Smith to Stabler: Channel Charles Schultz

July 31, 2008

In the Bay Area Reporter, Gwen Smith responds to one of HRC’s current token – and starry-eyed – trannies, Meghan Stabler.

I personally have seen a number of transgender activists get seduced by HRC, and firmly believe that this time it really was going to bat for us. They soon realize that they have been cast as Charlie Brown to HRC’s Lucy, and they aren’t going to get a chance to kick that particular football.

And Gwen also asks a question that doesn’t get asked enough:

[E]xactly what rights has HRC ever actually won for anyone? Does it just take credit for other peoples’ actions?

Inquiring minds already know.

Meghan Stabler either doesn’t know – or doesn’t care.


Always? Really?

July 31, 2008

From a Bay Area Reporter item on the anti-HRC protest:

“HRC does great work. Barney Frank is the one who should take the hit for this divisiveness,” said Mirian Saez, an HRC Federal Club member and Mayor Gavin Newsom’s director of operations on Treasure Island.

Saez attended the dinner with her partner, Julian Potter, a former top aide in the mayor’s office. She said that the “T” in LGBT has always been a part of HRC.

Always?

Even back in the early 1980s, when it was little more than a one-man operation – with that one man being a guy who did his utmost to keep us out of a statewide gay rights bill in Minnesota?

Oh…

But, all of this gets better.

Solmonese’s speech was briefly interrupted by 63-year-old lesbian Catherine Cusic, the Harvey Milk LGBT Democratic Club’s vice president of political action. Cusic had bought a ticket to the dinner at a discounted rate and began walking toward the stage while Solmonese was talking. Security, however, quickly approached her and dragged Cusic out of the room.

The following day Cusic circulated photos of her bruised arms and numerous LGBT Web sites ran her account of being roughed up by “security goons” at the event. She told the B.A.R. on Monday that she had filed charges of assault with the police and was demanding an apology from both HRC and Woolsey.

“I want both Woolsey and HRC to reconsider their position on ENDA, which is clearly discriminatory,” said Cusic. “She calls herself a feminist and just sat there. I want an apology from HRC for using goons and want an apology from Woolsey for letting them beat up an old woman in front of her.”

Once Cusic had left the room, Solmonese remarked that HRC has dinners across the country and that “each time it is different.” He also joked it helps to take the anti-anxiety drug Xanax.

Trust us, Pee Wee.

We make jokes about you too.

However, ours tend only to insult those who deserve to be insulted – you know, people like yourself.


Yet Another Elitist Who Wants a National Special Right to Discriminate Against Us

July 30, 2008

‘BostonPaul’ on Daily Kos:

T vs. the GLB: When Allies Attack

I’ll comment later.

I’m still vomiting.


Bailey Brouhaha Video is Now Online!

July 30, 2008

[UPDATED: NOW WITH VIDEO EMBEDDED]

I have just received word from Andrea James that she has the video from the June 21 NWSA Bailey Brouhaha Panel online.  It is available – in chunks – at Andrea’s page on You Tube.

Below each embed is the direct link to the individual segment:

 

 


 


 


 

 


 

 

 


Too Bad the Sam Houston Colisseum No Longer Exists

July 29, 2008

For those who don’t like sport, we have……….

sport.

From the Houston Chronk:

In a stunning move designed to push the Rockets from solid playoff team toward legitimate NBA contenders, the Rockets reached agreement Tuesday with the Sacramento Kings to acquire gifted but controversial forward Ron Artest….

Yes, the old Colisseum hosted concerts (including one by the Beatles), hockey (the original Aeros) and even basketball (the Rockets), but the only events I ever remember seeing there were, thanks to my father, boxing matches.

Artest would have felt at home there.

Now, once again, back to your regularly scheduled blog.


News Flash: Massachusetts Legislature Now to Turn Its Attention to Gay Pet Rights

July 29, 2008

No – not really. 

But it does seem that, on the civil rights agenda, anything and everything hops above the matter of rectifying the hate crime that was committed against trans people by the Massachusetts Legislature in 1989.  And it does seem that no one who benefits from having that special right to discriminate against trans people really gives a shit.  So why wouldn’t a law dealing with the civil rights of the pets of gays and lesbians hop above trans rights?

From Bay Windows:

The bill to repeal the 1913 law is on its way to Governor Deval Patrick, who will sign it into law. The bill cleared a final hurdle this afternoon, when the House of Representatives passed the bill on a roll call vote after about 25 minutes of debate. The vote was 118-35, with five members not voting.

State Rep. Byron Rushing began debate on the repeal by giving a history of the law, and disputing statements by those who have said it does not have racist origins.”Well sorry. sorry. There was a lot of concern about interracial marriage in this country in 1913,” he stated, noting the controversy at the time over Jack Johnson, an African American prizefighter, marrying a white woman.

The 1913 law prohibits out-of-state couples from marrying in Massachusetts if their marriage would be considered void in their home state.

Yup.

You got it.

Passing a law to benefit gays and lesbians who do not live in Massachusetts is a higher priority than passing a law to provide basic civil rights protections for trans people who do live in Massachusetts.

I’m assuming that after providing basic civil rights for pets of gays, the legislature will then turn to a resolution asking the Vatican to confer living sainthood upon Barney Frank?

Yeh – I know.  He’s Jewish.

But he’s not a transsexual – and that seems to be all that matters in Massachusetts.


I’m Sure Folks On Rhode Island Avenue Will Be Riiiiiiiight On It

July 29, 2008

From Queer Channel Media:

Two agencies charged with enforcing the city’s anti-discrimination laws issued a proposed rule change earlier this month that would exempt the Department of Corrections from complying with the D.C. Human Rights Act as it applies to transgender prisoners.

In a July 11 notice of proposed rulemaking, the D.C. Office of Human Rights and the city’s Commission on Human Rights called, among other things, for waiving a requirement that city government agencies “classify, house or provide access to gender-specific facilities to transgender individuals according to their gender identity or expression if the transgender individual is incarcerated, institutionalized or otherwise within the District’s custody.”

Department of Corrections officials have said the rule change was needed to address “safety and security” issues that have surfaced in the D.C. jail in connection with transgender inmates.

Uh huh.

But wait…

It gets better.

Gay and transgender activists this week said they were surprised and disappointed that the Human Rights Office and Commission on Human Rights apparently heeded requests by the Department of Correction to propose rolling back non-discrimination protections for transgender prisoners.

Among the Commission’s members are Christopher Dyer, director of the Mayor’s Office of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual & Transgender Affairs; and gay D.C. residents Michael Ward and Thomas Fulton.

Mario Acosta-Velez, president of the Gertrude Stein Democratic Club, the city’s largest gay political group, served as acting chair of the commission until his term expired in early July. Although Acosta-Velez no longer serves on the commission, he was a member at the time that Alexis Taylor, general counsel of the Office of Human Rights, introduced the proposed changes to the commission.

Acosta-Velez said he appointed a subcommittee of the commission to consider the proposed changes but chose not to become a member because his term on the commission was ending.

“This is not saying in any way that the commission is agreeing to these proposals or that it favors cutting back on the Human Rights Act,” Acosta-Velez said. “We decided to let them go through the process and to seek out comments from the public. It was our understanding that the proposals would come back to the commission for a vote, and that’s when the matter would be decided.”

Ward echoed that sentiment, saying he has concerns over parts of the proposed rule changes.

“We all expected there would be some controversy,” he said. “That’s part of the reason for putting them out there for public comment.”

I wonder…

Did they have the same laid-back attitude when Marilyn Musgrave and Wayne Allard put the Federal Marriage Amendment “out there for public comment”?

Somehow I doubt it.

Oh, BTW…

Among the groups joining the D.C. Trans Coalition in opposing the proposed changes are Transgender Health Empowerment, Helping Individual Prostitutes Survive (HIPS), D.C. Prisoners’ Project, National Center for Transgender Equality, National Gay & Lesbian Task Force, Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians & Gays (PFLAG) and Human Rights Campaign.

Oh yeh – I’m sure all of that expertise from the geniuses on Rhode Island Avenue will solve this whole controversy before you can say…

Tyra Hunter.

D.C. is as D.C. does.