For Jill Stein and All's Amended Proposal, please see: https://www.green-rainbow.org/2021_spring_unity_proposal_amendment
Proposal sponsor/shepherd: Matt Andrews
Floor manager: Maureen Doyle
Co-sponsors: Elie Yarden, David Keil, Maureen Doyle
Contact info for floor manager: [email protected]
Summary: StateCom opposes expulsions or dis-accreditations over perceived platform differences.
Background: A complaint against the Georgia Green Party is under consideration in the Accreditation Committee.
Text of Proposal:
The Green-Rainbow Party affirms support for the human rights of transgender people. Transgender people are oppressed, and we need to defend them.
The Green-Rainbow Party opposes the petition for punitive action against the Georgia Green Party being considered by the GPUS Accreditation Committee, which is not based on explicit rules, but rather on interpretations of the GPUS platform. The GPUS platform is an inappropriate standard for membership or the accreditation of state parties.
As alternatives to censuring, suspending, or expelling state parties or individual members on issues of sex and gender we advocate: education, democratic discussion, and debates. These must be free of insults, slurs, threats, and profane language. In the absence of specific evidence, an assumption of good faith among fellow Greens must be maintained. The right of Green-Rainbow Party members to participate in our democratic process, including the right to make proposals and request a vote, shall not be infringed by bureaucratic maneuvers or peer pressure campaigns.
Democratic discussion will be facilitated if participants' race, ethnicity, sex, sexual orientation, self-identification, dis-ability, and good faith disagreements of opinion are respected.
Implementation: The text of this proposal as adopted will be sent by a member of our National Committee delegation to the “NatlComAffairs” list.
Financial Implications: none.
Showing 299 reactions
Sign in withFacebook Twitter
That was supposed to say
“What people pee through”
Yes..you read that correctly
That was supposed to say
“What people pee through”
Yes..you read that corrected.
Also let’s not forget that Juan was also the first Puerto Rican, openly HIV positive person to achieve ballot status in MA PERIOD. Juan broke historical barriers making ballot history for the state of MA as well as for the GRP.
Using an emotional wedge issue to goad people into valid emotional reactions and then attacking them for being emotional seems to be a pattern I am seeing here and on the NC .
The definition of unity according to the dictionary is: Unity is being together or at one with someone or something. It’s the opposite of being divided. From what I know the following entities are UNITED with the Lavendar caucus:
1. Women’s, diversity and Youth
2. 17 State/local parties
3. Here in the GRP the most active chapter, the River Valley
With what or who are the writers of this proposal proposing unity? Certainly not 1, 2 or 3 above.
This quote is relevant to this proposal
If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor. If an elephant has its foot on the tail of a mouse and you say that you are neutral, the mouse will not appreciate your neutrality.
And just for everyone’s enjoyment on this dreary NE day..warning there are what some would deem inappropriate words in the lyrics.
Any member has the right to add input to statecom. This isnt a website for the elite few. Juan’s community is UNDER ATTACK. He is part of the LBGTQIA+ community that is being attacked by a bunch of hetero cis white males and a couple white women. No one said “feminists” are white supremacists. We identity as feminists silly!
This is a broken record and the divisive intentions of this so called proposal are VERY VERY VERY CLEAR at this point Matthew Andrews.
We have told you over and over what is wrong with this proposal. But you are losing so now you go after our STAR CANDIDATE. Gross! If his opinion is that you are evil pos, well maybe then thats just his opinions and feelings. Opinions and feelings can’t be hateful according to you right?
Or maybe it’s just a one way thing and only applies to your opinions and feelings about trans people.
Withdraw this proprosal!
I’m new here but even i know it was because of Juan and jamie I could check of Hawkins/Walker on my massschusettes ballot this past election.
IJuan ran a sucessful statewide campaign
It’s very disheartening how you continue to pick apart specific wording while ignoring the passion and emotion behind it. On this last day, I hope statecom members see past Mr Keils clear and consistent Manipulation of our words and instead see our stance and where we are coming from. Fighting for human rights isn’t pretty David and we are a party, not a classroom where to be lectured about how we express ourselves. Tone policing is classist
Tone policing (also tone trolling, tone argument, and tone fallacy) is an ad hominem (personal attack) and anti-debate tactic based on criticizing a person for expressing emotion. Tone policing detracts from the validity of a statement by attacking the tone in which it was presented rather than the message itself.1
— David Keil, Metrowest chapter, StateCom member
This is who we are. This is what we stand for
This is just a reminder about who we are and what we stand for.
“The Green-Rainbow Party of Massachusetts supports a vote of YES on statewide ballot Question 3 to uphold the 2016 law forbidding discrimination based on gender identity in places of public accommodation.
The Green Party Platform Section II (A) (5) recognizes “the rights of persons who identify as gay, lesbian, bisexual, intersex, trans-sexual, queer, or transgender” to be free from discrimination in “all areas of life.” Our history of being the first national political party to oppose discrimination based on gender identity stems from the Green Party’s Key Values of ‘Social Justice’ and ‘Respect for Diversity’. Based on these values, our platform further states that “the foundation of any democratic society is the guarantee that each member of society has equal rights.
Respect for our constitutionally protected rights is our best defense against discrimination and the abuse of power. Our Key Value
-DIVERSITY -commits us to the principle that all people deserve dignity, self-definition and self-determination” and that “we must consciously confront the barriers that include racism, sexism, homophobia, class oppression, and ageism, along with many other ways our culture impedes us from working together.” Our platform further states that “we support affirmative action to remedy discrimination, to protect constitutional rights, and to provide equal opportunity under the law.” With this in mind, the Green Party sees measures that discriminate against gender identity as harmful to all, and calls for any such discriminatory measures to be remedied with action. One of the actions we call for is to vote YES on Question 3.
The law which Question 3 addresses rightly added the words “gender identity” to a long list of protected categories of people who must not be discriminated against in places of public accommodation. The list includes religious sect, creed, class, race, color, denomination, sex, sexual orientation, and disability. The revised law has been in effect since 2016. There is no justification to now remove “gender identity” from this list and to blatantly legalize discrimination against transgender and gender non-conforming people.
Some who want to overturn this law claim that banning discrimination against transgender and gender non-conforming people enables and encourages pedophiles and sexual predators. This is a patently false claim. The law specifically excludes pedophiles from the category of sexual orientations that are protected from discrimination. Laws against rape and sexual assault and other sexual crimes are still in effect and are not changed by this anti-discrimination law. Since the non-discrimination law was extended to include gender identity in 2016 there have been no incidences of the horror that opponents promised would ensue.
Some worry that adding legal protections for people based on gender identity will erode protections based on sex that have been won for women through many decades of struggle. We believe that this worry is unwarranted as the anti-discrimination law in question continues to forbid discrimination based on sex as well as discrimination based on gender identity. The new law merely added gender identity to the list of factors on which we must not discriminate. The new law did not legalize discrimination against people based on any of the factors already included in the old law.
In summation, we urge everyone to vote YES on ballot Question 3. Every person deserves the right to use public bathrooms, and everyone deserves to be free from discrimination and have their identity respected in all areas of life."
PEACE! JAMIE GUERIN
I guess they are all expulsionists along with me and the only people who truly care about the party are those who side with this proposal. Anyone willing to do their research can see that this is a very small group trying to force this wdge issue nationally and state wide.
Mr. Andrews must have missed where I said my stance on Georgia is my Stance on Georgia and we have to look at each case differently . Their is no one solution for every case that may come before the AC but it is they who the GP Federation has given that power to…Not state parties or individual members on some crusade.
We have a women’s Caucus that the federation has given the purpose of representing women. They stand against Georgia.
Qe have a diversity Caucus that the federation has given the purpose of representing representing beautiful diversity of the GP and recruiting diverse members, they stand against Georgia.
We have a youth Caucus tasked with representing our younger Greens and recruiting young people. They stand against Georgia
And we have a Lavender Caucus tasked with representing members of the lgbtq+ community such as myself who also stand against Georgia.
They must all be confused expulsionists by Matt’s characterization of me
There is anti-trans legislation coming or in the statehouse of 24 states. 24 states! Our party is UNITED in standing against this as the Green-Rainbow Party was in 2018 and as our sibling state MAINE has had their statecom REACH CONSENSUS to take a firm stamd AGAINST the anti trans legislation and here we are bow being asked to support GAGP’s right to support it (specifically their platform amendments hr3, hr4, and their signing of the declaration)
Let the GRP be united with the rest of the party and the rest of the civilized world to stand once again AGAINST bigotry and transmisogyny and ask GA to remove those specific amendements and endorsement. Let’s stand UNITED with the WOMEN’S CAUCUS, THE LAVENDER CAUCUS, TJE YOUTH CAUCUS, THE DIVERSITY COMMITTEE and the majority of the Green Party on this, or seal out fate as signing into the small faction with a handful of people who have seized the GAGP….
Or LETS DO WHAT MANY MEMBERS HAVE BEEN BESEECHING the sponsors to do and WITHDRAW THIS PROPOSAL so at the very least the GRP and it’s committed members and activists do not have to wear the stain ans tarnish of GA and their anti-trans ideology.
I for one stand by my convictions and if that means leaving the GRP and doing the work in a different capacity then so be it but because this is bigger then me and bigger then us we are discussing human rights.
Their is no unity with transphobia.
Jamie posted to look at the archives and it’s all there. Since you’ve had so much time.to recruit people to the dne and push your beliefs we were hoping you’d also have the time to show us the past few months of emails you and miss Thompson have partake in and not just bits and pieces. Or if members want to see what we are talking about they can look themselves.
Stop defending oppressors…
REMOVE THIS PROPOSAL or be complicit in GA’s transphobia. Your names will not be forgotten.
Without evidence, members have made charges of intimidation and “anti-trans” activity by sponsors. Threats have been made to “secede” an entire chapter from the GRP.
In the interests of integrity of the State Committee voting tonight, there is time today to withdraw these threats and accusations.
“Maine Green Independent Party opposes discrimination in all forms, including discrimination against transgender people. With legislation being proposed in various states across the nation, including Maine, to ban transgender students from participating in sports, we felt it was important to take a stand.
The state committee of the Maine Green Independent Party voted with consensus, to oppose LD 926—Maine’s bill that would codify institutional discrimination against transgender women.
LGBT community will continue to liberate transgender people no matter the new ways they come up with to demonize us whether it be the bathroom bills of the past or these new bills to kick us out of sports. Many who oppose the inclusion of trans athletes erroneously claim that allowing trans athletes to compete will harm cisgender women. This divide and conquer tactic gets it exactly wrong. Excluding women who are trans hurts all women. It invites gender policing that could subject any woman to invasive tests or accusations of being “too masculine” or “too good” at their sport to be a “real” woman. In Idaho, the ACLU represents two young women, one trans and one cis, both of whom are hurt by the law that was passed targeting trans athletes.
Further, this myth reinforces stereotypes that women are weak and in need of protection. Politicians have used the “protection” trope time and time again, including in 2016 when they tried banning trans people from public restrooms by creating the debunked “bathroom predator” myth. The real motive is never about protection — it’s about excluding trans people from yet another public space. The arena of sports is no different.
On the other hand, including trans athletes will promote values of non-discrimination and inclusion among all student athletes. As longtime coach and sports policy expert Helen Carroll explains, efforts to exclude subsets of girls from sports, “can undermine team unity and also encourage divisiveness by policing who is ‘really’ a girl.” Dr. Mary Fry adds that youth derive the most benefits from athletics when they are exposed to caring environments where teammates are supported by each other and by coaches. Banning some girls from athletics because they are transgender undermines this cohesion and compromises the wide-ranging benefits that youth get from sports.”
They already went through the whole process on National over the past year and Hugh Esco of GA has doubled down on his anti-trans platform.
Withdraw this proposal Matthew Andrews.
One of our key values is respect for diversity. We are committed to establishing relationships that honor diversity; that support the self-definition and self-determination of all people; that consciously confront the barriers of racism, sexism, homophobia, biphobia, transphobia, class oppression, ageism, and ableism, and the many ways that our culture and laws separate us from working together. We support affirmative action to remedy discrimination, to protect constitutional rights, and to provide equal opportunity under the law.
Does this all get negated because we support Cesaw? In which case are their other parts of the platform.that contradict themselves.
Matt would like you to ignore everything him.and other supporters have expressed about trans people and instead take this proposal for face value…what a shame to request members not to research before voting. To tell them.to just read it and vote on it without understanding the implications.
This convention defines discrimination against women as “…any distinction, exclusion, or restriction made on the basis of sex which has the effect or purpose of impairing or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment or exercise by women, irrespective of their marital status, on a basis of equality of men and women, or human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural, civil or any other field.”
The key words here are “basis of sex.” Women are not defined by gender. The platform consistently refers to both “sex and gender” as categories deserving rights. You might think those who genuinely believe this language is harmful to trans rights would try to amend the GPUS platform before campaigning to expel state parties that adopt similar language.
Instead we are being told that in order to unite, first we must divide. I guess witch hunts and power politics are more fun than building the party.
I encourage State Committee members to read the proposal and accept the plain meaning of the words.
An appropriate snippet from the article linked below.
In Iceland the women’s rights movement as a whole has been wholly supportive of trans rights for decades. All major feminist and human rights organizations declared their support for the law, and hailed it as an important step in reaching true equality in Iceland. For them, it was obvious. And for trans people like me, it offered a sense of hope for the future – a future where we can all work together to make the lives of those most in danger more positive.
Þorbjörg Þorvaldsdóttir, the chair of Samtökin ’78 – the national LGBTI organization of Iceland – reflected on just how important this legislation was from a feminist perspective. “This is obviously a great step forward for LGBTQ+ rights, but the new law is also an important feminist milestone. Transphobia – as well as prejudice against LGBTQ+ people in general – is deeply rooted in outdated gender norms and misogyny. The passing of this legislation sends an affirmative message to society that every individual should be able to define and live their gender as they please without prejudice. I believe that this will benefit everyone, cis people and trans people alike.”
Trans community is less then 1% of the population is this country and less then 10% worldwide so talk about listening to a minority their you have it