Charles Barkley on the Peculiar Institution of Child-Whipping

From Philly.com:

Sunday morning, Barkley told Jim Rome on CBS Sports’ The NFL Today, “I’m from the South. Whipping — we do that all the time. Every black parent in the South is going to be in jail under those circumstances.”

I guess I missed the part where someone who, to be fair, was at least honest enough to admit that he was not a role model because he was an athlete has nevertheless been anointed as a pundit.

Male Christianist or Radphlegm Lesbian?

Here’s someone from one of those categories pontificating on trans people:

There are people who respect transgender rights. And there are people who think you should all be put in a camp. That’s me.

Here’s one from the other:

[S]ome of us wish they would ALL be dead

Its so hard to tell the difference, eh?

Imagine That

Why Barack Obama’s final two years in office look to be even more worthless than Bill Clinton’s:

You might recall that Democrats controlled the House of Representatives from the early 1930s until 1994 with only two brief Republican interludes. What ended all that was not an ill-advised swerve to the left, but the opposite: A long succession of moves toward what is called the “center,” culminating in the administration of New Democrat Bill Clinton, who (among other things) signed the Republicans’ NAFTA treaty into law. Taking economic matters off the table was thought to be the path of wisdom among expert-worshipping Washingtonians, but it had the unforeseen consequence of making culture that much more important for a large part of the population. Democrats were eventually swamped by all the crazy grievance campaigns of the right, which has splashed back and forth in the mud of the culture wars ever since.

Democrats still can’t seem to grasp that voters want them to stand for something

Yeh…

Why bother following the strategy that took control of Congress in 2006 and strengthened it in 2008?  Finding as many clones of Joe Lieberman as possible is soooooooooooooooooooo clearly a better way to go than listening to Howard Dean, eh?

Oy.

Mitt Rauner

This is good news:

It’s been known for a while that Governor Pat Quinn (D. IL) is one of the most vulnerable Governor’s struggling to win a second term this election season. Tea Party Governor Tom Corbett (R. PA) continues to remain the number one most vulnerable Governor in the country and continues to trail his Democratic opponent, Tom Wolf (D. PA) by double digits. Quinn narrowly won the Governor’s race in 2010 after former Governor Rod Blagojevich (D. IL) was busted in a corruption scandal trying to sell President Obama’s old U.S. Senate seat. Since taking office, Quinn has suffered in the polls due to support for pension reform and budgetary issues plus an angry electorate sick and tired of Illinois long history of corrupt politics. For a while now Quinn trailed his opponent, wealth venture capitalist and this election season’s Mitt Romney, Bruce Rauner (R. IL). But a series of gaffes and revelations about Rauner’s stance on the minimum wage, gay rights, workers’ rights, his shady business background and his Cayman Island tax cheating are all catching up with him.

The big gaffe on the minimum wage?  Rauner wants to get rid of it entirely.

[V]oters think Rauner is better equipped to deal with state government’s massive financial problems, it also indicates that Quinn has been able to paint the wealthy Republican equity investor as out of touch. And despite a summer filled with reports on Quinn administration scandals involving state grants and patronage hiring, voters view the governor as more trustworthy than his opponent.

[A Chicago Tribune] poll found Quinn at 48 percent support compared with 37 percent for Rauner, with 8 percent undecided. And 5 percent went to little-known Libertarian candidate Chad Grimm — support that likely would have gone to Rauner if Republican forces had been able to knock the Libertarian Party slate off the ballot.

Yes, those patriotic Republicans – who want everyone to be able to vote except everyone who isn’t a Republican.

Rauner’s ideas for schools make Scott Walker look like a socialist and his ideas for the rest of government and society make Mitt Romney look like…

Bruce Rauner.

And vice versa.

Still Not Related to Donna

And so, what used to be The Advocate allowed Donna Rose to opine about what she thinks used to be the organization whose Board she resigned from following the fraud committed by Joe Solmonese at the podium at Southern Comfort in 2007.  Of 2014’s Chad Griffin, she wrote:

He acknowledged and apologized for past slights and behaviors at the heart of a significant gap between HRC and the trans community in the hopes that fences can finally be mended.

Did he?

I’ve said before that, based on comments I had seen – and am continuing to see – from trans people who live in the real world (read: not named Donna Rose or not currently collecting paychecks from HRC), I have been giving Griffin as much or more credit than any trans person for what he did say at Southern Comfort.  But remember, this is what he said:

I am here today, at Southern Comfort, to deliver a message. I deliver it on behalf of HRC, and I say it here in the hopes that it will eventually be heard by everyone who is willing to hear it.

HRC has done wrong by the transgender community in the past, and I am here to formally apologize.

I am sorry for the times when we stood apart when we should have been standing together.

Even more than that, I am sorry for the times you have been underrepresented or unrepresented by this organization.

An apology?  Yes.

An admission of harm done to trans people by people who were allowed to earn a living at HRC?  Well….

HRC has done wrong by the transgender community in the past

I guess that that could encompass pretty much everything.

But it also could be linguistic finger-crossing which still allows HRC to avoid actual responsibility for its actual actions – not just against trans activism but against trans activists who dared to speak out against HRC.

I’m not asking you to be the ones to take the first leap of faith. That’s our job. My mom taught me that respect isn’t given, it’s earned.

So where are the reparations, Chad?

Where are – at the very least – the specifics?

I’m not unreasonable.  I know that there’s no way that you could stand at the podium in Atlanta and list them all.  Lets face it.  You’d have been there all night…

just to address the Birch years.

[W]e’re committed to doing more than just speaking out. It’s essential that HRC be meeting transgender people where they are, listening, and acting to create positive change.

So where are the reparations?

Where is the substance?

Where is the willingness to make up for the damage that the pre-you HRC did to trans people who wanted nothing more than to do precisely what you were imploring trans people to do in your speech, you know…

We need all hands on deck.

Where is the willingness to make up for the damage that the pre-you HRC did to trans people who wanted nothing more than to earn a paycheck being deckhands (whether for the S.S. HRC or the S.S. NGLTF or the S.S. Lambda Legal or, well, you get the idea) just like the non-trans people were allowed to be?

Where is the willingness to make up for the blacklisting that the pre-you HRC committed against trans people who pointed out the anti-trans policy that those non-trans deckhands were pushing?

Where is the willingness to make up for the blacklisting that the pre-you HRC committed against trans people who had the temerity to point out that there were no non-trans deckhands?

Where is the willingness to acknowledge any of it?  Because, when I see this:

Look, by now it should be clear that I didn’t come here today to tell you that HRC is perfect and that you’re wrong for not seeing it. Because we’re NOT perfect, and you’re NOT wrong.

I see an unwillingness to do anything to make up for what HRC did to entire generation of trans activists who had the temerity to point out when HRC was wrong.

You mentioned, among other people, Monica Roberts, saying “You’re an inspiration to me personally.”

By the time you arrived at HRC, she should have been (or at least have been given the opportunity to be) one of your most senior employees.

What are you going to do about that, Chad?

And all of that brings be back to Donna Rose:

What happened in 2007, when then-HRC president Joe Solmonese stood on that very same stage making promises and commitments that would prove to be inconvenient and hollow less than six weeks later, continues to be a dagger between the shoulders for many of us who dared to believe back then. Perhaps nobody felt that pain more acutely than I.

At the time I was the first and only trans member of the HRC board of directors. I was the cochair of the diversity committee. Jamison Green and I worked tirelessly for the business council, and many of the workplace protections and benefits that have become such an important reality for many trans people today are a direct result of the work that we started. As a board member, I raised a significant amount of money to fund the critical work we were doing, and I spoke passionately and tirelessly at dinners around the country. I rolled up my sleeves and wasn’t afraid to fight on the front lines wherever and whenever necessary. Why? Because I believed. I trusted that the organization would stay true to the lofty ideals I thought we represented.

And your presence there allowed at least some people to think that you were an employee, that, instead of simply deploying a Kool-Aid drinker to sell a bill of goods to people who jobs or other sources of income, HRC was actually willing to allow a trans woman to earn a living doing the activism that trans women were not then being allowed to earn a paycheck doing.

What happened was deeply, deeply personal, and there has still been no closure for me. But that’s water under the bridge at this point, and none of that is Chad’s fault.

I’m willing to concede that its not his fault.

I’m not willing to concede that none of it was your own fault.

You should have known better.

By 2007, the generation of trans activists that I’m demanding reparations for had already been thoroughly blacklisted by the Birch-Jacques-Solmonese-era HRC.  By 2007, HRC had a well-established record – well over a decade (more if you want to go all the way back to the organization’s founder) – of lying, double-speaking and non-speaking on trans issues.

Oh, and it had a track record of having had slightly more than one trans employee (one actual out trans man – for 18 months or so – and another trans man who, as of 2007, was still largely a phantom) in 27 years of existence.

You should have known better.

You should have known what the organization you were sucking money out of trans activism for really thought of you, people like you and what matters to you and people like you.

Maybe everything is just “water under the bridge” to you.

But being able to say that HRC’s past actions are just “water under the bridge” is a luxury that the people whose lives and careers were negatively impacted by the organization that you shilled for cannot afford.

We are owed reparations.  (Quite frankly Donna, you’re owed some as well, but if you’re unwilling to demand it, then just keep sipping your Kool-Aid and forever cease commenting on HRC’s relations with trans people.)

At SCC Chad Griffin promised:

with my sweet Southern mom and all of you as my witness, that we won’t stop fighting until everyone in this room and everyone across this country has the equal protection, equal opportunity, and equal dignity that we all deserve as human beings.

Forget the stopping point.  I want you, Chad Griffin, and HRC to address the starting point – the point at which HRC begins to substantively undo the un-equalizing that it heaped upon trans people.  Don’t want to start with me?  Fine.  Start with Monica.  Or Alyson Meiselman.  Or Vanessa Edwards-Foster.  But if you’re serious about moving forward, you and the current incarnation of your organization have to do more than offer a generalized acknowledgement of ill-treatment; the very real damage that your predecessors and their acolytes did to the lives and careers of real individuals requires very real reparations.

One of the current crop of HRC trans employees, Allison Vankuiken, said last week on Facebook – in response to my observation that Griffin’s speech was nice but that he and his organization must do something for the trans people who wanted (and who were amply qualified for) Gay, Inc. employment when it would not have even looked at a resume from Vankuiken or any other trans woman:

I have a deep respect and appreciation for those who came before me. It’s because of your work and the struggles you endured that I am where I am and proud to be out. For that I thank you.

Its not your obligation to thank any of us, Allison.  Its is, however, the obligation of you, Chad Griffin and the entire organization to open up HRC’s wallet to make up for, to the degree it is possible this far down the line, the damage done to the individuals among those people you claim to have a deep respect for who your current employer actively excluded from any possibility of ever holding a job such as the one you have now.

ENDABlog2 now has a donation button, so if you – or anyone else who actually desires to begin moving forward – want to start the ball rolling, feel free.  But if you weren’t there, it isn’t your obligation.  Chad wasn’t there, but he is as much a successor-in-interest to the sins of the organization as is the organization itself.

As an institution, HRC knows who it harmed – and how.

As an institution, if HRC actually wants to move forward, it knows how.

Any Bets that There Will Never be a ‘Motivational’ Segment About People Who are Motivated to Succeed Without (or in Spite of) Religion?

One more reason to not watch ABC in the AM:

Holier Than Thou Tim Tebow Joins Good Morning America

Good Morning America has recently hired the ex-University of Florida QB to appear in a segment called Motivate Me Monday.

(Almost) Deja Vu All Over Again

Only this time its a gay-specific book, not a pseudo-scientific anti-trans book

The Wyoming State Historical Society honored a book that asserts college student Matthew Shepard wasn’t murdered because he was gay, but was instead killed in a drug-related incident – even though the book relies on wild extrapolation and questionable or anonymous sources and has been denounced as “fictional” by lawyers and investigators involved in the case.

On September 6, the society gave Stephen Jimenez’s The Book of Matt: Hidden Truths About the Murder of Matthew Shepard an honorable mention in the nonfiction book category at a Gillette, WY luncheon.

[W]hy is the Wyoming State Historical Society honoring the book?

Rick Ewig, the society’s president, told the Billings Gazette that the award “doesn’t mean we accept the interpretation” of the book, suggesting that the society was honoring the book simply because it attempted to investigate part of Wyoming’s history:

Rick Ewig, president of the state historical society, said the nonprofit organization’s goal is to promote study of Wyoming’s history. Shepard’s murder is part of the state’s history.

The book’s publisher nominated the book, he said.

So I wonder if the same non-trans gays who defended J. Michael Bailey’s ‘free speech’ (and who defended the academic shills who defended Bailey) will just as vociferously defend Stephen Jimenez’s ‘free speech’ now?

Victoria?

Victoria Brownworth?

Where are you?

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 104 other followers