Desperate, Delusional Days at HRC

Finally a chance to sit at the computer for a bit! Blockwalking this time of year is turning out not to be a very good idea. We’ve been hitting near or at 100 degrees nearly every day, and the humidity’s getting worse than its usual bad levels. There’s nothing like coming in at dark and struggling to peel off your wet clothes – ugh!

Blockwalking and work aside, I’ve been monitoring Email (though not getting time to blog). Ethan St. Pierre forwarded me something about a week ago from HRC’s (or Joe Solmonese’s, I’m not sure) blog giving their take on the Congressional Sub-Committee hearings on transgender employment. Another which I just got last night described the protest in in front of an HRC paraphernalia store and their press department’s response.

Describing their recent actions in a word: delusional. And increasingly desperate.

First the congressional hearing blog: JoeSo was (like all other parties who did likewise) doing Wallenda-style backflips to glom onto the hearing and claim credit. Beside the obligatory self-important promotion, he actually took great pains to note a number of bloggers’ reactions to the hearing. You would expect they would mention their ex, Donna Rose, and it must be said they tried mightily to lure Autumn Sandeen into their sway by paying for her to blog for them! Autumn may not have the extensive history with them as others in the community, but she wisely kept a safe distance from their little Venus Flytrap.

Surprisingly Joe even mentioned folks like Becky Juro and even Monica Roberts! It appears JoeSo’s seeking every possible opportunity to dig in the crowbar and wedge us apart from ourselves. He may be able to wedge something loose with those of little history in trans politics … but some of his choices were pretty wild and unlikely to garner any flip-floppin’ trans activists.

HRC, or JoeSo himself, somehow think they’re doing themselves favors with this stuff! It’s incredible how clueless they are. It never ceases to amaze me how stupid and so easily duped they presume transgenders to be. Typically I’d be patently offended at this, but it’s become so commonplace that it’s lost any distinction. Another day, another attempt by HRC to play us trannies as fools.

Then came a nice article in Bay Windows by Ethan Jacobs and in the Washington Blade by Rebecca Armendariz [http://www.washblade.com/blog/index.cfm?blog_id=19557] about a protest that was to have taken place this weekend in San Francisco where gay activists were going to pass out rainbow flags in front of the city’s HRC store and urge everyone to abandon the old “equal sign” symbol. “"By contrast, sometime during the early 1990s, HRC introduced its own, purely-domestic, impostor flag, two gold bars — symbolizing wealth?” said a press release quoted in the Blade from Castro For All, which called HRC’s flag “unhistoric and unremarkable” and having “fallen into disrepute, coming to represent homosexuals living in the middle of the country — rather than the actual full diversity of our beautiful, global LGBT community."

Pretty strong stuff – and not even from trans people!

So what was HRC’s response?:

"We have been and continue to be one of the lead organizations supporting an inclusive bill," said Brad Luna, HRC’s press lackey du jour noted for the Blade. "We are doing more work to educate the public and members of Congress on the need for an inclusive bill than any organization out there."

Normally, folks would presume this means trans inclusive. Having enough years of observing HRC and their clever press structuring, the key word here is “inclusive.” Note that it doesn’t say transgender inclusive? Inclusive can mean trans inclusive … or it can mean gay and lesbian inclusive. And if we fall for this statement as proof positive of HRC’s support, then set brace yourself for a “misspoke” statement, or that we misconstrued what was intended (which due to its vagueness is open-ended). In short, words aren’t worth the paper they’re written on ….

But wait, there’s more!

For the Bay Windows article, Luna declared the protest "is completely built on a faulty claim, which is we don't support an inclusive bill. Not only is it wrong, but it couldn't be further from the truth.”

Really? And we’re supposed to believe y’all this time, right? No misspeaking? Uh … by the way, didn’t the board of directors effectively rescind their previous board vote in August 2004 by giving JoeSo the leeway to do what he felt was in HRC’s best interest … like he did last September after Southern Comfort Conference?

Oh! And Luna finished it off with this little gem:

"There's obviously a vocal minority out there who do a good job of organizing and making a lot of noise, but you cannot discount what the Bay Area community thinks, and they're obviously supportive of our work fighting for an inclusive ENDA as well as all the other work we're doing,"

Huh? Didn’t they just garner the Bay Area Reporter’s nomination for a Pink Brick Award just a couple months ago – the only GLB(t) organization to ever receive that ignominious honor? And last month San Francisco supervisors Tom Ammiano and Bevan Dufty, State Sen. Carole Migden and Police Commission President Theresa Sparks all announced that they were boycotting the HRC Dinner over the organization's ENDA stance, according to the Bay Area Reporter.

Yeah … you know, Mr. Luna, you didn’t do your credibility any favors there. This is like reading something from the press machine in the Bush White House. Methinks HRC has been in Washington far too long. They’re believing the success the RNC has had with propaganda, bald shameless and silencing dissension are good strategies to use … on their own community!

If they really think they’re doing so great recently, maybe HRC needs to lay off the psychotropic drugs for a bit. The real world’s out here waiting for them,, and it’s pretty pissed.