framework. For instance, one effect of GID being a "disorder" is that some insurance companies cover the costs of transition.

I am NOT trying to start an argument over whether or not the standards of care are a good idea, nor am I in any way trying to suggest that the classification of transsexuality as a disorder is a good thing. I'm also fully aware that not all T's are TS, and that not all TS plan to transition, so that an attempt to support transitioning TS isn't representative of everyone. I only want to suggest as the DSM stands now, the intent of the California bill may have in fact been to help us rather than hurt us.

[sterling12]

OK Kath, I see your point, but if reported to us correctly, it's not about a physician making a Diagnosis to get Hormones for a Client. Reported as: "To keep A health care provider from engaging in SEXUAL ORIENTATION CHANGE EFFORTS."

Now I would take that to mean The Classic "Deprogramming Efforts" engaged in by certain fringe groups, and ill-advised/planned efforts from SOME in The Psychiatric Community. In other words, "don't be kidnapping, abducting, or trying to get mental health orders for incarceration." ( In Florida, that's called a Baker Act. Don't know the name for it in California). I think that's The Intent of The Legislation, and it DOES effect ALL of us, or it could potentially effect us. In most States, your Spouse could get together with some Shrink, and have you committed for even expressing curiosity about things transgendered. All it takes is her OK, and a Willing "Professional." No doubt you would quickly be released, (with a little help from The ACLU) but The Damage like Public Stigma would already be done.

And I'm not trying to cause a Ruckus either. But, some of us always think that somehow we aren't part of the whole structure. "Oh, I'm not like those Transsexuals, I'm CD." Better start thinking more in terms of The Whole. I'm not Transsexual....today! But tomorrow, who knows? I've seen plenty around here who started out as one thing, and finished as someone entirely different. It just might be one of you!

I am 100% for supporting EVERYONE in The Community. I might not understand them, might not want to be like them, but it doesn't matter! We're all in The Boat together, and to survive, we support and share. To do differently would be foolish.

Peace and Love, Joanie

[Sally24]

You might actually read the bill before you complain about it....

It refers to TRANSGENDERED 3 times and to gender/gender expression 6 times. It primarily prevents sexual change therapy but also includes a ban on trying to change gender presentation on any patients under the age of 18.

It seems they did get it right for once.

Link To The Full Text Of The Bill

http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/fa...702fa113888b9f

[sometimes_miss]

might be because most people who are not crossdressers or know one well just think we are gay.

Bingo, you win the prize. Even lots of gay people think that we're all just in denial.

[AllieSF]

Thanks for the link Sally. I think that the OP misunderstood whatever she read. Here is a brief summary from this link http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/fa...ryClient.xhtml

Click on the 08/15/12- Assembly Floor Analysis


"COMMENTS: According to the author, "this bill establishes first-in-the-nation protections for youths [from] dangerous so-called therapies that aim to change a person's sexual orientation. This bill seeks to provide protections for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) youth by preventing these types of pseudo-therapies that are potentially dangerous. Practitioners may also try to alter a patient's sexuality with visualization, social skills training, psychoanalytic therapy, and spiritual inventions. Many SOCE patients report negative social and emotional consequences such as anger, anxiety, confusion, depression, guilt, hopelessness, and deteriorated relationships with family, loss of social support, sexual dysfunction, and even suicide."
SOCE is sometimes called reparative therapy or conversion therapy. It is an attempt to change the sexual orientation of a person from homosexual or bisexual to heterosexual. This type of therapy has sparked a national debate about the scientific relevance and the effectiveness of the therapy."

[Raquel June]

Awesome. And regardless,

The "bill would prohibit a mental health provider, as defined, from engaging in sexual orientation change efforts, as defined, with a patient under 18 years of age."

How's that tire feel on your face?

If this had been the scope of the bill, then it would have nothing to do with gender identity, so it wouldn't really be relevant to trans issues.

Although I certainly understand being pissed any time we're left off a list that includes L and G in it. Trans people have always been a driving force for lesbian/gay rights yet generally get written out of history.

We can blame HRC and other gay organizations all day, and they've definitely neglected us in the past, but the biggest problem is a total lack of understanding about who we even are. Trans people at Stonewall ended up getting reported as gays because people didn't know the difference between a gay guy and a drag queen and a trans person. And since there's no check box on a police report for "trans," legitimate statistics for crimes against us don't even exist.

In the end I think the most important thing for us to do is be proud of who we are and be positive examples who represent our community in a dignified way, not just spend years in the closet then those of us who transition just trying as hard as we can to go stealth and get back in the closet.

Not that I can necessarily blame the prettier folks for wanting to avoid the headache of occasional honesty, but people need to know we exist outside of SF and NYC and the occasional seedy gay bar. Otherwise what do we expect?

[Beverley Sims]

Sometimes legislators are not up with all the terminology and need to be reminded.
Without parents permission counseuling a minor to change sex is frought with danger.

[Sophie_C]

Well, this might not be as bad as intended. If being trans is not considered a "disease" or "condition", then it'll never be covered by any sort of healthcare in the future (hormones, SRS, etc). You've got to look at the flipside of the coin...