HRC's Trans and Faith Curriculum

Thanks, but no thanks

The Human Rights Campaign's "Gender Identity and our Faith Communities" curriculum has finally been released. Can't say I'm very impressed and if you are a pastor or rabbi or considering utilizing this "congregational guide for transgender advocacy" please don't do it on my account. Understand that HRC has two ultimate goals in this endeavor. The first is to try to curry favor with the transgender community it so willingly cast aside, and thus alienated, by excluding us from the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) in the fall of 2007. To this date, Joe Solmonese has not apologized for abandoning part of his professed constituency, but has also pledged to do it again should a non-inclusive ENDA move again in Congress. The second goal is to have you - the faith leaders - do the work they are unable or unwilling to do and that is to lobby Congress on my behalf. Thanks, but we're capable of doing that ourselves.

As to the curriculum itself, the lead editor of the project, Rev. Chris Glaser, begins with an introduction that blatantly belies HRC's past. In the introduction, Rev. Glaser writes:

"I was disappointed that “gender identity” had been dropped from the list of protected categories in the Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2007 before Congress, however temporarily. Voicing my opinion, I was met with HRC’s commitment to grassroots education in religious communities to support an ENDA that includes gender identity when it again comes up for a vote."

Talk about rewriting history! Here's what Joe Solmonese told the Detroit PrideSource in its April 2008 issue: "In that context, did I think then that it (a non-inclusive ENDA) was best for the community that the bill pass? Yes," Solmonese said. "Do I still support that position? Yeah. What was best for our community was that the bill pass rather than fail. Sometimes it is hard for people to see the whole picture, but sometimes you are faced with choices." This is a position from which he has yet to publicly disavow. Then again, this "curriculum" isn't about trans and faith, its about glossing over HRC's past.

If you don't believe my viewpoint, then consider the advice in the Planning Your Time segment that states: "Remember that the curriculum is an advocacy training manual first and foremost. Throughout the curriculum, we have guidelines about how to cut or shorten the exercises if you are running out of time. You do not, however, want to give short shrift to the third section on advocacy training!". In other words, this is about Politics and not Faith.

The whole notion behind this blog and my ministry, Chrysalis Mission, is to bring the Transgender and Faith Communities together. I simply want transgender people to find caring and accepting faith houses if they so desire, and to help faith communities understand and welcome transgender people. I have friends who feel so badly harmed, one physically, by their faith traditions that they no longer pursue any journey whatsoever. Surely for some congregations, Social Justice work is an important part of the life of their tradition. And there is much Social Justice activism to be done to benefit transgender lives, and voices of faith are needed in this endeavor. But, HRC's outreach seems most politically unctuous.

I was simultaneously disappointed to see some transgender people participate in this effort (don't they understand the depths of the damage done?) and the fact that it wasn't completely the effort of transgender people. Major parts of this curriculum uses "they/them" instead of "us/we". This should have been written in our voice, not on our behalf. That feels somewhat patronizing. Even Rev. Glaser acknowledges this: "It is no longer sufficient simply to lump the transgender experience together with the lesbian, gay and bisexual experience. The transgender experience deserves and requires its own focus.". Then why not let us define and express that focus on our own?

One other thing chafes my sensibilities and that is the lengthy essay written by Virginia Ramey Mollenkott entitled "Seven Reasons Why Congregations Should Embrace Their Transgender Members". If the title isn't long enough for you, it takes her seven full pages to present her case - a bit too much methinks. Anyway, in her essay she tries to make the case that Jesus was intersexed and a bisexual, then says the Magi weren't really Kings, but queens. This kind of pontificating isn't helpful and won't win over many of the minds or hearts of the "movable middle". Further, it attempts to define, and thusly limit, God's omnipotence. The Christian belief, and Mollenkott is Christian, is that God's power, authority and wisdom is something that we truly cannot fully comprehend. Yet she purports to do just that:

On Jesus being Intersexed: "If Matthew 1:23-25 is read literally, the virgin birth of Jesus was a birth without male input, so to speak (parthogenetic). In that case, he was chromosomally female; and according to the Gospel account, he was outwardly male. (The male appearance, science tells us, can occur through a late-term sex reversal.) So anyone who takes the virgin birth literally must acknowledge that Jesus was intersexual (a form of transgenderism) and thus a perfect incarnation of the entire sex/gender continuum."

On Jesus being Bisexual: "If we take seriously the New Testament description of Jesus’ relationships with Mary Magdalene and with the Beloved Disciple (John? Lazarus?)(John 13:25, et al.), we might conclude that Jesus was bisexually oriented."

On the Magi (though she references a book "Our Tribe" written by Rev. Elder Nancy Wilson of the Metropolitan Community Church): "the Rev. Elder Nancy Wilson writes about the three Magi who brought their gifts to the baby Jesus. She comments that it is highly doubtful that they were kings, but quite possible that they were “queens” — and probably eunuchs and shamans. My guess is that they were people who today would be termed transwomen."

Mollenkott also at times, confuses male/female with masculine/feminine in describing certain traits ascribed to Jesus and other Biblical characters. Being transgender is about my identity, not my gender role - and it certainly isn't about making some kind of socio-political, or queer-feminist statement, religious or otherwise.

The final insult - and yes, I do find this curriculum to be just that - comes at the very end in which HRC very conveniently provides you with a "sign-up sheet" which asks you to have everyone who participated in your lessons to provide their name, address, phone number and e-mail. Yep, the ultimate end to this is recruitment for HRC.

You want to engage a better understanding of transgender people so that your church may become more understanding? Engage us, we aren't that hard to find really. Let us define ourselves, let us explain ourselves. If you wish to lobby Congress, do so with your own Representatives and Senators, you don't need to take a trip to Washington DC for a photo op on the HRC website. And understand there is so much more than ENDA and the Matthew Shepard Act that is important to our lives. Yes, both are desperately needed. But HRC doesn't tell you about our problems with the Real ID Act, the exclusion of medical insurance coverage, the need for Gender Identity Disorder reform (get us out of the APA's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual!!!) and the many legal black holes we fall into.

So Caveat Emptor. Sure, use this resource if you'd like (there are some positive parts to the effort), but don't do it on my behalf. I can speak for myself. And so can my transgender sisters and brothers.

Making Up the Rules

A Trans Pastor is Called

This smiling face is Rev. Jay Wilson who has special cause for joy this week as he was formally called to service at First United Lutheran Church in San Francisco this week. It is always a joy when transgender people of faith are allowed to express their talents in their denominations and their congregations. Congratulations Pastor Jay.

There are many transgender ministers who serve, so in that regard, Jay's call isn't groundbreaking. But what is important is that he has had to accept a different path to ordination and call from the traditional process of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America. In fact, ELCA won't ordain Jay even though they have no rules addressing transgender ministers. His call is through Extraordinary Lutheran Ministries, an inclusive group that embraces and supports the pastoral gifts of lesbian, gay and transgender people.

In the ELM's news release, I saw this statement:

"Wilson was removed from the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) candidacy process due to his status as a transgender person even though there is no official policy against transgender clergy."

Now, ELCA does not ordain lesbian or gay candidates who do not renounce their sexuality via celibacy - something that I oppose, but at least that's the rule and everyone knows it. But there is "no rule" regarding transgenders? Just how then do they deny ordination to someone who is transgender?????

I was involved in softball for nearly two decades as a coach, player and umpire. Can you imagine playing softball - or any sport for that matter - whereby the umpire could simply make up the rules as they pertain to you, and you only? Just how would you be able to fairly participate or compete? Can you imagine police officers who could simply make up the rules regarding driving a car as they pertain to you, and you only? Just how would you be able to effectively and safely drive your car? Such is the situation that Pastor Jay encountered with the ELCA. And that is all any of us, clergy and laity, faithful and secular desire, to be able to fairly participate in our careers and our communities.

Other denominations have explicitly or tacitly endorsed transgender ministers, both those who transitioned before ordination and those who did so afterward. Still, the ELCA certainly has the right to determine fitness for service, but to have no rules and then deny ordination without any Scriptural or denominational foundation is absurd. I won't even grant the ELCA any lattitude for not having considered transgender ministerial candidacies, we've been around too long now with too many other higher profile cases to plead ignorance...its more like intentional ostrichism.

I began this blog to make the case that there is no Biblical prohibition to gender transitioning and I'd like to think that I have done so persuasively. In fact, I have pointed to certain verses and passages that seem to understand and accept just who we are. And I frequently raise eyebrows when I suggest I have more respect for people like Fred Phelps, James Dobson, Peter Labarbera and the like than I do for those who claim support and betray that promise, or worse yet simply make up the rules as we go along. While I do not, and never will, respect the message offered by those divisive and spiteful detractors, they at least have integrity in their beliefs, however odious they may be.

I am unfamiliar with the polity of the ELCA, but my guess is that our status within the full life and participation of the denomination - including ordination - won't be something they will consider any time soon. Accept us, or reject us, that is your choice - but don't make up the rules on the fly. That's all any of us want.

Giving Thanks

Why I am so Thankful

I am Thankful for two loving daughters who remain in my life, for many transgenders are alienated or prohibited from contact with their children.

I am Thankful for a wonderful spouse who has seen the best and the worst of me, for many transgenders lose their partners and face difficult challenges finding new ones.

I am Thankful for my church which has given me such amazing strength and support, for many transgenders are cast out of their churches or feel unwanted in new ones.

I am Thankful for the many friends who offered continued friendship during my transition, for many transgenders are quickly abandoned by those who profess to be their friends.

I am Thankful for the many new friends I have encountered whose smiles have nurtured my growth, for many transgenders are quickly dismissed, diminished or debased by strangers.

I am Thankful for a solid house over my head, when so many transgenders - especially our youth - have no such shelter.

I am Thankful for my economic security, since many transgenders are terminated from employment and have immense hurdles to leap to obtain adequate, new employment.

I am Thankful for my safety, as this year we added 31 names of transgender souls to those who have been murdered.

I am Thankful for my special sisters with whom there is our unique bond, for many transgenders are in isolation, without support.

I am Thankful for the many caring therapists who helped guide my journey and who helped pick me up when I fell so drastically, for many transgenders have no such counseling or encounter those who believe they can "cure" us.

I am Thankful for the allies who are steadfast in their support and advocacy, for there are those willing to exclude transgender people from full participation in the American experience.

I am Thankful.

Guide Us to a Place

"The Prayer"

I have been actively involved in the preparation and organization for our local Transgender Day of Remembrance gathering this coming Thursday evening. It is a deeply emotional and solemn task to undertake. As I write, there are now 30 names to remember for this past year. Most murdered simply because that they were different.

This past Sunday, I had the wonderful opportunity to enjoy the fellowship of a Unitarian/Universalist church and had the privilege of addressing the congregation about the violence that transgender people experience - murder only being the at the top of those who trangress against us.

At the service, they read the List of Names and for each I could recall the stories of their tragedies. Angie Zapata - killed for being an "it". Kellie Tellesford - her murder was acquitted using the trans-panic defense. Patrick Murphy and Stacy Brown - two transwomen in two different cities both shot in the head on the same night of violence. Sanesha Stewart - repeatedly stabbed by an attacker who gave police a "trans-panic" excuse. And for all the names, tears for each.

I began to recall a very lovely song, the music composed by Carol Bayer Sager and David Foster with lyrics in English and Italian by Guido Morra. Several versions have been performed, one notably by Celine Dion and Andrea Bocelli, but my favorite is done by Charlotte Church and Josh Groban.

I pray you'll be our eyes
And watch us where we go
And help us to be wise
In times when we don't know

Let this be our prayer
As we go our way
Lead us to a place
Guide us with your Grace
To a place where we'll be Safe.

I pray we'll find your light
And hold it in our hearts
When stars go out each night

Let this be our prayer
When shadows fill our day
Lead us to a place
Guide us with your Grace
To a place where we'll be Safe.

We ask that Life be kind
And watch us from above
We hope each soul will find
Another soul to love

Let this be our prayer
Let this be our prayer
Just like every child
Just like every child

Needs to find a place
Guide us with your Grace
Give us Faith so we'll be Safe.

I find this song to be incredibly appropriate to the purpose of Transgender Day of Remembrance, especially as it engages my faith journey. Yes, we seek your grace to find a place that's Safe. For these 30 lost souls, there was no Safe.

Amen.

Do I Dare Hope?

What lies ahead?

I will admit listening to President-elect Barack Obama's victory speech and getting a little tearful. It was moving, powerful and optimistic. He stayed true to his overarching message of Hope, and a hope that for many in the transgender community had all but flickered out. I will also admit that I did not vote for him - or any presidential candidate this year - as I have adopted the philosophy that I will not support "promise" only "deed". To that end, I did not find where he had acted on our behalf - with the only exception of the inclusive Matthew Shepard Act.

His stated belief of one man/one woman for marriage - while supporting a "separate but equal" process for gays and lesbians - gave me pause. Just as his reasoning behind that position citing his Faith. This is not a commentary about his former paster, Rev. Jeremiah Wright as I understood and appreciated the fiery minister's declaration of "God Damn America". But his church was not Open and Affirming - the United Church of Christ's formal declaration of embracing LGB and T souls in the congregation. Indeed, Rev. Wright held some views that could be termed homophobic. I've yet to encounter the homophobe who miraculously embraced transgenders.

So I offer up this message to the pending President. You said "Yes We Can". Will you? Yes, we do have Hopes. Our hope is for passage of the Matthew Shepard Act so that we may be safer in our lives. Our hope is for passage of an inclusive ENDA so that we may provide for ourselves and our families. Our hope is for abandonment of the Read I.D. Act so that we may maintain full citizenship rights in this Land of the Free. Our hope is for proper medical insurance coverage and mental health reform so that we may obtain affordable, appropriate physical and emotional care. Our hope is for a leader and a government that honors our dignity, respects our authenticity and desires our talents.

Sorry to say, I won't be holding my breath. First, there are many Democrats still around from the early, heady days of the Clinton presidency. Shortly after assuming office, the Clinton administration, with a Democratically controlled House and Senate, obligingly embarked on a number of liberally minded intiatives - some with some success and some with utter disastrous results. Remember "Hillary's Health Care Plan"? In two short years, the GOP overwhelmed the balance in Congress and we have been paying for that ever since. Until today. It would be politically appropriate for President Obama and the new Congress to adopt a "go slow" approach for some issues. But one of those issues is likely to be Our Hopes.

Second, election results in California, Colorado, Florida, Arizona and some local fights, show that LGB and T issues may still be a bit politically toxic to touch. Thus, there is an additional reason to, perhaps push Our Hopes to the back burner for awhile. And I fully expect the bulk of LGB issues to predominate whatever efforts that are undertaken - specifically the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act (thank you Mr. Clinton!) and "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (again, thanks Bill). After the ENDA betrayal in 2007, you think Our Hopes will even remain on the back burner - or, once again, get shoved under the bus?

I will remain hopeful, for a loss of hope leads to despair. But I will be realistic in my expectations as well, for hope that is betrayed is even worse. The next step will be action, not the offer of more "hope". Yes you can...now Do.

The Transgender Gene?

Science or Hokum?

The transworld is all a dither about a report in Biological Psychiatry that suggests there is a "transgender gene" that has been identified. Some suggest this "validates" our experience, others worry about tests that could prove harmful. Me? I'm just gonna be a wet blanket. Not only am I not all that excited about it...in fact I'm quite skeptical.

First, they report finding only that the gene variation (regarding a gene string thought to have impact as an androgen receptor) is noted more often in MtF's than the control group. So some/many MtF's did NOT have this genetic string and some/few of the control group did. I'm no geneticist, but I did a pretty good job in logic in college. Some is not all and neither is many. So if there are some who do not have the gene variation (which some reports have labeled a "defect" - another reason not to trust these reports) then one cannot claim this is THE cause. At best, it may be ONE cause. Or it just may be total bupkus.

Also, in reading the report it referenced the AR gene structure in how it *might* relate to "masculinity" and/or "femininity". Those are sociologically constructed gender roles, NOT personal identity factors. Many of us are/were very "masculine", just like many gay males are quite "masculine" and many lesbian women are "feminine". So once again, behavior is confused with status.

I first read about this via the BBC website - which you can find here:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7689007.stm

That page will also link you to an "authoritative" study from 2000 by Professor Richard Green of Imperial College in London who said that MtF's had certain traits in common - lefthandedness, late birth order and an abundance of maternal aunts. Of course, I'm right handed, first born and had no maternal aunts.

And I recall an article in the San Francisco Chronicle about Dr. V.S. Ramachandran's theory of a "phantom pain" connection and his rather egotistic declaration ""Those who study transsexuality tend to be territorial because they themselves have made so little progress. There is no literature that illuminates the underlying mechanisms, other than psychological mumbo jumbo. And then someone comes striding in and spends two weeks solving the riddle. It must be infuriating." I don't think so, but I'll give him props for "psychological mumbo jumbo"!

As someone who offers what I believe to be a rather credible presentation on transgender understanding, I come across a lot of these studies and research efforts. Some may have merit, most probably don't. Ours is an existence that lends itself to a lot of "pseudoscience" either by those trying to make a name for themselves or by those like Focus on the Family that have a clear agenda to support. In fact, I recently gave a presentation to a local college class. One of the student's memos that were forwarded on to me was from someone not terribly supportive, which is okay by me. What is not okay was his belief this was due to a sexual trauma earlier in my life....'cuz that's what he'd heard. So here is someone who'd rather believe the phony myths because it neatly fits his biases, rather than attempt to understand the real science as we can best discern it.

Its hard enough to recognize true scientific discovery and breakthrough when we are constantly bombarded with stories such as this. In fact the headlines cite "transgender gene found!", when even in the article the authors suggest this may only be a connection. Thus we can't even trust the scientific journalism involved, let alone the authenticity of the scientists themselves. Is it really that important to find the "cause"? Isn't our collective existence and experience sufficient? Listen to us and you will learn. Those who don't want to listen are the ones bound and determined to deny our journeys by finding some "cause".

Mike to Christine to Mike

The Re-Transition of Mike Penner

Word is spreading today that Los Angeles Times Sports Columnist Christine Daniels is transitioning back to her former life as Mike Penner. Mike/Christine made a huge public splash with an "outing" column published in the Times back on April 26th of last year. Everything written then spoke directly to the common journey experienced by so many others over so many years. There was nothing hinting of something amiss. But clearly, something is amiss. Just what that "something" is will be the subject of speculation until Mike/Christine (and I feel absolutely frustrated that I must list the name is such fashion) speaks directly.

Magnanimous me. Charitably I will suggest, as I do underscore in seminars I present, that this is Mike's journey, not mine, nor that of the trans community at large. Our gender identity struggles have no one-size-fits-all destiny. For some like me, full transition with surgery is where my journey has led to my peace. Others transition, but have no surgery - for them that is not that important. Some continue to fashion their own personal peace by living a dual life. The journey is the individual's. For that, I will offer my best to Mike.

Clinical me. I know little of Mike/Christine's early journey. Who was the therapist involved? I won't necessarily criticize the therapeutic skill or care of the counselor (was there one at all?) for they must proceed as the patient presents their story. This isn't an exact science, it is possible that appropriate care was provided, that there was something within Mike/Christine that wasn't brought out or kept hidden. We are very good about hiding ourselves. But in looking at others who have expressed severe regrets or "gone back", most of the time there was either incompetant therapeutic service or none at all. Still, it is reported that there is about a four percent "regret rate" among us...is Mike/Christine in that slim demographic?

Economic me. Perhaps these challenging economic days are bringing an emotional stress all its own. The Times has endured many layoffs over the past few years. A new spartan ownership, a dwindling readership and advertising base and the current crisis may have initiated a controlling fear that he might be better served in his employment if he "returned". Employment is a major hurdle for many of us. If laid off, who would hire a transgender sports columnist? My guess would be that if his position is on the chopping block, this move won't stave off the pink slip.

Cynical me. Was this all a ruse? Nora Vincent wrote a somewhat successful book, "Self Made Man", about her living as a man for a year or so - although it's interesting that the paperback version listed on Amazon subtitles the book "One Woman's Year Disguised as a Man" and the hardcover edition says "One Woman's Journey into Manhood and Back". Is it possible that Mike is going to write some kind of similar "autobiography"? The trans community adoringly absorbed Christine into the sisterhood and provided access to the top transgender leaders in the country. And we are talking about a very gifted writer.

Angry me. Mike/Christine has had every advantage that so many of us never enjoyed. Just yesterday I completed preparing the list of names for our local Transgender Day of Remembrance memorial next month. With a month remaining, there are 23 names. And so many were involved in sex work - so marginalized in their lives that this was likely their only legitimate option to economically survive. Dear Mike/Christine, this isn't a "whim". You were so darned certain with that initial column - were your doubts present then?

Jaded me. Christine became the "celebrity du jour" in the trans community. Without so much as a blink of a mascara-ed eyelash, we fawned all over her. Same thing happened with Susan Stanton. Susan, it turned out, harbored some of her own transphobic sentiments. After making hay with the Human Rights Campaign (she was introduced at the HRC's presidential "debate"), Stanton's star faded rapidly thereafter with her comments. She's argued that she was misunderstood, but the egg on HRC's face - if not hers - was most evident. Did we, the trans community, adopt another "star" much too quickly? Some of us, myself included, get our so-called fifteen minutes of fame - but does that make us any "better" than those transpeople whose transitions were in the margins or the shadows?

In the end, I'll return to the first point. This is not about me, but about Mike/Christine. But I worry not only about what lies ahead for Mike, but also for the transgender community at large.