I spoke with the LGBT Legislative Aid in his office in DC and he said that his was a totally false rumor. He supports a fully inclusive ENDA, that protects gay, lesbian, bisexual and TRANSGRENDER people from employment discrimination, which includes crossdressers, pre-op, non-op, post op, intersex, genderqueer and classical transsexuals, whether they want protection or not.
Now, like the diehard gender fascist that he is, Mr. Helms once against ignores the wishes of classic transsexuals who do not identify as transgender, rubs our noses in it, and then goes on to assert that this "protection" will be forced on us whether we like it or not.
As I said, this is gender fascism in action. Because of his stupid remark, I now actively oppose an inclusive ENDA. The law that Mr. Helms desires is harmful to women, including post-op classic transsexuals and survivors of HBS. If Mr. Helms has his way, women will lose any right to privacy from men like him.
Let me be clear. I have no problem with ENDA protecting gays, lesbians, and bisexuals. I object to a law that will protect men who wish to engage in the behavior of crossdressing like Mr. Helms. I object to a law that will force women to share the bathroom with such men. I object to a law that will force employers to allow me to dress as women when the mood strikes them. And I object to a law that will effectively remove legal distinctions between the sexes and redefine sex as being what one wants it to be.
I would also support a law that protects post-ops and, that would provide very narrowly defined protections for pre-ops. Anyone who is discovered to have abused said law by lying about their plans for surgery would be subject to prosecution.