Third Strike for Shillerico [UPDATED]

Well, unless you live in – and are a participant in the perpetuation of – the Gay Marriage, Inc.,™ bubble, you’ve heard that the original story upon which The Bil based his “Trans Mafia” slur has been conclusively debunked (at least as to the trans-participatory and trans-specific nature of the Vancouver incident; and even the glitterbombing aspect is in doubt at this point.)

But when has Gay Marriage, Inc.,™ ever let facts get in the way of drumming up energy against useful, substantive, legitimate trans progress?

[UPDATE]

Adam Polaski updated his piece to reflect what the Xtra report actually said about the Vancouver incident:

Unless you weren’t online on Monday, you probably heard that Dan Savage was glitterbombed for the third time in the past six months. Bil wrote a post about the incident (“Trans Mafia: Savage Glitterbombed Again”)….

But there’s that parenthetical – and the eagerness to demonize trans people that underlies it.

(Channels Ben Stein voice)

Bil?!?!?

Bil?!?!?

Bil?!?!?

Bil?!?!?

(Releases Ben Stein voice).

17 Responses to Third Strike for Shillerico [UPDATED]

  1. Aidan says:

    I guess they want to encourage us to glitterbomb. We get blamed anyway if we don’t do it or support it. Game on.

  2. Kathy says:

    They now have responsibility for taking some “back bearings” as George Smiley would say.

    Given that several people made them aware of this when the first article was published on Bilerico (Bil was emailed – and then followed up with another email when XTRA reaffirmed their original story. Not to mention the many commenters on the site who pointed out the error) – they have to explain how they read such a simple report incorrectly and how they continued to promote the mistake when it was made plain t them.

    They should also examine the results of their actions – look at the extremely bigoted torrent of comments on the blogs that this misreporting caused and ask themselves how their actions fostered the much desired civility they say they’re striving for. They should consider the distinction between comments about a person & his actions towards a community and vilification of an entire group. They should also disclose any coordination that went on between the blogs that flogged this dead horse.

    And good on Adam for responding to emails & comments on his misreporting – he should continue those efforts by removing “trans activists” tags etc for his story. For your own education Adam – please go read read the comments at Americablog, Towelies & Joe whatever his name is blogs. Please follow up on whether you think they’re festering boils that need lancing.

    • Katrina Rose says:

      They should also examine the results of their actions

      Mitt the Flip should be willing to pay a higher tax rate than the typical dead body that he forcibly converts into a mormon against its will…

  3. "Vic" says:

    Trans participation in this assault has not been debunked. But even if none of the criminals are trans, the ideology that motivated them is a trans activist/queer ideology.

    BTW, why has there been no obnoxious and hostile post about Kate Clinton? Didn’t your tranny network report to you that she said “tranny” in one of her comic routines at the so-called Creating Change conference/circus? Come on, you have this week’s victim of trans activist hate served up to you on a platter and you are late to the feast.

    • Kathy says:

      Ah – then even if no gay man is actually involved in a hate murder of a trans person – it’s the ideology and hostile slurs expressed by some gay men that motivated the murder. is that your proposition?

      Say – I wonder if trans youth reading those comments or reading Dan Savage tell a trans person that no one will ever love you – the most you can hope for is the like you as some sort if fetish – feels it getting better.

      • "Vic" says:

        There is nothing inherently anti-trans about the gay activist community, so your analogy fails. Gay activists have done more to accommodate your obnoxious demands more than any other group on the planet. Although some individuals may opt to return your name-calling, there is nothing intrinsically anti-trans about gay activists.

        The trans activist community is inherently anti-gay because it seeks to colonize the gay community and control it via the false ideology of queer/ LGBT. So even if these glitterers are “cis” (to use your bigoted terminology), the guilt flows right back to vile trans activists. The same would not be true if some straight and/or trans person assaulted a trans person in the name of gay rights.

      • Katrina Rose says:

        Now is the time on Sprockets when Vic dances!!!!

        There is nothing inherently anti-trans about the gay activist community, so your analogy fails….

        The trans activist community is inherently anti-gay….

        Does Cathy Brennan write your comments for you directly? Or do you pay her a per-cliche royalty?

    • Bianca Lynne says:

      “The trans activist community is inherently anti-gay because it seeks to colonize the gay community” – wait..

      Let’s back this up a couple decades, well more actually. Was it “trans activists” using any and all examples of “gender variance” to drive home the idea that gay people live in “all times and all places”? Was is trans activists pushing the notion that “some cultures valued gay men as spiritual leaders and healers (because some cultures had social space for 3rd/4th genders and ascribed to them some mystical connections)?

      Was it trans activists using murdered trans women as examples of “anti-gay” violence to push for the first (and all subsequent) hate-crimes laws – the ones that don’t actually cover trans people? Was it trans activists using a trans woman/cis man’s relationship in NY in some weird bid to push for gay marriage?

      Come on Vic, there is history and then there is the half-baked stuff that some G/L folks are tossing around lately. The frequency that this stuff is getting tossed around this past year is telling. The idea that trans folks just showed up and demanded inclusion is a blatant lie, the idea that G/L people have made any actual legislative or social sacrifice on behalf of trans people is another lie, the idea that trans people get more out of the LGBT than gay people do – a HUGE hulking pile of a lie.

      • Kathy says:

        No, no, no – when people demanded inclusion of sex, national origin and religion in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 – it was clearly a racist action – just ask Vic.

        All civil rights legislation only protects one characteristic at a time. Preferably just gay males, I’m sure.

  4. friday jones says:

    Look, now they’re blaming trans people for the activist language used mainly by radical lesbians like Lavender menace. Next they’ll be insisting we invented the German language and cause the milk to curdle in the pails. All that calumny against an entire disadvantaged community, just so that they can get to play house and save on their taxes by filing joint. G&L folks really HAVE gone mainstream.

  5. Kathy says:

    Vic – voting for Gingrich are you? Is your name Stephan Clark?

    Trans people are bigots for demanding inclusion in civil rights laws. Gay people are noble for doing so. And they’re noble for using real slurs like the cesspit comment sections over at Americablog, towlies and Joe whatever his name is. People who use slurs about trans people are blameless – people who use a term that doesn’t specificaly refer to gay people as a group at all and isn’t a slur – are bigots. Your mentioning Cis is hilarious – it’s as if people from Rhode Island said the term North American was only referried to them. And was a slur. Please point out how many gay guys have it used as a slur that refers only to gay men – any politicians, religous leaders or NOM using it? Anyone murdered with that scrawled accross their bodies?

    Guys like you are like the Koch brothers complaining about class warfare. Whatever you’re complaint about is what you’re doing. Just not as well as they do.

  6. Kathy says:

    Katrina Rose says:
    February 1, 2012 at 4:10 am

    Now is the time on Sprockets when Vic dances!!!!
    ====================================

    Reminds me of that debate Gary Hart was in years ago – when he asked the Reganite – “Do you believe in the Commonweal?”

    She stumbled, said …oh, that’s a very good question…….No New Taxes!!!!!!

  7. friday jones says:

    “Gay activists have done more to accommodate your obnoxious demands more than any other group on the planet.” -Vicathy

    Name two things that gay activists have done to accommodate our demands. Actually done, not paid lip service to. You’d be hard-pressed to name one I bet, and even then it would be a stretch.

  8. "Vic" says:

    @Bianca Lynne: I don’t know who these people are who threw around those examples in the course of some unidentified conversation or argument. If they – whoever they are – used improper examples to score a point, then they should be corrected. It doesn’t follow that trans activists have the right to declare themselves attached to gays and to arrogate for themselves the right to dictate what gay priorities and goals should be. Furthermore, gays don’t need to cite to such nonsense as “3rd and 4th genders” in ancient societies to win their political objectives, nor do they need to use anti-trans violence in order to prove that anti-gay violence is a problem.

    Finally, you are simply deluded if you think that any benefits flow to gay people from their association with trans activists. You raise no money. You don’t provide significant volunteering effort, since there aren’t that many of you. Your issues are unpopular and are the first thing that our opponents focus on. And you are atrociously nasty and divisive. There is nothing but downside to gays from LGBT.

    @Kit:

    Sorry, white dude, but you are wrong again. Seeking a ban on national origin and sex discrimination in 1964 was not racist. Demanding that nothing be passed, indeed insisting that all Blacks actively oppose passage of the Civil Rights Act unless it included sex, national origin and religion, and attacking Black people verbally and physically if they dissented – that would have been racist. Of course, no one suffered from the appalling lack of judgment of trans activists, so no one even suggested such a thing. And if they had, the Black leadership would have quite properly told them to go to hell. Which is what gays should tell trannie activists.

    • Kathy says:

      Sorry M’am. Many people indeed thought adding sex would derail that bill – but it was insisted upon.

      Just as – before the PA Hate Crimes Bill was being passed in 2002 – a number Reps wanted to support a gender Identity bill only and remove sexual orientation – trans people rejected that proposal. And gay people were included. Mind – it was overturned by the courts later in proceedural grounds.

      Gay people didn’t just stand aside then – trans people didn’t ask them to.

      Keep dancing – but – try a few new steps. The frug and the monkey are a bit dated.

    • Bianca Lynne says:

      Vic – Read “Gay American History” or “The Gay Book of Days” as examples of the WIDE net L/G academics used in the bid to normalize sexual orientation. It is a simple fact that trans women are still counted as “gay men” in many places for hate crime statistics. An early (and often) used justification for same-sex marriage is, in fact the many cultures that have multiple-gendered designations and recognize the relationships of those people (Pr-colonial India, American 2-Spirit, etc.) as proof that gay marriage isn’t a new concept.

      The fact of the matter is, gay people DID need to cite those examples, or they wouldn’t have used those examples, and those examples are STILL regurgitated in some form as “common knowledge” about gay people today.

      While I agree that correcting the points made that incorrectly used trans women to get gay-only laws should happen, it would mean the gays would have to re-win protections in MA, NY, Miami, WI and we all know that won’t fly.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 32 other followers

%d bloggers like this: