2007: Ten Years Ago, Ten Years After

Yes, posts have been sparse of late.

This is one of multiple reasons:
Has the Future Already Been Forgotten

The full text of this article is not yet available on the website of the William & Mary Journal of Women and the Law.  However, I will link to it when it becomes available.

Up Next: HRC Denying that it Discriminates Against Trans Women in its Own Employment Practices

From Q Notes:

Various posts on Facebook and Tumblr asserted that an HRC staffer asked transgender community members to remove a transgender flag from the podium area and said, according to one post, that “marriage equality is not a transgender issue.”

Jerame Davis, executive director of National Stonewall Democrats, said in an update on Facebook that he witnessed an HRC staffer asking that a transgender flag be removed, though he did not hear the alleged statement regarding marriage and transgender issues.

“I was there. I saw this happen,” Davis wrote on Wednesday. “It was only the HRC reps asking for the trans flag to be moved. If they’d only asked once, I’d have given them a pass, but they continued to harass this person over a flag.”

Davis described the incident as “really poor behavior.”

I’d describe it as: HRC-oids jockeying for promotions.

And, of course, where the Rhode Island Avenue Cesspool is involved, there are lies, wrapped in obfuscations, wrapped in doublespeak, with hegemony oozing from every pore..

HRC Communications Director Michael Cole-Schwartz issued a statement to qnotes in response to the allegations.

“It was agreed that featuring American flags at our program was the best way to illustrate this unifying issue

Okay, lets stop it right there.  The mere fact that HRC has declared that the shoving of marriage up to the SCOTUS right now is “unifying” is an act of rhetorical assault against everyone who is offended that Gay, Inc. has, in practical terms, killed the issue of employment anti-discrimination outside of those states that already have it (whether legitimate or gay-only.)

And, yes, I expect nothing less from an organization that still feels shocked when it is called out as transphobic – after perfecting the institutional practice that Jean O’Leary and Ron Gold pioneered over at NGLTF.

which is why when managing the area behind the podium, several people were asked to move who were carrying organizational banners, pride flags or any other flag that was not an American flag,” the statement read. “Several people refused and they were allowed to stay. The coalition welcomed the variety of signs and flags that were throughout the plaza that demonstrated the wonderful diversity of our community.”

HRC added, “It is a not true to suggest that any person or organization was told their flag was less important than another

Dude!  In your previous paragraph you all but explicitly stated that all flags were less important than the American flag!

— this did not occur and no HRC staff member would ever tolerate such behavior.

Bullshit.  Now, to be absolutely fair (1) I was not there.  (2) There is the slightest of chances that HRC guy could be telling the truth and that all of the reality-based people got it wrong.  And I genuinely and sincerely assert that, absent conclusive audio/video of the incident, we all should leave open that slightest of possibilities.

But don’t you dare EVER spew out the lie that ” no HRC staff member would ever tolerate such behavior.”  Your organization’s entire history – replete with its 2 1/2 trans employees, none of whom are still on HRC’s staff (and to this I address Q-Notes’ crack staff: Why didn’t you question why HRC had no trans employees available to answer inquiries about the alleged incident?) – is emblematic of gay transphobia.

To be clear, it is the position of the Human Rights Campaign that marriage is an issue that affects everyone in the LGBT community.”

And, once again, HRC is dead wrong.

It does not affect everybody in the LGBT community any more than gays-in-the-military does.  That doesn’t mean that trans people who do fight the marriage fight because of their personal interest in the issue or just because of solidarity are wrong.  But that sentence is just another act – albeit a touchy-feely one, cloaked in inclusivity to hide its poisonous core – of erasing the concerns of all LGBT people who might not have marriage as their first, last and only interest.

Here is the fully encrypted chunk o’ propaganda from Rhode Island Avenue:

Tuesday and Wednesday were historic days for our community, as thousands of LGBT people gathered in front of the Supreme Court and in every state across the country to demonstrate their support for marriage equality. HRC was proud to play a role in these events as a member of the United for Marriage coalition, the group which organized the gathering at the Supreme Court. Marriage equality is an issue that fundamentally impacts hundreds of thousands of LGBT people and families across our nation and is greater than any one organization.

It was agreed that featuring American flags at our program was the best way to illustrate this unifying issue which is why when managing the area behind the podium, several people were asked to move who were carrying organizational banners, pride flags or any other flag that was not an American flag. Several people refused and they were allowed to stay. The coalition welcomed the variety of signs and flags that were throughout the plaza that demonstrated the wonderful diversity of our community.

It is a not true to suggest that any person or organization was told their flag was less important than another – this did not occur and no HRC staff member would ever tolerate such behavior. To be clear, it is the position of the Human Rights Campaign that marriage is an issue that affects everyone in the LGBT community.

The events at the Court featured lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender speakers as well as LGBT families, religious leaders, Republicans, military spouses and civil rights activists. This has been a historic week and truly demonstrated how all of us – lesbian, gay, bisexual and straight, transgender and cisgender – can unite as one voice to advocate for our constitutional rights

No, it demonstrated how what is indeed a legitimate issue for many thousands of people – LGB as well as T – can be turned into just another corporate battering ram by a bunch of disgusting, self-interested greedmeisters who, apart from having never had to compete against a trans person for their current jobs, are so disconnected from life outside of the Islands O’ Gay Marriage that they probably really and truly believe that no one currently adrift on the waves over the horizon and beyond the view of Married Gay Millionaire White Sandy Beach, New York, or Loot-Loaded Lesbian Marriage Beach, Maryland, might want to get to Employment Island rather than one of the Marriage Islands.

I’ll say it again (if for no other reason to distinguish this blog from the five gay-male-run blogs that still refuse to acknowledge that they were dead wrong about the Vancouver non-incident of 2012): It is indeed possible that the folks who have made the allegation against HRC as to the anti-flag incident got it wrong, even without animus; honest mistakes do happen.

However, HRC again portraying itself as an organization that would never do anything anti-trans is actually a more disgusting act of aggression against the entire LGBT community than the anti-flag incident even if it occurred exactly as reported.

We – whether T or LGB or just simply reality-centric – cannot let it go unchallenged.

Addicted to False Equivalency

By now most folks have heard about the Onion’s sub-misogynistic tweet about 9 year-old Oscar nominee Quvenzhané Wallis last night.  Unlike so many – mostly on the right (though also a select group who claim to be liberal and/or feminist) – the Onion realizes when it screws up and, here, screwed up badly and admitted so.

On behalf of The Onion, I offer my personal apology to Quvenzhané Wallis and the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences for the tweet that was circulated last night during the Oscars. It was crude and offensive—not to mention inconsistent with The Onion’s commitment to parody and satire, however biting.

No person should be subjected to such a senseless, humorless comment masquerading as satire.

The tweet was taken down within an hour of publication. We have instituted new and tighter Twitter procedures to ensure that this kind of mistake does not occur again.

In addition, we are taking immediate steps to discipline those individuals responsible.

Miss Wallis, you are young and talented and deserve better. All of us at The Onion are deeply sorry.

Sincerely,

Steve Hannah
CEO
The Onion

Memo to Republicans (and Bil Browning, et. al.): THAT’S a REAL apology. 

But, unsurprisingly, the Imaginary PC Police (not imaginary police that are PC mind you, but those who police imaginary instances of political correctness) are up in arms.

ConservaOnion

Here’s the problem with that: However obnoxious the comment about Wallis was – and I think we can all agree that it was – it was about an entertainer who won’t be eligible to run for either the prsidency or the vice-presidency for 26 years and has done nothing other than appear in a movie and at the Oscars (and, importantly, she’s not an adult under any moral or legal framework in the United States.)

Palin(s)?

Even though many versions of the questions about Trig Palin’s ancestry were posed obnoxiously, the questions themselves were quite legitimate given (1) the visual questions regarding images of Sarah and Bristol from the period when Sarah, according to official narrative, was pregnant with Trig, (2) Sarah’s then-status as someone claiming to be worthy of holding America’s vice-presidency, (3) Sarah’s then-status as actual chief executive of the State of Alaska, and (4) the seriousness of the matter of whether someone with the status of (2) and (3) had ever lied on any official documents (much less to the electorate) regarding who the father and the mother of Trig are.  So what if Bristol was only 17 in 2008?  That’s already actually an adult in some states and certifiably so in any state whose penal system might want to lock her up.  If the kid is actually Bristol’s (irrespective of who the father actually is), then she was then and still is a participant in an ongoing fraud.  Personally, despite making several posts about it at the original ENDABlog, I do think the visual evidence was pretty flimsy (though, as a purely legal matter, the bare questions were far more legitimate than anything that was being asked re: Obama and Jeremiah Wright and Bill Ayers.)  Nevertheless, as usual with the Palin Defense League: Massive Fail.

Another Fact: In New York, Its Been Ten Years Since SONDA

And GENDA is…………………………………………….?

The people of Washington and Maine deserve to see marriage prevail at the ballot today.  It seems like there’s a decent chance that that will happen.

The people of Minnesota deserve to see Michele Bachmann’s wet dream (yes, she’s in Congress – something that will hopefully change today – but the thing on the ballot today was her pet project while she was in the Minnesota Legislature, something she could never accomplish because at least one chamber was always under Democratic control) die an ugly death today.   I worry about Minnesota, though; people tend to underestimate just how radical the Republican party there has become (remember: Bachmann is actually just the tip of Minnesota’s Republican crazyberg.)

The people of Iowa deserve to have their judiciary – as well as Varnum v. Brien and the fourth signatory to it to come up for a retention vote since the decision – defended today from Bob Vander Plaats and corporate christianist psychopaths who think that a 6,000-year-old earth is not a myth but that separation of church and state is.

What do all four states have in common?

All enacted civil rights laws that (1) were legitimate (read: trans-inclusive) from day one and (2) preceded same-sex marriage.

Maryland, however, chose a different path: not only enacting a genocidal gay-only rights law 11 1/2 years ago but then – as predicted – moving right past the basic civil rights needs of trans people and on to the gay want of marriage.

And, as the New York example has shown, if marriage prevails in Maryland, trans people will forever remain unequal to non-trans gays and lesbians under state law.

Yes, there are some non-trans gays and lesbians in Maryand who actually support trans rights and its a shame that they should have to wait for something that, if the U.S. Constitution were interpreted properly, no state would have ever had the right to ban in the first instance.  But there are a buttload of trans people who support same-sex marriage – people who Maryland’s Gay, Inc. sees no problem in making wait….

again.

The difference, of course, is simple – and ugly:  those non-trans gays and lesbians in Maryland may lack marriage rights, but they currently do have the legal right under Maryland state law to refuse to hire trans people, rent to trans people or even allow trans people into their places of business.  

Until those non-trans gays and lesbians in Maryland – and the Gay, Inc. that they allow to shape policy on their behalf – are willing to give up that right, they will not have earned a vote in favor of marriage.

No, I don’t have a vote – but because, thanks to Maryland’s Gay, Inc., I’m a third class citizen whenever I set foot in the state, if I did have one, it would be no.  Trans people in Maryland who do have a vote – and who have any hope of the state ever undoing the political hate crime of 2001 – should actually vote no.

Countdown to this post being quoted out of context by not noting my support for marriage in the other states in 3…2…1….

Looks Like Tom Arnold Really Was the Classy One

What have we learned over the last few months?

When a Twitter user accused Barr of transphobia, she tweeted back, “Women do not want your penises forced in their faces or in our private bathrooms. Respect that FACT.”

More recently, Barr tweeted: “I remember when the LGBT community stopped supporting NAMBLA” and claimed “I was instrumental in forcing lgbts to dis include man boy love as part of their program.”

Instrumental?

Really?

I guess we can presume that the proof of this is honeymooning in some gold-toileted, car-elevator-encrusted sister-wife hideaway in Utah right along with Mitt Romney’s tax returns and the evidence of Mary Daly’s renouncement of her trans-exterminationist works, eh?  Right along with an explicit statement from you that clarifies the implication of what your curent hissy fit represents your position to be: namely, that, (1) even if you view pre-op trans women as men, you nevertheless do view trans women who have had SRS to be women, (2) you have no problem with post-SRS trans women being in what you feel you have the right to demarcate as women’s space, and (3) that you’re willing to say this to the radphlegm exterminationists who are, at this moment, lathering up to christen you as their new martyr, eh?

But even beyond that (for, after all, we all know that Queerty – along with Shillerico, AmericaBog, Joe.My.Clod and TowleToad are fact-free zones)…

With this we can clearly see the swiss-cheesiness of the Barr brain.

I was instrumental in forcing lgbts to dis include man boy love as part of their program

I seem to recall the war over NAMBLA involvement being concluded at least 15 years ago (in many locales  more), and I doubt seriously if any Ts were in any position to take part in the rightful exclusion of actual pedophiles (although, as I’ve heard one old-time gay rights activist note: on at least a couple of occasions, the so-called NAMBLA representative attempting to get involved with gay pride organizational affairs turned out to be an undercover cop) from LGB(T) anything because the obnoxious exterminationists for whom this obnoxious, over-the-hill, never-really-funny-in-the-first-place ‘comedian’ is carrying historical water had long since pretty much ensured that no trans people – irrespective of plumbing -had any place in the gay rights movement.

Stick with national-anthem-singing, Roseanne.

Memo to The John, The Bil, The Towle, The Joe and The Queerty: Its Okay to Stand By Your Stories IF THEY’RE ACCURATE

The gay blogosphere with a transphobia agenda as compared to the Boston Globe:

We received your request late this afternoon for a correction regarding this morning’s Globe story. Having carefully reviewed that request, we see no basis for publishing a correction. The Globe story was entirely accurate.

The Globe story was based on government documents filed by Bain Capital itself. Those described Governor Romney as remaining at the helm of Bain Capital as its “sole stockholder, chairman of the board, chief executive officer, and president” until 2002. The story also cited state financial disclosure forms filed by Romney that showed he earned income as a Bain “executive” in 2001 and 2002, separate from investment earnings.

The Globe story accurately described the contents of those documents.

A contrast indeed….