Because No One Else is Eeeeeeeeeeeever on the Short End of Propaganda

…certainly not trans women, right?

Remember the pseudo-academic (and likely closet TERF) complaint about all of the big, bad, establishment-accepted, discrimination-free trans women who (rightly) said that one need not even open the radioactively transphobic cover of Michael Bailey’s fraudulent nugget o’ ‘science,’ The Man Who Would be Queen?

Well, here is the latest example of something that can (rightly) be ripped to shreds without going beyond the title.

From HuffPo:


I have no idea what he says in the body of the piece and I don’t care.  (See anything B or T specific in the ‘follow’ glob?  I didn’t think so.)

The LGBT Community needs to confront anti-gay propaganda?

Welcome to Gay, Inc.-ism 201: The Erasure Shuffle!

Nice trick – but getting away with it ends here.

The title is the exact opposite of what needs to be transpiring.  It is those elements of ‘LGBT’ who have overly-benefited from the unjustifiably skewed 21st century priorities of Gay, Inc. who should be tearing out their pockets to support measures and programs which confront anti-trans propaganda…

including trans-movement-suicidal ramblings of some clueless Ts.

There, I said it.

The authority of the first judge to get a trans case who decides to issue a ruling that the EEOC’s trans-inclusive interpretation of Title VII was wrong.

Now that may be a bit overly cynical even for me; plenty of judges have been ruling in that general direction and those rulings helped nudge the EEOC toward its pro-trans ruling…

but nine who sit in D.C. have yet to do so.

Their authority (actually, just 5/9ths of their authority) exceeds Title VII if they want it to…

just as the EEOC’s can – when next a not-so-enlightened EEOC panel decides to ‘revisit’ the Macy decision…

you know, as soon as the next Republican president gets to make some appointments to the Commission…

which, if the current crop o’ “Why do we need to bother with ENDA when we can be spending our time, energy and money erecting altars to rich, trans charlatans and quislings?”-meisters have their way, will occur while statutory law – you know, law that an administrative body can’t rewrite on its own – contains a gay-only ENDA.

It is factually accurate to state that the EEOC interpreted “sex” in Title VII to include trans people.

It is a fact to say that that’s a good thing.

Of course, it is also a fact to state that one of the earliest federal appellate decisions to say that trans people were not included uner “sex,” Holloway v. Arthur Andersen & Co. (9th Cir. 1977), came to that conclusion in no small part because, even by 1977, Congress had rejected all of the Bella Abzug/Ed Koch-era bills to add “sexual orientation” to the Civil Rights Act – bills that, even had they become law, would not have – thanks to the Gay, Inc. of the day (same as it ever was – and is) – covered trans people – meaning that trans people have, in large part, Gay, Inc., to thank for the cobbling of the boot of anti-trans law that has so magnanimously just recently been quasi-removed from on top of our necks.

There, I said that too – because…

This is an important fact that all trans Americans need to know.

There is nothing in the Macy v. Holder decision that can’t be erased judicially and/or administratively without any of the overpaid, underworked non-trans people who are foerver allowed to earn their livings in Gay, Inc. (without, of course, ever having had to compete for their jobs against equally-/better-qualified trans applicants ) ever seeing it coming (mucg less having to even care) and without any of the oh-so-well-educated-on-trans-issues-by-all-of-those-non-trans-Gay-Inc-employees congresscritters ever having to take a position on it.

Macy v. Holder does exist.

It is useful.

It is substantive.

But it is also an illusion.

There, I said that too.

It is suicidal to crank out nonsense that seems to have emanated from the wet dreams of Gay, Inc. and TERFs (as if there is no substantive overlap, right?) who have never quite been able to get over the hump in their goal of completely sanitizing ENDA (you know, the desired gay-only successor to those Abzug-Koch gay-only Civil Rights Act amendment bills) of The Trans Stain™…

without getting a handful of overly-visible, lacking-in-legal-training, overflowing-with-self-importance trans clowns – and quislings, of course – to begin laying the groundwork for acceptance on behalf of a community (that they in no way shape or form represent) by ‘centrist’, ‘moderate’ ‘blah blah blah’ trans-oids of the ‘compromise’ of excluding trans people from ENDA yet again…

but this time forever.

The psychotic Republican Party of the 21st century can’t accomplish any of its treasonous, anti-LGBT, anti-anything-other-than-white, anti-woman goals without its token self-loathing blacks, its token self-loathing gays (I’m sure the search is on for a token self-loathing Republican T) and its stable of stable of legislative June-Cleavers-on-steroids to pollute the airwaves and political discourse in general by providing an illusion of non-uniform-white-male control for tele-consumption by the too-busy-earning-a-living-in-order-to-survive-masses-to-actually-pay-attention-to-how-fucked-up-things-really-are rabble…

and Gay, Inc. can’t accomplish its goal of sanitizing ENDA of The Trans Stain™ without help from a handful of well-placed trans people – some (all?) of whom perhaps are actually too stupid to realize that they are being used as fifth columns – who seem to be get off on conning their own people.

There, I said that too.

There Must Actually be a Move Afoot on ENDA


The John is back to his gay-primacy shtick, longing for the days when “gay” was understood as a modifier for “man” and only “man” (you know, the way that “American” carried undersood silent modifiers of “white,” “male” and “christian”) only now he’s framing it as ‘everyone in ‘LGBT’ who is not a gay male is forcing po’ po’ pi’ful John into a closet against his will’.

It’s not a huge secret that I’m not a big fan of the ever-expanding abbreviation LGBT for what used to be the “gay” community.

Once upon a time (the mid-1990s, in fact) we were gay, then “gay & lesbian,” then “gay, lesbian and bisexual,” then “gay, lesbian, bisexual and trans,” then “lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans,” and now, depending who you talk to, we’ve added on the letter Q (having multiple meanings), I (having multiple meanings), and a few As to boot.

Putting aside the argument about who is and isn’t a member of the gay community, and whether “questioning” is even a legitimate category at all (are there questioning Jews? – yes – so perhaps we should rename Judaism “JewsQ”).

But let’s not even get into any of that.  One of my biggest concerns with the abbreviation LGBT, or whatever your preferred alphabet soup, is that fact that’s basically shoved ourselves back into the closet.

No, John – the only into-closet-shoving is done by out-of-touch quasi-Republican elitists such as yourself who, if a lie detector could be allowed to do its work, would be shown to be not only transphobic but also to actually oppose civil rights laws in general.

How so?

I’m glad you asked.

Plenty of trans people who might like to be out aren’t because they know that they don’t have anti-discrimination protections – and in places like Wisconsin, New York, New Hampshire and Maryland they don’t have them whilst arrogant elitist snotbags like The John do.

Advocates see momentum for ENDA, other bills


Told ya.

Group of White Men Who Have Never Not Had Access to Healthcare Opposes Obamacare

They just happen to be gay…

Log Cabin denounces ‘tyrannical’ Obamacare

…and as obnoxiously self-interested as ever.

I’ve Had Just About Enough of ‘Elite Gays’ Who Whine About Being Referred to as ‘Elite Gays’

I’m just sayin’.

But, don’t take my word for it.  His own whining about making too much to get the Bush-era tax rebate check pretty much tattooed ‘Elite Gay’ on his forehead.  I’m just reminding people about the layers of make-up he’s applied to try to cover it up.


Are gays selling out by seeking the right to marry?

But, of course, The John – typically – decceptively asks the wrong question, because few if any in LGBT land criticizes LGs for “seeking” the right to marry.

Reality-based people – and not limited to those states without LGBT anti-discriminaion laws, but certainly concentrated there – who have far more concern about finding and maintaining employment in an economy destroyed by people whose policies more than a few of those afflicted with Marriage Derangement Syndrome have no problem with than with marriage.

“Yes” is the answer to the question that The John should have asked – a question which history (which includes him having a quantification addiction when he got his transphobia on in 2007) has long since demonstrated that he will not ask: Are gays selling out by ensuring that seeking the right to marry is the first, last and only item that is actually on the agenda?

The John – liar, racist, elitist biphobe and transphobe extraordinaire – picked the week after the Trayvon Martin atrocity to whine about how demonized “gay white men” are by the people whose concerns the “gay white men” (and women) of Gay, Inc. have flushed down the toilet to ensure that the definition and yardstick of “equality” is gay marriage and nothing else but gay marriage.

Way to go.

You Mean As Opposed to it Being Proof that He Could Not Possibly Have Ever Directed an Impure Thought or Action at a Trans Person?

You know…

…the de facto amulet that you’re wanting everyone to believe that Josh Seefried’s being a gay man should be where even the possibility of institutional transphobia is in play?

I wonder how many non-trans LGBs who (rightly) lambasted the “Trump The Race Card: Are You Sick And Tired Of Being Called A Racist When You Know You’re Not One?” panel at this years Christianist Racism CPAC Conference are buying into the current ongoing online “Trump The Transphobia Card: Are You Sick And Tired Of Being Called A Transphobe When You Know You’re Not One?” panel being hosted by The John?