I Don’t Need a Movement to be “Not Transgender”

I simply do not give a damn creating a counter group to fight Transgender Inc and the Transgender Borg.  That is one of the luxuries of being post-transsexual.

I’m not part of the cult.  I don’t particularly hate them although their ideology is seriously fucked up, in a Stalinistic sort of way that is wedded to a bunch of mumbo jumbo that I consider bullshit..  I can even vaguely support their rights on the same basis I support the rights of other minority groups that I am not a part of.

If that makes me a separatist… Well then so be it.  I view it as simply a matter of my not having any stake in the fight.

When I started doing documentary photography in 1973 I realized the cameras were an instrument of distancing, making me a participant observer and documenter instead simply one of the participants.

Writing does the same.  I observe, document and comment on.  I was making those same choices of what to show and comment on by choosing the moment to click the shutter as well as the myriad of other decisions that distance and freeze reality in a photograph.

I suspect that most long time post-transsexual women are neither part of the Borg/Inc nor part of HBS/Classic Transsexual crowd.

Particularly if we ever heeded the “Get a life!”,  imperative.

Who needs the constant fighting.

Besides part of getting a life after transsexualism was getting back to my roots and interests.  Today is my birthday and some of my presents to myself arrived.  DVD guitar lessons and guitar lesson book, some Earth First buttons, a feminist book.

The title of this blog is Women Born Transsexual, not Transsexual Women.  This is why so many of the news articles and teasers I run are not specifically about matters that affect transsexuals, but rather are about matters that affect women and ordinary working people.  The POV is atheist, environmentalist, left/anarchist rather than trans because I am an atheist, lefty/anarchist and tree hugger.  I’m an old hippie dyke not a transgender warrior.

I’m not transsexual anymore except in a historic sense.  I had an operation for transsexualism and it cured it, I haven’t wanted to change sex since.

I am a lesbian feminist and that is why I am offended by the homophobia and heterosexism as well as misogyny within the Borg/Inc.

But there is something else.  Next year I’ll be post-SRS 40 years.  How long am I supposed to be focused on the needs of people in transition?  As for being focused on the needs of those who do not get surgery…  Why should I have ever focused on their needs?  Beyond concern for human rights.

Given a choice between going to a Transgender Conference and say a Media Reform Conference I’d go with the Media Reform.

Jillian Weiss made a comment on one of Mercedes Allen’s posts asking how one creates a movement to of “Not Transgender”.

The answer is by voting with your feet.

Leaving.  Letting it be known you find being labeled as transgender to be highly offensive.  Then proceeding from there.  Because the constant fighting and name calling is counter-productive since it keeps one mired in the argument.

To cite an other organization’s name just “Move-on”.  Leave the transgender folks to their own devices.

If Obama cuts Social Security…

From Salon:  http://www.salon.com/news/david_sirota/2011/07/07/obama_social_security_cuts/index.html

The president indicates that funding for the hallmark Democratic program is on the table. Is this the last straw?

By David Sirota
July 7, 2011

Wednesday night, the Washington Post reported that on top of the big cuts to Medicare he’s already proposed, President Obama is now considering endorsing cuts to Social Security. In making this announcement (which formally embraces the concept of Social Security cuts first proposed by Obama’s debt commission), the White House has lost all credibility in arguing that its 2012 political problems are the result of unfair expectations, particularly on the left. At the same time, the White House has finally exposed the strategy behind what so many of its apologists insisted was deft “three dimensional chess” on behalf of old-school liberalism — and as we see, these tactics have nothing to do with liberalism and everything to do with Orwell-ism.

To review: The Wall Street Journal reports that “across a wide range of measures — employment growth, unemployment levels, bank lending, economic output, income growth, home prices and household expectations for financial well-being — the economy’s improvement since the recession’s end in June 2009 has been the worst, or one of the worst, since the government started tracking these trends after World War II.” In light of this miserable situation, it’s no surprise that Gallup’s Frank Newport reports that the president’s job approval rating “has been hovering near the fault line between probable re-election and probable ‘one-term’ presidency.”

For most of the president’s tenure, he, his staffers and his devoted-but-dwindling army of sycophants have insisted that the political fallout from the crushing recession reflects unrealistic expectations of Obama in the wake of George W. Bush’s destructive reign. It is, dare I say, an audacious claim, especially coming from a candidate who asked us all to have the “audacity of hope” — and it’s more than a little insulting. After all, much of the complaints about the president have been about campaign promises that he didn’t just fail to fulfill — but that he refused to even try to fulfill.

Indeed, when a political candidate promises to try to pass a public option to compete with private insurers, attempt to crack down on Wall Street abuse, do what he can to stop unfair trade deals, oppose extending his predecessors tax cuts and avoid initiating initiate costly new wars sans congressional approval, and then once in office works to kill a public option, refuses to prosecute Wall Street crimes, presses the rigged trade deals he opposed, supports the extension of his predecessor’s tax cuts and starts a new war in Libya with no congressional authorization — whose fault is it that he ends up in reelection trouble?

Continue reading at:  http://www.salon.com/news/david_sirota/2011/07/07/obama_social_security_cuts/index.html

Posted in Uncategorized. Comments Off on If Obama cuts Social Security…

Federal government says marijuana has no accepted medical use

From The LA Times:  http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/07/federal-government-rules-that-marijuana-has-no-accepted-medical-use-.html

-John Hoeffel
July 8, 2011

Marijuana has been approved by California, many other states and the nation’s capital to treat a range of illnesses, but in a decision announced Friday the federal government ruled that it has no accepted medical use and should remain classified as a dangerous drug like heroin.

The decision comes almost nine years after medical marijuana supporters asked the government to reclassify cannabis to take into account a growing body of worldwide research that shows its effectiveness in treating certain diseases, such as glaucoma and multiple sclerosis.

Advocates for the medical use of the drug criticized the ruling but were elated that the Obama administration had finally acted, which allows them to appeal to the federal courts, where they believe they can get a fairer hearing. The decision to deny the request was made by the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration and comes less than two months after advocates asked the U.S. Court of Appeals to force the administration to respond to their petition.

“We have foiled the government’s strategy of delay, and we can now go head-to-head on the merits, that marijuana really does have therapeutic value,” said Joe Elford, the chief counsel for Americans for Safe Access and the lead counsel on the recently filed lawsuit.

Continue reading at:  http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/07/federal-government-rules-that-marijuana-has-no-accepted-medical-use-.html

Posted in Uncategorized. Comments Off on Federal government says marijuana has no accepted medical use

Vatican Likens Being Gay To Incest, Pedophilia In Condemning UN Gay Rights Resolution

From the same people who supported Hitler and referred to Jews as “Christ Killers” as recently as the 1950s.

From On Top Magazine: http://www.ontopmag.com/article.aspx?id=8879&MediaType=1&Category=24

By On Top Magazine Staff
Published: July 08, 2011

The Vatican has likened being gay to incest and pedophilia in condemning a United Nations gay rights resolution.

Earlier this year, the United States backed a non-binding United Nations resolution condemning discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton cheered passed of the resolution in the 47-member Human Rights Council.

Obama called the resolution’s passage a “significant milestone in the long struggle for [LGBT] equality.”

“This represents a historic moment to highlight the human rights abuses and violations that lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people face around the world based solely on who they are and who they love,” Clinton said.

While the measure was backed by representatives from the European Union, Brazil and other Latin American countries, African and Islamic countries condemned the resolution, saying it had “nothing to do with fundamental rights.”

Continue reading at:  http://www.ontopmag.com/article.aspx?id=8879&MediaType=1&Category=24

Progressives Won’t Criticize Obama For Proposed Social Security Cuts

From Huffington Post: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/07/progressive-dems-social-security-cuts_n_892210.html

July 7, 2011

WASHINGTON — Progressives in Congress are largely holding their fire at the White House over reports that President Obama is considering deep Social Security and Medicare cuts as part of a debt ceiling deal. Cuts to entitlement programs have been floating for several weeks around the edges of the conversation, but moved to the center of the debate Thursday morning, when a report that Obama would offer to “tackle the rising cost of Social Security” appeared on the front page of the Washington Post. Liberals outside of Congress, however, are wasting no time trying to pop that trial balloon.

Ahead of a meeting with House and Senate leadership, in which President Barack Obama is expected to voice willingness to change entitlement programs, a dozen members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus wrote a letter to the president asking him to refuse cuts to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. The president is set to discuss a deal to raise the debt ceiling in exchange for deficit reduction, which could include major cuts to programs that help the elderly and the poor.

“We feel the discussions have been skewed up to this point,” said Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.), co-chair of the caucus, who also said he would not support a final deal if it involves entitlement cuts and does not include revenue-raisers. “It’s incumbent upon the president to put what I believe are the real priorities on the table for deficit reduction.”

But Grijalva and Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas), a vice chair of the caucus, defended the president for signaling he would be willing to take a look at changes to the programs, arguing there are ways to restructure entitlement spending to save money without hurting beneficiaries.

Other Democrats have made a similar shift over the past two weeks, as lawmakers strain to find a deal that raises revenues while at the same time making spending cuts. Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), a top message-maker for Senate Democrats, said on June 24 that Democrats would be open to delivery-side reforms to Medicare, which they have previously said should be kept off the table.

Continue reading at:  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/07/progressive-dems-social-security-cuts_n_892210.html

Posted in Uncategorized. Comments Off on Progressives Won’t Criticize Obama For Proposed Social Security Cuts

What Have American Unions Ever Done For Us?

Posted in Uncategorized. Comments Off on What Have American Unions Ever Done For Us?

Obama blames political wrangling for rise in the number of unemployed

From The Guardian UK:  http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/jul/08/us-jobs-debt-unemployment-obama

US president predicts agreement on nation’s debt ceiling will give companies the confidence to recruit workers again

and guardian.co.uk, Friday 8 July 2011

Barack Obama has blamed political wrangling over the US debt ceiling for a jump in unemployment to 9.2%.

The US president warned that uncertainty over a deal being hammered out between Republicans and Democrats, which involves plans to raise taxes, cut government spending and stimulate the economy, is stopping businesses hiring.

His comments follow figures that show employers last month hired the fewest workers for nearly two years, crushing hopes of a turnaround in the jobs market, and adding to jitters to world stock markets. Companies added only 18,000 jobs in June, the US labour department said, compared with the 90,000-120,000 that had been forecast. It was the weakest reading since September 2010.

Speaking at the White House, Obama said that once Congress reached an agreement on the debt ceiling, businesses would have the confidence they needed to add workers to their payroll.

Austan Goolsbee, head of the president’s council of economic advisers, added that the jobs report showed “the need for bipartisan action to help the private sector and the economy grow – such as measures to extend the payroll tax cut, pass the pending free trade agreements and create an infrastructure bank to help put Americans back to work”.

He said: “It also underscores the need for a balanced approach to deficit reduction that instils confidence and allows us to live within our means without shortchanging future growth.”

Continue reading at:   http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/jul/08/us-jobs-debt-unemployment-obama

Posted in Uncategorized. Comments Off on Obama blames political wrangling for rise in the number of unemployed