Scanning a Scampaign ‘List’

The Shamvocate has out a speculative list of who might be in line to occupy the Throne of Drone inside the Rhode Island Avenue Cesspool.

Reached by phone, HRC spokesman Michael Cole-Schwartz declined to give details on when a successor to Solmonese may be announced or who may be among the finalists for the job. Multiple outside sources, meanwhile, speculated that the following LGBT leaders could fit the job description to run the 1-million-member-plus organization.

The list?

  • Patrick Guerriero – former Log Cabin Republican head
  • Brian Ellner – served as a “senior strategist for the Human Rights Campaign during the multi-coalitional, bipartisan effort New Yorkers for Marriage Equality” which fucked over trans people by enabling gay wants to trump trans needs and ensuting that New York will never add trans rights to its immoral 2002 law which gave gays and lesbians the right to discriminate against trans people. “He ran a very successful campaign, and it’s the biggest thing [HRC] has been involved in in awhile,” a source said.
  • Queen Elizabeth III – seriously. at least according to this list
  • Chad Griffin – “cofounder for the American Foundation for Equal Rights—the backer of the lawsuit against Proposition 8, which the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled unconstitutional earlier this week”
  • Sean Eldridge – “Eldridge left Columbia Law School to work as communications director for Freedom to Marry, where he served as political director during the successful effort to pass the marriage equality bill last year. “
  • Chuck Wolfe – executive director of the Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund
  • Kevin Jennings – founder of the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network and served as assistant deputy secretary for the Department of Education’s Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools
  • Randi Weingarten – president of the 1.5-million-member American Federation of Teachers,  someone whose screen presence is so nauseating that I can’t stand listening to her even if she’s saying something that I agree with, and – the icing on the cake – current partner of Hilary Rosen.

So, here’s what we have: A list that is all but completely cloroxed; two women – neither trans but one who would be a re-animation of an era of trans-exterminative doublespeak (remember the 2001 declaration that Maryland had become, via enacting a gay-only rights law, a “discrimination-free zone”?) and the other the current partner of the other’s obnoxious, transphobic corporatist ex; a Republican; some Marriage Derangement Syndrome-pushers; and a couple of other re-treads.

Transphobic gay political incest at its most diseased.

Yes, taking the Shamvocate at its word, this isn’t the actual list; allegedly, there is a trans person being considered – not a trans woman, of course.  However, even if the Rhode Island Avenue Cesspool’s actual list is a bit less white and a bit less trans-exterminative, what does this say about the Shamvocate regarding what it was willing to throw together as a list?

37 Responses to Scanning a Scampaign ‘List’

  1. “Chuck Wolfe – executive director of the Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund.”
    Money, Money, Money, MONEY!
    He knows how to Fund-Raise. What else is there?

  2. SarasNavel says:

    Meanwhile, in Maryland

    Equality Maryland is MIA when it comes to fighting the bathroom meme.

    One guy from GLAAD showed up at the last meeting and said no one shows up anymore because “we know we’ll just be speaking out against the same lies each time”.

    The result?

    “After hearing hours of testimony on a bill to ban discrimination against transgender people, Baltimore County Council members said Tuesday they would consider exempting public restrooms and locker rooms from the measure.

    Restrooms have emerged as a hot-button issue in the county’s debate over the bill. At public hearings, the bill’s opponents have said they fear that if the law is passed, men would sexually assault women in restrooms.

    Four of the council’s seven members have signed on to the proposed amendment, which says the law wouldn’t apply to public places “that are designated for male or female use, such as restrooms, bath houses, locker rooms, dressing rooms, changing rooms, and similar facilities.” The sponsors are: Democrat Cathy Bevins of Middle River, Republican Todd Huff of Lutherville, Republican David Marks of Perry Hall, and Democrat John Olszewski Sr. of Dundalk.

    A vote on the bill and amendments is set for next week. Other proposed amendments would exempt certain institutions, including religious ones, from the law, and would allow employers to require that workers “adhere to reasonable workplace appearance, grooming, and dress standards” as long as the employer allows employees to dress as the gender with which they identify.”

    • Katrina Rose says:

      “we know we’ll just be speaking out against the same lies each time”

      Funny…

      I’ve not seen any ceasing of the usual Marriage Derangement Syndrome subjects showing up wherever the opportunity might arise to speak out against the usual christianist anti-same-sex marriage lies.

      Actually…

      Its not very funny, is it?

    • What is it with all these perverted, male legislators who want to use the same restroom as transgender women?
      There is cause for some serious concern here.

  3. friday jones says:

    They’re our allies, unless “Glee” is on that night, or they’re really tired at the moment.

  4. Want trans human rights done right, gotta do it your damned self…

    • Vic says:

      Finally, you are starting to get it. We are not your servants. We are not your slaves. We owe you nothing. We don’t apologize when gay organizations, funded and staffed by gay people, focus on gay rights. You don’t have any claim on our time or resources. If we help you, it is because we choose to and we decide the terms on which that happens. So if you want your “trans rights” you are going to have to do the work.

      • Katrina Rose says:

        Actually, you owe us everything you’ve got – but why quibble.

      • valeriekeefe says:

        I think Sylvia Rivera wants interest on the heels and bottles she thew defending your privileged ass.

      • Vice says:

        Damn those years I spent on the HRC steering committee & the work to help gay guys with aids – I should have told them to stuff it.

        As should straight say people to gay folks. Hey – do it yourself. Like David Bois & Ted Olsen said to you.

        You’re a cartoon – but – not the ones that make you laugh. You’re funny in a pathetic manner. You’re the Mallard Fillmore of gay people.

      • Kate LBT says:

        This is why I am starting to HATE cisgender gays. Because these fuckers don’t get it. Because these fuckers think that Stonewall happened because well-heeled gender-normative Gay Male Lawyers did it. FUCKING NO. Stonewall happened because *PISSED OFF TRANS WOMEN* started fighting back!!! And then the well-heeled gender-normative Gay Male Lawyers – the GAY 1% – started stealing resources and time from trans women and expecting us to be THEIR slaves.

      • Katrina Rose says:

        Stonewall happened because *PISSED OFF TRANS WOMEN* started fighting back!!!

        Well, just so you don’t give “Vic” the opportunity to say, well, what we all know people like “him” love to say when we mention Stonewall…

        There were plenty of people there other than trans women – but absolutely no one who, if HRC in its current state of stasis existed in 1969, would have been on its board (and in all likelihood no one who had ever actually paid the equivalent of $35.00 to be a mem-bah.)

        (Letters to the editor in the Sept. 2, 1970 issue of what was then still The Advocate – responding to a complaint that the first parade commemortating Stonewall was infested with too many people who weren’t of the future-HRC caliber of upstanding homo-decency and gender-normativity.)

      • Bianca Lynne says:

        Do the work? You mean like the work done from the mid 1950’s through the 80’s where trans people and our doctors won (legislatively mind you) the basic means to recognize out most fundamental legal needs? The work that became more and more difficult the more and more the public linked trans and gay? the work this is now almost impossible because people are afraid trans women will do the things gay men are well known to do in the restrooms?

        “If we help you, it is because we choose to…” That must be an amazing position to be in – one the LGB won’t accept from other progressive groups. Groups like labor, and women’s orgs, urban leagues, etc. The groups that have routinely done work on marriage and anti-discrimination laws. groups the LGb is notoriously lax in returning the support (yet criticized if there is any waver in supporting the needs of the LGB).

      • Katrina Rose says:

        legislatively mind you

        No fair!!!!!!!

        You’re using FACTS!!!!!!!

        And you’re using facts that contradict the Gay, Inc. narrative!!!!!!!!

      • An says:

        Bianca, if the public links trans and gays it is the public’s fault, in the first place. And then some trans and some gays belonging to organizations contributed to the confusion, with the LGBT invention.
        But the average gay person is not responsible for that. There isn’t any organization that represents all gays, and most gays – and trans – did not agree with the LGBT invention, and don’t have to answer for it.
        Also, the “public” is not afraid that trans women do the same as some gay men do. They are afraid that trans women do the same as some heterosexual men do. And you know that. But trans women seem to be more resentful towards gays for not putting your interests above theirs, than towards heterosexuals who actually discriminate in the first place.
        And are you seriously comparing the demands that trans people try to impose on gay organizations, with the ones that gays ask of women’s or labor movements? Really? Do you see gay men demanding that women include a session on gay rights in every single legislation they get passed? And that they postpone the fight for their rights until gays have all the rights they want?

      • friday jones says:

        Right now, trans people in relation to gay & lesbian people are about where lesbians were to the Women’s Rights movement a few years after Betty Friedan kicked the lesbians out of NOW, citing them as “The Lavender Menace.” Exactly in that place, considering that there are gay & lesbian writers who write hateful screeds that say “I admit I don’t know much about the topic, but here’s my opinion on what’s REALLY behind this and my recommendation for how to deal with it,” people trying to freeze us out of the movement, and all the while ignoring the fact that, just as lesbian women are WOMEN, about half of all trans people are gay or lesbian or bisexual, and do not deserve being frozen out of a movement of which we’ve always been a part and in fact in the LGBT liberation movement the trans people have generally been the front line troops who took the brunt of the damage.

        We’re not demanding that the LGBT movement prioritize trans people over gay & lesbian people, we’re insisting that basic NEEDS trump WANTS. That employment, housing, and other basic nondiscrimination legislature is far more important than getting married. We are also for legalizing same-sex marriage, you know, it’s just that we see it as a lower priority than fighting people getting fired or evicted or refused service in a public place because they “look queer.”

      • An says:

        Friday Jones, I see your point and I don’t completely disagree with it. I don’t have a definitive opinion about this issue. But consider these 2 points:

        1- Every lesbian is a woman. The women’s movement can only refuse lesbians if it relabels itself as the heterosexual women’s movement. Likewise, the gay movement can not refuse trans gay people. But it only has the obligation to accept heterosexual trans people at the expense of reformulating their own identity by buying into LGBT lie. This is adopting an identity based on the prejudices of society. We could be allied movements, given the historical overlap, but not the same movement. Not at the expense of giving up our own identity.

        2- The only reason why trans people have basic needs problems is because they decided to put their own dignity before their basic needs. A trans woman could pretend to be a man. Even if the need for surgery is something so primal that they can’t help it, they could have the surgery and still pretend and act as men, without problems. Surgery is not visible from the outside, at least with some clothes. And things such as masculine or feminine names are simply wants, social conventions. My point? If gays want the right to marry, it is not because of a mere vain want. It is because relationships are at the heart of gay discrimination and identity, and marriage right is the only thing missing to have our relationships recognized by the state as being as valid as heterosexual relationships. How would trans women feel if we told you “just postpone the right to have a feminine name and stop wearing feminine clothes, as these are simply conventions and wants that put you into trouble, and society will not believe you anyway.”?

      • Megan says:

        An: if you think that trans women pretending to be men in order to not get discriminated against is a reasonable idea, could you tell us why you think gay marriage getting passed is so incredibly vital? I mean, couldn’t you pretend to be straight and get a straight marriage if having a relationship the state will recognize is of such great importance to you?

    • An says:

      Megan, I don’t think it is a reasonable idea to ask trans women to pretend they are men. Not at all. That is my point: I don’t ask trans women to pretend to be men even though that would solve their basic needs problems. I understand dignity takes precedence even over basic needs. Trans people understand it too, but only when it is about their issues.

      We don’t tell you things like: “while there are old gay people who dying alone in hospital because they are not married and so their partner does not have visitation rights, you trans people just think about the clothes you wear and which toilette to use”. If we told you that, it would be insulting, wouldn’t it? I think it would. And also think it is insulting when some trans women say things like: ” here we are homeless while you gays just think of wedding parties”. This is insulting. The right to marry is not about parties.

      Both trans and gay issues are important. But gay people have the right to fight for their own. Selfish? Well, you also don’t press trans organizations to fight for the rights of African orphans of war before they fight for your own.

      • valeriekeefe says:

        In New Jersey, the state has guaranteed with force of law that a civil union carries all the same privileges and obligations as marriage, hospital visitation included… but instead of say, “We have marriage in all but name and we’ll have that in good time, let’s focus on a state where gays and lesbians, be they cis or trans, aren’t legally guaranteed non-discrimination in the workplace.” It seems instead to be the opinion of HRC that, ‘fuck those Texans, they chose to live in a shitty state, we’re gonna get marriage in the real America.’

        I have no problem with incrementalism. I have a problem with classism, and cissexism and homonormativity (AKA Biphobia in the cisGL community) masquerading as incrementalism.

      • Megan says:

        I’m sorry, I misunderstood your point about trans women pretending to be men. I do think that gay people have the right to fight for their own. If they could just do so without using us as rhetorical examples and bargaining chips like Bianca points out, we wouldn’t be having this discussion

  5. Vice says:

    Kat, we all know that’s revisionism. Funny how it was contemporaneous revisionism; was there a blue police box nearby?

    Hey – Leo (rest his soul) had some thoughts for Vic:

    Leo Martello (1931-2000) was an author, lecturer, gay civil rights activist, and an early voice in the American Neopagan movement. …………
    ………………………..he was known for his lively and sometimes confrontational style. For example, in his books he tried to popularize the “Witches’ Curse” which was “I wish you on yourself”.

  6. Vice says:

    Dick Griffo – obviously a made up name or some fringe nutjob.

    “The band benefits from the fantastic guidance and arrangement talents of Dick Griffo , the legendary alto sax player formerly with Woody Herman, and Jim Kurzdorfer, the great bassist and original member of Spyro Gyra. Come and re-live the era of jazz greatness.”

    I must have seen him play back when I saw the thundering herd – someone I was dating had a family member in the band – we popped into the tour bus.

  7. Vic says:

    It is remarkable to read the sense of entitlement and privilege in these comments. Someone worked on AIDS 25 years ago, so now they have ownership of the gay movement? Right.

    I worked on Habitat for Humanity once. That doesn’t make me a director of the group nor does it give me a right to dictate policy to the movement to end homelessness. Ya see, I was doing something good for its own sake. I didn’t do it with the expectation fo compensation or power. And if I had told Habitat that my 2 days’ of work would entitle me to co-own the housing movement, they would have declined my services.

    Finally, unless transgender means every man who speaks with a lisp, then Stonewall was not a trans event. Other than the druggie Rivera, there is no evidence of any true transgenders at Stonewall. And those who may have been there were only there b/c they had nowhere else to go and we were charitable enough to let them hang with us. Once again, trannies need to say thank you.

  8. Bianca Lynne says:

    An – Really, the public just decided that trans= gay all on its own? And the gay history movement in the late 70’s/ early 80’s grabbing onto anything and anyone remotely “gender variant” to prove it’s point had nothing to do with it? How about using any and every case where a trans woman was killed as an instance of “anti-gay” violent to push hate crime laws that often didn’t cover trans women?

    So, heterosexual men have sex in the restrooms? that’s news to me.

    “But trans women seem to be more resentful towards gays for not putting your interests above theirs, than towards heterosexuals who actually discriminate in the first place.” Patently false assertion. here. Trans people are tired of gay groups sidelining our needs and trading our protections so they can gain their own trans-free protections and marriages.

    Also, I do see lesbians demanding that progressive women’s groups include specific support for gay marriage, lesbian only spaces, and discussions around sexuality. I do see the labor movement do lots of work for the LGB as well as the NAACP (at least the national/ leadership). I don’t see the national L/G movement supporting any labor or racial actions or initiatives. As a woman who is active in various progressive causes (and not out as trans) the LGB is notoriously greedy in their demands for support and very lax in actually providing support in return.

    • Katrina Rose says:

      Dammit Bianca, there you go again with your obnoxious facts.

      Can’t you just stay in your place like a good nonentity and let those-who-must-be-respected-because-they-ooze-privilege-like-pus speak for you while their gay-only rights feet – and slogans – crush your windpipe?

    • An says:

      Bianca, as I said the “public” makes this confusion with the help of some gay and some trans organizations. I don’t agree with gays appropriating trans experience, any more than I agree with trans rewriting the history of the gay movement to suit their interests (the myth that Stonewall started it all, etc.) What I meant is that most gays, and trans, are not responsible for that confusion.

      And yes, in the beginning society made the confusion on its own, by assuming that real men could not love other men. Why do you think it is so difficult for some people to understand that some trans women are lesbians?

      Heterosexual men don’t have sex with other men in restrooms, certainly. But prejudiced people don’t want trans women in female restrooms because they fear heterosexual men will take advantage of the opportunity and go there to assault women. This is a fact (that prejudiced people are afraid of this). You just have to read what they say, it has nothing to do with gay men!

      Perhaps your particular experience in progressive movements is very peculiar, by chance. But if you think other movements are less greedy, perhaps trans people should go there demanding support. I don’t see the labor movement, or any other movement, adding a T to their definition anytime soon. Certainly the womens’ movement has not been not such a good friend of trans women.

      • Bianca Lynne says:

        An, the emphasis on Stonewall is hardly a trans rewrite. Actually, it’s a part of a larger gay rewrite to exclude other, earlier public disobedience that was even MORE clearly trans led.

        Does it really matter if you agree with gays appropriating trans experiences or not? The appropriation has been done and there is staunch resistance to any correction by gay academics. Even in the marriage fight, examples of native two-spirit folks and their “same-sex” relationships are brought up as proof that gay marriage isn’t a new thing.

        Actually, what people write about trans women in bathrooms is very similar to the justifications given to retain DADT and before that, to keep gays out of the military – or to justify firing lesbian coaches and PE teachers. These fears were not expressed in the 60’s or the 70’s when many basic trans protections were before sate governments and passed. It was later, when the L/G academia made the push to stake claims to all Bi and trans peoples and label them “gay” that the fear that trans women will do what gay men were feared to do in the bathroom popped up.

        Women’s groups routinely sign onto actions and support anti-racist and economic justice demonstrations. Progressive worker’s rights groups are often on the front lines of clinic defenses and protest the KKK. Every progressive group I have worked with has had a working relationship with other groups… except the LGB groups. While they expect (demand) unwavering support for marriage, they are notorious for not actively supporting women’s, racial, or worker’s rights groups in return. Most progressive groups support the LGB because it is the right thing to do, not because they are particularly great at being allies.

      • An says:

        Really, Bianca? It is usually trans people that I see very keen to remember Stonewall, exaggerate their role on it, and minimize the importance of previous and parallel gay events. If they are naively contributing to the erasure of earlier and more clearly trans led events, you may want to share your history sources with them.

        I doubt we have a good understanding today of the importance of “two-spirits”, considering that gender presentation and gender identity are two different things, and gender presentation changes across history and cultures. Were there two-spirits of every sexual orientation, like there are trans people?

        What people write about trans women in bathrooms is very similar to what people write about heterosexual men in women’s bathrooms. A part of society wants to keep heterosexual men out of women’s bathrooms because of the history of male violence perpetrated against women. These legislators don’t think this is demeaning or insulting for heterosexual men. It is just the way it is, according to their world view: women as weak beings to be protected by good men (legislators) against bad men (the heterosexual men who would disguise as trans women to gain access to women’s bathrooms.)

        In the 60s and 70s these issues were not so visible to society. In many cases I think it would have suited trans people to keep the fight for their rights at a low profile and with the help of doctors. But you must face the facts. If people in the 60s and 70s started identifying trans women in women’s bathrooms, there would have been a strong reaction against it.

        You have been very unfortunate with the LGB groups you work with. LGB organizations have routinely supported labor, women’s and racial rights groups. In some cases, their support was refused, because such groups didn’t want to be associated with LGB people.

      • friday jones says:

        Actually, I far prefer the tale of Compton’s Cafeteria myself. A much earlier riot by gender-variant people that strengthened direct communications between the authorities and the G&L and gender-variant communities alike. Harvey Milk’s door to local politics was opened up by the fairies at the Compton’s Cafeteria riot.

      • friday jones says:

        Oh, and for really ancient and little-known history, there was also the Cooper’s Donuts riot in 1959:
        http://www.cakeandeatit.org/coopersdonuts.html

      • An says:

        Thank you for reminding me those events, friday jones. But, although they were important, there was more to the gay or trans movement than riots. There has always been parallel groups following different courses of action.
        We don’t know how things would ultimately evolve without riots, but they were evolving: from things I read, the Mattachine Society, and other groups, were not as ineffective as people like to portray them nowadays. In some sense, I think the same-sex marriage movement has more in common with those non-riot events.

        And perhaps there was also a parallel trans rights movement that wasn’t related to those events. Isn’t this what Bianca was talking about, when she mentioned the advances they were doing before being associated with gays? Anyway, riots like that seem to have associated gays and trans forever.

  9. Bianca Lynne says:

    An – just to touch on one of your questions:
    “Were there two-spirits of every sexual orientation, like there are trans people?”

    Yes, one of the primary sources for Will Roscoe’s “Zuni Man-Woman” was noted as being married to a woman. Other sources listed various two-spirited people as being single, married to men, and married to women.

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: