From: Danielle Ni/ Dhea/haidh Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 17:18:54 -0700 Subject: *M*: ICTLEP: Same-Sex Marriages Exist & Are Pro-Family INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON TRANSGENDER LAW AND EMPLOYMENT POLICY, INC. ICTLEP is a non-profit, 501(c)(3), Texas corporation P.O. Drawer 35477 Houston, Texas 77235-5477 USA 713/777-TGLC(8452) fax-0909 e-mail: ictlep@aol.com Phyllis Randolph Frye, Atty, Exec Dir (prfrye@aol.com) Sharon Stuart, Atty, Gender Rights Dir (stucomone@aol.com) Melinda Whiteway, Atty, Documents Dir (melindamw@aol.com) Dee McKellar, Secretary-Director (deemckellr@aol.com) Sandy Kasten, Atty, Treasurer-Director (aldebke@aol.com) ***************************************************************** 9 June 1996 EDUCATIONAL RELEASE: Same-Sex Marriages Exist, and Same-Sex Marriages Are Pro-Family #################### During the past several months, there has been a flurry of news accounts dealing with various state legislatures and the U.S. Congress seeking a way to dishonor the full-faith and credit clause (Art IV, Sec 1) of the United States Constitution should Hawaii allow two people of the same sex to get married. And on 30 May 1996, a U.S. House sub-committee approved a bill restricting same-sex marriages, should they ever become legal in any of the states, over the objections of openly homosexual congressperson Barney Frank of Massachusetts. What has caused the herein written response by the Executive Director of the letterhead organization is the declaration by Judiciary Committee Chairperson, Henry Hyde of Illinois, who stated "same-sex unions condoned immorality and demeaned marriage." The International Conference on Transgender Law and Employment Policy (ICTLEP), in its primary role as educator, states herein that Same-Sex Marriages Already Exist (and have so for years) and that Same-Sex Marriages are Pro-Family. The same-sex marriages that ICTLEP refers to are those that arise out of an already legal marriage wherein one party is transgendered; however, it is merely a small jump to opine that since same-sex marriages already exist within the transgender community and they are legal, there is little reason why the homosexual community cannot argue (not to be argued herein) for equal protection under the Equal Protection Clause (Amendment XIV, Sec 1.) of the United States Constitution. Same-sex marriages already exist, and same-sex marriages are pro-family. There have been two gross misperceptions in the legal and medical and psychological communities since the late 1950's bombshell broke over Christine Jorgensen. The first misperception is that genital surgery is the end all goal of all transgendered people. This simply is not true. As the transgender community grows and communicates within itself the majority is clearly non-transexual (purposely spelled with one "s"). And as more transexuals ("transexual" being the full-time, name-changed, hormonally altered part of the broader, umbrella termed "transgender" community) communicate, a growing minority is not interested in completing genital altering surgery. (The reasons are many, but are irrelevant to this writing.) The second gross misperception is that once someone -- who earlier had possessed one type of genitals and had then liked women for sex partners -- completed genital surgery, then that same someone -- who was now possessing different appearing neo-genitals -- found their brain to suddenly and irrevocably turn them into liking men for sex partners. Vice versa also is wrongly believed. A little common sense thinking on this subject will yeild that, with the exception of a fully bisexual person, any someone who is predisposed to liking women for sex partners, will like them before and after genital altering surgery, and any someone who is predisposed to liking men for sex partners, will like them before and after genital altering surgery. (The term "liking" in the previous sentence is as the term "know" in most biblical references.) The transexual sub-community is becoming very aware that their own genitals (altered or unaltered) have nothing to do (unless fully bisexual) with what their brains tell them as to who they like. And the transexual sub-community is educating both the medical and psychological community about that point. Even so, there persists the notion among legal and medical and psychological professionals that if this liking-consistency is true, and if their client is a transexual seeking genital alteration, then that client must divorce prior to such surgery because it would yield an illegal same-sex marriage. Nothing could be more cruel, more distructive of a family that wants to stay together and more further from the truth. What we have is two people (one penised and one vaginaed) who are legally married. They may have been married a short time or a long time. They may be on their second or third or fourth legal marriage. (Is there any legal limit on how many times the heterosexual majority can marry and divorce and remarry? They do it so often and often do both with social, legal and religious blessing.) They may or may not have children or grandchildren. The point is that we are looking at a legal marriage -- legal in all fifty states of the union. In a minority (but a significant number) of these legal marriages, where there is one partner who is transexual and who comes to terms with what their brain tells them their true sex is, there is the other partner who is so very loving, caring and secure in their own sense of who they are, that that other partner wants to stay within the bonds of the marriage. We are looking at a secure, loving and committed marriage. Where does this condone immorality? Where does this demean marriage? When ICTLEP began in 1992, one of its first preachments and missions was to insure that the medical and psychological folks quit telling the transexual couples that they had to become divorced. Do not be confused. Most transexual couples do divorce when the one partner comes to terms and the other partner wants out. There are huge social pressures by those same gender police types and institutions that used to tell men they could not wash dishes and tell women they could not run corporations. Foolishness these, but the same forces continue to press people into rigid gender molds with rigid gender expectations. Thus divorce is often the result for the transexual couple when the one begins to transition. But, if a couple wants to stay true to each other and stay true to their marriage vow during and following transition of the one, then no person or institution has any legal, moral or medical business telling them that they have to divorce prior to the one having genital altering surgery. ICTLEP stands firm on preaching this and encourages all transgender (many non-transexual couples also seek marriage counseling for the same pressures) couples who are counselled that they must divorce to contact their state's professional grievance committees and complain that this counsellor is giving wrong advice. ICTLEP is pro-family and offers the shield of legal knowledge and strategy for legal change to all transgendered couples. No person or institution other than the two marriage partners themselves can force a divorce (except for the obviously few voiding statutes such as underage, bigomy or insanity). ICTLEP encourages all transgendered married couples to keep and cherish their marriages: do not let social pressure take your rightful and loving committment away from you. The confusion is often because of the legal misperception that there is no such thing a same-sex marriage. That is not true. In the various states, the laws prevent two people of the same sex from *getting* married. This is not the case for a transexual couple who are differently genitaled and *already married* where the one partner has genital alterating surgery so that we now have two people (one penised and the other neo-penised, or one vaginaed and the other neo-vaginaed): they were already legally married (when they were one penised and the other vaginaed) and have chosen to stay true to the marriage bond and committment. Is that not pro-family! Is that not pro-marriage! In her private law practice as an expert in the area of transgender law, and in response to numerous inquiries from each and every of the fifty states handled by the ICTLEP office since 1992, the Executive Director knows that there are many same-sex transexual legally married couples in most of the states. And with the exception of very, very few, they have chosen to remain private in their married lives. They live and appear to the world as a lesbian or gay male couple, but they retain the legality and security of their still legal marriage. Many have children who adjust with no problems. She also knows of an even larger number of transexual divorcees who have related to her that years ago (and some even today) they were coerced to divorce by medical and psychological professions prior to genital alteration because those so-called professionals did not wish to create a same-sex marriage. Even worse, lawyers unfamiliar with the above distinctions did not give proper advice, but instead concurred and petitioned for the divorce. She assumes that there are many, many more that have never contacted or heard of her or of ICTLEP, and that with ICTLEP's pro-family push and publicity there will be even more couples in the future who will chose to keep their marriages intact as they transition. Two more views must be examined herein. One is that it should be obvious that there are obsessive types who are so fixated at their own perception of the wrongness of it all that they will declare that if a transexual person goes through a surgical alteration of their genitals, then that transexual person is so immoral in that situation that a divorce should be a price for the new "lifestyle" (which is a frequently used, stereotypical code word). If so, then why? Why are some humans so fixated with everyone elses' clothed genitals (which they should never see anyway unless they are an intimate partner or they themselves are doing something immoral)? It is almost like watching a pack of dogs sniffing each others' crotches and checking out each others' genitals. Are we dogs? Or are we above that? Do we force divorce if someone has elective surgery for breast enlargement or ovary removal or a vasectomy or a cosmetic nose bob or a tummy tuck or a face lift? These are all sexually or birth controlling or attractiveness related surgeries. Why no divorce forcing here? The second view again deals with that it should be obvious that there are obsessive types who are so fixated at their own perception of the wrongness of it all that they will declare that if a transexual person goes through a surgical alteration of their genitals, then that transexual person is so immoral in that situation that a divorce should be a price for the new "lifestyle." If so, then what about the spouses who are not the transexual partners? Why should these persons be forced into a divorce? These persons have done nothing other than stay committed and true "to death do we part, in sickness and in health, for richer and for poorer . . . ." Why are these persons punished with an unwanted (unwanted by both spouses) divorce? (These persons are considered to be saints within the transgender community.) ICTLEP believes and will continue to promote the belief that regardless of the new laws coming out and regardless of any adverse ruling from a trial court, no appellate court will hold invalid any same-sex marriage that once began legally as an opposite sex marriage. And in the final analysis, those courts will probably so rule that our same-sex marriages are valid because to force the non-transexual partner into a divorce would be cruel, would be immoral and would demean marriage. The non-transexual partner who wants to stay married (when the other partner does not petition for divorce) should not have their marriage interfered with by the power of government. No one else should have standing in this situation. ICTLEP also assumes that the homosexual community will similarly win their same-sex marriage fights for their own reasons, but also because they will use the equal protection leverage offered by the transgender community. It is, after all, one big struggle. And it is with one enemy -- those who continue to demean and dehumanize all transgenders, lesbians, gays and bisexuals and their supportive friends. (NOTE: ICTLEP hosts an annual transgender law and employment policy conference: 3-7 July 1996 will be the 5th such conference at the Ramada-Astrodome Motel in Houston, Texas USA. ICTLEP is a 501(c)(3) non-profit Texas corporation that is funded solely by private contributions and monthly check or credit card pledges. For more information, contact ICTLEP via above letterhead.)