Columnist Ivan Moore wants trans people excluded from anti-discrimination initative (Photo: Prog. Alaska)
THE GUERRILLA ANGEL REPORT — [UPDATED — see below.] Specifically, the columnist is saying because some trans people are “crossdressers” who, quote, “just loooovve how tight the panties feel,” unquote, trans people should not be included in the upcoming Anchorage, Alaska anti-discrimination initiative.
The writer, the GLB part of the initiative, but not the “T” part. Yes, of course, exclude the most discriminated against and abused group under the LGBTQ umbrella because some might be hot for panties!
From The Anchorage Press: “That’s the problem with the muddiness of transgenderism. There clearly are people whose physical existence in their assigned gender is miserable, a misery only lifted when they “reassign” themselves, living, to the extent they feel necessary, as the opposite gender. But there are also people who cross-dress, for example, because they just loooovvve how tight the panties feel. And I’m sorry, doing something that feels good isn’t sufficient grounds to warrant legal protection from discrimination.”
He said he expects some sort of outrage, so you might want to send yours: ivan@ivanmooreresearch.com
The entire article: MOORE REPORT: Transgenderism muddies issue of gay rights – Anchorage Press: News.
A reader of the newspaper responded to the article with this: ” . . . The measure to amend Title 5 refers explicitly to rights for gays and lesbians as well as those who identify as transgender, and the language is not likely to change. Yet Moore would like to remind his readers that there are two classes of transgendered people: respectable, rational people who undergo re-assignment surgery and perverted freaks about whose underwear preferences Moore does not mind speculating. Frankly, the fear-mongering and “good transgendereds versus bad transgendereds” sounds very similar to the bunk arguments against civil rights for homosexuals.
The idea that a class of people must be “well-defined, distinct, and homogeneous” in order to be protected is absurd. Other classes of people included in the anti-discrimination legislation are neither well-defined nor homogenous. . . .
Transgendered people are human beings who face discrimination based on sexuality and gender as much as gays and lesbians. Moore betrays his privilege as a cis-gendered person (i.e., someone who identifies with the gender assigned at birth) in arguing that transgendered rights should not be a priority. If we allow the movement toward greater equality to be divided by fear and exclusivity, we’ve already lost what we had hoped to achieve.” -Kirsten Barrett
The entire letter: http://www.anchoragepress.com/news/feedback-fear-mongering-has-no-place-in-fight-for-equal/article_b8fd89fe-37e7-11e1-9a9c-0019bb2963f4.html
Thumbs up to Kirsten Barrett for clearing things up, thumbs down to Ivan Moore for muddying up the issue in the first place.!
——————
UPDATED – Jan. 14, 2012: It appears that the initiative is on the April 3 ballot with the transgender language still intact. Apparently Ivan Moore’s suggestion that the trans protection in the initiative be deleted failed to get traction.
The link I have for this actually about other matters related to the initiative: http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/anchorage-equality-initiative-draws-national-scrutiny
I did, however, find this an enjoyable read: http://www.adn.com/2012/01/14/2264247/if-you-want-to-push-bigotry-leave.html
——————-
You’re welcome to share this entire article!
Follow this topic and others on Lexie Cannes’ Facebook page: http://www.facebook.com/lexiecannes
Get the transgender-themed feature film “Lexie Cannes“ here:
http://www.LexieCannes.com
Categories: Discrimination, Equality, Civil Rights, Transgender, Transsexual, Trans
LEXIE CANNES STATE OF TRANS 
What a fool. Crossdressing is not, nor has it ever been, related to transgenderism. It is merely about men, or women, who derive some sort of pleasure merely from WEARING THE CLOTHING of the opposite gender. Period. If you want to make public proclamations you should at least inform yourself on the subject at hand.
How about we just exclude you, Ivan, from society?
It’s disturbing to see a cis person echoing the TS Separatist meme like this. Is this an attempt to provoke disunity in the ranks of our community? Maybe, maybe not but I sure hoe, if it is, that it doesn;t work.
Rubby, I want to sit next to you on the bus!!
Humm so according to this idiots thinking, anyone who is in a class of people who are discriminated against are not to be afforded equal protection under the law because some of them may be faking their inclusion into that group? I guess we should educate him by saying that the protections of the first amendment should be extended to everybody except him, because he is not a real reporter and just an idiot!
We shouldn’t discriminate against CDs. Firstly there is no absolute distinction between CDs and TS in reality. The fact is many TS people originally thought they are just CDs but then decided they are TS. Secondly CDs aren’t all the same. People cross-dress for very different reasons. I doubt many CDs cross-dress simply because they like “how tight the panties feel”, I think that’s a caricature of cross-dressing in general. Thirdly why should people be discriminated simply based on how they dress anyway? Why should society enforce a strict gender binary dress code? I agree CDs and TS are different since CDs don’t even subjectively consider themselves as gender variant, but neither TS nor CD should be discriminated against.
I’m with you. We shouldn’t discriminate against CDs — or anyone for that matter.
Thanks for your comments. 🙂