Though the intent of the study was to measure the general public’s attitudes towards transgender people, its greatest impact—and source of controversy—may be how it affects the often rocky relationship between gay and lesbian leaders and transgender activists with respect to including protections for transgender people in proposed gay rights laws.

It’s no secret that transgender leaders and gay and lesbian leaders often butt heads on this volatile issue. The most well- known, and on-going, battle is that of the federal Employment NonDiscrimination Act, or ENDA, which would make it illegal to discriminate in the workplace based on sexual orientation. The bill, which for years has been struggling to get passed in Congress, does not include transgender people, and has frequently been a point of raw tension between the transgender and gay communities.

But ENDA is just the most high-profile example of a widespread controversy around the country about the inclusion of transgender people under gay-rights laws. Similar ENDA-like battles are taking place at state and local levels—and causing much damage, infighting and political ill will along the way.

To be sure, there remains a segment of the gay and lesbian community that argues that transgender issues are separate from gay and lesbian issues, and thus that transgendered people should not be included in the larger gay and lesbian civil rights movement. But for the most part, at least on the level of political leadership, the battle between gay politicos and transgender activists is less one of an equal-rights philosophy than a practical political strategy.

It is rare that a gay or lesbian political leader will say that the transgendered should not be protected under the law. Instead, gay and lesbian leaders who exclude the transgendered from proposed gay-rights bills argue that including them makes it too difficult to pass the laws at this moment in time. The public has grown comfortable enough with gays and lesbians to protect them from discrimination, but still gets skittish about what it often sees simply as men running around in lace underwear and dresses in order to get their rocks off.

While a gay-rights law has a chance of passing on its own, including language that covers transgender people is a sure death-knell. That, anyway, is the often-presented argument against including the transgendered in gay-rights proposals.

Not surprisingly, many transgender activists take umbrage to this line of political reasoning. Rightly or wrongly, many transgender activists feel the argument about political practicalities is simply a smokescreen to keep them out.

The new study, titled “Public Perceptions of Transgender People,” is strong evidence to counter the arguments for excluding the transgendered from proposed civil rights legislation, many transgender activists believe.

To make their case, they point to the surprising acceptance exhibited by respondents of the HRC study. For example, nearly everyone who took part in the scientifically designed survey had heard the word “transgender,” and nearly 70 percent accept it is possible to be “born as one sex but inside feel like the other sex.” And 74 percent said they would be “OK” working with someone who was transgendered.

Public opinion towards the transgendered was particularly high with respect to the core question of civil rights laws: 68 percent are in favor of hate-crimes laws that cover the transgendered, and 61 percent support laws that would make it illegal to discriminate against transgender people at work.

“It’s always a rousing issue whether or not to include transgender people in [proposed civil rights] laws,” says Celinda Lake of Lake, Snell, Perry and Associates, the polling firm that conducted the survey. “This data says that the public is supportive, and that transgender people should be included.”

Indeed, several transgender activists I spoke with called the report a stake through the heart of the argument for excluding them. And they all agreed that the study would be used most in their combat with gay and lesbian leaders on the issue of exclusion, rather than as any tool to help them directly with the general population. There’s no doubt that the biggest policy implication of this study is on the relationship between gay leaders and transgender leaders, and how they map out their political futures together.

But it would be naive of transgender leaders to believe this report alone will change the minds and hearts of those who worry about including transgender protections in gay and lesbian civil rights laws.

Personally, I believe protection for transgendered people should be included in any local, state or national civil rights law, and I think those in the gay and lesbian community who oppose it on philosophical grounds are not only short-sighted, but also are blind to what our broad movement is about.

However, it would be too simplistic to paint as “bad” or “prejudiced” anyone who raises questions about the political viability of a bill that includes the transgendered. Transgender activists themselves admit that public awareness is roughly ten years behind public understanding and acceptance of gays and lesbians. Whether we like it or not, the hard, cold fact is that there remains less understanding of the transgendered than of gay and lesbian people in our society—a political reality that is reflected many times over in other parts of the HRC report. Furthermore, there can often be a big difference between how you can get the public to think, and how you can get politicians to vote.