If They’re Not Pulling a Con, Why Do They Refuse to Address Substantive Questions?

Kelli at Planetransgender regarding the scam of 2011:

My comments on Equality Maryland facebook continue to be deleted even as I attempt to answer EQMD’s membership questions why there has been no publicity regarding HB235 other than side notes to marriage equality.

And in the comments at “Come to Think of it, I’ve Never Seen Morgan Meneses-Sheets and Cathy Brennan in the Same Room at the Same Time,” Maryland transphobia’s most obnoxious apologist crawls out from under her rock of state-consecrated gay privilege to refuse to address the scam of 2001 – and how absolutely nothing about the theory upon which she based her overbearing justification for the anti-trans nature of the 2001 Maryland gay-only rights law has come true and to whine that a Grande Armée of two trans women who can read and who dare quote back to her what she wrote and said a decade ago somehow amounts to the deck being stacked against her.  (That’s a stacked deck, eh?  Its clear who has no experience whatsoever applying for jobs in the gay rights industry – or anywhere – as a trans woman.)

9 Responses to If They’re Not Pulling a Con, Why Do They Refuse to Address Substantive Questions?

  1. Cathy Brennan says:

    Crazy train – the stacked deck comment goes to your presentation of argument, not to my personal oppression. I’ve told you before, the attention flatters me!

    Be brave – come to Maryland and say these things to my face. Or would you then have to admit you’ve never tried to chat with me? Truth gets in the way.

    • Katrina Rose says:

      Isn’t it amazing how overly-privileged, undeservedly-employed con artists feel taht they have the authority to make demands of those who they have helped relegate to the status of ‘other’?

      Crazy train – the stacked deck comment goes to your presentation of argument

      What? The fact that I quoted you in full – and in context? And the fact that I’m demanding that you come up with some proof that your theory that you expected trans people to settle for – a theory that I think a jury could reasonably find that you knew was full of shit even in 2001 – has been doing nothing in terms of Maryland state law for the last ten years excecpt floating in the punch bowl of our lives and attracting maggots and flies?

      Everyone is smelling you sweat.

      And we can hear the sound of you twisting at the end of the rope made of strands of your petrified bullshit.

      • laughriotgirl says:

        But Kat, her arguments here ate sound. So far:

        * You are “obsessed with her” – You know you specifically target her while ignoring Barney Frank, Aravosis, Liz Birch – it’s quite clear this is all Cathy Brennan all the time.

        * Your blog is unpopular/ unread – It isn’t like people link to you, cite your articles, or value your observations and presentation of historical facts.

        * You don’t know what you are talking about – If you were a lawyer, an activist who lived through most of the events you chronicle, or someone with a keen eye to connect dots maybe – just maybe you’d have some credibility.

        Obviously, the cis GLB and their apologists always have trans people’s best interests at heart. You can tell by the employment of trans women in GLB organizations, and the vastly superior access to civil rights and protections trans folks have.

        *eye roll*

      • Katrina Rose says:

        I hereby defer to laughriotgirl 🙂

    • Megan says:

      Yeah, truth gets in the way, all right…which must be why you’re working so hard to obscure it, right?

  2. Kathleen says:

    “Be brave – come to Maryland and say these things to my face.”

    Oh my God – I think she’s double dog daring you! Now you just have to jump on a jet and fly to Maryland.

    Hey, Brennan – be brave – admit your actions helped cause a decade of disenfranchisement. You can do that from the comfort of your armchair while enjoying a nice glass of port – no travel needed.

    • Katrina Rose says:

      I think she’s double dog daring you!

      Too late, you know.

      I already have multiple dogs – and they dare me to pick up their shit all the time.

      The difference is…

      They’re dogs.

      Not only do they not know any better than to shit anywhere and everywhere, I actually do have some obligation to address their concerns.

  3. […] If They’re Not Pulling a Con, Why Do They Refuse to Address Substantive Questions? […]

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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: