First Video Blog for Transpolitical

“ If you can afford a pretty expansive media room, you can afford what I spent in the hospital.” — Rush Limbaugh after leaving a hospital stay in Hawaii

A New Year and a New Decade ... and I decided to try something new. It's my attempt at a VLog (video blog, whatever). It's too cold here in the house (I don't use heat) to type at the moment -- too much to say, too many cold days without end.

Basically it sucks, but it's better than nothing!

Reflections On A Historic Campaign

"Tonight is a night for all the activists." — Rick Hurt (aka: Rainbo De Klown)



In many ways, this election cycle for Annise Parker's latest candidacy has been very familiar. It's also been very different as well.

Just as the last two times Annise has run for her first shot at a new office, I've been long-term unemployed, there's been family strife and stress to deal with on the side, severe depression set in and there was a sore need of finding a diversion to keep me focused and not obsessing on my own hell. It even rained on me again and soaked me to the bone on election night eve. It's certainly coincidental, but not something I'd ever want to plan (especially getting rained on in December).



Cold dark weather, holidays, the isolation and feeling out of synch with the rest of the world on this whole "seasonal happiness" also add to the malaise. It's not something I'd recommend to anyone, but it does seem oddly comforting in that it produces political wins, strange as that sounds.

And after it got dark and the blockwalking we were doing became impossible, I spent the last hour plus where I was first assigned to work the polls: John Reagan High School in the Heights.

Unlike 1997, I didn't have a dozen friends and relatives die in a six month span during election season this time (too intense). The election also worked much smoother with a larger influx of volunteers and actual paid staff. Election eve was so smooth that I felt guilty leaving to drop off signs at polling places before 10pm! And of course the election, though pulling close near the end, wasn't as stressful as the first one which seemed as if everything was riding on it.

Even my time at Reagan was low impact as they closed off the other three gates and had all voters, and all card pushers, at the one main gate into the school gym. (Back when we had all four gates open, that location required lots of energy to run back and forth across the schoolyard to catch voters trying to avoid the main gate.) It actually removed the challenge of that location. Obviously I burned off zero calories working Reagan this time, but then I'm getting older too....

What little resources we had in the old days and how stressed we were at getting everything organized correctly was now a well-oiled machine moving like clockwork. There were multiple coordinators with various pieces of the tasks instead of one volunteer coordinator and one field general. It was amazing how simple it looked this time. I was a bit envious.



Financing was a big difference this time as well, which accounted for that easier process. At the post-election celebration, about a dozen folks walked around with the Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund pins and even Chuck Wolfe, their executive director, was onstage with Annise during her victory acceptance.

However, it also seemed like homecoming week being back at the campaign. So many of the old volunteer stalwarts I used to pester on the telephone to come in and help back in the days were back again, 12 years later. It was great seeing Peggy Smith again, and blockwalking with Annise's best friend, Cicely Wynne, on major thoroughfares in Meyerland during rush hours.

It was great seeing the '97 TV ad guru Cindy Rindy (her official name now that she's married, although she goes by her maiden name Miller to avoid being called Cindy Rindy.) We chatted, laughed and reminisced about raising baby squirrels during the '97 campaign.


At the victory party, even more of the familiar faces from '97 that I hadn't seen for so long: former Parker staffers Kathy Elek and Terence O'Neil, former city council candidate Mary Ann Young, former Women's Caucus member and judicial candidate Mary Kay Green, and one of the other former Team Parker members, Patrick McIlvain. I even got a quick wave with Cong. Sheila Jackson Lee who was holding court with a throng of animated supporters as I was leaving.

Things like this are the blessed diversions that help prop the spirit up during dark times.



Obviously media was everywhere. This was a history-setting day for lesbians and gays across the nation. Peggy Smith and I even showed up on a live CNN feed (unbeknownst to us) at the victory party. Thank goodness I brought my signs along from the polling place as eye-catching props.

Besides Victory Fund, it seemed a number of folks were in from out of town to catch a ride on the Parker phenomenon. You see the best and sometimes (especially at the victory) the most unctuous aspects of politics in full display. One of the men I blockwalked with (an older gay gentleman) showed up to volunteer right before dark on election night for his first time. He asked me if I'd ever met Annise (and I gave him my history going back 12 years). Then he had the audacity to ask me "does she remember you and did she do anything for you after election?" along with other questions of how one gets an insider track with someone like Annise.

In response I gave him a flip answer: "she gave me one of her cats" (true). Not knowing if he had contributed or not, I held my tongue; but I felt like telling him this isn't a quid pro quo game that johnny-come-latelys can buy into on the cheap. Other than asking for trans inclusion on the city employees' non discrimination, I'd never asked for anything personally ... and I guess you could say I got what I asked for.

It just drove home the reminder that political stardom is like a lit spotlight to moths at night. Opportunists abound.

Catching up with some of my old-time friends at the party, one noted there were a lot more gays and lesbians in attendance at the runoff victory party than attended the general election party. Admittedly, I didn't attend the general party either.

Another noted that during Gene Locke's concession speech, the "diversity" onstage with him looked anything but. It was a pretty homogenous group. But for the fact that they were virtually all African-American instead of virtually all white, it could have been a Republican victory party. Indeed, Annise's had a very nice pastiche of all cross-sections, obviously heavier on gay/lesbian but still a very sizable contingent of straight as well as seemingly every ethnicity.

An old friend from the Houston Gay/Lesbian Political Caucus days, Rick Hurt (aka: Rainbo De Klown) and a couple others commented that he was surprised the party was held in a small room of the George R. Brown, instead of one of the larger rooms. It just made it intimate and more crowded looking. He also kept repeating that "this is a night for the activists."

Maybe it was a night for activists. Annise started off as an activist. Many of the longtime Team Parker folks have been perennial activists. And it also allowed this activist a night of basking in the warmth of victory's afterglow, watching the ebullience on Annise and her family's faces as they stood onstage, seeing the pride and excitement (and maybe even a bit of inspiration) in the faces of every lesbian and gay person in the room that night. It's fun getting to see people finally achieving their dream. It's also a nice little vicarious thrill, even if for a moment.

After the victory speech, Rainbo and I went to the Montrose to check out the victory street party. It wasn't. The street was blocked off, but there was no one out there as it was chilly and damp. They were all in the bars — essentially a typical bar night. Nothing there for me.

Other thoughts that hit me during and after the victory was how many people were congratulating me; not just trans, but gay and lesbian – even Grant Martin – as well. Surely I was quick to return it to Grant, as it is directly his and Annise's leadership to this victory. But to the Trans Community I'll remind how infuriated we've been throughout the years when gay and lesbian groups like HRC, GLAAD, NGLTF, et. al. co-opt or capitalize on our issues and efforts. We should not be doing the same in reverse, regardless of whether they do it. Take the moral high ground.

This is rightly the gay and lesbian community's victory and not a time for Trans people to be in the spotlight taking bows or grandstanding. Our efforts were a part of what helped them achieve their goal.

Which brings up the issue of the next bit of history to work on: Trans people in office. It's easy for us to make a decision to run, but putting this desire to reality by being elected is another thing altogether.

In her speech to the Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund, Annise noted that she got elected "with gay money, transgender volunteers and black voters." We should work on attracting the black or straight voters. But with Trans money?!? And then who would we attract as volunteers – intersex? And Trans people still have the image problem (even within some segments of the lesbian and gay community, much less straight) and zero media presence to combat this. Even T employment in politics is rare, so how easy would it be for us to be elected? This is a discussion we in the Trans community need to have: how do we make what is a virtual impossibility a reality?

Nevertheless I'm very pleased for Houston's gay and lesbian community and especially for Annise and Kathy. Of course Annise has her work cut out for her in the years to come. We've got budget constraints, sales tax revenue that's dropping like a rock, home values that are stagnant at best with the foreclosures popping up and a lot of people dealing with major hardships.

As a Club For Growth lobbyist mentioned to me, Houston's attracted all these Fortune 500 corporations because it's a place they can locate, pay their people low wages and yet their employees can still have a good quality of life due to low costs on most everything (except utilities). While that's true, even Houston's companies have been shipping our "low waged" jobs to even lower waged countries across the globe, like all other locales in the country. Unlike these other cities, though, Houston's wage-earners are much more vulnerable inasmuch as the low wage base means there's typically little to nothing saved up in order to weather the hard times. And Texas is renown for ensuring there are virtually no safety nets at all.

None of this bodes well. And Annise's victory speech acknowledged that there's many Houstonians in rather dire economic straits. She'll have her work cut out for her. But as she also mentioned in her speech, she intends to be there for all Houstonians. This writer sure prays it's so. It can't come too quickly!



"Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage" — Anais Nin

Pride 2009: We Yelled, They Screamed. But Did Anyone 'Hear' Us?

"When you're drowning, you don't say 'I would be incredibly pleased if someone would have the foresight to notice me drowning and come and help me,' you just scream.” — John Lennon

It was one for the ages. Forty years after Stonewall, to the day (with an additional 12 hours added) ... we found ourselves marching down Fifth Avenue through downtown New York and cutting a path directly through Greenwich Village and right down Christopher Street in front of the Stonewall Inn where the riots – the flashpoint for the organized Gay Rights Movement around the world – began.


Marching through this parade, in the very same New York, with a banner for the contingent noting "Sons and Daughters of Sylvia Rivera" on this anniversary was inspiring. The roar of the crowd as we passed, especially throughout Greenwich Village, was absolutely deafening! My ears were literally ringing afterwards.

In so many ways this was an event to remember! As Sylvia Rivera recalled saying that night of the riots, "I'm not missing this for the world!"

Privately, it was also a trying and disappointing result. I knew it would be a logistical task coordinating something in a locale hundreds or thousands of miles away. But this one was a bit more "Murphy's Law"-like than most others. Everything that could go wrong ....


The banner people were nothing but a mass of confusion, and the banner had to be sent to Mona Rae's house in Yonkers NY as I was afraid I wouldn't receive it until after my flight to NYC. I literally picked up the banner at a drop off point on Friday in Manhattan just a few minutes before the Trans Day of Action after criss-crossing the town to pick up poster boards (which were shipped late) after a speech out in far East New York, and dropping those off in Hoboken where I was staying! Between that, crossed wires, lost items, help arriving too late to be of any good, a subway weekly pass that arbitrarily stopped working and family and personal issues to deal with long-distance while in New York, it was, um, interesting!

Coordinating things in your back yard is simply stressful. Coordinating things 1500 miles away tends to border on madness.


We were also unsuccessful in getting the Stonewall Girls to the 40th anniversary. One showed interest but the other two didn't. As one noted, there was far too much bad blood over how she and the other trans folk were treated to gloss over it. For a lot of old-line trans members, there's nothing to really celebrate and much more to mourn or stew over.


We had participants cancelling due to health reasons (theirs and their spouses), even a group cancelling while en route due to a communter train's power outage! We had a number of confirmed attendees who simply didn't make it; no idea why, just no-shows. Locally, even though I made the circuit to promote, we didn't draw any from those, save for five from Mid-Hudson Valley Trans Assn. up in the Kingston / Poughkeepsie region.


That said, we did get Alyssa Harley (who's taken pains to remember Sylvia Rivera every year by attaching red roses to the lamppost at Sylvia Rivera Way.) Both she and Breanna Smith helped lead our contingent and worked their asses off to stir the crowd. Jamie Dailey who made it down from Connecticut also gets props for working the crowd and for her help on the banner preparation on Pride day.

We also brought in a couple of the old Transy House crew: Rusty Mae Moore and Jamie Hunter. It was great seeing them again and especially marching as the Sons & Daughters of Sylvia Rivera. In fact, Jamie even brought her boyfriend Michael Gredowski, a brand new straight ally. Rusty originally wasn't sure that she could make it through the entire length of the parade route, but I noted admirably that she was just as energetic, holding her sign high above her head and stirring the crowd even at the very end of Christopher Street! Meanwhile Jamie did her own tribute to Sylvia Rivera by marching the entire route in heels (amazingly!) and was leading our contingent running and stirring the crowd herself. Michael, who stood in as our "Son" portion of the "Sons & Daughters" absolutely kicked butt and really got into the march himself.


Special thanks go out to both Jamie Hunter and Michael for all their help during and especially before and after the parade. They were indefatigable assistants that really helped make this succeed. In fact, with all the complications and potential to fall flat on our face, our team made it look effortless and successful!

We later had another older latino man (not even sure that he was gay) who joined us from the sidelines on the banner as our second "adopted" son of Sylvia, ha! We even had a couple other latinas join us as well! We were pulling people in from the crowd – it seemed everyone wanted to be part of the Sons & Daughters of Sylvia Rivera!


The Sons & Daughters of Sylvia Rivera garnered a lot of attention from photo journalists and the crowd itself! However, I believe I overestimated its importance to the Trans Community. While Sylvia herself was around and had her voice, people listened. However, she's been gone for over seven years now. Most of the newer trans community members either don't know of her or the history, or they are busy making their own individual history and doing and participating in their own ventures. Rather than one group, we're now spreading out into hundreds of groups and individually expressing our own perspectives.

"I just can't do what I done before,
I just can't beg you any more.
I'm gonna let you pass and I'll go last.
Then time will tell just who fell
And who's been left behind,
When you go your way and I go mine." — Most Likely You'll Go Your Way And I'll Go Mine, Bob Dylan

This is a good thing. However there is also a downside to that dispersal. As we all know after hearing it from Barney Frank or other gay and lesbian critics of the Trans movement, people "don't know" us, and we're "a very small segment" of the community. The message has always been that Trans people are an infinitesimally small portion of the greater Queer (originally Gay) movement. Between the stigma of Trans and being out about it, and the compulsion to do our own thing, it's tough to gather trans folks in numbers adequate enough to make a statement to gay and lesbian leaders and the world that we're not tiny, insignificant and doomed to utter obscurity.

At the risk of sounding like a skipping record, I can't stress the need for quantifying numbers of us. We need to establish our population and our income (especially lack thereof). Its needed not just for demographics for political attention, but even afterwards to establish our market share (the key to corporate funding for things Trans the way even the gay and lesbian and all other segments are able to draw.)


And again, these numbers will help us actually steal back our own voice (which is incresingly being co-opted and capitalized on of late). It's about the only thing we ever really had in the Trans community was our voice and it appears others think we've abdicated it. When you sit back and let anyone represent you, you end up with the type of governance or oversight you deserve.

Even while I was up in New York, there was an apparent dust up between trans folks and others on Pam's House Blend which ended up resulting in a number of people being censored or banned (I'm not sure which). There was a noticeable hue and cry over it all with folks complaining about the list's owner and the uneven treatment. But a reminder: it's Pam Spaulding's list, she's not a trans person and she can do whatever the hell she feels like with her blog (emphasis on "her blog"). If she wishes to ban trans people, it's her blog! She has the autonomy to do so.

If we trans readers disagree, well then, start your own. Nobody should think that anything trans that's valid must come from an entity that is always led and/or created by a gay or lesbian. Similarly anything that was created and that provides autonomy to trans people should not be quashed simply because it isn't led or created by gay or lesbian leaders who then choose the agenda and represent the de facto face of the trans community. TransAdvocate is attempting to do that right now.


Yet too many of us end up contributing to building up gay and lesbian-led institutions as "they're our allies" and end up watering down or thwarting our own voice in order for some perceived considerations or reward. Maybe that worked adequately for Mara Keisling or a few select folks from the NCTE ilk. For the rest of us there is absolutely nothing gained — it's an absolute net loss. All we do is water down our own numbers, our own voice and our own efficacy. We must get out there and actively take control of our own fate, lest we end up not even being the face of our own community.

"You know, with all the press releases you do, people think that it's just NTAC — or just you – drawing attention to yourself." — Mara Keisling of NCTE in a conversation to me in August 2004


Taking back the Trans community's voice is a must. It is more than needed, it's urgent. The original hope was that this would hopefully serve as a catalyst to begin earnestly to re-seize our destiny and our voice.

Is it possible? Well, after seeing the response on the march in New York and how easily separable we are from our own community, it's not likely. Far too many of us have no desire for the involvement (much less the work getting it done). The few of us with such desire for involvement or working to make things happen will be going our individual directions in things such as Pride parades. The solution to this still needs some rethinking.


We've got to find a way to take a Trans movement that's dying on the vine and get it spurred in the ass into some forward motion. We have people dropping out of the movement in frustration, fatigue and dreams of wanting to have a "real life" away from being "the tranny" or "the activist" and on point constantly. I've even had numerous others ask me how I'm doing this still after 14 years with the obvious burn-out and the high, high cost that it's come with. Certainly it would seem better to just admit it's fruitless and walk away. But that only makes certain defeat.

We need to bear in mind trans history, with all our forebearers efforts ending in absolutely nothing for those who gave all. We need to recognize there's nothing ever to gain from relinquishing our destiny to the trust of others who have no full understanding of our needs, much less the urgency. And I fully keep in mind that with no future or hope, I certainly have nothing to gain by giving in, and in fact nothing to lose (save for my life, which we all lose in the end) by anything I do. As I noted to the most recent activist stepping away asking how I continue this, I just put myself on auto-pilot – or more precisely auto-battle mode. As I had on one side, "when hope is gone, fight like Sylvia! (fiercely and to the very end!)"


In years down the road, Trans folks will realize we must re-seize our movement. Until then, I'll just be the crazy, quixotic old tranny, screaming in the wind about our need to own our voice, our movement and our destiny. Sylvia said the same thing years ago, and nobody much listened to her while she was around either. They may not hear, but we should continue speaking truth to power and never stop screaming it.

Maybe it's the roar of the crowd drowning us all out.


"Lift every voice and sing,
'Til earth and heaven ring,
Ring with the harmonies of liberty." — Lift Every Voice And Sing, James Weldon Johnson

"Ain't no one gonna listen if you haven't made a sound." — Filthy Gorgeous, the Scissor Sisters

Legislative Chatter On The Eve Of Pride: Will We Be Equal?

"Part of the problem, frankly, is with the transgender community and some of those who put that in the forefront, because they didn’t lobby. The only time they started lobbying is when we said ‘You know what, we don’t have the votes for this, we gotta to do it partially.’ Then they began lobbying the Democrats that were supportive. I’ve never seen a worse job of lobbying. For years, literally years, I have been begging them to start talking to people about this, and have said you, look, have political problems here, I wish we didn’t but we do, and you have to deal with them." — Cong. Barney Frank in 2007

As we converge on New York City next week for the 40th Anniversary of Stonewall (and others partake in their own cities' Pride celebrations), word comes out that the Employment Non Discrimination Act (ENDA) will be reintroduced to coincide with the occasion. This is tailor-made timing to induce good vibes to soothe over the raw feelings and disastrous previous sessions' disarray and fracturing of the community. How successful the community repairs will be leaves me naturally skeptical, but we'll see how they conduct themselves this time.

We've mostly heard the wording will stay similar to the original HR 2015 (the inclusive ENDA originally submitted before we were ditched and HR 3685 eventually passed. There has been at least a bit of a murmur from one contact that "there's talk of the language changing this time," but that's yet to be independently confirmed anywhere else.

There's one thing we can bet the house on. Trans folks most in need of such legislation, the outsiders and unequivocal backers of inclusive legislation, those not of the HRC ilk will be nowhere in sight or earshot of the negotiation table (much less participating). Yes, it'll be "trust us" yet again ... y'all know the modus operandi by now.

It's good timing for Rep. Barney Frank and HRC to submit this next week. In fact it couldn't be better. The Gay and Lesbian community will undoubtedly be overjoyed. There's a possibility trans people may also celebrate it equally. Maybe.

Until we see it we don't know what we'll be dealing with. Therein lies another reason the bill is timed well for Ol' Barn' and HRC: we'll be busy partying our butts off per their estimation, giving them a bit of cover in the off chance it was needed.

And as we've already seen, just because a bill drops in one version doesn't mean it's going to stay that version or that it'll not be switched yet again.

The House won't be the big worry this time unless we see a replay of Ol' Barn' and the backroom boys making a deal about abandoning trans due to the dreaded "toilet issue" (as in, "which one?") We hopefully confronted that adequately in lobbying this past May: all they have to do is look at NTAC's Lobby Packet cover to see what it is the conservatives are truly asking for – something I don't think they intended.

The worry on ENDA will be the Senate stripping out the trans inclusive language (or stonewalling it altogether.)

On a more uplifting note, the Hate Crimes Bill should be making it to the Senate vote any time now. In this case, we should have the votes to pass it. The only caveat is it's been attached to a Tourism Bill (whatever that's about). This means there will have to be a conference committee revisitation from a joint committee of Senate and House. Prospects are good, but anything can happen in a conference committee. The downside (if any) is if it gets stripped there, it goes on to the President for signature and we have no ability to affect it at that point.

If I had to put money down on it though, I'd say there are better odds on it passing inclusively as the President has already asked for the bill and checked it's progress.

Meanwhile on the DOMA brief from the Dept. of Justice, I've been watching the rhetoric and heat flying around. It's true that the head of the DOJ is President Obama's doing, but I'm sure that there's not been a massive purge of all former DOJ employees from the Bush years, nor is it the President's responsibility to micromanage the department. Atty. Gen. Eric Holder wasn't exactly known for his "bleeding-heart liberal" credentials, save for the likes of Rush Limbaugh or other extremists. Ultimately they do their job and the President reviews, but doesn't necessarily have obligation to second-guess everything.

That said, it seems some of the immediate blasts may have been more than just premature, but from a position of not even reading the brief in the first place! Originally even Cong. Barney Frank took initial umbrage, then stepped back from his initial statements by admitting he hadn't read the brief and was relying on oral arguments!

While that is a black eye on Ol' Barn', he actually came clean and admitted! That's a refreshing bit of honesty, and I've got to give Rep. Frank credit there.

Much of this seems deriven from John Aravosis' Americablog and possibly references to Charles Socarides' article, and its initial read (if indeed it was read) on the DOJ brief. Lawdork blog had the following to say (http://lawdork.wordpress.com/2009/06/17/chairman-frank-and-aravosiss-misstatements/)

Soon thereafter, John Aravosis published a piece that just went round the bound. I have tried to keep my blog as forward-looking as possible, but it’s clear that Aravosis’s heavy popularity at his blog and media contacts have allowed his false statements about what the filing means to push the debate into the twisted, contorted view he is giving it.

The two main problems that I have with Aravosis’s coverage are:

(1) His continued misstatements regarding whether Justice should have filed a brief in this case.

(2) His “comparing us to incest and pedophilia” claim is overstated and does not withstand any serious, legal scrutiny.

First of all, it’s clear that his poisoning of the well most likely led to Chairman Frank’s misimpressions about the brief, which he said he had not read until today. (I’ll admit that I too was surprised that he hadn’t read it yet, but I have noted before that Frank is wholly dedicated to the financial reform package that he’s been working on for the past several months.) Frank said: “I made the mistake of relying on other people’s oral descriptions to me of what had been in the brief, rather than reading it first.”

So, then John (Aravosis) falsely concludes that “Frank now thinks the brief is just super.”

Here’s what Frank actually said:

Now that I have read the brief, I believe that the administration made a conscientious and largely successful effort to avoid inappropriate rhetoric. There are some cases where I wish they had been more explicit in disavowing their view that certain arguments were correct, and to make it clear that they were talking not about their own views of these issues, but rather what was appropriate in a constitutional case with a rational basis standard – which is the one that now prevails in the federal courts, although I think it should be upgraded.

Of course, John cites to none of that in his post, which is very similar to what I’ve been writing and what Harvard Law School Professor Laurence Tribe and former Clinton Justice Department senior staffer Robert Raben have said as well. [...]

Then, Aravosis gets into this notion that the President regularly just “goes about telling the DOJ to oppose existing law in court.” Aravosis states that Richard Socarides’s vague statement results in a factual, final reality: “It’s not debatable, it’s what actually happens in the Oval office, and it’s not illegal – it’s a fact.” Yes, it is.

Aravosis has to turn words up-side-down to create this idea. He keeps changing statements from people, which admit of times when a law can be challenged, into statements that people haven’t said, which is that Justice can “never” fail to defend an existing law. Despite Aravosis’s false statements, Justice spokespersons never said that Justice always has to uphold laws. As I pointed out, Justice has consistently said only that it “generally” must defend laws. [...]

(2) “Comparing us to incest and pedophilia” claim is overstated and does not withstand any serious, legal scrutiny.

This claim, to which I’ve previously objected, has been Aravosis’s claim to fame on the brief, with him taking credit whenever anyone uses the claim.

Here’s the actual line — yes, only one sentence, and not really even a sentence but just a list of cases (called a “string cite”) after a sentence — from the brief:

And the courts have widely held that certain marriages performed elsewhere need not be given effect, because they conflicted with the public policy of the forum. See, e.g., Catalano v. Catalano, 170 A.2d 726, 728-29 (Conn. 1961) (marriage of uncle to niece, “though valid in Italy under its laws, was not valid in Connecticut because it contravened the public policy of th[at] state”); Wilkins v. Zelichowski, 140 A.2d 65, 67-68 (N.J. 1958) (marriage of 16-year-old female held invalid in New Jersey, regardless of validity in Indiana where performed, in light of N.J. policy reflected in statute permitting adult female to secure annulment of her underage marriage); In re Mortenson’s Estate, 316 P.2d 1106 (Ariz. 1957) (marriage of first cousins held invalid in Arizona, though lawfully performed in New Mexico, given Arizona policy reflected in statute declaring such marriages “prohibited and void”).

These were three cases about marriages, which were valid in one jurisdiction, not being allowed under the laws of another jurisdiction. There is nothing further. The brief does not ever use the words “incest” or “pedophilia.” And, by the way, the American Psychiatric Association Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR), the standard for diagnosis, defines pedophilia as involving “sexual activity with a prepubescent child or children (generally age 13 years or younger).” Under that definition, there is not even a case involving pedophilia appearing in the brief at all — which is likely the reason that no mainstream publication has repeated that claim.

Despite all that, this is what Aravosis concluded this evening about Chairman Frank:

Barney thinks the language of the brief was great. He even, between the lines, defends the invocation of incest and pedophilia.

No, he clearly did not think the brief was great, as his statement made clear. Moreover, he never defended anything that isn’t in the brief, despite your constant claims to the contrary.

It is Aravosis’s spreading of this continued falsity — particularly to demean the smart, legitimate statements of members of Congress — that lead me to continued reporting about why it’s false.

That last point spiked my curiosity enough to pull up the brief and begin reading in search of the comparison to pedophilia (though I was still a long way from finishing before I got this post from the Lawdork blog. Hey, I'm not a legal beagle – it takes me a bit more time to read through the technical and the legalese. Nevertheless, I'm glad to see this. The claim seemed a bit more like hyperbole than fact, and apparently so.

One thing everyone needs to keep in mind is that the President cannot overturn DOMA. He can state his opinion (which he has), but ultimately it's something Congress must enact and then get the President's signature on. It's how the damn bill was enacted in the first place, and signed by Pres. Clinton! One person (one is they're George W. Bush with Dick Cheney interpreting his constitutional law) cannot simply overturn or undo a passed, signed and enacted law.

Additionally, it'd probably look a bit odd if the Dept. of Justice had sent a brief that supported overturning DOMA. Their job is to carry out the voted and enacted law of the land and interpret what's on the books. They are not in the business of defying existing law on the books (again with exceptions given to Bush-Cheney era justice opinion).

Perhaps they should've withheld any amicus, but they would've drawn howls for going against the DOMA law. If DOMA is to be overturned, even better than having the Supreme Court do so in a ruling, DOMA must be undone via legislation.

Yes, Obama could use his bully pulpit. But last I checked, we're still hemorrhaging jobs and the economy's still in the bottom of the tank. I know, I'm one of those falling through those widening economic sinkholes. Not to mention Iran, North Korea, corporate bankruptcies and fending off right-wing nutcases throwing the conjectural kitchen sink at him. Maybe priorities aren't there at the moment.

And this comes from one of those "impatient," "screaming" trannies from NTAC! Hmm ... and we're the only ones who are supposed to be histrionical, huh?

"No, I ain’t lookin’ to fight with you,
Frighten you or tighten you,
Drag you down or drain you down,
Chain you down or bring you down.
All I really want to do
Is, baby, be friends with you." — All I Really Want to Do, the Byrds

You Can Marry, But You Can't Work

"I look at you and see the passion eyes of May.
Oh, but am I ever gonna see my wedding day?" — Wedding Bell Blues, Fifth Dimension

It became official yesterday afternoon when New Hampshire Gov. John Lynch signed a bill into law, making New Hampshire the sixth state to allow same-sex marriage. Lynch, a Democrat, personally opposed gay marriage but earlier said he would view the issue "through a broader lens." Virtually all of New England now allows same-sex marriage, with Rhode Island the sole exception.

Said New Hampshire's favorite gay son, Bishop V. Eugene Robinson, "It's about being recognized as whole people and whole citizens. There are a lot of people standing here who when we grew up could not have imagined this," Robinson said. "You can't imagine something that is simply impossible. It's happened, in our lifetimes."

So now we have yet another state that allows gay and lesbian couples, and even transgenders, to marry on January 1, 2010. You can bet there will be couples lined up taking advantage of the new law on New Years morning!


However if you're transgender, you won't be able to work. Like Massachusetts or Connecticut, you can only marry but still be fired for being who you are. As Bishop Robinson said, you're whole people, whole citizens – just not free to work in the Live Free Or Die state. And no, if you have no ability to be hired and end up homeless, you can't live FOR free there. Of course you do have the right to die there and they likely won't have much problem with that. It's the latter option in their motto, and we trans people certainly aren't free to work in New Hampshire.

For trans Americans (unless you live under a rock), we remember the recent New Hampshire senate vote on Trans employment non discrimination. Zero to 24 – we were absolutely shut out! That spoke volumes!

In discussing how marriage will affect the New Hampshire primaries in 2012, an Associated Press article noted it was likely to have an affect in that state's election dialogue. They note that in New Hampshire, Republicans tend to be more fiscally conservative and socially moderate.

"When presidential candidates campaign here, they have traditionally focused on the economy, foreign policy, health care," said political analyst Dean Spiliotes. "Social issues have never really played a major role here in the campaign."

That's rather interesting. It also flies in the face of recent reality, where Republicans defeated trans employment non discrimination by forcing a new name upon it: "the Bathroom bill."

Now I ask: does that sound like New Hampshire Republicans are socially moderate? Do you believe social issues never really play a major role there?

Yet even in hard-ass, conservative places like New Hampshire where they still openly play trans people as perverted freaks lurking around bathrooms, same-sex marriage is now legal. Six years ago marriage wasn't even on the radar. Employment non discrimination, which has been worked on for over 15 years is not a reality.

On employment, we in the Trans community are actually a bit worse off than we were when the marriage fight began. Not only are employment rights stalling, but bathroom issues and freakish caricatures of society's phobias about trans people are becoming more common in even the halls of government.

That's to say nothing of the increased difficulties in trans people getting jobs in the first place! Unlike gays and lesbians, when trans people transition we face the no-match problems with Social Security and other complications thanks to the Real I.D. Act. Blogger Marti Abernathey pointed this out in her TransAdvocate blog recently [http://www.transadvocate.com/no-match-no-job-no-surgery.htm]

I always thought when I got my documentation changed, I transitioned, and was passable, that I'd be able to live the nice normal life I did before transition. It hasn't quite worked out that way. Recently I was interviewed a few times and offered a job... and then I got that dreaded call.

"Marti, we were doing our normal background check and we have a problem. We keep getting a rejection with your gender."

I had to tell my potential future employer that I am a pre-operative transsexual.

It must be said that Marti lives in Wisconsin, the first state in the union to enact employment non discrimination for sexual orientation, and one that still has no such protection for trans folk like her.

Worse still, I live in good-old-boy, rednecked, so-arch-conservative-that-fascists-are-bleeding-heart-liberals Texas. My last permanant job was in 2002 with only a patchwork of temporary jobs since. Imagine the prospects for trans people in the southern tier of states.

Even if states like Wisconsin or Texas or any others newly enact non discrimination laws, it's not like marriage where folks line up and immediately take advantage of the new law. Marriage happens immediately upon the day it goes into effect.

Employment, especially for trans people who are still lagging far behind on being known and understood, it may be months, a year or years after before an employer hires trans people. So, when have we seen anyone in the gay and lesbian leadership or media prioritize employment recently?

Yes, we did have a big stink raised over President Barack Obama not nominating an "out" gay or lesbian to his cabinet yet. He's only hired 31 gays or lesbians to various staff positions that apparently aren't considered key or high-profile positions. But that's a very limited employment opportunity scope. And it's also for "high-ranking" and "respected" and "openly" gay White House staffer, per Charles Socarides May 1, 2009 article in the Washington Post.

To Socarides' credit though, he did also mention need for an "omnibus federal gay civil rights legislation, similar to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, outlawing discrimination based on sexual orientation." (Yeah, I know ... nothing in there that effects trans.)

But that's been about the extent of it on employment.

As for now I keep getting more stories from my friends of their lost jobs, their vastly reduced hours or income, the long-term-with-no-end-in-sight unemployment (not unlike my own!) and folks on the edge of going homeless. I've lost touch with at least one who likely has now gone homeless: another blip that stops pulsing on the radar screen.

Meanwhile, we have the right to marry who we wish in New Hampshire. That's important.

I only wish it were as important for trans people to live. Live Free ... or ... Die. Indeed.

"A lot of New Hampshire families have come to know people in their families who are gay -- co-workers, former classmates – and that's what really made this difference. We are no longer talking about an issue. We are talking about people." — Bishop V. Eugene Robinson

"To have no job is to have no pride. You're nobody. Where do you go? There's nothing...." — unidentified former professional man interviewed in a homeless encampment in Florida.

June Is Pride Month, But Trans Folk Just Don't Feel Much....

"When authorities warn you of the sinfulness of sex, there is an important lesson to be learned. Do not have sex with the authorities." — Matt Groening, creator of the Simpsons

Yesterday began the month of June: Pride Month in America and other countries around the world. It's, as the name indicates, a source of pride for many in the greater LGBT community. For some of us, it's a reminder of how little we have to take pride in at all.

While not in all cities, a sizable number of them hold their Gay Pride celebrations and parades in this month. Of course as many know already, this was the month chosen as it was the month of the Stonewall Inn Riots in New York City's Greenwich Village on June 28, 1969.

There have been a lot of gains made in the movement over the past forty years. Indeed, even same-sex marriage is gaining momentum, winning passage in numerous states on an issue that just over six years ago was merely a pipe dream. Gays and lesbians are winning acceptance and even popular support in media and even in politics for being considered "equal" citizens. Even one of the most arch-conservative voices around, ex-Vice Pres. Dick Cheney, just came out in a story reported in AP to support states granting rights for same-sex marriage.

"I think, you know, freedom means freedom for everyone," Cheney said in a speech at the National Press Club. "I think people ought to be free to enter into any kind of union they wish, any kind of arrangement they wish. And I think that's the way it ought to be handled today, that is, on a state-by-state basis. Different states will make different decisions. But I don't have any problem with that. I think people ought to get a shot at that,"

However you rarely see anyone saying the same thing about employment, and specifically about trans people in the workplace. About the extent we're treated to is Rep. Barney Frank: "“Efforts to include transgender people have failed in New York, Massachusetts and Maryland,” he said. “It doesn’t get easier when you throw in South Carolina and Utah.” Ol' Barn' said he's “more optimistic” that an inclusive ENDA would pass, but stopped short of saying he was certain the bill would pass with the gender identity provisions.

“There’s no certainty in politics,” he said. “People got to lobby hard."

"trans inclusion will be a legislative priority over my dead body" — Elizabeth Birch, then Exec. Dir. of the Human Rights Campaign (HRC)

There is one bright spot in President Barack Obama's proclamation on LGBT Pride Month, which began: "Forty years ago, patrons and supporters of the Stonewall Inn in New York City resisted police harassment that had become all too common for members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community." Did you get that? The President of the United States has actually uttered the word "transgender" (at least in writing)!
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Presidential-Proclamation-LGBT-Pride-Month/

While this has long ago become a fait accompli with gay and lesbian America, we're just now getting our first taste of even this small gesture: mere mention, acknowledgement that we even exist to the outside world! At times, we don't even get this from gay or lesbian leadership even in 2009. The President noticed!

It's not a panacea. We still have precious few rights, and even fewer opportunities for even the basics such as employment. In this increasingly anemic economy, trans peoples' lives are currently being devastated.

But at least in declaration, Pres. Obama has done what no other president has. "I continue to support measures to bring the full spectrum of equal rights to LGBT Americans. These measures include enhancing hate crimes laws, supporting civil unions and Federal rights for LGBT couples, outlawing discrimination in the workplace, ensuring adoption rights, and ending the existing "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy in a way that strengthens our Armed Forces and our national security.... During LGBT Pride Month, I call upon the LGBT community, the Congress, and the American people to work together to promote equal rights for all, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity."

There is a faint glimmer of some promise for Trans people.

Meanwhile we find ourselves in the midst of the auspicious anniversary of the Stonewall Riots, 40 years after. We have out federal congressmembers, out Administration staff and hundreds if not more than a thousand out state and local elected officials. Trans people have one mayor recently elected in Silverton, Oregon and a state school board member in Hawaii.

As has been the case for decades, there are gay and lesbians working on staff at even the highest levels on Capitol Hill. This year saw the first trans person ever hired by Congress in Rep. Barney Frank's office.

Americans are long ago familiar with the need for equality for gays and lesbians, and most of the country is already there in support. Trans people's issues get scant attention when it's our call. Our attempts to educate, when not closely guided by gay and lesbian leadership, are criticized and privately discredited at the same time the Barney Franks of the world chide us for "not doing the needed education" in this Catch-22 exercise.

Media and popular support are rallying around gay and lesbian leaders pushing for marriage rights and fighting for equality. When we do manage to get trans people's own independent thoughts out in media, we are reprimanded, and undermined and blackballed out of eyesight in order to ensure we don't get media's ear again. The message: we can't be trusted to speak from our own perspective or to articulate our own issues.

Yes it is Pride Month, and there's certainly something to note after forty years, especially after the President's proclamation.

But for trans people who've been pushing for well over a decade at great personal expense, losing jobs and income, going bankrupt, into foreclosure, going homeless ... pride is not what we're feeling right now. Desperation and the survival instinct are.

"I am sick of the disparity between things as they are and as they should be. I'm tired.I'm tired of the truth and I'm tired of lying about the truth." — from the play "The Death of Bessie Smith" by Edward Franklin Albee III

The Monsters Have Come To Maple Street … Or Creekside Park”

"Look at that street. It's nothing but candles. It's like going back into the Dark Ages or something." — the character Charlie from 'The Monsters Have Come To Maple Street' by Rod Serling

Well, since my original blog post yesterday got hijacked (read wiped out) by the 21-hour power outage due to yesterday's run-of-the-mill thunderstorm, I'm doing a different one instead.

Yesterday and especially last night was right out of Rod Serling for me, save for the meteor vs. space ship controversy, resulting paranoia and eventual, chaotic turning against ourselves. We had nothing but a typical thunderstorm with heavy rain and not even a notable amount of lightning strikes, but we couldn't explain nor determine why it required us a full day in the dark. The Monsters had come to Creekside Park Drive.

As night fell, it became obvious that our block was the only one left without power! Literally I could walk down to the main road, or over to the next street and see light, but then turn the corner onto our street and it was pitch dark! Literally there was one house with light and another with no power right next door!

It was kinda creepy being the only ones left in the dark for the night. Even though we were civil amongst ourselves, there was edgy frustration. No one was happy, and we were either sitting on porches or truck tailgates in driveways or restlessly wandering the streets.

It was as if the rest of the world was going on with their regular lives and we were left out and forgotten. Our street was singled out for the Dark Ages. Oddly it's how I felt: I had so much I needed to get done along with the blog and I was simply stuck in neutral with a fully wasted day!

So I began today inherently agitated. It also occurred to me the date: today is April 19th. This is the wack jobs nut-out and commit mass mayhem day. It's also a red-letter day for liberal-hating right-wing types as it's the anniversary of the siege at the Branch Davidian compound outside of Waco. While his sect was deemed extremely controversial and referred to as a cult, the FBI raid and resulting violent immolation by David Koresh and his followers struck a nerve in neo-conservatives of the religiopolitical variety.

Extremist conservatives saw it as a catalytic date to strike back at the government. At the two-year anniversary, it was Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols who used the day to bomb the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City.

Hopefully the day ends up with no incident, however the significance shouldn't be put out of mind with the current anti-government fervor by even more mainstream conservatives. To wit: the recent Teabaggers revolt. While the Teabag parties went on without incident on April 15, there was one incident in front of the White House where protesters tossed over a box of tea. In the post 9/11 world with America at war, it's no surprise that the Secret Service immediately seized upon the item and broke up the protest post-haste.

"Let me tell you: you're starting something here that ... that's what you should be frightened of! And as God is my witness, you're letting something begin here that's a nightmare!" — character Les Goodman from 'The Monsters Have Come To Maple Street' by Rod Serling


A number of articles looked at the tax day, teabag protests and seemed to note a lack of real message. It seems these are just protests of folks being angry just for the sake of being angry. And of course conservative politicians are taking every opportunity to be front and center, riding the wave of anger.

Brian Smith, a marketer from Greenville, S.C., in Washington on business who came by the rally stated his reasons for attending: "I love my country and I don't like what's going on. Government – to be honest with you, and this will probably be misquoted, but on 9/11, I think they hit the wrong building. They should have gone into the Capitol building, hit out, knocked out both sides of the aisle, we'd start from scratch, we'd be better off today." When the reporter from Salon pointed out that "they" did try to hit the Capitol, Smith replied "Yeah, I know, they missed. The wrong sequence. If someone had to go, it should have been the Capitol building. On that day I felt differently, but today that's the way I feel." http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2009/04/16/tea_party/index1.html

Neo-patriotism: Love your country, but cheer on any terrorist that takes out the U.S. Government! And this is post 9/11, coming openly at a rally that nationally featured a who's who of conservative Republican America! I recall Pres. George W. Bush stating before his initial joint-session speech after the attacks that "either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists." So now in 2009 you can be with both?

The Washington protest crowd cheered loudly when neo-con radio pundit Laura Ingraham said they were all "right-wing extremists," referring to a Homeland Security report warning of danger from disgruntled conservatives. Actually I don't think that's so far-fetched to be scoffed. These types of protests, full of older, 'rock-ribbed Republicans,' would be perfect cover for agents provocateur. Toss in a Posse Comitatus or a WTO anarchist type with an incendiary device and this could get ugly very quickly.

And the jammed messaging in heavy rotation is that "this is the tip of the iceberg!"

"I know who it is! I know who the monster is! I know who it is that doesn't belong among us!" — the character Charlie from 'The Monsters Have Come To Maple Street' by Rod Serling


Even Texas' own Gov. Perry's comments are being both picked apart and strongly defended by many of his conservative colleagues! Fox's Geraldo Rivera called him "grossly irresponsible" and ripe for impeachment, but good conservatives like the unimpeachable Tom DeLay called Perry a "righteous governor" who was "standing up for the sovereignty of his state." To that end, Texas House is pushing through HCR 50, a resolution establishing Texas' sovereignty from Federal Government mandates. The Guv is also still pushing forth that he will reject at least unemployment funding (though his rhetoric indicates he's rejecting stimulus money en toto).

To that end, with little debate, the House on a voice vote approved erasing 96 percent of the nearly $24 million that budget writers had recommended for Perry's office operation over the next two years. "That's the headline: 'Two days after governor says we ought to secede, House zeroes out the governor's budget,'" said Appropriations Committee vice chairman Richard Raymond, (D-Laredo) http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/041909dntexhousebudget.e4ed7a0a.html

Impact the state's budget and the state will impact yours!

"Here's something you can do, Charlie. You can keep your mouth shut! You can quit sitting there like a self-appointed hanging judge and climb into bed and forget it!" — character Steve Brand from 'The Monsters Have Come To Maple Street' by Rod Serling

Now some are trying to pull back a bit and explain Gov. Perry's secession commentary on Teabag day. Rep. John Culberson (R-Houston) explained that Gov. Perry just got "excited. Texans are the most patriotic of Americans. Gov. Perry's a patriot, he just got revved up."

After all of the created controversy during last year's presidential campaign about whether or not Barack Obama had refused to pledge allegiance to the flag, it's ironic that Gov. Perry, presumably a "patriotic" pledger would make such statements even in excitement, considering the pledge declares: "one nation, under God, *indivisible* ...." side note to Gov. Rick Perry: Pledging "indivisible" means not dividing states away from the union ... just in case the term wasn't understood. One wonders how "excited" one must get to allow and excuse unpatriotic commentary, Rep. Culberson?


All of this revolutionary hubbub is over, what exactly? They've called them, and people are showing up with blood in their eyes. But what exactly is their point? There's not a tax-hike as yet and taxes are as low as they've been since the 20's, so the paying "too much taxes" doesn't pan out as a sudden problem. Some note the government spending, but this has been going willy-nilly for eight years under a heavy GOP-laden government and no one uttered a peep. Bank bailouts? Those began under George W. Bush, and would've been worse if the House had just buckled under to Bush & Paulson's initial request of $700 billion with no strings attached, nor any accountability!

All we've got is the anger, and as so many of the gleeful anti-Obama pundits have continued the mantra: this is just the tip of the iceberg. With everyone scared and in the dark, and the frenzy the media pundits have inspired now, the monsters have come to America now. The only question is truly who are the monsters?

"Throw them into darkness for a few hours, then sit back and watch the pattern.... They pick the most dangerous enemy they can find; and it's themselves. All we need do is sit back and watch.... Their world is full of "Maple Streets." And we'll go from one to the other and let them destroy themselves." — the lead observer Alien from 'The Monsters Have Come To Maple Street' by Rod Serling

"We have met the enemy, and he is us." — Walt Kelly from the comic strip 'Pogo'

Outrage Is All The Rage

"You don't really know why
But want justify
Rippin' someone's head off....
Your best bet is to stay away, motherf*cker!
It's just one of those days!" — Break Stuff, Limp Bizkit

Decorum is out. Outrage is in. And it seems there's no end in sight. It's not just outrage from the right or outrage from the left. Outrage in America is everywhere.


Transgenders are outraged at gays and lesbians. Gay and lesbians are outraged at straights. Even straights are losing patience with bigoted churches and religiopolitical hypocrites and leaving organized religion in notable numbers. And of course the Moral Majority's religiopolitical leaders are outraged at politicians on all sides as well as all queers for allowing tolerance to happen.


The wealthy are enraged at the Wall Street investors who've ruined their investments, and in some cases created elaborate scams over the years to literally fleece them like sheep! Americans of all stripes who are not the wealth-class are livid with the wealthy executives everywhere, who profiteer on outsourcing jobs to other countries for years, then when the workers no longer buy, again shed jobs like crazy to retain their own jobs and living standards.

Political pundits and reporters are incensed at politicians for having no answers and allowing America to end up in this financial crevasse. Politicians are demanding greedy, insensitive executives' heads on a spit.


Republicans are outraged at Democrats who want to increase the deficit for infrastructure instead of just borrowing money to continue funding their tax cuts. Democrats are outraged at wealthy Republicans who voted for initial Wall Street bailouts, raised hell over spending and are now trying to run interference instead of taxing their Wall Street pals.


America's citizenry is livid with Washington elected officials (though more avidly so on those of parties opposite of their own), and as an example we see Tea Party efforts springing up around the country to protest. Meanwhile the President and his cabinet are starting to become testy with the critics who have them on a hot seat, wondering where the criticisms have been for the previous Administration while this economy tanked over the past couple years.


Even overseas, countries around the world are outraged and taking to the streets in mass protest over their governments, such as we've seen in France's protests against Sarkozy, and the British protests of the country's banks when the Obamas came to London. In both the U.s. and even in India where many of America's jobs were offshored to, angry employees facing layoffs commandeered and held employers hostage, with the one in India resulting in serious violence to their former boss.

This recent mood-of-the-day has begun to take on a life of its own. In some of the scenarios, if one projects this forward, we could be facing some extreme and maybe uncontrollable situations. All the ingredients are there – and this time it won't simply be World Trade Organization protests.

"Get out of my way!
Just step aside,
Or pay the price.
What I want I take.
What I don't I break –
And I don't want you." — Problem Child, AC/DC

Even former President George w. Bush (remember the Bush-baby?) foresaw the need last year to quell some serious foreseen outrage take the 3rd Infantry Division, 1st Brigade Combat Team fresh back from Iraq, train them during the summer and deploy them on October 1, 2008 right here in the U.S. True! It's the first time ever that an entire American brigade has ever been deployed in America (per Posse Comitatus, it's supposed to be the National Guard that handles those duties – maybe the folks in Washington are angling for an ugly fight?)

Since the election went the wrong way for them, these same GOP folks who grew used to having the world by the tail are now in a very special outrage. Forget their big pundits like Rush Limbaugh wanting America to fail, we just saw an outraged conservative type taking rage to a new level by putting on his bulletproof vest, arming to the teeth and when his mom called police for a domestic dispute, ambushed and killed three Pittsburgh police officers answering the call.


So does this mean it's time to put a lid on the rage and try to quell it? There's certainly the usual answer that this is a prudent way of dealing with a suddenly volatile situation. The last example I provided was a good example of rage gone wrong. There must be limits that aren't surpassed.

So then should all this rage be turned down and silenced?

Personally, I don't see that as being a good idea at all. It's exactly what those empowered types who've driven us to this point of utter outrage and desperation are counting on: we will self-control ourselves and simmer down, inuring ourselves to this new era of allowing the outrageous acts to continue with little to no recompense. This only emboldens the perennial transgressors to "screw" us yet again since there's no real disincentive, with an additional sense for the rest of us all to feel we were connived into letting the transgressors off the hook! That, of course, again increases the rage another notch.

At some point, the blatant disparities and the Machiavellian winner-take-all cheat-fest have to stop. We've been experiencing this sense for well over two decades and it's only building to a head. Allowing it to slide by yet again is tacit approval and leaves all those who've lost feeling the need for vindication.

Back in the day I used to half-joke about Bastille Day II coming. As Bush's arrogant presidency was nearing its end, it became much less a joke. While we have a much better sense of leadership coming from Washington these days, we're still feeling the institutions in business and politics are screwing the too-trusting White House and, most especially, the American citizens.

Something's gotta change drastically, and soon. But knowing our history and the stodgy resistance ingrained in those business and political institutions, I fear it won't change until it's forced.

"One - Something's got to give.
Two - Something's got to give.
Three - Something's got to give, now!
Let the bodies hit the floor!" — Bodies, Drowning Pool

Suicide Prevention Groups Are Potential Trans-Allies

"Each victim of suicide gives his act a personal stamp which expresses his temperament, the special conditions in which he is involved, and which, consequently, cannot be explained by the social and general causes of the phenomenon." — French sociologist, Emile Durkheim

My last blog apparently broke open the floodgates on this subject, unintentionally. Just a note, y'all: I didn't do this to put out my shingle as some sort of community counselor. I'm not. In three days, besides C (subject on my last blog), I've now had to talk three people away from dancing along the edge perilously. I would go into the details but I just don't have the energy.

It's strange how things seem to come in waves. For me they seem to be extreme tidal waves, though maybe it's just me (and maybe instead I've just worked out my quota for the next four years or more recently). But just today, our local news featured a murder / suicide. In calling my friend C to make sure she was okay, she related a story of another community member in North Carolina who came home and "walked into her house, just in time to see her wife blow her brains out."

And even sitting here writing this entry this evening, there's a program about the economy's devastation worldwide, its effects on Japan, and how increasing numbers there are turning to prayer, and then to suicide. I don't like that fact that I hear it so frequently suddenly, nor that it's had it's rather close history to me.

But for me, just like in football, when you hurt an ankle, a leg or a foot, you don't favor it. You put your weight on it to the point where you reach your pain threshold – and continue the process. In time, you push the threshold further. In time, you are able to tolerate incrementally larger amounts of the pain. Maybe it's not for everyone, but it helps me shave time off of recuperation for me. You seek out coping mechanisms as best you can.

"People say I'm crazy doing what I'm doing.
Well they give me all kinds of warnings to save me from ruin.

.... No longer riding on the merry-go-round
I just had to let it go." — Watching The Wheels, John Lennon & Yoko Ono

Coping, and finding the tools to cope, are key to living in these trying times. One of the things my friend C has been doing recently in order to cope is roughly what she's been doing before all this: avoiding her personal life and its problems and sinking herself into doing something, even volunteer work. The day after her suicide attempt, and again today, she dropped in on meeting with her state chapter of the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention (www.afsp.org). This time it was a good move.

It's highlighted some natural alliances that really shouldn't be ignored. One of the things she mentioned is how survivors noted at the meeting an anguish of how others misunderstood their family or loved one's suicide. They felt that outsiders tended to think of suicide victims as being "freakish," feelings of being ostracized and of others not understanding. She then asked me "who else does that sound like?"


That doesn't even take into account the fact that trans people make up a disproportionate number of suicides for many obvious reasons: employment loss or long-term joblessness, family ostracization, isolation, stress, fears for their future or for their safety, etc. Just as with trans people, there are a lot of myths and misconceptions.

One thing most people may not realize is that approximately 35,000 people commit suicide in the U.S.A. annually. Suicides also consistently outnumber homicides by 3 to 2 per the Suicide Prevention Action Network (www.spanusa.org). That's over seven times the number that perished during 9/11. In one years' study for 2005, there were 32,637 suicides. Ironically, the prime ages for those committing suicide were between the ages of 35-55. This is a wake up for folks like C, and me too! But for society at large, as well as trans people, we're finding that age met where you reflect on life at a time when larger and larger swaths of society are finding that "American Dream" has vanished. It stands to reason these would be the most vulnerable ages.

And the highest per capita rate was actually from those age 75 and older, with teens and pre-teens the lowest percentage, though for those 15-24 it was still more than 10 per 100,000 people. More than twice as many women attempt suicide, however men succeed in suicide more than four times more often. In fact, women attempt suicide on average of once every 78 seconds in this country. Men actually commit suicide once every 90 minutes.

That said, women have the best coping mechanisms typically: a social circle of friends. That social circle is key to surviving this condition. Isolation, or feelings of being alone and uncared for tend to be one of the strongest symptoms of leading people to feeling suicidal.

Yet even with the prevalence of suicide, it's rarely discussed, rarely addressed in Washington and rarely ever is given a high profile in seeking legislation to proactively effect programs or measures to help mitigate the problem. Like trans issues, it's nearly always a political hot potato legislators handle gingerly it at all.

We share more than community overlap, but also some common frustrations at the political pace of progress – or lack thereof.

"Whatsoever I've feared has come to life.
Whatsoever I've fought off became my life.
Just when everyday seemed to greet me with a smile,
Sunspots have faded and now I'm doing time.
Cause I fell on ... black days.
I want to know, if this could be my fate." — Black Days, Soundgarden

There's certainly a need for us to be not only finding ways to incorporate our folks into the helping professional and suicide prevention community, but to seek a partnering on other issues as well as it relates to our community overlap. For some time, there's been discussion in the trans community about trying to expand Day of Remembrance (remembering victims of hate violence) into a larger memorial to simultaneously include victims of suicide.

They are, however, two separate issues. Hate violence deals with specifically directed violence by a person or persons that physically causes injuries or death. While suicide can have an ulterior cause being some of the discrimination and lack of understanding, or even violence threats, they tend to be more murky inasmuch as there's often no direct link to a person who committed physical violence on the victim. It's more reactive, not a physically predatory action committed toward the victim.

Further, equating the two diminishes the unique sense of pain and outrage felt by families whose loved ones died at the hands of such extreme violence. Conflating the two issues doesn't help either surviving family or friends cope adequately.

That said, there is certainly reason to be remembering the victims of suicide as well. Lord knows we've had an inordinate number of them in the trans community, even some of our community leaders.

C had also mentioned that Sept. 10 is the national day of Awareness for Suicide Prevention. Perhaps we may have an opportunity to partner with a non-GLBT entity on something that effects us both. Maybe we could port a Day of Remembrance-styled observance to the designated day for suicide awareness.

It's just a thought. But we need to keep in mind the suffering by the families and friends of suicide victims as well, and find ways to alleviate their concerns about the gulf of unawareness between us. We should be preparing ourselves now to know the reasons, symptoms, and ways of getting those still with us on a more sure footing and able to proceed with their lives.


My most abject fear is that these next few years will be overly daunting enough, and that conditions will be overripe for a wave of trans people falling through the cracks of society, falling into that abyss. Worse, I feel there's a complete disconnect between our leaders – Washington politicos and our own community's advocate leaders alike. There's no sense of the stark realities down here at the bottom, and most of us tend not to look anyway out of our own fears or discomforts.

Hiding our eyes from it won't make it go away. If anything, the problem will quickly snowball and could even create reverberating echo effects from folks that would not normally be in such position save for the tragedy and coping of their own friends' untimely departure.

If we don't start seriously looking at this now, we may be paying a much greater price later.

"Try as you might to remember how a person lived his life, you always end up thinking about how he ended it." — news show host, Anderson Cooper