Do words matter?

Legislation uses Old Paradigm terminology:  gender identity disorder, learning gender, gender choice, gender determined by genitals.  Terminology and concepts that lie at the core of discrimination and bigotry.

Look, the law provides legal protections for transgenders.  Why debate over words?  Why fight over which paradigm or philosophy is True?

The point is valid.  It's so pointless to decide which transgender is The True Transgender:  Cross-dressers?  Transsexuals?  ...Or maybe, Gender Queers?

Should post-op transsexuals be allowed to disappear into mainstream society? 
Cross-dressers should undergo transsexual surgery! 
Transsexuals should adopt a Gender Queer lifestyle, instead of trying to surgically transform themselves into something they're not!

Instead of perfecting the criteria for exclusion from the One True Group, transgenders are better served by uniting in a common cause;  by  building bridges of mutual understanding with society at large.

Hate Legislation
Imagine a law that prohibits discrimination & violence against "Fags and Sodomites".  After all, it protects "homosexuals"--does exact terminology matter?  Who cares what words are used?

An anti-hate law that uses hate language PROMOTES hate.

Referring to Gays as "fags" in government documents would establish a policy of hate & bigotry.  It would give official sanction to hate groups.  At best an ambivalent law might limit the expression of the sponsored hate to non-violent acts only.

Legislative Limits
Colorado law protects transgenders from employment discrimination.  Surveys report that 39% of transgenders experienced  workplace discrimination within the past five years (Lamda Legal 2006);  40% fear for their safety at work because of gender identity issues (Human Rights Commission 2009).  

But the number of discrimination complaints that have been filed can be counted on the fingers of one hand.      ...What gives?

"Transsexuals who lose their jobs because of their medical condition traditionally do poorly when they seek relief through the courts. With a few exceptions, a transsexual who is fired for having Gender Identity Disorder and following a recognized course of medical treatment, will not be able to win back his job by seeking relief under federal or state statutes."
Ask Anybody...
Why are transgenders excluded?  Ask around;   ...the answer is always based on the gender-hate words listed in the first sentence above. The gender-hate words that are enshrined in supposedly protective legislation.

"The term "gender" is understood by the Holy See as grounded in biological sexual identity, male or female.  Furthermore, the Platform for Action itself clearly uses the term "Both genders".  The Holy See thus excludes dubious interpretations based on world views which assert that sexual identity can be adapted indefinitely to suit new and different purposes."

"The larger goal  [of the transgender agenda] is to radically deconstruct the traditional and biological understanding of "gender" and "sex" and normalize the notion that gender is somehow "fluid" and changeable."

Why do the courts not provide protection?

"It [has not] been established that transsexuality is an 'immutable characteristic determined solely by the accident of birth' like race or national origin.

Perhaps gender-confusion terminology does matter after all.  Social leaders have announced that the words are the basis of their policy of exclusion.   Perhaps "correction" of the confusion terms is a necessary first step before legislation can be effective.  "Protective" legislation phrased in gender-confusion terms will never protect anyone.  Even legislative victory means defeat for the entire transgender community.