Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is: Boycott and Protest

One of the non-trans people that gay-corporatist-agenda-pusher NAACP is allowing on its LG(??) panel left a comment to the Bilerico version of Monica Roberts’ post about the fiasco:

I don’t know what happened for the lack of trans inclusion here.

Where I will have to respectfully disagree is that because the panel may mostly share a “lesbian” and “gay” way to identify themselves–and I use queer as much as I do gay for very specific political reasons– that this panel is going to be an “all marriage” panel, or which I guess is to say single issue, or coming from one perspective.

Well, even though Kenyon Farrow does appear not to be an all-gay-marriage-all-the-time flack, if the panel is trans- and bi-free then the panel will indeed be “coming from one perspective” – the perspective that something being billed as ‘LGBT’ is legitimate when the B and the T are excluded.  Its the lie that allows NGLTF to continue to portray itself as legitimate despite its discriminatory anti-trans record of hiring (and I won’t even mention HRC and its culturally fraudulent trans-token-only hiring practices.)

I want to support the main critique about the lack of trans inclusion in the panel….

But you’re apparently not going to put your money where your mouth is by openly and publicly refusing to participate in this latest symptom of the anti-trans apartheid that is creeping into the civil rights industry, are you?

Of course not.

I don’t know what happened for the lack of trans inclusion here.


You really have no idea?

If that’s true, then that’s as disturbing as the panel itself.

9 Responses to Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is: Boycott and Protest

  1. Yep…almost as disturbing as the GL people who loudly suggest that the BT folks aren’t part of ‘their’ movement.

    History says otherwise, when you GL peeps aren’t busy trying to white wash it.

  2. TYFT says:

    Why do trans insist on a level of inclusion that is statistically far and above the proportional representation of any other sexual, racial, or cultural minority?

    We all support equal rights for trans. But we do not all agree that the right strategies LGB rights are the right strategies for T rights. You yourselves get offended when you are lumped in with “the gays” when it comes to media, publicity, artistic portrayals, and even legislation – so what’s with the offense now?

    We will fight our battles, and we will support you in yours. But the fact that I get lambasted and maligned as” white, elite, ableist and transphobic” by “radical trans queers” whenever I hold an educational event or rally that doesn’t specifically cater to the trans population makes me want to dump this altogether.

    The reality is that trans make up a tiny fraction of a percent of our population. We as gay men value our trans brothers and sisters and we devote a significant amount of time to their causes, even if they don’t directly benefit us.

    That the legislature offers our community a significant piece of groundbreaking legislation doesn’t mean I’m going to stop fighting for trans inclusion in the future, but it also doesn’t mean that I’m going to throw it in their face and go back to square one just because 0.02% of our community isn’t in on it.

    Let’s continue to advocate–but continue to be realistic.

  3. And TYFT, since we’re being so realistic here, why do white gay people insist that others (including the POTUS) bow down and immediately deal with their civil rights demands?

    And excuse me, you’ve devoted a significant amount of time to trans rights causes? Really? That’s laughable news to me and other trans people who have seen you GL peeps since the 70’s be bigger OPPRESSORS than you have been allies throughout the years. Wisconsin 1982? Maryland 2001? SONDA in New York 2002? ENDA 2007?

    Barney Frank and the ‘penis in showers’ comment ring a bell? A lesbian by the name of Diane Hardy-Garcia as head of Equality TX proto org got transpeople cut out of the James Byrd hate crimes bill that covers GL people only.

    We are actually estimated to be 3% of the population, not the ‘tiny minoirty’ that you GL peeps like to purport when you want to argue about excluding us from a movement that we created and you peeps ‘gayjacked’ to protect your ‘special rights’ to discriminate.

    • TYFT says:

      I was talking about inclusion and visibility, you are talking about civil rights legislation.

      And even with regard to legislation, there is a big difference. Trans people have every right to insist that POTUS and any and all legislator/public official bow down and immediately deal with their civil rights demands.

      What they must not to do is insist that LGBs PASS UP on or DELAY their own civil rights demands for the sole reason that trans are not included or that those are not “trans priorities.”

      w/r/t statistics – no. The latest credible, national estimation of the LGBT population puts gays at less than 2% (~4 million) of the US population and transpeople at 0.3% (~700,000)


      It’s not to say that the small population size means trans rights don’t matter – but the fact is that that there are, literally, millions more gay people than there are trans (well over 5x): of course gay visibility is going to be higher, and, in the interests of proportional representation, that is not necessarily a terrible thing.

  4. Aver says:

    Monica Roberts, are you sure you don’t know there was a gay movement before Stonewall?
    Also, why would we have any obligation to include you in our bills? To refuse to give someone a free ride, is not the same as “throwing you under the bus”.

  5. @Aver, the vanilla scented privilege and selfishness of GL people is strong with you.

    Are you sure there wasn’t a trans movement before you peeps even began your ‘just like you’ assimilationist movement?

    Transpeople, and especially transpeople who look like me are taking the brunt of the casualties and discrimination hits thanks to the anti-TBLG hate directed at us.

    So yeah, it stands to reason that the people being killed for being who they are should be first in line to get civil rights coverage.

    And if you were really in tune with the African American civil rights legacy you claim to respect but are hitching a ‘free ride’ on, then one of the tenets of that legacy is that when you compile civil rights legislation, you write it as broadly as possible, not narrowcast it as you GL peeps have repeatedly and selfishly done.

    We now return you back to discussing the post in question

    • Aver says:

      Monica Roberts, as to the post in question: if an organization is saying they are discussing LGBT issues, then of course they should include T and B people. I agree with you in this particular issue.
      (Although, as a bisexual, I personally feel much better represented by LG’s since I am only discriminated against when/if I engage in same-sex relationships, and the issues that many so-called B representative usually talk about don’t apply to me. Also, I am not hitching on the African-American movement. I am an European born and living in Europe. But my personal circunstances are not the question.)

      Anyway I was answering to your comment about GLB having been oppressors instead of allies over the years. That is not true overall and you should know it. Of course, you can cherry-pick your examples. I also have mine: in Portugal, trans people involved in mostly-LGB organizations managed to get approved the legislation they wanted. That happened using mostly-LGB resources and help, after LGB got marriage rights and before we got adoption rights (that we still don’t have). Do you imagine an African-American movement or any other movement diverting their time and money to trans rigths while they still don’t have theirs? Why should LGB do it if on top of it we are called your oppressors?

      The point is: we know trans are with us just to use our resources, and not because they particularly care. As a human being I care about trans rights like I care about many other movements that I support with time and money. What I don’t accept is that you try to rewrite our history and redefine our identity. There are no LGBT people; that is nothing but a sad acronym built on the basis of heterosexual prejudices and trans convenience.

    • Aver says:

      I just forgot to answer this:

      “Are you sure there wasn’t a trans movement before you peeps even began your ‘just like you’ assimilationist movement?”

      I don’t know if there was a trans movement before, since I was only talking about the GL movement. That didn’t start with trans, it started with several people and organizations in different countries, sometimes working together, sometimes without any connection.

      As for assimilationist, that can apply to some of those people, or not. I don’t keep a track of each one. Do you? GLB (and trans) are part and builders of society, just like heterosexuals. I am not going to pretend that I am wanting to change society radically if I don’t feel like it. It has nothing to do with seeking approval, it has to do with having the right to be myself, and to be a part of the society that I and other GLB and trans contributed to build.

      “when you compile civil rights legislation, you write it as broadly as possible, not narrowcast it as you GL peeps have repeatedly and selfishly done.”

      I agree with compiling legislation as broadly as possible, and I find it strange that there isn’t a law that simply forbids discrimination in regards to all kinds of people. However, that is the responsability of the Government, not of GL’s.
      If the Gov. (wrongly) only accepts step-by-step laws, then unfortunately each particular group has to fight for their own rights.

      Personally, eventhough I am not old, I am particularly sensitive to discrimination in regards to old people in jobs. I would like to include them. But if the law doesn’t pass in that case, what can we do? Wait? Say we don’t mind to be fired until old people stop to be fired? Who am I to tell a poor GLB person to wait and be fired until I can pass a law that includes everybody?

      And yet, GL’s are fighting for an ENDA- trans-inclusive bill, knowing they are risking their own jobs. And you still complain.

  6. TYFT says:

    “So yeah, it stands to reason that the people being killed for being who they are should be first in line to get civil rights coverage.”

    No, it really doesn’t. It stands to reason that everyone should be at the same place in line to get civil rights coverage, and in the fight for full protections, we should take what we can get at every step of the way. Holding the gays back until you get what you want, especially in this political environment, helps no one, least of all transsexuals.

    There are thousands upon thousands upon thousands of LGB and straight allies fighting every day for trans inclusion and you know it. However, if you feel like the movement as a whole is silencing or unresponsive to your needs, which are just as urgent as the civil rights needs of the rest of us, then I sincerely and with good will would urge you to align with a different movement that can be more effective for you.

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

%d bloggers like this: