“Like a Dog?” Nasty GOP Insults Flung at Women Candidates

From Alternet:  http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/dog-nasty-gop-insults-flung-women-candidates

Todd Akin put his foot in his mouth again with comments about his opponent, while Mayor Michael Bloomberg attacked Elizabeth Warren.

By Alex Kane
October 22, 2012

Missouri Senate candidate Todd Akin can’t stop putting his foot in his mouth.

During an October 20 fundraising event with Fox News star and evangelical Christian Mike Huckabee, Akin compared Claire McCaskill to a “dog.” McCaskill is Akin’s Democratic opponent for the Senate seat.

“She goes to Washington, D.C., it’s a little bit like one of those dogs, ‘fetch,’” said Akin, according to the website PoliticMO.com . “She goes to Washington, D.C., and get all of these taxes and red tape and bureaucracy and executive orders and agencies and brings all of this stuff and dumps it on us in Missouri.”

The comments  are only the latest controversial remarks from Akin. He became a household name in August when he claimed on television that “legitimate rape” victims rarely get pregnant because “ the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.” Akin also said last month that McCaskill’s debate performance against him was not as “ladylike” as she was in 2006.

Akin is trailing McCaskill narrowly in the polls.

Meanwhile, another male, conservative politician has hammered away inaccurately at a female candidate. In a New York Times interview, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg threw his weight behind Senator Scott Brown of Massachusetts, who is running against the progressive Elizabeth Warren. Bloomberg told the Times that a vote for Warren is a vote to “bring socialism back, or the USSR.”

Complete article at:  http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/dog-nasty-gop-insults-flung-women-candidates

Posted in Equal Treatment, Feminist, Male Privilege, Misogyny, Politics, Right Wing Bigotry, Right Wing Bug F*** Insanity, Right Wing Extermist, Sexism, Uncategorized. Comments Off on “Like a Dog?” Nasty GOP Insults Flung at Women Candidates

Conservatives’ HPV vaccine dilemma: are they anti-cancer, or just anti-sex?

From The Guardian UK:  http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/oct/16/conservatives-hpv-vaccine-dilemma

Proof that vaccinating girls against the HPV virus does not cause promiscuity puts culture warriors in a spot


guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 16 October 2012

According to a recent study, giving children tetanus shots will not, in fact, encourage them to stab themselves with rusty nails or be less cautious when playing outdoors. Various political organizations have advocated against the tetanus vaccine, arguing that tetanus shots send the message that recreation is acceptable, and that if children know they’re protected from lockjaw, they will be less vigilant about avoiding the kinds of cuts and scrapes that can lead to deadly nervous system infections. Attempts to require tetanus vaccination have met extreme backlash from conservative groups who argue that mandating the vaccine is an assault on parental rights and family values.

Even bills that simply would have made the vaccine free for low-income children without mandating it were vetoed by Republican governors. Doctors hope that these study results, which show that tetanus-vaccinated children are no more likely to engage in unsafe recreational behavior than their unvaccinated peers, will increase the tetanus shot rate for children of parents who fear that tetanus shots encourage risk-taking.

At this point, you’re thinking, I hope:

“What in the world is this lady talking about? Everyone gives their kids tetanus shots! You’d be irresponsible not to inoculate your child against tetanus, and you’re nuts if you think that giving a kid a tetanus shot will make him be less careful about slicing his skin with filthy rusted metal. And there’s absolutely no political controversy around tetanus shots.”

You would be right. If only the same were true of the HPV vaccine.

According to a recent study, giving girls the HPV vaccine will not, in fact, encourage them to engage in sexual activity any earlier than their peers. Various political organizations have advocated against the HPV vaccine, arguing that the vaccine sends the message that sexual behavior is acceptable, and that if girls know they’re protected from HPV, they will be less vigilant about avoiding the kinds of risky sexual behaviors that can lead to pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections.

Continue reading at:  http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/oct/16/conservatives-hpv-vaccine-dilemma

Posted in Choice, Christo-Fascism, Feminist, Gender, Health Care, Male Privilege, Medical Studies, Medicine, Misogyny, Sexism. Comments Off on Conservatives’ HPV vaccine dilemma: are they anti-cancer, or just anti-sex?

Mitt Romney’s Heartless Advice to a Woman Whose Pregnancy Might Have Killed Her

From Alternet:  http://www.alternet.org/election-2012/mitt-romneys-heartless-advice-woman-whose-pregnancy-might-have-killed-her

Mormon women remember Romney’s advice when he was a church leader, and there wasn’t much ‘moderate’ about it.

By Geoffrey Dunn
October 17, 2012

The summer of 1983 was blistering hot in New England. A record heat wave saw temperatures soar toward the 100-degree mark from June well into September. July had been the hottest month ever recorded at Boston’s Logan Airport.

The region’s beloved Boston Red Sox, full of hope and promise early in spring and claiming first place in the American League East as late as June 1, apparently melted in the heat, losing game after game and tumbling to last place by mid-July, where they were to remain the rest of the season.

It was also during the sweltering summer of 1983 that the family of Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney made its celebrated escape from the oppressive New England heat for the cooler climes of Beach O’Pines, Ontario, where the Romney family owns a beachfront cottage in a gated community on the shores of Lake Huron. Prior to departure, Mitt Romney placed the family dog—an Irish setter named Seamus—into a dog carrier and lashed it to the roof of the family’s Chevy station wagon for the 12-hour drive into Canada.

The infamous dog ride (dubbed the “Seamus incident”) was to become a full-blown issue in the 2012 presidential primaries, as Romney’s chief Republican opponent, Rick Santorum, invoked the incident to attack Romney’s “character.”

Political cartoonists and late-night comedians had a field day with the story. The incident inspired aNew Yorker cover, while the punk band Devo recorded a song entitled, “Don’t Roof Rack Me, Bro.” ABC’s Diane Sawyer, in an interview with Romney during the primaries, dubbed it the “most wounding thing in the campaign so far.”

Continue reading at:  http://www.alternet.org/election-2012/mitt-romneys-heartless-advice-woman-whose-pregnancy-might-have-killed-her

Posted in Abortion, Choice, Christo-Fascism, Feminist, Male Privilege, Misogyny, Religion, Reproductive Rights, Right Wing Bigotry, Right Wing Bug F*** Insanity, Right Wing Extermist, Sexism. Comments Off on Mitt Romney’s Heartless Advice to a Woman Whose Pregnancy Might Have Killed Her

Which Side Are You On?

The Transgender Borg and Transgender Inc put out a massive quantity of bullshit about identity and identifying as a woman, about how that identity trumps both physical reality and the perceptions of others. Based on the claims of some to be considered a woman all one has to do is claim to identify as such.

Being considered a woman doesn’t require being assigned female at birth.  Doesn’t require surgical sex reassignment from an initial birth assignment of male.  Doesn’t require the removal of testicles and definitely doesn’t require the surrender of one’s penis.  One isn’t required to live 24/7/365 in a socially accepted female sex role.  One doesn’t have to have electrolysis or even wear women’s clothing, according to Transgender Borg ideology to be considered a woman based on “identifying as a woman.”

Neither assigned female at birth nor later surgically reassigned as female women are permitted to have a say in this matter, but instead have to swallow the entire reactionary pile of crap regarding gender that we spent years fighting against.  Betty Friedan’s book The Feminine Mystique was all about how gender (sex) roles were used to trap women and limit their ability to function in the world as whole people with the agency to make their own decisions regarding the course of their lives.

For all of the Transgender Borg/Inc.’s  BS about deconstructing gender most of their philosophy seems deeply grounded in the reification of gender stereotypes as defining who is a man or who is a woman.

Indeed their ideology of “Transgender Umbrella” and “Transgender Community” seems intent upon stifling genuine attempts at breaking free from sex role/gender role stereotyping.  It is terribly oppressive to have your life colonized and be berated by the Borg/Inc for not embracing “Transgender as Umbrella” once they have decided you are part of a class that they have decided belongs under the “Transgender Umbrella.”

Speaking of “process”.  Isn’t there something incredibly phalliocentric happening when one group composed largely of penis people and their sycophants get to decide when some one is part of the “Transgender Community” or not, without the consent of the person or class of people being colonized?

I am well aware of Christan Williams attempts to write a form of revisionist history where  “Transgender” is a self chosen collective noun that was embraced as early as the late 1960s/early 1970s by women with transsexualism.

How does it feel, Christan, to be a sycophant toadie for a bunch of people who have advocated violence against feminist women, who had the courage to say no to the demands of phalliocentric transvestites and their demands to share the women’s room based on “identity”?  Identity with out actions that actually change your sex is meaningless, nothing more than a con game played by penis people who want to violate women’s privacy.

Don’t think I haven’t noticed the attempts at rehabilitating Angela Keyes Douglas, a psychopathic douche nozzle from the 1970s who hindered the integration of post-transsexual women into the feminist and lesbian communities with his androcentric “transgender superiority” and his calling  lesbian feminists  “ugly cunts” and “fish”.

BTW that word, “Fish”…  That’s the word that set the feminists off when it was used by Saint Sylvia during her drunken Pride Day Parade episode back in 1973.  Do you think that really gave post-transsexual women a big boost in the feminist community?  Or did it hurt us?

Many of us  look upon SRS as ending a chapter in our lives and with the end of that chapter come an end to membership in a shared class that has come to be called “The Transgender Community”.  At that point we face a life choice.  One road means we continue the process of becoming women, a process that can only happen if we drop the “Trans”.  That means dropping the “Transgender Community”.  It means embracing the bare unadorned label, “woman” with out the prefix “trans” much less the adjective “transgender”.

In spite of the TG Borg/Inc.’s protestations to the contrary one cannot identify as a woman and as transgender.  The two are mutually exclusive.  One might identify as a “trans-woman” or as a “transgender woman”, one might even identify as transsexual, although the term transsexual implies actual actions taken to permanently physically change one’s sex.  But as long as one either has to stick a prefix or adjective, or voluntarily sticks that prefix or adjective in front of the word woman then one is identifying with the modifying prefix or adjective and not with the noun being modified.

Being woman identified might have all sorts of readings and levels, take all sorts of forms from spiritual to political.

But one thing should seem obvious.  Living one’s life in transgender-centric surroundings is not conducive to taking the final step in the process of becoming part of the community of women.  It is continuing to live in the transgender ghetto.  One does not have to be hostile to genuine transgender people nor wish to deny genuine transgender people their rights.  But who is actually transgender?  This is a reasonable question. I had a hostile transvestite who goes by the on-line name of Carolyn-Ann come here a while back with his penis waving transvestite BS.  He got pissy when he found out I wasn’t about to be bullied by him and has periodically trashed me on his blog ever since.  Do I have to consider him a woman, or welcome him into women’s space?

Speaking of women’s space…  Many of us have been welcomed into women’s space based upon our work within the feminist and lesbian communities, our personalities.  Even the Michigan Women’s Music Festival quietly expanded its policies to permit women identified post-transsexual women into the festival.  Yet Camp Trans continues as many will not be satisfied until people with penises can invade any and all gatherings of women.

I have been accused of being a “genital surgery essentialist” by Autumn Sandeen.  Monica Roberts, who has advocated violence against Cathy Brennan and Elizabeth Hungerford, suggesting they should be pimp slapped and condoning a transvestite named Anthony Casebeer suggestion that these women be attacked with a baseball bat.  Monica Roberts, who often points out racial injustice is equally often given to hyperbole and regularly engages in phalliocentric dismissals of post-transsexual women, snidely implying that women born transsexual has racist connotations with her oh so cute”WWBT” and her disparaging of our bodies as having man-made vanilla scented neo-coochies.

Nice going Monica.  You have insured the heightening of the contradictions.

One can be woman identified or one can be part of the phalliocentric Transgender Borg Collective.  One cannot be both.

I consider the attacks upon Cathy Brennan and Elizabeth Hungerford to be unwarranted, nor do I see any real merit in the arguments coming fron the TG Borg/Inc.  The inclusiveness of the “Transgender as Umbrella” paradigm is its weakness not its strength.  They use post-transsexual women as a front when so many of them are men in their daily lives.  The refusal to limit Transgender to people who live 24/7/365 when writing legislation that grants entry to restrooms and other spaces where women expect a reasonable level of privacy, causes many women to be reasonably wary, to ask just what this means.

When post-transsexual women who have been around the scene and know what is going on because they have seen the reality take sides in this issue one may justifiably ask, “Do you stand with women, or do you stand with transvestites?”

I have been called a “radical feminist” by some in the TG Borg/Inc.  I guess I am, if that means I put the interests of women either assigned female at birth or surgically reassigned as female at a later time ahead of the interest of either transgender people or transvestites.

I put women without a prefix or adjective and their interests first, because that is what being woman identified requires.  Being woman identified isn’t an identity or make-up and clothing.  It is a commitment to women, both because you are a woman and because you put the interests of women first.

Is Every Single Anti-LGBT/T Religious Figure Really a Closet Case?

Here’s a little hint.  Hating LGBT/T people doesn’t make you straight.

It is a reflection of self hate if you are LGBT/T and preach hatred of LGBT/T people

It will not cure you of being LGBT/T.  It will not erase the fact that you are LGBT/T.

If you are an obvious gay man like Eddie Long trying to pass as straight the fact you preached anti-LGBT/T bigotry only makes you look like a con artist when the fact you are as queer as a three dollar bill comes out.

The Catholic Church which is one of the all time biggest supporters of anti-LGBT/T bigotry and discrimination is filled with closet case homosexual men perverted by the institutionalized homophobia of the church into an arrested state of development.  An arrested state of development they might have out grown if the church didn’t tell them they should deny being gay, become a priest and pray it away while living a life of celibacy.

As an Atheist I am automatically non-religious.  I am anti-religion because I see the damage done by religion and how religion is a parasitical way of life with its constant demand of money from its followers.

When a gay minister (most priests and ministers are male) has the closet door ripped open and his scam revealed he stands there with his dick in his hand saying, “Who me?  I’m not gay.  I only did it once.  Are you going to believe me or your lying eyes.”  Then he retreats and prays away the gay, comes back and starts the con game all over while claiming to be cured a la Ted Haggard.

Posted in Abuse, Christo-Fascism, Gay, Hate Speech, Homophobia, Male Privilege, Pedophilia, Religion. Comments Off on Is Every Single Anti-LGBT/T Religious Figure Really a Closet Case?

Gender… Schmender #$%@&^*

The whole ideology of gender is purely sexist bullshit.

Gender is a pure social construct, a fiction that oppresses both men and women but more women than men.

When I hear “gender assigned at birth” I want to slap someone. I wasn’t assigned a gender at birth.  The doctor looked between my legs and said, “It’s a boy.”  I was assigned male by reason of having a penis there later in life I had an operation that reassigned me to female based on that same genital appearance factor.

When I came out in 1969, I came out as a feminist.  Women in the collective gave me clothes. While the guys claimed they respected me but they also started treating me in a way that told me they expected me to adhere to the sex roles both hippie and movement women were expected to adhere to.

When other movement women saw this they introduced me to feminism.  When SDS split into Weatherman and other factions I became Weather, largely because of Bernadine Dohrn.  You see there weren’t very many strong women’s voices in SDS and the Anti-War Movement.

Bernadine Dohrn gave great rants…  Maybe months later on reflection you went WTF but at the time…  Oh how I admired her audacity and how she inspired me to act courageously.

I also learned from other radical women. Putting women and the interests of women first yet never forgetting that sexism was only one axis of oppression. Consciousness raising and analysis gave me/us an understanding of what the world expects of women.

Many of us who were dealing with having been born with transsexualism owe far more to feminism and the feminist movement than we ever did to Stonewall and the Gay Liberation Movement. We weren’t gay men even if we had male lovers.  Especially if we had male lovers… being transsexual and having a male lover meant we were straight or more accurately heterosexual since straight also had other connotations.

We weren’t some “T” so recently grafted on to what was first a Gay Liberation Movement.  We were women in transition to female having to deal with the same sexism as natal female women had to deal with.  It didn’t much matter if we were radical feminist Weather Nation women or Cosmo “Sex and the Single Girl” women.  We had to deal with sexism and pay discrimination as well as sexist assumptions based on what are now called “gender” stereotypes.

Gender was something used to keep women oppressed.  It was the idea that women are weak and stupid; fit only to be sex objects or mothers. Daddy’s little princess until given to a man only to lose her last name and become his property.* Gender became a way of telling feminists that they were not real women since they questioned the marketing of very high profit items based on pandering to a sense of insecurity in one’s own womanhood or attractiveness.

When feminism challenged those who were dealing with transsexualism part of the challenge was due to the tendency of so many of us to embrace all the marketing of gender without insight or even a sense of irony.

But gender as it is so often used today is if anything a far more sneaky and loaded with subtextual readings semiotic. Gender has now replaced sex in so much of the common discourse that we look at the construct as reality and skip over the subtextual readings of the semiotic.

Whereas once upon a time the Cockettes Troupe in San Francisco deconstructed gender and showed it as performative through the usage of exaggerated costumes and the performing of equally over the top stereotypes taken from films of the 1930s and 40s I now have some people ask if these performers were transsexual or transgender. The answer is maybe some were.  One was in the Stanford program at the same time I was, others were gay men and some were natal females.

By breaking the rules of gender through Absurdist Theater they created both campy comedy and a critique of sex roles. One of the crucial mistakes in feminist criticism of more traditional drag is the assumption that women are the target when it often seems the aim is more a matter of ridiculing roles portrayed in movies.

But Second Wave Feminism went even further in delivering a devastating critique of sex roles as defining what the proper role of women was.  When women dared step beyond the stereotypes and enter male dominated career field they were told that doing so would un-sex both women and men.  Fashion magazines and all sorts of corporate interests dished up massive loads of propaganda aimed at undermining the confidence of women seeking equality of opportunity.

One of the critiques of transsexual to female people is that we have not been socialized as women. This is an assumption that is often times contradictorily both true and false. Transsexual to female people grow up as transkids and are influenced by the same sales pitches and indoctrination as natal women yet they are told it is something they must adhere to and we are told it is something to be ashamed of.

This makes it hard for us to have a critical eye regarding this propaganda when we first come out. We may acquire it with experience but it is equally possible for us to join the masses of women who march to the beat of Sex in the City rather than to NOW and more radical feminisms.

At some point sex became gender and roles acted replaced that which was written upon the body. The ironic labeling of sex as a definer of maleness or femaleness as essentialism has resulted in many people with a poor understanding of feminist theory using it as a careless accusation.

Dividing people into classes of male and female based on the appearances of genitalia would mean that heterosexual post-SRS women and men would be able to legally marry partners of the other sex.  No more Christie Lee Littletons, no more Nikki Araguzs.

But when the misogynistic reactionary forces of both religious fundamentalism and ultra right wing politics united to defeat feminism as well as LGBT/TQ liberation and the progressive movements of the 60s and 70s they seemed to unite with corporate interests in reasserting misogyny.  Trying to sell sex roles and their importance after 15 years of serious feminist critique was more of a struggle than repackaging sex roles as gender.

The Total Woman by Marabel Morgan was supposedly a self help book for women.  In reality this 1974 publication was grounded in the rising right wing Christo-Fascist backlash that also spawned the rise of the homophobic bigotry of Anita Bryant and crew.

Along with Phyllis Schlafly these genderists put forth an ideology that could have been penned by the late transvestite activist pioneer, Virginia Prince.  The ideology was one that kept women in their places by telling them that they weren’t real women unless they filled this total woman gender role.  The same gender role feminists had critiqued under the name of “sex roles.”

Now I view “gender” as a culturally defined social construct that varies a great deal according to culture and time (see Margaret Mead’s work.  BTW her “debunker” were right wing McCarthyites).

With western modernism the naturally occurring over lapping of sex traits and abilities lead to a lessening of rigid gender roles that are more often found these days in non-western cultures.

Defining people as real men or real women based on gender is a characteristic of conservative values often based in religiously fanatical cultures which is why I find the embrace of “gender” as definer by Transgender Inc. to be more reactionary than progressive.

I read a story on Bilrico about some creep beating an infant boy to death to make him act like a man. http://www.bilerico.com/2010/08/man_kills_17-month-old_boy_for_acting_like_a_girl.php This is the problem with putting so much emphasis on gender.

In the real world an Emo boy even with nail polish and a magenta streak in his long black hair is still a boy.  The rocker girl with facial piercings, tats and black leather motor cycle boots is still a girl.

Of course without the ideology of transgender Thomas Beatie is a masculine woman who dresses and acts like a man when she isn’t having children.  But c`est la vie.  And no I wouldn’t mis-gender him like that even though I am supremely irritated by the neo-quiver full thingie.

Gender is masculinity or femininity not maleness or femaleness.  We got suckered into discussing that core identity of male or female as being gender based on Stoller’s book (Sex and Gender) way back in the 1960s.  We didn’t have a whole lot of information to operate on and lacked a vocabulary to describe what we were feeling.  We should have used “core sex identity” for that sense of being female trapped in a male body.
Little did we realize that even then introducing “gender” in to the discourse was using poisoned seeds from the fruit of a poisonous tree.  The misogynistic world according to Virginia Prince became the bullshit crop of the transgender social construct of gender.

The way Transgender Inc. uses gender is not the least bit liberating.  It can’t be as it is based on a construct that defines membership in the sex class of female or the sex class of male not based on what one commonly uses.  Male and female are generally based on whether one has a penis or vagina.

Yet the simple reality of hole or pole unites both Transgender Inc and the religious fanatic/right wingers in finding ways to tell women born transsexual that their pussies do not really make them women.

Worlds Without Women

From the New York Times
April 11, 2010
By MAUREEN DOWD

WASHINGTON

When I was in Saudi Arabia, I had tea and sweets with a group of educated and sophisticated young professional women.

I asked why they were not more upset about living in a country where women’s rights were strangled, an inbred and autocratic state more like an archaic men’s club than a modern nation. They told me, somewhat defensively, that the kingdom was moving at its own pace, glacial as that seemed to outsiders.

How could such spirited women, smart and successful on every other level, acquiesce in their own subordination?

I was puzzling over that one when it hit me: As a Catholic woman, I was doing the same thing.

I, too, belonged to an inbred and wealthy men’s club cloistered behind walls and disdaining modernity.

I, too, remained part of an autocratic society that repressed women and ignored their progress in the secular world.

I, too, rationalized as men in dresses allowed our religious kingdom to decay and to cling to outdated misogynistic rituals, blind to the benefits of welcoming women’s brains, talents and hearts into their ancient fraternity.

Continue reading at: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/11/opinion/11dowd.html

Pope’s immunity to prosecution may be challenged in Britain

By The Associated Press
Sunday, April 4th, 2010 — 5:29 pm

Protests are growing against Pope Benedict XVI’s planned trip to Britain, where some lawyers question whether the Vatican’s implicit statehood status should shield the pope from prosecution over sex crimes by pedophile priests.

More than 10,000 people have signed a petition on Downing Street’s web site against the pope’s 4-day visit to England and Scotland in September, which will cost U.K. taxpayers an estimated 15 million pounds ($22.5 million). The campaign has gained momentum as more Catholic sex abuse scandals have swept across Europe.

Continue reading at: http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0404/popes-immunity-prosecution-challenged-britain/

Posted in Catholic Church, Hate Crimes, Homophobia, International, Male Privilege, Misogyny, Pedophilia. Comments Off on Pope’s immunity to prosecution may be challenged in Britain

Italian exorcist: Devil made NY Times attack Pope

Gee Maybe they will call for an Inquisition complete with “Malleus Maleficarum”  (The Hammer of Witches)

From Raw Story

http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0402/italian-excorcist-devil-ny-times-attack-pope/

By Daniel Tencer
Friday, April 2nd, 2010 — 1:36 pm

A spate of recent news reports alleging cover-ups of child sex abuse by priests was “prompted” by Satan, says a prominent Italian exorcist.

Father Gabriele Amorth, the Vatican’s chief exorcist, told Italian media this week that a New York Times report alleging that Pope Benedict XVI ignored reports of sex abuse at a Wisconsin school for the deaf was the work of the Devil.

That story asserted that the Pope, then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, ignored repeated warnings from bishops that a Wisconsin priest, Father Laurence Murphy, may have molested as many as 200 boys at a school for the deaf.

“There is no doubt about it. Because he is a marvelous Pope and worthy successor to John Paul II, it is clear that the Devil wants to ‘grab hold’ of him,” Amorth said, as quoted at the Catholic News Agency.

Father Amorth added that in instances of sexual abuse committed by some members of the clergy, the devil “uses” priests in order to cast blame upon the entire Church: “The devil wants the death of the Church because she is the mother of all the saints.”

Continue reading at: http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0402/italian-excorcist-devil-ny-times-attack-pope/

Pope apologizes for priests’ child sex abuse

Pleads to keep the jewelry, satin dresses and red Prada pumps.
Time to disestablish Catholicism.  The con game is some 1700 years old and has murdered and enslaved more people than Hitler, Stalin, and Mao combined.  These crimes are only the latest in a long list of crimes against humanity.
By Agence France-Presse
Saturday, March 20th, 2010 — 6:50 pm

Pope Benedict XVI apologised Saturday for Irish priests’ child sex abuse in a letter with far-reaching implications, but victims said it was not enough to address the growing scandal.The pastoral letter, which came with the sex abuse scandal having spread to several countries, including the pope’s native Germany, also said Irish bishops had “failed” in addressing the problem.

“You have suffered grievously and I am truly sorry,” the pope said in the long-awaited letter to Irish Catholics to be read in all Irish dioceses, in which he also expressed “shame and remorse.”

Continue reading at: http://rawstory.com/2010/03/pope-apologises-priests-child-sex-abuse/

Utah Governor Signs Controversial Law Charging Women and Girls With Murder for Miscarriages

From Alternet:

http://www.alternet.org/story/145956/utah_governor_signs_controversial_law_charging_women_and_girls_with_murder_for_miscarriages#wp-comments

By Rose Aguilar, AlterNet
Posted on March 9, 2010, Printed on March 10, 2010
http://www.alternet.org/story/145956/

On Monday afternoon, a controversial Utah bill that charges pregnant women and girls with murder for having miscarriages caused by “intentional or knowing” acts, was signed into law by Gov. Gary Herbert.

Contrary to media reports last week, the “Criminal Homicide and Abortion Amendments” or HB12, which previously also applied to miscarriages caused by “reckless” acts, was never “withdrawn” by its sponsor, Republican Representative Carl Wimmer (who is crafting similar “model legislation” for other states). After the governor expressed concern over “possible unintended consequences,” of the legislation as written, Rep. Wimmer swiftly introduced a new version, titled “Criminal Homicide and Abortion Revisions” (HB462), which omitted the word “reckless.” Gov. Herbert signed the new bill and vetoed the old one.

Continue reading at:

http://www.alternet.org/story/145956/utah_governor_signs_controversial_law_charging_women_and_girls_with_murder_for_miscarriages#wp-comments

Male Dominance and its origins in our present society

by
Andrea Brown

In our present society which is dominated by a set of financial cults masquerading as spiritual cults which worship a social construct known as man, transsexualism has no place for the following reasons. We do not pay large amounts of wealth to these cults or give them large amounts of influence therefore we are attacked for the following reasons.

Women born transsexual people are getting rid of penises, which the religiously dogmatic, psychiatrists, psychologists, sociologists, fanatics and transgender all worship as the supreme organ. In the eyes of the religious cults, psychiatrists and other deranged sociopath’s, which is seen as a grave sin. They worship the penis as the giver of live. They have not figured out it is just an organ that the body can live without and in fact is the same tissue as the vagina, just differently arranged in the womb.

Sex reassignment surgery just rearranges the penis tissue into vagina for transsexual people, although not as well as what would occur in the womb. The organs that life comes from are the womb, ovaries, vagina and testes with some minor assistance from the penis. The womb is the safe place for life and the vagina is the releaser of life into the greater world, from the safety of the womb. The womb is the protector of life.

Present day male dominance comes from pre-christian Roman male supremacy. They would never allow a female emperor or a woman to hold any position of power. When a roman emperor Elagabalus who reigned from 218AD to 222AD ordered his surgeons to change him from male to female, the Praetorian Guard murdered him as an affront to Rome. Roman emperors were notorious for there excess’s, but wanting a vagina was to much for the Roman’s, due to there hatred of women, but everything else, such as Trajans genocide in Dacia (Romania) was completely acceptable and celebrated as a great event.

Trajan’s column is seen as a cultural exhibit. It celebrates the deaths and enslavement of millions as well as the destruction of an entire language and culture, previously known as Dacia, which was a comparable civilization with the Hellenistic Greeks.

The coliseum may have had as many people die in the arena as in Auschwitz. How can such a place of evil were people died for the amusement of mobs be seen as a cultural icon?

The Roman’s had a very anti-female attitude to the point that if a woman was raped, the rapist was only charged with an affront to her husband. A woman was the property of her father until marriage, upon which she became the property of her husband. If her husband died her oldest son or male relative became in effect her owner. Basically in plain language a woman was subhuman and merely property in Roman eyes at the same level as a horse or cart.

Strangely today a lot of people keep trying to promote Rome as some sort of basis of civilization. Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini both tried to emulate the Roman Empire, although Hitler was closest due to his genocide of entire groups in society, just like the Roman’s. They exterminated the Dacians (Romanians). They also killed one third of the French, wiping out their language and culture, then replacing it at the point of the sword with Latin, which evolved into modern French over the last 2000 years. The ancient Gaul’s, spoke a mixture of Basque in the south-west, Celtic in the central part east and west, Hellenistic at the mouth of the Rhone and Germanic languages in the north of France as did the Belgae. The roman’s in their genocidal rampage, which stripped every piece of gold, destroyed all of this European cultural heritage and cultural richness, and silver it could from every country.

It is good to see the modern day European Union funding so many language and cultural issues, groups and events all over Europe, in some cases even leading to strengthening of local culture.

All the Romanesque languages are descended from Latin, which was imposed in those countries at the point of a sword by the Roman army. Countries such as Spain, Portugal, France, Belgium, north Italy, Bulgaria and Romania, all of who had their language and cultures wiped out and replaced by Latin and roman woman hating. Those countries lost their languages and their cultures. The loss to society is incalculable.

The southern Germans got it from the Romans from 15BC to 13BC, although they got even in the battle of Teutoburg in 9AD, the 2000th anniversary of which was this year. That battle checked the Roman Empire, slowing the spread of roman woman hating, which in turn slowed down the spread of Christianity to Northern Europe until 1000 to 1300. Without that, the reformation may not have taken place, as older ideas still existed in some places in common memory and story telling in parts. Arminius (Herman the German) may have given all of us our present freedom, without even realizing it. If Arminius had not checked the Roman Empire, Scandinavia, Scotland and Eastern Europe would have fallen soon afterwards, leaving the Romans to only face the Partheons/Persians on there eastern side, instead of always defending there northern borders. That would have condemned the European world to permanent decay, eventually leading to a religious take over, that would have been permanent inquisition.

A lot of Christian historians still do not even mention the battle of Teutoburg, yet it was one of the most, if not the most decisive battle’s in history. The site of the battle has been found and it appears that the roman tale of ambush may have been exaggerated. The latest research indicates it may have been a straight out battle. Military tacticians study that battle, due to its sheer decisiveness and the fact that the Germans literally had been in the Stone Age 20 years before, yet completely and utterly annihilated the most modern roman army of the time. No commander of an army, before or since has achieved such a victory.

The worst act by the Roman’s may have been the destruction of the Hellenistic civilization. Leaving aside the horrific toll in human lives, the Antikythera mechanism gives a good idea of what the roman’s really did. They destroyed technological advances, setting us back farther than anyone realized, until the Antikythera Mechanism was studied. Now a horrible truth is starting to dawn on people studying the Hellenistic society and Rhodes in particular. The roman’s were the destroyers of technological development and scientific thought, all of which the roman’s considered unmanly, therefore beneath them and to destroyed.

I was once tried to build a replica of the Antikythera mechanism as I have a casual interest in older technology. It is the only ancient creation I had to give up on in the early stages. When 3D printers become available in the next few years, I will print one from the lithographs that have been taken, as it is almost or possibly as complicated as Charles Babbage’s machines. I asked an engineer for advice on building it. He initially laughed, making jokes about building it in an hour, saw the nature publication on the antikythera mechanism, said it is impossible, he sat dumb struck, when he realized it was a real design from the 2nd century BC. He couldn’t build it either and passed the links to it around his engineer friends, who were all in disbelief. If it had not been published in the scientific journal Nature, neither they or myself would have believed it was real and would have dismissed it as something from a new age nut job.

http://www.antikythera-mechanism.gr/node/35
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v444/n7119/abs/nature05357.html
http://www.antikythera-mechanism.gr/system/files/0608_Nature.pdf
http://www.antikythera-mechanism.gr/system/files/0608_Nature-Supplementary.pdf
http://www.antikythera-mechanism.gr/
http://www.antikythera-mechanism.gr/data/ptm/full-resolution-ptm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZrfMFhrgOFc

The Catholic Church took over from the roman emperors after Attila the Hun was bought of in 452 when Pope Leo 1 brought the richest man in Rome to meet Attila. The spin the Catholic Church put on it was that the social construct which the Catholic Church uses as a societal control mechanism called God had defeated Attila the Hun. By bringing ex-consul Avienus, the richest man in Rome and Trygetius, a diplomat. Leo had the perfect team to negotiate with Attila the Hun on behalf of Valentinian. Avienus had the gold to bribe Attila and in effect would have meant no gold left in Rome, so pointless destroying from Attila’s point of view. Trygetius was a great diplomat, who would have smoothed over all negotiations. Leo was completely fearless. He had an ego as big as any megalomaniac in history, believing he was directly protected by the protection of the holy trinity. Leo was perfect to bring as he would have been able to play on Attila’s fears, as Attila was superstitious.

In effect that meant Attila had all the gold, so there was no point in invading Rome. Leo in classic Catholic Church spin-doctor mode, used this event to add even more control over the dying remains of the Roman Empire from the Emperor. Leo extracted a letter from Emperor Valentinian formally recognizing Leo as leader of all the catholic Church as he was holder of the keys of St. Peters in 445 AD, the same year that Attila took over control of the Huns from his uncle Rugila. Leo then went on to declare in 452 AD that a miracle occurred upon meeting Attila and that the Catholic Church had driven back the Huns with the help of God, when in fact it was a massive gold bribe.

That event led to a deranged belief taking hold in the Roman Empire, that the Catholic Church could save them from Earthly dangers. A belief, which is ingrained into almost a billion people today, worldwide.

The roman empire was then a white hot crucible in which there was a mindset of slaughter in the Coliseum for amusement, slavery, extermination of perceived enemies, anti-science, anti-technology, anti-women, anti-disabled, male supremacy at all costs, destruction of all other cultures and replacement of other languages with Latin. All this was occurring in an empire in its death throws, at its most dangerous time.

In the all-consuming firestorm, that was the Roman Empire at the time. Catholicism violently defeated other forms of Christianity such as Arianism. The birth of Christianity at the time in the Roman Empire was as violent as the birth of Islam, shortly afterwards.

The attacks on women were particularly violent. A good example of the violence towards women is Hypatia of Alexandria.

Hypatia of Alexandria was a tall, very strong-minded woman, who rode a chariot, who taught the following statements to her students of mathematics, engineering and astronomy.

“All formal dogmatic religions are fallacious and must never be accepted by self-respecting persons as final”.

“Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to think at all”.

“To teach superstitions as truth, is a most terrible thing”.

The fact that she was tall, glamorous, would not be subservient to men, outspoken against religious dogma, rode around in a chariot and was a mathematician would have really pissed of the Christians at the time as they were anti-science, enforcers of religious dogma and only saw woman as existing to give birth to more men and to serve men as slaves.

In 412 AD a group of catholic monks known as the “Parabalani” led by Saint Cyril, dragged her from her chariot and into a church. There Cyril and his followers sliced her to pieces with oyster shells and when in her last breath, burnt her. Saint Cyril was made a saint for this act and he declared his followers in the Parabalani to be saints for this Christian act of butchering an innocent woman.

The term Parabalani means student, as does the term Taliban. Now you know where the Taliban get their inspiration.

Cyril is still revered as a saint. For those of you who wonder what it takes to become a saint, the Vatican is in the middle of creating another saint. His name is Cardinal Stepianic or ‘beloved’ as nazi apologists now refer him to. According to the former Yugoslavian government when they tried him in 1946 for war crimes, he and his Dominican monks followers were responsible for the deaths of up to 750,000 Jews, Serbian orthodox, gypsies and others in the area covering modern Croatia and Bosnia. His followers had a thing for slitting the throats of young children. Pope John Paul 2 started the process of making that nazi war criminal a saint. Joe Ratzinger, now known as Pope Benedict who wears dresses and red patent shoes, formerly of the Hitler Youth, is now finalizing the process of making a nazi war criminal a saint.

The allies choose not to try Stepianic at Nurnberg, as they did not want to embarrass the Vatican, instead having Tito take on the task. Tito had to deal with the Catholic Church setting up martyr committee’s in every country, forming campaigns stating that Stepianic was a prisoner of conscience, when in fact he was a genocidal murderer. He should have been hanged at Nurnberg along with the rest of the nazi’s. He was seen as a good Dominican as was Miroslav Filipović who was hanged in his friar’s robes.
Miroslav Filipović was a true Dominican friar, upholding its highest ethics. He slit the throats of young girls stating he and his followers were doing gods work. In doing so, he has proven there has been no change since Saint Cyril in how the Catholic Church operates.

The Ustaše were against industrialization and democracy, just like the modern day Catholic Church and the earlier Roman Empire, which they inherited. The basic principles of the movement were laid out by Pavelić in his 1929 pamphlet “Principles of the Ustaše Movement”.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_clergy_involvement_with_the_Usta%C5%A1e
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miroslav_Filipovi%C4%87
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usta%C5%A1e
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jasenovac

Over the next few centuries the cult of ultra male dominance slowly spread all over Europe. Mostly it was by the sword, not by consensual belief as most think.

The crusades were one example of how it spread. Most think the crusades only happened in the Middle East. There was a crusade to destroy the Saxon religion in Germany and Netherlands. Part of this was forced conversion to christianity and then execution. They then tried to crusade against Denmark but got beaten back. The crusade against the Slavs to christianise them was particularly violent.

When the Normans entered Ireland, most do not realise that the Normans considered all christians there to be heretic. The Pope at the time said that the Irish were heretic, due to some limited freedom of ideas.

After each crusade women had less rights and freedom of movement.

Now Rome is on a new crusade. The present Pope is calling for no rights for gays and transsexuals.

After all the dominance of the penis must be protected at all costs.

Posted in Christo-Fascism, Culture, History, Male Privilege, Misogyny, Religion, Uncategorized. Comments Off on Male Dominance and its origins in our present society

We Wanna Be Excommunicated or What’s a Girl Gotta Do to Get a Drink Around Here

My friend Andrea and I hate the Catholic Church in the manner that only some one raised in its oppressive clutches can.

We were involuntarily violated by having a ritual performed upon us in our infancy when we were too young to consent.

Ever since I have reached the age of reason and been confronted the contradiction of having been born transsexual, which is to say in the words of the Papal Bullshit, “intrinsically disordered” and I discovered the Epicurean Dilemma:

If god is omnipotent and permits evil, then god is malevolent

If god can not prevent evil then he is not omnipotent

Therefore if god is either malevolent or not omnipotent why consider him god?

Being born an abomination in the eyes of the Church raises serious doubts about the infallibility of this supposed god.  With choices like not even thinking about what you are born with and an eternity in some lake of fire its almost enough to make a girl wish her mother had aborted her.

Ooops… Abortion to is a mortal sin.  In fact it seems almost as though being born female is some what sinful in the eye of the Holy Roman Church of Pedophilia.

But be that as it may my parents sent my sissy transkid ass to catechism and had me kneel before the magic word sayer in order to participate in ritualized cannibalism eating a piece of bread that stuck to the roof of my mouth and because it had been transmogrified into the flesh of Jesus I wasn’t supposed to touch it with my tongue.

What a waste of several weeks of precious summer complete with the daily poundings by the bullies who took it upon themselves to punish me for what I was born.

By the time the final ritual I was forced to participate in rolled around, (confirmation) I was already a stone atheist and a full blown teen age transkid planning on getting a sex change operation.

I was expected to go through the magic ritual any way.

Now I know people get excommunicated and I haven’t believed in a god for over 45 years now.  No gods, No masters and all that but on several occasions when I have found myself in unpleasant proximity to one of these scam artists I have asked, “How do I get formally excommunicated?  I want to never ever on any level be associated with or claimed by the Catholic church.”

They all give me some sort of wishy washy answer that says they are sort of like the Mormons who baptize every person who dies into their cult.  But not one of them wants to tell me how to formally get a declaration of excommunication that I can proudly display.

So yesterday when my dear friend and frequent contributor to this blog wrote the following I basically laughed my ass off and thought I can’t publish this.  But then I thought.

Why the hell not?  After all what could they do?  Excommunicate us?  A girl can only hope…

By Andrea Brown

[spelling errors are deliberate]

Vedi, Veni, Reni, Recti, Peni, Penetrati-Rectum.

I ze Pope Ben-e-dick-i-rectum, RECTUMFUHRER of ze Holyiest Catholic church hereby issuze zis papal bull(shit).

Vi have consulted vit mein RECTUMFUHRER, Ze Cardinalz Himmler och Bormann at ze Reichstag here in Greater Berlin, now known as Rome.

Az of today, zis will be law for alt in ze United Kingdom.

Ve deal with ze Britisher degenerate pigdogs und undermensch, firsta. Den Vi vill hav ze Operation Barbarossa and deal vith ze Soviet menace und create ze living room for ze pure.

I RECTUMFUHRER Ben-E-Dick-i-Rectum declar zat ze degenerate homosexual and transsexual menace vil hav to report till ze nu Ghetto for de degenerates i Shetland Islands.

Tranzportation vil be provided to all degenerates till ze nu high living standard ghetto. All nu living quarters hav been superiorly designed by ze master race to giv appropiate living conditions til ze degenerates.

Du vill liv in ze Ghetto area. Du vil not be permitted to congregate vit normalt
people as du may cause ze extinction of alt humanity.

Alt ze Parishez vil pray away ze gayz.

Ze Uber Godz, Adolf Hitler vil lizten to ze prayerz av ze pure, praying awyz ze gayz.

Ze youngest and prettiest med ze tightest rectums, vill be selected for special treatment und hav special houzing and treatment. Zey vil be houzed in ze special parochial houses which vill serve as brothels for ze rightous and god fearing officers of ze church of ze master race.

Alt degenerates vil report to ze local priest, vare zu will submit to anal examination i de Anal Strazze examination suite i parochial howze. Zu degenerates vil den report til ze cattle truckz for immediate deportation to your nu life in efter du hav entered ze specialz showerz.

Vit regard to ze tranzzexual und transveztited degenerates, zey vill also be housed within ze ghetto immediately. Those degenerates vad vish till hav der genitalz removed vil report to Cardinal Mengle at his Eunuch research centre. Those who wish to dress as women may only do so in the confines of ze ghetto und vil submit zer rectums fir tightnez examination. Unholyz lack of tightnezz which vil reduce priest enjoyment, wil earn ze degenerate a ticket to jump zee queue til ze nu showerz, leading to ze better ghetto.

Az a church ve cannot allow ze homosexualz, tranzzexualz und transveztited degenerates til hav access to ourz mozt holy church, as ve have far too many as it is. Zer minority is to much i ze priesthood. Ze paedophiles feelz uncomfortable at ze rizing numbers of non-paedophiles, which is ze desgrazeful situation. Vi must increaze ze number of ze paedophiles, so az til maintain normality i ze holyz church.

If ve were to allow any homosexual i ze Catholic seminary, ze church would be in a sorry state. Ve hav rules, prozeedures and years of demented study before you can be accepted into our men’s club. They muzt be completed.

ZE VAGINA IZ EVIL, UND MUST BE DEZTROYED..

Also,the same applies to tranzzexual und transveztited degenerates. Ve cannot allowz just anyone to vear ze dress. It took me over 60 years before i could vear expensive dresses all the time. I prefer white, ze red really didn’t suit mine colouring, although i vas partial to brown shirtz when i vas younger.

If homosexual and tranzzexualz und transveztited people vant to enter ze church and achieve ze high office, well ze vill just have to do as ve all did. Seminary, college, study, vorking in poor parishes, looking after altar boys, raping them, singing Kumbaya vith ze childrens choir, condemning single mothers, ostracising openly homosexualz, etc.

Ze cannot expect just to walk in and take over…ze must follow ze code…no one muzt ever know zu are ein homosexual, transsexual or transveztit.

ZU VIL OBEY UND COMPLY.

Ze Holynezz

Pope Ben-e-dick-i-rectum, Rectumfuhrer Benedict (Jo Ratzinger)

Posted in Christo-Fascism, Existentialism, History, Male Privilege, Misogyny, Satire, Social Justice, Uncategorized. Comments Off on We Wanna Be Excommunicated or What’s a Girl Gotta Do to Get a Drink Around Here

No More David Letterman in this House

Most male comedians aren’t all that funny and most spend an inordinate amount of time disparaging both women and gays in an orgy of misogyny and homophobia.

When they turn their sights on transsexual and transgender people they manage a two-fer that tends towards the even more vicious since both women and gays have spent nearly the last 40 years gradually raising awareness that such naked abuse is actually wrong.

Obama’s appointment of of Amanda Simpson to a senior level government post is a first.  For transsexual and transgender people it is a first on the order of the first woman to occupy such a position, the first African American or the first gay or lesbian person.  If we do not feel a little twinge of pride then perhaps we should.

As expected all the Christo-Fascists with their coded language of bigotry attacked her.  The neo-Nazi pundits were rolling in the aisles.

But we did not expect the snickering and nasty jokes coming from liberal comedians.  Although perhaps we should have.  Particularly in light of all the hardy, har, har about Ann Coulter.  I don’t like Ann Coulter even though she is totally outrageous and taught me the wording I should use to get away with saying shit I think but can not prove, without getting sued.  If Ann is transsexual or transgender it is wrong to attack her for that.  If she is perceived as possibly transsexual or transgender it is equally wrong to attack her for it.  It is irrelevant and there are plenty of things said and written by Ann that are far more worthy of attack.

Letterman has crossed the line into pathetic dickwaddery on numerous occasion over the past few months.  Again like with Ann Coulter I am certainly no fan of Sarah Palin, yet even I have to acknowledge that his joke about Alex Rodriguez impregnating the Palin girl was both crass and misogynistic as well as seriously offensive and not funny.  Nor are the charges of sexual harassment funny.

Put together they add up to Letterman being no more than a pathetic, over the hill misogynistic loser.

Perhaps it is time for him to retire.

The Incident

HRC’s Response

Human Rights Campaign Sends Letter Condemning CBS Late Show with David Letterman Skit, Asks for Apology

Late Show sketch includes “incendiary remarks” over Obama Administration’s first transgender appointment

1/6/2010

WASHINGTON – The Human Rights Campaign, the nation’s largest lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender civil rights organization, sent the following letter today to David Letterman and CBS Corp. in response to a Late Show sketch mocking the appointment of Amanda Simpson to a senior position at the U.S. Department of Commerce.

Simpson, who until recently was Deputy Director in Advanced Technology Development at Raytheon Missile Systems and was a test pilot for 20 years, was appointed to be Senior Technical Advisor to the Department of Commerce, where she will work directly with the Under Secretary of Commerce on international trade and national security issues.

In a skit during Letterman’s opening monologue, the host announced Simpson’s historic appointment and revealed that she is transgender, displaying a photograph of her.  The show’s announcer, Alan Kalter, then feigned “trans panic,” implying he had some prior relationship with Simpson but was not aware of her gender history, and ran yelling from the stage.

Letter from Human Rights Campaign Associate Director of Diversity for Transgender Issues Allyson Robinson:

January 6, 2010

David Letterman
Late Show with David Letterman
1697 Broadway
New York, NY 10001

CC:      Nina Tassler
President, CBS Entertainment
51 West 52nd Street
New York, NY 10019

Dear Mr. Letterman,

I am writing on behalf of the Human Rights Campaign, the nation’s largest lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) civil rights organization, to express my disappointment over the inappropriate and incendiary remarks made on The Late Show with David Letterman last night on the appointment of Amanda Simpson to a senior position in the U.S. Department of Commerce.

The decision to ignore the fact that Ms. Simpson is incredibly well-qualified for this vital national security position and focus instead on her gender identity reflects transphobia.  Ms. Simpson’s appointment represents meaningful progress for the LGBT community and in particular transgender Americans who have faced significant and well-documented discrimination in the workplace and their communities.

You may not be aware that the punch line in your skit has been used as a defense in nearly every hate crime perpetrated against transgender people that has come to trial.  For example, the “trans panic” defense was infamously used by Allen Ray Andrade, who was convicted in 2009 of beating 19-year-old Angie Zapata to death with a fire extinguisher after learning of her gender history.  According to media reports, it has also been the main defense employed by Juan A. Martinez for the killing of Jorge Steven López Mercado, 19, in Puerto Rico last November.

Your skit affirmed and encouraged a prejudice against transgender Americans that keeps many from finding jobs, housing, and enjoying freedoms you and your writers take for granted every day.  We ask that you apologize publicly to Ms. Simpson and the transgender community for this unfortunate episode.

Sincerely,

Allyson Robinson,
Associate Director of Diversity for Transgender Issues
Human Rights Campaign

Both the You Tube Video and the HRC response were taken from Pam’s House Blend

http://www.pamshouseblend.com/diary/14730/hrcs-response-to-david-lettermans-skit-about-transgender-obama-nominee-amanda-simpson

Posted in Male Privilege, Misogyny, Social Justice, Transgender, Transsexualism, Uncategorized. Comments Off on No More David Letterman in this House

Class Structure in Transworld vs the Reality Based World

Sara Seton asked me:

So what do you think of someone’s proposed caste system amongst TS?   Here is how I think the grass roots sees this “ladder” as ranked, from top-to-bottom:

“Post-Op TS, living as female
Pre-Op TS, living as female
Non-Op TS, living as female
CD, living as female
Pre-Op TS, living in both genders
Non-Op TS, living in both genders
CD, living in both genders
CD, living as male, but appearing publicly
as female on occasion
CD, male exclusively, but at home “en-femme”
among family and/or friends
CD, only “dressed” when alone
AND THEN, ME: Pre-Op TS, on HRT– living as male, never dresses
as female, and may never will. It’s not my issue!
There is much trouble ahead for me. I will undoubtedly be an object
of derision and scorn at that meeting. I can understand why, too.
They will think me a pretender or a coward. THEY fight the battle in
the trenches, I choose the path of least resistance, where the outside world is concerned. So, I will be the pariah…the laughingstock… the object of negative attention, in spite of my wishes and best efforts, even among my own sisters! This really hurts me!”  (from a winner at Laura’s suicide site.)

It seems to me that this is a very male competition based form of class structure that is at once both misogynistic and very TV fantasy based.

I think that the idea that the poor closet transvestite or even worse closet hormone taker is some how on the bottom rung is akin to the white guy who blames affirmative action for giving all those unqualified women/people of color the position he deserves.

Excuse me while I go hunt for the world’s smallest violin.

I’m one of those post-ops, the flawless kind who had my operation what seems like a hundred years ago and I sure don’t feel like I’m atop some sort of freaking pedestal.  Plus I’m seriously feminist enough to see the pedestal as being as much a form of misogyny as any other form of de-humanizing objectification.

Being at the top of the TV fantasy class structure and a pre-paid ride card gets me on the subway and little else.  You see if one is flawless, even pretty and passes well enough to assimilate in to the world of women then one becomes part of the class “woman”.

The patriarchal systems structure of oppression means that no matter how far up or down the socio-economic scale she is she will in the vast majority of cases always be consider as less than a man of the same class and talents.

Always First Lady and never the President because the idea of there being a First Gentleman seems on the face of it to be absurd.  Such is the reality of sexism, misogyny and gender/sex roles.

This means that one’s place in the real world is determined by education and the amount of class privilege one brings to the table.  If you are a lumpen poor trannie sex worker and you have sex reassignment surgery you become a lumpen poor sex working female.  If you are a high status person before and you are in a protected field then your status has a good chance of translating into your continuing that status.

Your status can also be dependent on your being heterosexual and the status of the man you marry.

I would also disagree with the placement of the CD at the bottom in any world outside the mind of the TV fetishizing other people’s lives.  The closet TV, even one who takes hormones continues to possess and be able to exercise male privilege.  Unless he is so obvious as to be viewed as an effeminate gay man this means he has a “male” job and is a man in what still remains a man’s world.

This level of male privilege means he generally speaking does not need to be as good at his job as a woman would be in the same position and that he will probably earn more over a life time than a woman would and that he will enjoy greater autonomy than a woman.

That said it is possible to lose both male privilege and what “Questioning Transphobia” would call “cis-sexual privilege”.  That happens when one comes out publicly and starts to transition.  It is particularly true if one’s appearance makes them so obvious as to subject them to public mockery.  If it makes one the actual “man in the dress”, rather than the often cited mythical one who supposedly haunts rest room scaring nice right wing Christian ladies, then there is good chance homelessness and unemployment will ensue.

Hardly the step up envisioned by the closet CD creator of this mythical hierarchy and in fact a step downward.

Even for the person who presents well and offers an acceptable image as a member of the sex they are transitioning to in their profession and class faces having to do some serious explaining while executing some pretty fancy footwork to avoid the down button on the class and status elevator.  But let us say for the sake of argument the newly transitioned person manages to stay in the same profession and maintain the general respect of peers in their field. As the person moves further and further into transition and eventually into assimilation one’s status ceases to be related to trans and becomes more related to the status of other members of the sex one has become.  Generally women have a lower status than men.

Often coming out involves a complete loss of status and instead of being a respected if closeted heterosexual CD one finds oneself on the streets.  If one is a pretty transkid, the hot envied by cross dressers, babe, who is also a throwaway kid with no resources…  TVs envy this kid but not what she has to do to survive.  They envy the image, put her on a pedestal but how many envy the turning tricks to survive part?

Listen to how the respectable CDs talk about the “trannie whores” and you will find the real answer.

One of the most problematic ideas that came out of Dr. Benjamin’s book was the idea of a Kinsey sort of scale with closet heterosexual CDs on the 0-1 portion of the scale and those who get SRS on the other.  The leap of presumption in the formulation of that theory based on the miniscule number of patients Dr B had actually seen is astounding.

That leap pre-supposes that all those trans prefixed words are descriptors of a continuum of the same phenomena when there is an equal likelihood that there are a number of different phenomena that only bear a superficial similarity most closely tied to the Biblical injunction against cross dressing.

At any rate being transsexual is not like entering either a sports event or an academic competition if for no other reason than the objective being ordinariness rather than the perceived extra-ordinariness projected by the above cited cross dressers projected hierarchy.

The lack of reality based world experience can be seen in the total neglect of the misogyny factor that even the prettiest and most capable of assimilation post-SRS women face simply by being ordinary or even exceptionally brilliant and talented women in a world where women are still by and large the second sex.

At any rate the idea of the hierarchal structure projected by the above cited CD seems far more Transworld based than reality based.

Posted in Male Privilege, Misogyny, Sexism, Transgender, Transphobia, Transsexualism. Comments Off on Class Structure in Transworld vs the Reality Based World

I Guess Women Aren’t That Good At Writing After All

As a blogger and writer still working on my first book I receive mail from “She Writes”, a mailing list for women writers.  And I just know many of you think the struggle for women’s equality has been won and that male privilege is a thing of the past but…

From She Writes:
Wow, did I feel good yesterday. 5000 women writers here. A depth and breadth of talent that takes my breath away. We write fiction, we write memoir, we write scifi; we are bestsellers, we are award winners, we are just starting out; we are working hard, we are writing well; we are…not as good at it as men are.

Or at least that seems to be the opinion of Publishers’ Weekly, which published its “Best Books of 2009” list on November 2nd and could not see its way to including a single book by a woman without destroying its integrity or betraying its unassailable good taste. Apparently books by women just aren’t as good. Sorry, girls! Poor PW, they felt really badly about it. According to the novelist and journalist Louisa Ermelino, the editors at PW bent over backwards to be objective as they chose the Best Books of the year. “We ignored gender and genre and who had the buzz. We gave fair chance to the ‘big’ books of the year, but made them stand on their own two feet. It disturbed us when we were done that our list was all male.”

It “disturbed” you? In what way exactly? Like, did it make you think, “we are insane?” Try to imagine if they had come out with a list of the Best Books of 2009 and it had included ZERO MEN. Try to imagine if Amazon had released its Best Books of 2009 and it had included only TWO men. I know it’s hard. But just try.

And in case you think ALL men got the star treatment from PW, you should also know that only ONE of the men on the list isn’t a white dude. Naturally he is the dude on the cover. (More on that in a post to come.)

I have never felt clearer about why I started She Writes. It is time to start making our own lists. On that note I am issuing our first She Writes call to action. Tell us what YOU believe are the top ten best books of 2009 thus far. Written by men or women, please — fiction or nonfiction. Be as objective as you can, with the awareness that lists of the “best” anything are subjective in the end. We are not trying to generate a list of books only by women. I’m guessing there will be some overlap with the lists Amazon and PW put together. I am also guessing we will somehow, some way, find a book or two by a woman that can stand on its own two feet.

Click here to give us your list of the Top Ten Best Books of 2009.

We will announce our She Writes Top Ten list two weeks from today.

In the meantime, I will be featuring posts from our membership on this subject. Please feel free to share your lists and alert me when you do. Cate Marvin and Erin Belieu, co-founders of the much needed new literary organization WILLA (Women in Letters and Literary Arts), will be discussing their reaction to PW’s list (and Amazon’s) in a conversation we will post on She Writes in the next few days.

A parting thought: my friend and colleague Gloria Feldt, who also happens to be one of the most inspiring and important thought-leaders on women and leadership in the country, likes to cite a pair of statistics that speak volumes: women make 85% of the consumer buying decisions in this country; women are 17% of Congress.

Here’s another one for you: 65% of books sold in the U.S. are purchased by women; women wrote 0% of the Best Books of 2009. Really

A Modest Proposal: The Future Role of Private Health Insurance

Over the past few days several articles have appeared that have simply given me pause to ponder moments.
One WTF moment was caused the following Headline from Raw Story

Democrats’ healthcare bill would pay for ‘prayer’ treatment

http://rawstory.com/2009/11/democrats-healthcare-bill-pay-prayer-treatment/
What the fuck?
Yet on Tuesday 11/03/09
By John Byrne reported

What do Sen. John Kerry (D-MA), Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) and Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) have in common?

A soft spot for Christian Scientists.

The three senators have quietly inserted a provision into the Democrats’ healthcare overhaul that would allow the Christian Science church to receive remuneration from the federal government for prayer treatments as medical expenses.

Why are liberal Democrats teaming up with a conservative senator for a provision that would normally be the bane of the Senate’s liberal elite? Because the headquarters of the Christian Science church is in Boston.

“The measure would put Christian Science prayer treatments — which substitute for or supplement medical treatments — on the same footing as clinical medicine,” the Los Angeles Times’ Tom Hamburger and Kim Geiger, who found the measure, write. “While not mentioning the church by name, it would prohibit discrimination against ‘religious and spiritual healthcare.'”

See the full story at the above link.

The news this week has been full of these What the Fuck stories of government kowtowing to the Christo-Fascists and helping them to install the Christer version of Sharia.

The same day the Washington Post ran the following:

Democrats’ concerns over abortion may imperil health bill

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/02/AR2009110203232.html?wpisrc=newsletter

Bloc could withhold support over fears of a governmental role

By Perry Bacon Jr.
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, November 3, 2009

While House leaders are moving toward a vote on health-care legislation by the end of the week, enough Democrats are threatening to oppose the measure over the issue of abortion to create a question about its passage.

House leaders were still negotiating Monday with the bloc of Democrats concerned about abortion provisions in the legislation, saying that they could lead to public funding of the procedure. After an evening meeting of top House Democrats, Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (Md.) said, “We are making progress,” but added that they had not reached an agreement.

The outcome of those talks could be crucial in deciding the fate of the health-care bill. Democrats need the vast majority of their caucus to back the bill, since nearly all congressional Republicans have said they will oppose the legislation.

“I will continue whipping my colleagues to oppose bringing the bill to the floor for a vote until a clean vote against public funding for abortion is allowed,” Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) said Monday in a statement. He said last week that 40 Democrats could vote with him to oppose the legislation — enough to derail the bill.

Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, cast Stupak as “attempting to ban abortion coverage in the private insurance market.”

We already have Health insurance companies that will pay for dead dick pills for men whose gluttonous consumption of greasy fast food and obesity has led them to take medications that all have impotence as a side effect.  These same “Health Insurance” companies routinely refuse to fund not only abortion but birth control for women.

Any bets on their willingness to fund sex reassignment surgery?

I have an answer on that one courtesy of Brenda Lana Smith’s news mailing list.

US – Social conservatives are working to ensure that federal funding for sex change operations will be banned in the health reform bill.…

[2009-11-04 Politico]

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1109/29164.html

Conservatives shop sex ops ban to GOP

By JONATHAN ALLEN

11/04/09 9:00 PM EST

The federal government would be banned from funding sex change operations and other services for transgender individuals if social conservative activists get their way.

There’s no sponsor yet for an amendment to the health care overhaul – and it may remain in the dustbin of unrealized wedge issues – but culture warriors are shopping the proposal to Republican senators.

The language is written: “None of the funds authorized or appropriated under this act (or an amendment made by this Act) shall be used to cover any part or portion of the costs of any health plan that includes coverage of” any sex or gender reassignment procedure,  surgery related to such a sex change, hormone therapy for a sex change or pre- and post-operation treatments for a sex change.

A senior aide to a Republican senator said that a public insurance plan could easily end up covering sex-change procedures if that’s not specifically banned in the bill.

Follow the link above for the full article.
The misogynistic, homophobic neo-Nazi bigots of the Republican Party and their lynch mobs of bigoted thugs want the enforcement of Christo-fascist Sharia through the government in a manner that is the complete opposite of the intent of the framers of our Constitution.

Remember Jefferson posited a wall of separation between Church and State.  The Nazi like Republicans want the state to not only endorse their superstition based bigotry but to institute Christian Sharia in the process.

They embrace Confederate family values to the point where they ignore the 14th amendment to the Constitution.

I have come to see their “conservative” movement as growing out of the same ideological well spring as the KKK, the John Birch Society and Father Charles Edward Coughlin.  Nazis or Nazi sympathizers one and all.

They hated Roosevelt’s “New Deal” and later the “Fair Deal”, the War on Poverty even though it helped thousands rise above a life of poverty and despair.  They have warred against unions to the point where unions no longer protect the vast majority of workers who have seen their lives reduced to virtual slavery, subjected to the indignity of involuntary searches in the form of drug tests.

Employer provided health insurance is a luxury enjoyed by the rapidly dwindling middle class while many of us are on the stay healthy or die program beloved by both the rich elite scum who run the health insurance corporations and the Republicans alike.

But you can always trust the Nazi like impulses of the Republicans to attack women’s right to control their own bodies and now to attack the new sacrificial lambs, transsexual and transgender people.

And you can always trust the cowardly Democrats to cave to this as they cower in fear of being called socialists or communists.

So we see Democrats offering to include “Prayer Care”

I promised a modest proposal. Here it is.

Get the private health insurance companies out of the business by instituting National Health Insurance funded by taxes paid by everyone.  So what if the rightwing Christian Republicans object that they do not to fund this plan.  There have been a whole lot of imperialistic wars and worthless war toys I would have rather not helped pay for but I did because that is the price of citizenship.

Let the Republicans and Christians who hate National Health insurance opt out and buy private insurance that we could call, “Christian Care”.  Christian Care could cover make your dick hard pills and treatment with the money saved from not providing health and reproductive care for women.  They would of course cover all costs of quiver full artificially induced multiple births with the money they save from treating older women.  Since the only function many of these ultra right wing Christians see women as having is the pleasing of men and bearing of children they could save a bundle of money by cutting off care for women past the age of menopause unless their husbands buy supplemental “Christian Care” packages.

Since everything is in “god’s hands” in the first and last place (alpha and omega babble) Christian Care could use prayer teams instead of expensive surgery and trained specialists.

There was a reason why the right wingers of the 19th century formed the Know Nothing Party.

Pinked

Yesterday was my day off and we went to see the Michael Moore’s film Capitalism: A Love Story down at the Magnolia Theater in the Village.

Afterward we went to a Borders Books so I could use one of the discount coupons they bombard me with.  Among other things I picked up a paper copy of Mother Jones Magazine.

From Mother Jones Magazine

Articles like this one are reason enough to support the independent muck raking and nay saying publications such as Mother Jones and In These Times

http://www.motherjones.com/media/2009/09/code-pink

Code Pink

By Lauren Sandler | Mon October 12, 2009 7:00 AM PST

WHEN MY DAUGHTER WAS BORN about a year ago, I was suddenly buried in pink. The only gender-neutral clothing appearing on my doorstep was the brown uniform of the guy delivering piles of packages containing untold yardage of powder-pink cloth: pale-pink blankets to swaddle pale-pink diaper covers, monochromatic onesies and rompers that redundantly announced “baby girl” in contrasting embroidery. (Thank God my generous gift givers did not send any of those bow-festooned headbands designed to confirm the femininity of a bald infant.)

We’ve come a long way from my early-’70s childhood. Those were good days to be an ungirly girl: I wore work boots while sharing a sandbox with the progeny of some of the authors of Our Bodies, Ourselves. In those circles, it would have been absurd to suggest that girls’ clothing be exclusively stitched with butterflies and blossoms or that boys be clad in T-shirts emblazoned with something requiring an engineering degree to build. Such totalizing distinctions were seen as defunct at best, and at worst, harmful. Yet many of the self-described feminists who had dressed their own children in primary colors and overalls were now deluging me with enough pink to adorn a Barbie convention. What happened?

Maybe they were just buying what’s out there. Kids’ clothing stores are sharply divided into boys’ and girls’ sections, with no demilitarized zone in between. Healthtex touts its toddler boys’ line as “rich with fun, rough and tough images of cars, dinosaurs and animals in vivid bright colors”; its girls’ line is “adorable with flower art and embroidery in light and airy colors.” Restoration Hardware’s nursery designs are exclusively pink or blue, as is almost all of Pottery Barn’s kids’ line. Everywhere you look, American kids appear to be waging a national color war.

Despite the aura of old-fashioned wholesomeness that surrounds it, the pink-blue phenomenon is actually a fairly recent one. Only in the last century have American babies worn any color at all: Throughout the 19th century, children of both sexes were dressed in long white gowns. When gendered palettes came into vogue in the first two decades of the 20th century, boys were assigned pink and girls blue. This was a nod to symbolism that associated red with manliness; pink was considered its kid-friendly shade. Blue was the color of the Virgin Mary’s veil and connoted femininity. In 1918, Ladies’ Home Journal advised mothers that “pink, being a more decided and stronger colour, is more suitable for the boy, while blue, which is more delicate and dainty, is prettier for the girl.”

By the late ’30s and early ’40s, the color code flipped. It’s not entirely clear why—Shirley Temple’s light-pink dresses? Navy-blue wartime uniforms?—but by the time the baby boom kicked in, the his and hers hues we take for granted were firmly established. Pop psychology and salesmanship intertwined as trade publications urged clothing store managers to segregate boys’ clothing from girls’ after age two, since little boys “feared” being perceived as girly. In 1959, the New York Times quoted a children’s clothing buyer, “A mother will allow her girl to wear blue, but daddy will never permit his son to wear pink.” Conveniently, the fashion split also meant that families with boys and girls had to shell out for at least two separate new wardrobes—for the rest of the kids’ childhood.

Fast-forward five decades, and the marketing of color-coded gender differences has entered a new phase—one that author Peggy Orenstein has described as the “relentless resegregation of childhood.” Whether fueled by anti-feminist backlash, third-wave feminists reclaiming their girliness, or the trickling down of the Juicy Couture aesthetic, bruiser boys and dainty girls are big business. The ITP—infants, toddlers, and preschoolers—apparel market is expected to be worth $20 billion next year. Disney recently announced plans to expand its $4 billion Princess franchise, originally aimed at three- to six-year-olds, into baby products. The brand’s head told the Wall Street Journal that the move was merely a response to “highly gender aware” moms who’d tired of cute yet asexual characters like Winnie the Pooh. The Princess line even has its own dedicated shade of pink: Pantone 241. As Lise Eliot, a neuroscientist and the author of Pink Brain, Blue Brain: How Small Differences Grow Into Troublesome Gaps—and What We Can Do About It, wonders, “In today’s hypermarketed world, what niche is easier to exploit than male or female?”

Yet beyond sapping parents’ paychecks and offending feminist sensibilities, does the current wave of pinkness actually have any negative effects on kids? After all, it’s not as if gender equality defined the epoch when babes were all tangled up in the lacy hems of white gowns. Pink itself isn’t the problem; it’s the message it conveys. That troubling message, explains Eliot in her sharp, information-packed, and wonderfully readable book, is that girls and boys are deeply dissimilar creatures from day one. She argues that the pink-blue split shapes some enduring assumptions about babies’ emotional lives—at a time when girls’ and boys’ brains are almost entirely alike. Eliot notes a study in which researchers concealed infants’ sex by dressing them in gender-neutral garb or referring to them by a popular name of the opposite sex. When adults were asked to describe the babies’ behavior, the “boys” were often said to be “angry” or “distressed”; the “girls” were thought to be “joyful” or “quiet.” Throw in some pink headbands and suddenly baby girls are from Venus.

Kids quickly get wrapped up in the pink-and-blue world. In an investigation into what was termed the PFD—Pink Frilly Dress—phenomenon, a team of social psychologists from New York University found that as early as age two, children’s sense of gender is heavily based upon notions of color and dress, with little girls becoming adamantly attached to pink. One mother reported that she had to prove to her three-year-old daughter that every single pink article of clothing she owned was in the laundry—literally showing her the soiled clothes—before the little girl would agree to wear any other color. (To be fair, that’s pretty typical picky toddler behavior.) Likewise, kids latch on to gendered toys like Thomas the Tank Engine (blue) and Dora the Explorer (pink). When offered a choice of a typical “boy” or “girl” plaything, three-year-old boys are 97 percent more likely to pick a toy like a truck.

Plenty of arguments have been made for why children gravitate toward trucks or dolls—boys like motion, girls are nurturing—yet no one has reliably proved that kids are hardwired with these preferences. As Eliot points out, “neither trucks nor dolls existed a hundred thousand years ago, when the human genome stabilized into its current sequence.”

But the theory that the PFD is rooted in our evolutionary past dies hard. Two years ago, neuroscientists from Newcastle University suggested that women are drawn to pinks and reds because their prehistoric ancestors had to be attuned to ripe berries and feverish infants. Early men, on the other hand, were connoisseurs of blue—a sign of good weather for hunting. Fortunately, most academic responses to this study suggested that it was a shade of bovine-manufactured brown.

But no matter how dubious their results, the media buzz about such studies adds to the popular suspicion that we can’t defy our evolutionary urges, which feeds back into the idea that it’s harmless—and maybe even essential—to indulge our kids’ inner princesses and train engineers. “The more we parents hear about hard-wiring and biological programming, the less we bother tempering our pink or blue fantasies,” writes Eliot.

Yet is pink really the gateway color to painting your nails in science class or an appearance in Girls Gone Wild? Buried in the PFD study is the reassurance that the pink phase is just that; many elementary-school-aged girls told the researchers that they had outgrown pink and now refused to wear it. Does that mean that these girls have also shed the “math is hard” mentality that we fear lurks in the folds of crinoline? Perhaps: Notably, the pink tidal wave has crested at the very moment that girls have caught up with—and often outperform—boys in the classroom. Now pundits and parents fret that it’s boys who are getting left behind, victims of a new bias against boyishness.

Clearly, trucks and tiaras are not destiny. Despite the racing set in my childhood bedroom, I still can’t drive a car, much less fix what’s under the hood. My closet is stuffed with high heels and dresses with cinched waists. I’d like to think that I chose my girliness, not the other way around.

And I’m ultimately more freaked out about the prospect of my daughter wearing tween-size thongs than pint-size princess outfits. Besides, I’ll admit that bright pink lights up her cheeks, and I’m happy to pair it occasionally with some cargo jeans from the boys’ department or a charcoal shirt. I’ve had quite a few of those on hand ever since I dumped a mass of pink presents into a giant lobster pot on my stove top, poured in some dye, and turned them a lovely shade of gray.

See Also: https://womenborntranssexual.com/2009/04/26/green-blankets/

Pope Says Priests are Chickenhawks not Pedophiles

In what has to be considered one of the most perversely pathetic excuses ever for priests behaving badly, the red Prada pump wearing former Hitler Youth, CEO of the misogynistic pandering to the powerful Catholic Church, made the astounding claim that it is improper to call the priests who have sex with underage boys perverts and pedophiles.

In an exercise in post modern word games where words mean what I say they mean and if you accept my definitions then it follows that these priests are chickenhawks and not peodophiles….

Oh well..

You can read the whole story here:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/sep/28/sex-abuse-religion-vatican

Sex abuse rife in other religions, says Vatican

The Vatican has lashed out at criticism over its handling of its paedophilia crisis by saying the Catholic church was “busy cleaning its own house” and that the problems with clerical sex abuse in other churches were as big, if not bigger.

In a defiant and provocative statement, issued following a meeting of the UN human rights council in Geneva, the Holy See said the majority of Catholic clergy who committed such acts were not paedophiles but homosexuals attracted to sex with adolescent males.

The statement, read out by Archbishop Silvano Tomasi, the Vatican’s permanent observer to the UN, defended its record by claiming that “available research” showed that only 1.5%-5% of Catholic clergy were involved in child sex abuse.

He also quoted statistics from the Christian Scientist Monitor newspaper to show that most US churches being hit by child sex abuse allegations were Protestant and that sexual abuse within Jewish communities was common.

He added that sexual abuse was far more likely to be committed by family members, babysitters, friends, relatives or neighbours, and male children were quite often guilty of sexual molestation of other children.

The statement said that rather than paedophilia, it would “be more correct” to speak of ephebophilia, a homosexual attraction to adolescent males.

“Of all priests involved in the abuses, 80 to 90% belong to this sexual orientation minority which is sexually engaged with adolescent boys between the ages of 11 and 17.”

The statement concluded: “As the Catholic church has been busy cleaning its own house, it would be good if other institutions and authorities, where the major part of abuses are reported, could do the same and inform the media about it.”

The Holy See launched its counter–attack after an international representative of the International Humanist and Ethical Union, Keith Porteous Wood, accused it of covering up child abuse and being in breach of several articles under the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Porteous Wood said the Holy See had not contradicted any of his accusations. “The many thousands of victims of abuse deserve the international community to hold the Vatican to account, something it has been unwilling to do, so far. Both states and children’s organisations must unite to pressurise the Vatican to open its files, change its procedures worldwide, and report suspected abusers to civil authorities.”

Representatives from other religions were dismayed by the Holy See’s attempts to distance itself from controversy by pointing the finger at other faiths.

Rabbi Joseph Potasnik, head of the New York Board of Rabbis, said: “Comparative tragedy is a dangerous path on which to travel. All of us need to look within our own communities. Child abuse is sinful and shameful and we must expel them immediately from our midst.”

A spokesman for the US Episcopal Church said measures for the prevention of sexual misconduct and the safeguarding of children had been in place for years.

Of all the world religions, Roman Catholicism has been hardest hit by sex abuse scandals. In the US, churches have paid more than $2bn (£1.25bn) in compensation to victims. In Ireland, reports into clerical sexual abuse have rocked both the Catholic hierarchy and the state.

The Ryan Report, published last May, revealed that beatings and humiliation by nuns and priests were common at institutions that held up to 30,000 children. A nine-year investigation found that Catholic priests and nuns for decades terrorised thousands of boys and girls, while government inspectors failed to stop the abuse.

Trans-Inclusive ENDA Introduced

Whoopee-do…

Yeah… Yeah… I know I’m supposed to be enthusiastic and ready to get down with the cause.

But it’s hard for me to get beyond an apathetic feeling of, “Yeah that great.”

Which is my general feeling towards the whole transgender social construct.

I’ve felt more screwed over by transgender activists colonizing my life than I ever have by any other group with the possible exception of the Taliban Christians.

I get positively pissed off when any of them try to tell me I am transgender because they decided to define me as such.

With out my consent.

Don’t get me wrong.  I’m down for ENDA.  I’m a far more femme than butch lefty hippie lesbian and over the years I’ve had to put up with getting sexually harassed and even terminated for it.

But my past medical history hasn’t been a part of it.

I’ve never felt like I was part of the Johnny come late crowd that wanted to graft a T on to the end of Gay and Lesbian Community.  I sort of feel that like bisexuals they really aren’t part of the community that happened after Stonewall.

I feel that way too many of the transgender movement are really straight full time cross-dressing heterosexual men who want to come and run their numbers in lesbian bars.  I also remember all the homophobia that was present and obvious in the pre-Tapestry Tri-Ess groups.  The misogyny and homophobia of the closet case Prince of many names who founded the Transgender Movement.

A trans-inclusive ENDA won’t do shit for me.

I will still be a woman in a patriarchal misogynistic world having to deal with all the sexism that men throw at women.

I will still be affected by the lack of the Equal Rights Amendment.

I will still be a working class member of the servant industry they call retail sales.  I will still curse the rich right wing elite who have destroyed the unions.

I will curse the idea workers can be forced to pee in bottles in spite of having lived clean and sober for many years.

A Trans-Inclusive ENDA won’t do shit for people when there are 700 equally qualified people with the same level of resume looking for a job above part-time no-benefits retail sales.

Welcome to the neo-lib/neo-con post industrial free market world where employers can terminate at will.

When y’all whip out the poor me, I can’t get a job in my field because I am transgender it smells to me a lot like you expected to continue to utilize your male privilege.

Welcome to the real world.  I work the floor of a big box store with half my crew having B.A.s,  a Ph.D. candidate as well as people who used to make 6 figures.

For many of us age is the factor that condemns us to retail hell.  For others it is being the wrong color or class, or both.

ENDA isn’t going to do shit about that.