Transgender Exercise of Male Privilege

It is an exercise of male privilege and expectations, of possessing male authority, when those who have penises presume the right to dictate to women how they should think and behave.  That includes dictating thought and behavior to post-transsexual women who had sex reassignment surgery and now have female parts.

It is an exercise of male privilege to presume those transgender people, who have an intact from birth penises, have the right to verbally abuse and harass post-transsexual women, who have committed the thought crime of believing they are ordinary women now and are not part of the Transgender Borg Collective.

It is male privilege to presume to speak for F to Ms or to use F to Ms as a club to drive in the idea that actual sex changing surgery is an unreasonable thing to expect people to do in order to be considered members of the sex to which they transition.

It is an exercise in male privilege to demean the sex organs of post-op transsexual women.

It is a presumption of male privilege to expect to be permitted into female only space while still in the possession of a prick.  That goes for the women’s locker room and for things like the MWMF.

It is an exercise in male privilege to expect me to side with you instead of with women.  Even if in certain cases a few those women would exclude me as well.  If that is the personal cost of supporting women’s rights I am willing to make that sacrifice for the sake of women.

It is an exercise in male privilege to tell me that I have been drafted into a cult I never joined, that didn’t exist until recently.  To tell me that because you baptized me into this cult against my will I can never leave the cult.

It is sociopathic male behavior to threaten, bully, verbally abuse and harass post-transsexual women, who refuse to be part of the Transgender Borg Cult.

It is sociopathic male privilege to think it is alright to abuse us for wanting to be ordinary women after we have had our surgery and in some case have been post-op for far more than half our lives.

It is male privilege to create transvestite dialectics and then impose them upon post-transsexual women as it invalidates our lives.

It is male privilege to presume you have the right to invalidate the lives of women in order to validate your claims to being women even though you have a penis between your legs instead of a vagina.

It is male privilege to not care that substituting gender for sex is the worst form of misogyny as it reimposes the use of stereotypical sex roles  upon all women, those same sex roles that have kept women the second sex for thousands of years.

It is male privilege to tell female people that you get to define woman and that having a penis should not keep one from being considered female.

It is male privilege to decouple  woman from female, to demand adherence to gender stereotypes when adherence to rigid gender stereotypes has been a patriarchal tool used to oppress women and which has become part of a massive attack upon women’s most basic rights.


Punishing Protest, Policing Dissent: What Is the Justice System for?

From Truth Out:

by: Erik Hoffner
Monday 20 February 2012

This year promises to be another historic year of people calling for change worldwide. Citizens took to the streets for a wide variety of reasons, from the Wisconsin Capitol to DC, which hosted many actions last year, including the highly visible civil disobedience of activists seeking to halt the proposed Keystone XL pipeline. The resulting mass arrests, totaling over 1,200 by early September, surely played a large role in President Obama’s decision to delay approval of that climate- and water-supply-threatening project.

The climate justice movement also experienced a low point this year, though, when its most visible young leader, Tim DeChristopher, was sentenced to two years in prison for disrupting a federal oil and gas lease auction by peaceful means. Even though the auction was later shown to be illegal, DeChristopher’s case proceeded in a manner that made it clear that the government’s prosecutor sought to make an example of an activist who showed no remorse.

For his part, Tim saw it as a necessary action to protect his future from runaway climate change, and seemed ready to prove that his movement is unafraid of such retribution when he refused to apologize or take a plea deal. As he told Terry Tempest Williams in Orion recently, “… it’s important to make sure that the government doesn’t win in their quest to intimidate people … They’re trying to make an example out of me to scare other people into obedience.” The punishing protest is not unusual, and can result in long-term victories for those targeted, but that didn’t comfort Patrick Shea, DeChristopher’s lawyer, who said in a recent post that he’d witnessed “a miscarriage of justice, fairness, and what I believed America stood for.”

Continue reading at:

How Greece Could Take Down Wall Street

From Common Dreams:

by Ellen Brown
Published on Monday, February 20, 2012 by Common Dreams

In an article titled “Still No End to ‘Too Big to Fail,’” William Greider wrote in The Nation on February 15th:

Financial market cynics have assumed all along that Dodd-Frank did not end “too big to fail” but instead created a charmed circle of protected banks labeled “systemically important” that will not be allowed to fail, no matter how badly they behave.

That may be, but there is one bit of bad behavior that Uncle Sam himself does not have the funds to underwrite: the $32 trillion market in credit default swaps (CDS).  Thirty-two trillion dollars is more than twice the U.S. GDP and more than twice the national debt.

CDS are a form of derivative taken out by investors as insurance against default.  According to the Comptroller of the Currency, nearly 95% of the banking industry’s total exposure to derivatives contracts is held by the nation’s five largest banks: JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup, Bank of America, HSBC, and Goldman Sachs.  The CDS market is unregulated, and there is no requirement that the “insurer” actually have the funds to pay up.  CDS are more like bets, and a massive loss at the casino could bring the house down.

It could, at least, unless the casino is rigged.  Whether a “credit event” is a “default” triggering a payout is determined by the International Swaps and Derivatives Association (ISDA), and it seems that the ISDA is owned by the world’s largest banks and hedge funds.  That means the house determines whether the house has to pay.

The Houses of Morgan, Goldman and the other Big Five are justifiably worried right now, because an “event of default” declared on European sovereign debt could jeopardize their $32 trillion derivatives scheme.  According to Rudy Avizius in an article on The Market Oracle (UK) on February 15th, that explains what happened at MF Global, and why the 50% Greek bond write-down was not declared an event of default.

If you paid only 50% of your mortgage every month, these same banks would quickly declare you in default.  But the rules are quite different when the banks are the insurers underwriting the deal.

Continue reading at:

David Lazarus: Paid time off? The U.S. is no holiday

Posted in Uncategorized. Comments Off on David Lazarus: Paid time off? The U.S. is no holiday

Opus Dei: Neofascism Within the Catholic Church

From Daily Kos:

Sun Feb 19, 2012

What we are seeing today in the fight over birth control is a revival of a very old, and very dangerous kind of Catholicism. It is not one supported or practiced by most Rank and File Catholics. It is a kind of Catholicism which has done irreparable harm. It is a kind of Catholicism unfit for existence in the modern world.

It was the underpinning of the regimes of Mussolini in Italy, The National Catholicism of Francisco Franco, in Spain; The Parti Rexiste in Belgium; The Irish Blueshirts; The Croatian Ustaše, the Nazi puppet government in Croatia, and ultimately, was the kind of Catholicism practiced by the Sainted Josemaría Escrivá, founder of the Catholic order Opus Dei.

That’s where the story begins and ends: Opus Dei.

Spain, The Founding of Opus Dei

Josemaría Escrivá is the best place to start. He was a catholic priest during the Second Spanish Republic, who developed a kind of Catholicism in the late 1920’s which Fascists found very attractive. He rose to prominence and political influence during Franco’s spain. His book describing Opus Dei was first published with an introduction by a Pro-Franco bishop, which contained many statements in support of National Catholicism. Saint Escriva personally preached to Franco during a week-long prayer retreat at Franco’s Palace.

Saint Escriva has been accused by catholic priests who knew him of Holocaust Denial, and many recall statements by Escriva defending Hitler. Saint Escriva has said that hitler couldn’t have killed 6 million Jews, and that “Hitler against the Jews” really meant “Hitler against communism.”

He famously wrote a letter to Franco in the 1950’s saying

Although a stranger to any political activity, I cannot help but rejoice as a priest and Spaniard that the Chief of State’s authoritative voice should proclaim that, “The Spanish nation considers it a badge of honor to accept the law of God according to the one and true doctrine of the Holy Catholic Church, inseparable faith of the national conscience which will inspire its legislation.” It is in fidelity to our people’s Catholic tradition that the best guarantee of success in acts of government, the certainty of a just and lasting peace within the national community, as well as the divine blessing for those holding positions of authority, will always be found. I ask God our Lord to bestow upon your Excellency with every sort felicity and impart abundant grace to carry out the grave mission entrusted to you.

None of this is to say that all Catholics supported Franco. Plenty of Catholic bishops and priests opposed him, including bishop Mateo Múgica, and Cardinal Francisco Vidal Y Barraquer. I would also like to point out that neither Vidal Y Barraquer or Mateo Mugica were sainted. They are relatively forgotten. Múgica doesn’t even have a Wikipedia page in English.

Continue reading at:

What’s My Debt, Dad? ‘Greece left to beg for pocket money’

Posted in Uncategorized. Comments Off on What’s My Debt, Dad? ‘Greece left to beg for pocket money’

Pain Without Gain

From The New York Times:

Published: February 19, 2012

Last week the European Commission confirmed what everyone suspected: the economies it surveys are shrinking, not growing. It’s not an official recession yet, but the only real question is how deep the downturn will be.

And this downturn is hitting nations that have never recovered from the last recession. For all America’s troubles, its gross domestic product has finally surpassed its pre-crisis peak; Europe’s has not. And some nations are suffering Great Depression-level pain: Greece and Ireland have had double-digit declines in output, Spain has 23 percent unemployment, Britain’s slump has now gone on longer than its slump in the 1930s.

Worse yet, European leaders — and quite a few influential players here — are still wedded to the economic doctrine responsible for this disaster.

For things didn’t have to be this bad. Greece would have been in deep trouble no matter what policy decisions were taken, and the same is true, to a lesser extent, of other nations around Europe’s periphery. But matters were made far worse than necessary by the way Europe’s leaders, and more broadly its policy elite, substituted moralizing for analysis, fantasies for the lessons of history.

Specifically, in early 2010 austerity economics — the insistence that governments should slash spending even in the face of high unemployment — became all the rage in European capitals. The doctrine asserted that the direct negative effects of spending cuts on employment would be offset by changes in “confidence,” that savage spending cuts would lead to a surge in consumer and business spending, while nations failing to make such cuts would see capital flight and soaring interest rates. If this sounds to you like something Herbert Hoover might have said, you’re right: It does and he did.

Now the results are in — and they’re exactly what three generations’ worth of economic analysis and all the lessons of history should have told you would happen. The confidence fairy has failed to show up: none of the countries slashing spending have seen the predicted private-sector surge. Instead, the depressing effects of fiscal austerity have been reinforced by falling private spending.

Continue reading at: