Two Questions for Marion G. “Pat” Robertson, Franklin Graham and Jerry Falwell, Jr.

If a catastrophic tornado hit Missouri’s capitol city of Jefferson City days after the state’s General Assembly enacted pro-LGBT equality legislation, what would you deem said tornado to be?

Of course, we know that the Missouri General Assembly did not enact pro-LGBT equality legislation this year, and, lets be real, we all know what all of you would deem a tornado that might have hit immediately after the enactment of such legislation to be.

Yes, we all do know.

So, now on to the second question….

If a catastrophic tornado hit Missouri’s capitol city of Jefferson City days after the state’s General Assembly enacted woman-hating, body-control legislation, what would you deem said tornado to be?

America awaits your responses.

Advertisements

Conservatives Are Really, Really, Really Upset That People Have Noticed That Lisa Littman’s Anti-Trans Propaganda Is Just The Latest Generation of Trans-Exterminationist Junk Science

From Think Progress:

Opponents of LGBTQ equality are in a tizzy this week, claiming Brown University is “censoring” a study about transgender kids. That research, however, is pure junk science designed to make parents feel justified in rejecting their children’s gender identity.

There is nothing that distinguishes ROGD [rapid onset gender dysphoria, so-called] from the diagnostic criteria that already exists for gender dysphoria in children except parents’ perception that it has come about quite suddenly. Not coincidentally, it is only parents who wish to disabuse their children of the possibility that they are transgender who have observed ROGD and insist upon its validity.

One might think that a researcher looking to understand or substantiate ROGD would actually find ways to work directly with the children who supposedly experienced it to document their experiences. Or perhaps one could simply reach out to a large swath of families with transgender kids to try to assess what distinguished supposed cases of ROGD from others. But [Lisa] Littman did none of that. All she did was anonymously survey parents from the exact same anti-trans online parent groups that invented the concept (4thwavenow.com, Transgendertrend.com, and Youth YouthTransCriticalProfessionals.org), codifying their totally bogus myth in the guise of a scientific study.

Doubtlessly, TERFs, Alice Dreger and Michael Bailey (as if there is any real daylight between all of them and other right-wing conservatives) are in a tizzy as well.

And lets not forget the neo-Bailey herself:

PLOS One and Brown have backed away from her study, [but] Littman has stood by it. She has insisted that it’s a “descriptive study” consistent with other such studies that are “a first description of a new condition or population.”

I guess “descriptive study” is the latest euphemism that will allow someone clothed in the raiments of academic tenure that trans women are never considered for no matter our qualifications to get away with describing a handful of anecdotes derived from a few trips to Chicago-area drag bars as “The Science of Gender-Bending and Transsexualism.”

Lisa Littman: The Woman Who Would be Michael Bailey.

Joe McCarthy Called – He Wants His Face Back

Both of them.

Seen recently on Twitter:

CruzTwit

Who the hell made Facebook the arbiter of political speech, you ask?

Well, you personality-devoid buffoon, you attempted to be hip by using the #1A hashtag, but I’ll go ahead and give you a full answer: The First Amendment to the United States Constitution – you know, the Supreme Law of the Land (that’s right – THAT’S the Supreme Law of the Land, NOT your Bible!) – makes all private entities masters of their own decisions as to whether or not to speak.

And wasn’t that YOUR position when it came to christian-owned Hobby Lobby?

I guess a different standard applies to entities controlled by people with names such as Zuckerberg.

Yes, on a sleepy Sunday morning in July, I discovered yet another reason to hate Sen. Rafael “Ted” Cruz (R-Calgary): He forced me to say something in defense of Mark Zuckerberg.

Was Barney Frank Ever Right About Anything?

From the Dec. 15, 1976 issue of The Advocate (page 8), please note the quote at the beginning of the paragraph halfway down the third column:

Advocate1976

For those who can’t make it out:

The bills will pass in ’77.
– St. Barney

For those not keeping score, Massachusetts did not pass a gay rights bill until 1989.  By then, St. Barney had been in Congress for eight years (though he was spending 1989 calling in every political favor, marker and chit he could unearth in order to avoid getting kicked out of Congress.  Google ‘Steven Gobie.’  Just sayin’….)

Thirty years after his declaration of what would happen in 1977 he bullied the LGBT community – trans people most pointedly – with what he *knew* was capable of passing and not passing.  And then he professed to know for certain that 15-20 more Democrats would make a legitimate (read: trans-inclusive) ENDA a sure thing.

Between the Massachusetts Legislature and Congress, St. Barney drew a legislative salary for forty years.

In all of that time, was he ever right about anything?

If I Could Have the New York Daily News’s Baby, I Would

TrumpForBrains

Jake Tapper for the Slam Dunk

TapperSlam(We would also have accepted ‘Jake Tapper Slams the Skunk’)

 

No! No! A Million Times: NO!!!

DBMSHN

When Maryland finally went back and added trans people to its trans-genocidal 2001 gay-only rights law in 2014, Dana Beyer rewarded the gay sponsor of that 2014 bill, Rich Madaleno, with a primary challenge.

I had questioned Madeleno’s sincerity on trans issues a few years earlier, but he put that questioning to rest in 2014.  He deserved – and still deserves – the respect of the trans community for delivering something that his state’s viciously transphobic gay elite had stolen from trans people thirteen years earlier.  Sadly, he immediately had to deal with a Trans Jester whose raison d’être is, on the political evolutionary ladder, one rung removed from “Dilly, dilly!”

I leave it to you to surmise in which direction.

Beyer is a clown who has infected trans politics for far too long – and has only been able to do so because of wealth.  No one deserves to be rewarded with a Senate seat because of a penchant for wasting money on vanity political campaigns that, in the long run, have harmed the trans community. Dana Beyer is Harold Stassen without the political technicality of having actually once held office and Caitlyn Jenner without the technicality of having once been briefly legitimate enough to snag an Olympic gold medal.