Almost Done With The Latte-Sipping Activist Crowd

TransGriot Note: Guest Post from Indigo Sage Morada discussing her frustrations with activists in her area focused moreso on the illusion of inclusion and talk about checking their privilege than actually doing the hard work to make both happen.


I am seriously wondering if I should even deal with the latte sipping "activist" crowd. White, young adult LGBT activists in the Michigan area are some of the most privileged and undercover bigoted people I ever met.

They sit there and preach about equality, checking privilege and compassion, acceptance and open-mindedness. But their personal lives are another matter. I've experienced intolerance, bigotry, outright hostility and just douchy treatment from privileged activists.

They are too busy going to their coffeeshops, drinking micro brews and congregating with clones of themselves to care.

Why was I often the only black person there? Why did black people who went to groups felt unwelcome? Quite simply, the lot of them are too absorbed in their hedonistic lives and pursuits to actually care. They actively exclude people who are not like them.

I finally concluded that people like me, who are truly diverse.....we are not welcome in their communities. We are too different, too alien to them. We are a constant reminder of their privilege, the suffering incurred by us reminds them that the system they are part of does this to us, it reminds them they they are involved and benefit from the system they oppresses us all.

And instead of checking their privilege, they just remove all sources of guilt and live in divine ignorance. They pat themselves on the back and tell themselves they are not a part of the problem. They hang in crowds of the same latte sipping clowns and tell themselves they are pro diversity.

They are not. They are just as privileged as anyone else upper middle class, white and socially acceptable.

They just get a free pass because they are LGBT.

And I want nothing to do with them. They are a obstacle to equality. I am no one's token. Not anymore.

Thanks, Sadie!

It would be a better world if everyone knew that transgender people have the same hopes and dreams as everyone else. We like to make friends and want to go to school. Transgender people want to get good jobs and go to doctors like they are exactly the same. It really isn't that hard to like transgender people because we are like everyone else."  Sadie, January 21, 2013 



Little did I know when I posted a  transkid's essay on my blog yesterday expressing her dream for the world it would take off like it did and go viral..

Sadie's essay is now up at HuffPo and there's a nice story about this young girl like us along with some photos.. .

My  thoughts when I first saw it was that it needed to be read by a wider audience.  It also encapsulated the conflicting emotions I and a lot of trans people were feeling in the wake of President Obama's second inaugural speech and witnessing him give a shoutout to the GL community in front of the nation and the entire world.

And yes, it was a trans youngling fearlessly speaking her mind through the power of the written word..

Make no mistake about it, President Obama has been the most trans friendly president in American history.  There's a lot of trans affirmative policy that has come out of his administration during his first term that has helped our community and I expect that we'll see more of the same in this second one.  It's why we transfolks busted our butts in the 2008 and 2012 campaign seasons and donated our T-bills to help him get elected twice.  

Yes, actions speak louder than words. But it bothered me that our transkids didn't get to have the affirming moment that gay and lesbian kids did of seeing and hearing the leader of their nation specifically mention them in his inauguration speech.  

To me that was important especially after the antics of the British Transphobic Troika exploded on the other side of The Pond in the weeks leading up to the inauguration and our TERF's trying to join the transphobic party.

I submit that because of the overwhelming transphobic negativity that transkids see and hear aimed at their trans elders and themselves, it is vitally important for them to develop a bedrock sense of self esteem and pride in who they are as trans human beings.  It's also important that they learn how to be fearless in speaking their minds, even if they are at times a minority of one.

It's why I and a lot of trans elders wished in that inauguration moment President Obama had said the T-word in his speech.   It's important for us and our transkids to hear our president that we helped get elected SAY it like gay and lesbian people, their kids, and more importantly the nation and the world got to hear Monday. 


Sadie's essay was important on another level.   It reminds us trans elders who we are really fighting for besides ourselves when we seek to pass trans human rights coverage. Hopefully when we adults start having drama with each other, we'll think about Sadie's essay and immediately return to having a laser like focus on the trans human rights prize.  

Thanks Sadie, for reminding us that your dream is also ours as well, and we have much work to do right now to ensure that your dream is a reality by the time you hit adulthood.

It's also a reminder to myself and the transcommunity that we not only need to be paying attention to the wise words of our trans elders, but the wise words of trans kids like yourself as well.

Sadie's Dream For The World

TransGriot Note: While the GL community was justifiably jumping up and down excited because President Obama mentioned them in his second inaugural address, an 11 year old transkid in the western US was writing her own essay on this inaugural day that also happened to fall on MLK, Jr Day.  

Sadie's essay highlights who we adult transpeople are really fighting for when we push for trans human rights here in the United States and around the world.  

Let's redouble our efforts to make trans human rights a reality for Sadie Croft and ourselves.

***

Sadie's Dream for the World.

"The world would be a better place if everyone had the right to be themselves, including people who have a creative gender identity and expression. Transgender people are not allowed the freedom to do things everyone else does, like go to the doctor, go to school, get a job, and even make friends.

Transgender kids like me are not allowed to go to most schools because the teachers think we are different from everyone else. The schools get afraid of how they will talk with the other kids' parents, and transgender kids are kept secret or told not to come there anymore. Kids are told not to be friends with transgender kids, which makes us very lonely and sad.

When they grow up, transgender adults have a hard time getting a job because the boss thinks the customers will be scared away. Doctors are afraid of treating transgender patients because they don't know how to take care of them, and some doctors don't really want to help them. Transgender patients like me travel to other states to see a good doctor.

It would be a better world if everyone knew that transgender people have the same hopes and dreams as everyone else. We like to make friends and want to go to school. Transgender people want to get good jobs and go to doctors like they are exactly the same. It really isn't that hard to like transgender people because we are like everyone else."

Our Struggle

TransGriot Note: Guest post by Denise Norris that needs to go up on King Day 2013.   Loved the video too.




First and foremost our struggle is about Gender Expression Diversity - the equality to express our gender identity as we see fit to do so. It is a struggle we have faced since King Josiah conveniently discovered new Mosaic laws under the Temple and created a state-sponsored gender binary to suppress the gender expression diversity of the Assyrian and Babylonian cultures.

Secondly, our struggle is to spread the awareness that Transgender is about Transcending Gender and not simply a replacement word for 'transsexual' or for 'cross-dresser'. All people should be allowed to transcend the gender binary without discrimination or harassment by those who surrender to its mundane comforts.

Lastly, our struggle is against the destructive effects of the social stigmatization which occurs simply because we transcend gender. The waste of human spirit and talent because of gender expression stigmatization is tragic and could so easily be avoided.

Above all, it is this last point that is the primary motivation for our struggle - to prevent more lives from being needlessly twisted and broken by gender expression stigmatization.

Denise A Norris
20 Jan 2013

'Django Unchained,' Quentin Tarantino's Broken Clock Moment

 

TransGriot: Note: Guest Post from Renee of Womanist Musings 

Long before Django Unchained was released on Christmas day, there was a lot of buzz about this movie. Spike Lee called Django Unchained an insult to his ancestors and swore that he would not see it. On just about every major Black blog and Facebook page, there has been a discussion about how this movie deals with slavery, whether or not Tarantino is a racist and what this film says about the media in general. 

Leonardo Di Caprio has publicly stated his difficulty with having to repeatedly use the word nigger in the film, Samuel Jackson has refused to answer any questions regarding the usage of the word unless the journalist actually says nigger instead of the "N word" and Kerry Washington has spoken about the difficulty of her role and the staged whipping.   This movie was difficult for the actors, for the viewers and the critics.  In terms of race, I cannot remember the last time we had a movie become so much a part of the social discussion.

I am going to preface this review with the fact that I am not in the least bit a fan of Quentin Tarantino. I think he is far too comfortable using the word nigger in his work and much of the time, it adds nothing to the plot or development of the character.  A White man can never understand how deeply casual usage of this slur hurts Blacks and Tarantino's treatment of the pain itself, has a history of being cavalier at best.

Without doubt, the usage of nigger was ubiquitous throughout Django Unchained but unlike other Tarantino movies, a setting of two years before the civil war absolutely justified its usage. It would have been ahistorical for White plantation owners to use any other word to refer to Blacks, let alone their slaves.  It is wrong to apply 21st century standards and moral sensibilities to this time and would have made slavery itself seem like a benign institution.  The problem is that given Tarantino's comfort with the slur, it makes acceptance of its inclusion in Django Unchained, feels like giving him permission to continue to litter his work with it. 

I find it interesting that there was so much fixation on the word nigger considering the context, but no one had anything to say about grown men being forced to fight to death, a slave being eaten alive by a dog, whippings and brandings.  The very idea that Quentin Tarantino reduced the barbarity of slavery by his usage of slurs, when these violent events were a part of the movie is ridiculous. As a viewer, I had no doubt that Black life was viewed as cheap and that slavery itself was beyond dehumanizing. In fact, the brutality of the violence itself, made the moments of brevity absolutely necessary to give the viewer a form of relief.

Django Unchained is like no other western I have ever seen because of it's theme and of course Black protagonist.  Watching it, I could not help but realise that no Black director could have made this film because it would have been difficult to get the financial backing.  Even George Lucas had to fund Red Tails himself because studios refuse to believe that movies about Black history, or which have a largely Black cast, can possibly be successful outside of the coonery produced by Tyler Perry.

Though Django Unchained is a western and therefore filled with violence, many have refused to consider the genre and instead have labeled this simply a revenge fantasy. Tavis (I will sell out my people for funding) Smiley had the following to say:

The suffering of black people is not reducible to revenge and retribution. The black tradition has taught the nation what it means to love. Put it another way: black people have learned to love America in spite of, not because of, so if the justification for the film in the end is, as Jamie Foxx’s Django says, “What, kill white people and get paid for it? What’s wrong with that?”­ well again, black suffering is not reducible to revenge and retribution.

It's true that the Black experience is not solely reducible to revenge; however, the turn the other cheek doctrine of Dr. King is also not the definition of the Black experience. Yes, Blacks have resisted oppression and we have done so both forcefully and violently.  Does Smiley believe that there was never a slave uprising or that Haitians peacefully asked the French for their freedom?  Does he think that Blacks always slept fearfully waiting for the Klan to ride, or can he understand that some stood on their porches with shotguns determined to meet a threat to their lives with one in kind?  Not all resistance was, or is, non-violent, nor should we necessarily demonize people who respond to the violence that Whiteness has perpetrated on Black people with violence. Anger, rage and a desire for retribution are a part of the Black experience; we have simply been taught not to validate it, or see it as a viable response.  Because one of the fears of Whiteness is a reckoning for the great evil of slavery and Jim Crow, revenge has solidly been discouraged.

Quentin Tarantino tapped into this emotion, which is why it has resonated so strongly. Black rage is a real phenomenon and it is justified, I am just not sure that Quentin Tarantino is the one to tell this story because it is so far outside of his lived experience. Take for instance the character of the house slave Stephen, played by Samuel L. Jackson.  Stephen was clearly painted as evil and was directly responsible for Django, Dr. Shultz and Broomhilda being unable to leave the plantation peacefully.  When Calvin Candie was shot dead by Shultz, it was Stephen who fell to the floor ravaged by grief.  There has long been a problematic binary of house slaves equal sell out/ field slaves pro black.  To be clear, both groups were slaves and there is no such thing as a benign form of slavery.  The relationship between house slaves and their White owners was far more complex than Django Unchained could even hope to portray.

Django Unchained is a movie worth seeing.  Far too many people are willing to form an opinion on the movie based on what they have read or their discomfort with Quentin Tarantino. It adds to the dialogue about race and slavery even if Quentin Tarantino is so high on himself that he now sees himself as the sole arbiter of Black history in film.  Despite his Whiteness and out of control arrogance, he has made a contribution worth watching and thinking about.  Even a broken clock is right twice a day and Django Unchained is most certainly Quentin Tarantino's moment.

True, Guns Don't Kill People But...

TransGriot Note: Been a while since I spotlighted the brilliant commentary of Kat Rose on this blog, and this one definitely needed to be signal boosted in the wake of that jacked up press conference this morning by Wayne LaPierre in which he talked loud but said nothing as usual in the wake of another mass shooting their NRA lobbying paves the way for.

Kat has very definite opinions about that too, but let me give you a taste of her commentary in the wake of the Sandy Hook shooting last week that I needed to signal boost.

Despite that, people like the Connecticut shooter(s) aren’t what worry me most.

What does?

Morons.

Morons with machine guns (or any other kind of gun.)

And, no, I don’t mean mass murderers who, after the fact, do suddenly begin to care about what the legal system might do to them and then try to game the system with an insanity plea – and I don’t even mean people who may truly be insane (though they are technically a subset of who I’m talking about.)
I mean morons – the people you, I and everyone know who you would never even let touch the remote control to your television because they’d somehow manage to break the entire system, from the DVR to the dish and right up to the satellite itself…

but who, if they suddenly get a hankerin’ after managing to watch at least part of Sudden Impact before the system crashes via their incompetence with the remote control, can run out and buy and one of them thar big-ass automoatic pistols that Clint used in the movie.

read the rest of 'True Enough, Guns Don't Kill People' at ENDABlog 2.0

It Doesn't Pay At The Ballot Box To Be A Misogynst

Guest post by Renee of Womanist Musings, who is all that and four bags of ketchup flavored potato chips.

One of the reasons that the GOP believed that Barack Obama was elected four years ago, is that they weren’t conservative enough.  This election cycle, several GOP candidates increased their misogynist rhetoric and engaged in what can only be described as a war against women.  Considering that women make up fifty percent of the electorate, this was hardly a smart decision, as the election results proved last night. 

Todd Akin who referred to doctors who provide abortions (which by the way is a perfectly legal medical procedure), as “terrorists,” didn’t fare well last night.  Apparently these doctors who have undergone years of medical training perform abortions on women who aren’t actually pregnant and scare women into making the decision to abort.  By his reasoning, women aren’t capable of making up their own minds about what to do with their bodies.  Todd Akin also at some point must have failed basic biology because he also believes that women cannot get pregnant from rape. “If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down, Akin said.”  Don’t feel sorry for Akin because he lost the election last night to the incumbent Sen. Claire McCaskill because he now has time to go back to school and actually learn some basic biology.  Education should after all be a lifelong effort.

Tom Smith who tried to create distance between himself and Todd Akin compared pregnancy conceived through rape to being a single mother.  Someone should have advised him that you cannot run away from misogyny while sticking your foot in your mouth.  Tom Smith lost his election bid to democrat Bob Casey.  

Richard Mourdock  came under fire for saying, "I struggled with it myself for a long time, but I came to realize life is that gift from God and I think even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something that God intended to happen."  I suppose this is a polite way of saying that when life gives lemons, make lemonade.  Well, Mourodock better get his lemonade stand ready because he lost his election bid to Democrat  Joe Donnelly in Indiana. 

Joe Walsh wanted the world to know that he is pro birth no matter what the situation is. Apparently, modern medicine means that the life of the mother is never at risk.  He stated, “There is no such exception as life of the mother, and as far as health of the mother, same thing.” I wonder if he believes all of the science aired on Star Trek as well? Joe Walsh lost his re-election bid last night to Democratic challenger Tammy Duckworth in Illinois' 8th congressional district.

Last night’s election results was more than a win for President Barack Obama, it was a win for women; it was a win for reproductive freedom.  All of these straight cisgender white men will never be in a position to have to choose between carrying a pregnancy to term and having an abortion, yet for some reason, they believe that they have the right to legislate our wombs. There can be no other word to describe this than misogyny.   

Uniformly, they based their convictions on religious beliefs and by so doing, have forgotten that the U.S. has a separation between church and state for a reason. Christianity is far from the only religion in America and its place is most certainly not in government. Measures like sex education, access to free or low cost birth control, as well as lessening the income gap between men and women would go a long way to reducing the number of abortions but that is not something any of these men advocated for.  Instead their agenda was to control women and sympathise with rapists.  

As a woman, these decisions buoy my belief in the system.  Due to free speech laws, these men certainly had the right to say what they did but that does not mean that they should be free of consequences.  The people have spoken and advocating for a lessening of reproductive freedom is not a something the country is interested in.  Hopefully this will be a lesson to legislators that a woman’s womb belongs only to her and should not be subject to government intervention.  

Though the U.S. is still clearly very much a sexist society because women have yet to reach parity with men and this is especially true when it comes to marginalized women, these election results prove that we are willing to use the power we do have to our benefit.  Hopefully, it will serve to remind young women that the rights which our foremothers fought so valiantly for will always be under threat until we achieve true equality in all spheres of life with men. This is why there will never be an election that we can afford to sit home and pretend that what happens does not affect our lives.  Even if you personally believe that abortion is not something you would choose, women should have the right to decide individually.  Every vote matters when it comes to ensuring that women retain our right to choose.  

Ehipassiko-Because You're Stupid

Another one of Cristan Williams' posts from her Ehipassiko blog that needs to be signal boosted whacking all those conservasheeple who only get their news from Fox Noise and AM Talk radio.

Here's a taste of it:.

Yup. That’s right. You were duped. You were lied to. There is no quote wherein Obama talks about population wealth distribution. They edited the above speech and lied about what he was talking about… and you believed it. He’s clearly talking about moving resources from ineffective government agencies and redistributing those resources to agencies with “innovative in thinking, what are the delivery systems that are actually effective.”

Yep, if you watch FOX Noise or AM talk radio and believe everything you hear is the gospel truth without engaging those critical thinking skills, that's a problem because FOX noise.is nothing but a 24 hour purveyor of right wing propaganda. 

but here's the link to the rest of Cristan's post at Ehipassiko.

Gettng To Out On The Hill On A Dime

TransGriot Note: The 2012 edition of Out On The Hill is rapidly approaching, and for our collegiate younglings who would like to take part in this empowering event, here's a guest post from Toni-Michelle Williams, one of the members of the NBJC Leadership Advisory Council who I met at last year's Out On The Hill along with some of her Norfolk State classmates.

Attending the National Black Justice Coalition's  OUT on the Hill Black LGBT Leadership Summit last year was both an honor and a blessing. I left knowing who I was and who I wanted to be. I fell in love all over again with my Black LGBT family. As Emerging Leaders, we don't always have the means to pay for conference costs such as registration fees, lodging, and meals. That didn't stop me (and the ten Norfolk State University students I recruited). And it shouldn't stop you. Here's all you need to know about the upcoming summit and six steps for you to attend OUT on the Hill at practically no expense.

 

On September 19-22, 2012, over 200 Black LGBT leaders and activists from across the country will once again gather in the nation's capital for the 3rd annual OUT on the Hill. Attendees will participate in an inspiring week of discussion, strategizing and organizing as well as educate congressional leaders and federal agencies about Black LGBT public policy concerns.

OUT on the Hill was a liberating experience for me and my colleagues. As African American LGBT and ally students, it is important for us to gain knowledge of not only the politics of the overall LGBT movement, but the strategies specifically dedicated to the experiences of people of color. OUT on the Hill provides opportunities for Emerging Leaders to network amongst each other, while providing a safe space for us as future leaders to hold conversations that will advance our community. The summit also allows Emerging Leaders to connect with powerful Black LGBT politicians, activists, creatives and more.

OUT on the Hill is an experience that will change your life as LGBT person of color and as an Emerging Leader at a Historically Black College and University (HBCU) or majority institution. It is an experience worth fighting for. By the end of the journey you will be equipped with the tools necessary to own your power.

OUT on the Hill - Video Promo

Six Steps to Gain OUT on the Hill Sponsorship from Your College/University

1. Point out the pluses. Notable conferences are typically events that college campuses sponsor. The college gains "bragging rights" (they will get to boast that their students attended special briefings at the White House and met with Members of Congress) and students return to the institution with a wealth of knowledge to share with the campus community. It's a win-win all around.  
2.  Know your target. Seek out departments that are in need of knowledge on LGBT-inclusion. These include the Student Life and Engagement, Office of the Provost, Student and Resident Affairs, Women's Center, Sociology Department, Gender and Women's Studies and the Political Science Department. Maybe there has been an increase of reports of violence against LGBT students or a new women's center recently opened. Take advantage of these opportunities to be a resource for information and cultural sensitivity.  
3. Be relatable. Connect your experiences as an LGBT person to their broader research or mission. For example, approach the School of Education with an emphasis on bullying and how LGBT students of color are disproportionately victims. Or stress the importance of advocating on behalf of homeless LGBT youth to the School of Social Work. The possibilities are endless.  
4. Identify allies. Speak to Deans and other administrators who will have access to funds that could possibly promote awareness of these causes. Look to faculty advisors of student groups and professors of LGBT-inclusive courses.  
5. Be a champion of change. Know what you and/or your student organization want to accomplish on and off campus. Then market yourselves as ambassadors of change and diversity for your college campus.  
6. Be prepared. Utilize resources and statistics on everything from hate crimes to transgender equality from national organizations such as the National Black Justice Coalition (NBJC), the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), Gay & Lesbian Student Education Network (GLSEN), and the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force. You will be able to make a better case for why your presence at OUT on the Hill is imperative.

See you at OUT on the Hill, September 19-22, 2012. Read more about this year's summit here!  Contact NBJC's Programs Associate Je-Shawna Wholley via email at  jwholley@nbjc.org with any questions.

- Antonio "Toni-Michelle" Williams

Antonio "Toni-Michelle" Williams studies journalism at Norfolk State University and hails from Atlanta, Georgia. Her most significant leadership position is as President of LEGASI, which serves as NSU's Gay-Straight Alliance organization. Under her two year leadership, the organization's membership has significantly increased. Toni-Michelle is also a distinguished member of the National Black Justice Coalition's Leadership Advisory Council.

Eyewitness To LGBT Foundation

TransGriot Note: Guest Post by Denise Norris

I want to share some eyewitness history about the founding of LGBT and the original meaning of Transgender. As some of you know, I participated in the formative events back in the early 90s in New York City.

A Transgender Nation

The word transgender dates back decades, well before it was used by Virginia Prince in the 1980s. Overtime, it has been used to represents all types of people who transcend society’s definitions of gender, from episodic crossdressers to transsexual woman. It was first publicly re-purposed in its modern incarnation by Anne Ogborn when she started Transgender Nation in 1993 which she modeled on Queer Nation, a predominately LG radical young activist organization that arose out of the AIDS crisis and lack of civil protections for Queer people. More and more people began to substitute the work transgender when referring to themselves to avoid the stigmatization associated with ‘transsexual’ Over time, this has lead to many cis-people thinking that transgender only applies to people who have, are or intend to change their sex.

That being said, Transgender is actually an umbrella sociopolitical term intended to cover all aspects of non-conforming gender. It is not a medical term, it is not a condition, it is not something to pathologize. It was adopted to represent all the people who face discrimination because they have a non-conforming gender in the eyes of society.

So why was it important that the term was so broad? Simply put, we realized that all the groups under the umbrellas (including drag, intersex, crossdressing, butch women, fem men, transsexuals, etc…) alone lacked the numbers to effectively reform society to stop discrimination and achieve equality.

But even then, we still lacked the numbers to effectively press forward an agenda for equal rights and stopping discrimination.

Enter LGBT

While transgender was slowly becoming an accepted term within the Queer world, there was still great resistance with the older gays and lesbians who represented a majority of G&L community. Trans people were frequently frozen out of G&L support centers or we were tolerated, but a member of the family.

Things soon came to a head. 1994 was the 25th anniversary of the riots at Stonewall in NYC and we found ourselves completed excluded from the Huge Pride March that year. We were told we would have a place in the alternative march. Even worse, in the slew of Gay history books that appeared at that time, the role of what we now call transgender people in the riots was completely excised. Needless to say, we fought back and won inclusion in the parade. I recommend http://books.google.com/books?id=KmMEAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PP1&ots=YuNwga5SVH&pg=PA59#v=onepage&q&f=false to those who want to get a better understanding of the dynamics of the times.

Getting the G&L community to back down and include us acted a seed crystal in a supersaturated solution. More and more of the progressive G&L thinkers reconsidered the demands of bisexuals and transgenders for inclusion. Many people were pushing for the adoption of a word like queer, but for many, it was too loaded with negative history and as a result, Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender was adopted, building on the existing Gay and Lesbian theme. Eventually this was changed to Lesbian, Gay Bisexual and Transgender to place more focus on the needs of woman and so, LGBT was born.

It was never intended that LGBT stop at Transgender. The original intent was for a rainbow of people, celebrating diversity and inclusion, while fighting against discrimination and for equality for every one under that rainbow. According to Gilbert Baker, creator of the rainbow flag, this rainbow included everyone.

Forward to the Future

Eventually, I believe that we will find a better moniker than LGBT to describe our rainbow, but like the old G&L guardians that sought (and still seek to exclude) T, there will be people who have found safety in the identity of LGBT who will resist the changes still necessary to have equality for all people in our spectrum. I, for one, look forward to true equality for all people who don’t comply with the gender binary, be they gay, lesbian, bi/omni/pan, trans, intersex, questioning or any other member of my family.

Lt. Gov. Carroll: How Dare You Denigrate Me and My Beautiful Black Lesbian and Bi Sisters?

TransGriot Note: I had my say about Florida Lt. Gov  Jennifer Carroll's jacked up comments about my Black lesbian and bi sisters, and now I'm pleased to signal boost for my readers this post from the NBJC blog and from NBJC Communications Director Kimberly McLeod

July 16, 2012   06:26 PM

Florida's Lt. Gov. Jennifer Carroll is on the defensive (and has apparently lost her mind) after former staff member Carletha Cole claimed that she caught Carroll and her female travel aide in a compromising sexual position in Carroll's capitol office. In an absurd attempt to deflect questions about the alleged same-sex encounter, Carroll told a local news outlet that Black lesbian and bisexual women don’t look like her.

“My husband doesn’t want to hear that. He knows the type of woman I am for 29 years. I’m the one that’s married for 29 years. The accuser is the one that’s single for a long time,” Carroll continued on camera while chuckling. “Usually Black women that look like me don’t engage in relationships like that.”
What exactly do Black lesbians and bisexual women look like, Lt. Gov. Carroll, since you seem to know so well? And what “type of woman” have you been for the last 29 years that by default makes you not lesbian or bisexual?

Actually, don’t answer that. Because who knows what more ignorance and utter word vomit you can further spew. As a self-identified Black lesbian who embraces and celebrates her femininity, allow me to answer that for you.

At the core of Carroll’s problematic statement is the misconception that people “turn” gay because they are unattractive, cannot meet someone of the opposite sex and out of desperation “switch teams.” Being gay isn’t our “Plan B.” It is part of our identity that isn’t dependent on our physical features or “success rate” with men. Someone’s marriage to a man, good looks, or femininity isn’t evidence of anything related to their orientation.

There is nothing “wrong” or deviant about being a lesbian. In fact, the lesbians I’ve met personally, as friends, co-workers, lovers, partners and mentors, are some of the most radiant Black women – inside and out -- I’ve been blessed to know. They are mothers, sisters, daughters, community organizers, spiritual leaders, artists, wordsmiths, CEOs, doctors, and more. Their brilliance and beauty is undeniable. These women engage in some of the most loving and committed relationships I have witnessed.

What “type” of woman exactly are you, Lt. Gov. Carroll? You seem so keen on differentiating yourself from me and my Black lesbian and bi sisters. And what makes your relationship with your husband so different from the thousands of Black women raising children together? Inquiring minds would like to know.

The fact that Lt. Gov. Carroll went out of her way to specify that Black lesbians and bisexual women don’t “look like her” implies that non-Black lesbians and bi women are entitled to more a fluid gender expression. This is yet another problematic notion of female sexuality so many Black women, and women in general, have internalized from the patriarchal policing of Black female sexuality.

To add insult to injury, then there’s Lt. Gov. Carroll’s jab at single Black women. As if those single for extended periods of time have somehow gotten the short end of the stick, or, gasp, are gay. Heaven forbid there are Black women who are single by choice or who are happily single for long lengths of time.
For the record, this is what a Black lesbian looks like. They look like me. They look like comedian Wanda Sykes, actress Jasika Nicole, model Az Marie, singer Tracy Chapman, activist Angela Davis, poet Staceyann Chin and others. Many, Lt. Gov. Carroll, look just like you.

You can defend your marriage without dissing Black lesbian and single women. You can protect your reputation without revoking Black lesbian femininity.

That is why I am standing with the National Black Justice Coalition, the nation’s leading Black LGBT civil rights organization, and with Black lesbians, bisexual women and our allies everywhere, demanding that Lt. Gov. Carroll retract her statement immediately.

Tweet your photo to @NBJContheMove to show Lt. Gov. Carroll and others what Black lesbians look like. Use the hashtag #whatablacklesbianlookslike.

Kimberley McLeod

Kimberley McLeod serves as NBJC's Director of Communications.

Janet Mock Discusses The #GirlsLikeUs Twitter Campaign

Janet Mock recently launched the #GirlsLikeUs Twitter campaign (which I enthusiastically support) and explains why she did so in a recent post on her blog that I will happily signal boost here.

Here's a little sample of it. 

I found it exhilarating that these young women were naming themselves, that they were identifying how they wanted and that they exerted themselves in a world that rarely, if ever made room for them. I found myself uplifted by the “girls…with something extra” because it wasn’t coming from a place of want or lack. It didn’t fall prey to the tired, simplistic, limiting media sound bite of “girl trapped in boy’s body.” Instead it celebrated who we were as trans women: We have something extra. You can take that literally or figuratively, which is how I choose to read it: We are extra, we are more, we are special, we are everything.

Read the rest of what she had to say about it.

Pastor Sean Harris Advocates Beating The Gay Away

Guest Post From Renee of Womanist Musings

Next week there will be a vote on Amendment 1, which would add a ban on gay marriage to North Carolina's constitution.  Filled with false righteousness and determined to influence the decision, Pastor Sean Harris of Berean Baptist Church in Fayetteville, took to his pulpit to advocate strict adherence to the gender binary, and compulsory heterosexuality for all children.  For this bigot, conformity begins in the home and to ensure that children are properly abused, Harris even go as far as to suggest that fathers should punch their sons.

So your little son starts to act a little girlish when he is four years old and instead of squashing that like a cockroach and saying, "Man up, son, get that dress off you and get outside and dig a ditch, because that is what boys do." You get out the camera, and you start taking pictures of Johnny acting like a female, and then you upload it to YouTube, and everybody laughs about it, and the next thing you know, this dude, this kid, is acting out childhood fantasies that should have been squashed.

Shaming a four year old child for expression is disgusting.  It had me thinking about an incident I had about a month ago in which a parent decided to inform me that I was going to make my youngest son Mayhem gay, by allowing him to wear nail polish and encouraging his love of dancing. As you might well imagine, the conversation did not go well for the bigot.  What Pastor Harris is advocating is so incredibly emotionally harmful for children.  Kids should be free to explore who they are in a safe environment without constantly being policed, and if they do happen to be GLBT kids, no amount of forced conformity is going to change that.  All you are teaching your child is that hate is acceptable, and that you don't believe in unconditional love.

Can I make it any clearer? Dads, the second you see your son dropping the limp wrist, you walk over there and crack that wrist. Man up. Give him a good punch. Ok? "You are not going to act like that. You were made by God to be a male and you are going to be a male."

 So, if ordering a change in behaviour does not work, it's okay to be violent with a child.  I hope to heaven that this man does not have any children. As a pastor, he is supposed to minister to his flock and tend to the weak and defenseless, and instead he is using his power to do the exact opposite.  What ever happened to love one another as I have loved you? No, it's only more violence in the name of God and parental rights.

Can I make it any clearer? Dads, the second you see your son dropping the limp wrist, you walk over there and crack that wrist. Man up. Give him a good punch. Ok? "You are not going to act like that. You were made by God to be a male and you are going to be a male."

Once again, Harris is preaching the gender binary as though it is not a pure construction of society.  There is no specific way to be a man.  Gay men don't stop being male when they become aware of their sexuality. The very fact that he could advocate punching a child tells me that he has no conscience, and no respect for anyone who isn't exactly like him.  This kind of attitude, is what is behind the suicides of gay teens across North America.  Harris isn't preaching the gospel, he is using hate speech to promote genocide as far as I am concerned.

And when your daughter starts acting too butch you reign her in. And you say, "Oh, no, sweetheart. You can play sports. Play them to the glory of God. But sometimes you are going to act like a girl and walk like a girl and talk like a girl and smell like a girl and that means you are going to be beautiful. You are going to be attractive. You are going to dress yourself up."

I guess it's nice to see that he is an equal opportunity bigot. Girls can play sports everyone, they just have to remember to make themselves pretty on a regular basis.  Really?  All women are good for are their appearance and their ability to please men?   If it weren't so disgustingly sad, I would laugh.

You say, "Can I take charge like that as a parent?"
Yeah, you can. You are authorized. I just gave you a special dispensation this morning to do that.

Right, his hatred makes him so powerful that he can give a dispensation over ruling the law of the land. This is beyond arrogance.  Children aren't our possessions even though they are vulnerable and dependent on us to take care of them.  If anything, their vulnerability and innocence makes us responsible for caring for them and respecting them as little people.

From start to finish this man has advocated strict adherence to the gender binary, compulsory heterosexuality and child abuse. When I look at him, I don't see a man of God, but a hate filled angry bigot with too much power and less common sense then God gave cabbage.  Attitudes like this are exactly why I no longer belong to any form of organized religion.  I feel that it is a stain upon Christ's teachings to advocate hate instead of loving thy neighbor.  I don't believe any loving God would advocate harming another in this fashion.

I Shouldn't Have To Think So Much About My Hair

Guest post from Renee of Womanist Musings

So as readers know, I have had natural hair for about 10 years now.  First I wore dread locks which hung almost to my behind.  After years of wearing that I got tired and wanted a new look, so I did the big chop.  I knew without a doubt that I never ever wanted to relax my hair again.  I know that the chemicals are not good for my hair or my scalp, and I felt that straight hair was capitulating to the Eurocentric standard.  I took to youtube and learned all about twist outs and Bantu knots.  Since there are no natural hair salons where I live, let alone a Black hair dresser, I knew that I would have to care for my hair on my own.  I spent time asking all the Black women I knew where they got their products and set about trying to find something that wouldn't break the bank, that would still work for my natural hair.  Let me tell you that was a tough task.  As much as Carol's Daughter for instance, has an incredible line of products, for everyday care, they are extremely expensive.

After several horrible attempts, I finally was able to rock a twist out that worked for me.  I covered it that night, went to bed and the morning, my hair was a disaster.  From this I learned that to make this look work, I would have to retwist my hair nightly.  It seems like a small thing, but when you're hands are aching and the thought of raising your arms up does not sound at all appealing what do you do?  Okay, that means an afro on the days that I am incapable of twisting, a look btw that I am not fond of on me.

I made the decision to buy a wig to wear on the days when twisting my hair was simply not going to happen, through time constraints, or aching hands.  The thing about this whole purchase is that I had to agonize over it.  What was I saying politically by buying a wig?  Did this mean that I didn't love my natural hair enough to fight the good fight?  Was making the decision to buy a wig an internalization of Black hatred?  On and on it went in my mind.

Finally, I talked to Monica of Transgriot and her answer was, "Renee, just buy the damn wig and move on".  I made the decision and I bought a wig, which btw I love and looks great on me.  I have actually gotten several compliments on it.  Still, every time I put it on, the niggling questions still remain.  I have to come to realize that the fact that I have to question what I am doing with my hair is a reflection of the ways in which my body is policed.  Though hair should be a simple thing, it is not the case with Black women.

When I first went natural, I had to threaten to sue my former employer because they deemed my natural hair to be radical.  This applied to breads, dreadlocks and afros if you can believe it.  Hair that was not neatly combed was deemed unkempt.  They had a business to run and there was no room in that business plan for me to be who I am naturally.  I know without a doubt, that I am not the only Black woman who has been through this.

When Viola Davis took off her wigs and went to Academy Awards with her natural hair she was praised solidly by many Black women.  The fact that there was conversation after conversation about a woman wearing her natural hair in public proves how political Black women's hair choices still are.  Sheri Sheppard of The View has talked openly about her wigs and weaves.  Just recently, she commented that her partner from Dancing With the Stars kissed her weave for good luck before her performance, which is something she says, "never happens to her."  Sheri travels everywhere with her wigs.  Though she commonly shares the stage with Whoopi Goldberg, who has dredlocks, Sheri very rarely wears her natural hair.  Whoopi, has long been considered the anti-beauty of Hollywood. With the exception of the rare few like Whoopi, Solange, Wanda Sykes and Lauren Hill, most of the Black female celebrities that we see in the media either have relaxed hair [note: this includes blow outs], or are rocking weaves and wigs.  Beyonce is famous for her lacefronts.

Have all of these women really internalized such a negative view of their natural hair, or have the circumstances of their lives caused them to make specific choices about their hair?  By making these choices, does it mean that they don't love their Blackness, or that they aren't thinking of the examples they are setting for the young girls who are watching them, hoping to emulate them some day?  I don't think that's the case at all, after much thought on the issue.  I used to believe that relaxed hair was the sign of a colonized mind.  I used to believe that hair had to be neat and kept even if it was natural.  Now I know that women make hundreds of choices everyday, and that unless we are walking around in their head, we have no idea what lead to the decisions they have made.

As long as we live in a racist society, there is always going to be a cost for wearing our hair natural.  There are always going to be those believe that our failure to conform to Eurocentric beauty standards makes us radical.  The bottom line is that no matter what decision a Black women chooses to make with her hair, we have no business questioning it.  For me it really comes down to respecting women's bodily autonomy.  Sure, more women walking around with natural hair would be nice to see, but at the same time, with the costs that we know which can arise from such a decision, using natural hair as a barometer to decide how much someone has internalized negative ideas about Blackness is not only judgmental, it's wrong.

It shouldn't have to be this hard.  The agonizing and the worry should not have to be part of a decision to wear a wig, weave, blow out, relaxed hair, dred locks, bantu knots, or twist outs.  What these styles should represent are options Black women can choose at will based on what they feel looks good on them.  Whether it's twist outs today, or my wig tomorrow, it shouldn't say anything about me to the world.  I am the same person, no matter what I choose to do with my hair.  I have come to see the hair policing and debate as yet one more thing that keeps us distracted and focused on each other, rather than the society that has created ridiculous standards of appearance. In the end, I have decided to go with what looks good on me, and what makes me feel confidant and beautiful. Today it is my funky gravity defying twist out, but tomorrow it may be my wig.

It's Easy to Call John Derbyshire a Racist

Guest Post from Renee of Womanist Musings

John Derbyshire, a former writer for the conservative magazine The National Review was fired after he published a piece in Taki's Magazine entitled: The Talk: NonBlack Version.  Derbyshire was inspired to write this article because of the conversations that Black parents are having with their sons in the wake of the murder of Trayvon Martin. I am going to share with a small portion of Derbyshire's advice to his children:

(10a) Avoid concentrations of blacks not all known to you personally.
(10b) Stay out of heavily black neighborhoods.
(10c) If planning a trip to a beach or amusement park at some date, find out whether it is likely to be swamped with blacks on that date (neglect of that one got me the closest I have ever gotten to death by gunshot).
(10d) Do not attend events likely to draw a lot of blacks.
(10e) If you are at some public event at which the number of blacks suddenly swells, leave as quickly as possible.
(10f) Do not settle in a district or municipality run by black politicians.
(10g) Before voting for a black politician, scrutinize his/her character much more carefully than you would a white.
(10h) Do not act the Good Samaritan to blacks in apparent distress, e.g., on the highway.
(10i) If accosted by a strange black in the street, smile and say something polite but keep moving.
(11) The mean intelligence of blacks is much lower than for whites. The least intelligent ten percent of whites have IQs below 81; forty percent of blacks have IQs that low. Only one black in six is more intelligent than the average white; five whites out of six are more intelligent than the average black. These differences show in every test of general cognitive ability that anyone, of any race or nationality, has yet been able to devise. They are reflected in countless everyday situations. “Life is an IQ test.”
(12) There is a magnifying effect here, too, caused by affirmative action. In a pure meritocracy there would be very low proportions of blacks in cognitively demanding jobs. Because of affirmative action, the proportions are higher. In government work, they are very high. Thus, in those encounters with strangers that involve cognitive engagement, ceteris paribus the black stranger will be less intelligent than the white. In such encounters, therefore—for example, at a government office—you will, on average, be dealt with more competently by a white than by a black. If that hostility-based magnifying effect (paragraph 8) is also in play, you will be dealt with more politely, too. “The DMV lady“ is a statistical truth, not a myth.
(13) In that pool of forty million, there are nonetheless many intelligent and well-socialized blacks. (I’ll use IWSB as an ad hoc abbreviation.) You should consciously seek opportunities to make friends with IWSBs. In addition to the ordinary pleasures of friendship, you will gain an amulet against potentially career-destroying accusations of prejudice.

At first The National Review simply tried to separate itself from Derbyshire's article, but decided to fire him after public outrage was evident. There have been several articles in major news outlets like The Guardian and Huffpo, as well as commentary at CNN, declaring Derbyshire's piece to be racist. Anger at this piece is the quintessential White liberal response, and comes with the added bonus of being able to separate oneself from Derbyshire and declare that since you would never dare to express these kinds of idea publicly that you are not a racist.


It is absolutely impossible to read even a small section of The Talk: NonBlack Version, without declaring it racist. Socially there is very rarely difficulty calling out the extreme overt examples of racism, in large part because racism has come to mean to many: A noose, a burning cross, brilliant White sheets and in some cases the N word [note: I say some cases, as there are plenty of White people who actively believe that they are oppressed, because of an inability to use that word without facing some form of social censure].  What gets ignored is the systemic ways in which racism works and the everyday acts of covert racism that negatively impact the lives of people of colour.

Challenging racism as an institution is beyond the understanding and desire of many, because it would mean the eradication of White privilege. They would rather live in a world in which they can co-opt pre 1963 Dr. King, and wax poetically about a colour blind society, while our children are being undereducated in broken down schools, and shot for daring to wear a hoodie at night. This is the world as it really is, and why I simply cannot take comfort in any kind of discipline that Derbyshire is facing.

Reading his article, what I felt was not outrage, because this is exactly the kind of thought pattern and behaviour that Whiteness has normalized.  People are simply upset that Derbyshire had the nerve to air his dirty laundry in public, rather than internalizing his racist ideas.  The world is still very much segregated, with Sunday being the most segregated day in North America.  If you doubt that, walk into a Black church and then a White church.  Blacks and Whites who supposedly worship the same God don't even pray together, and yet we are told that racism is a thing of the past and that we are all equal now, with exception of course, of a few isolated incidents.  White on Black violence, even when it is continually perpetrated by the police, is always constructed as isolated, [Oscar Grant and Sean Bell] because White people are individuals, but the moment a Black person behaves in a manner which we have deemed socially unacceptable, ze is suddenly a representative of their race.

To bring up the systemic ways in which racism effects the lives of people of colour is deemed racist because interjects the much taboo subject of race into a conversation.  We cannot even talk about racism, except to view it as a thing of the past, and yet we have White liberal after White liberal decrying the language Derbyshire used, while not holding themselves accountable for the multitude of ways in which they uphold and maintain White supremacy.  Today, racism is seen as a card that Blacks employ to achieve an unfair advantage over decent God fearing White folks. The conversation has been so twisted that we now have White people claiming that they are victims of racism, when people of colour react with righteous rage to the ongoing assault against their persons.

It's easy to call Derbyshire a racist, and that is why it is happening.  If it meant a true assault on White supremacy, what you would be hearing right now is crickets and not outrage.  Nothing this man wrote in his column is in the least bit surprising.  I found that I could not even drum up outrage, because I am so accustomed to living with this sort of racism day after day.  Whether it is the White person who seeks to turn me into their very own Black BFF [yes we're collectors items], or commentary on how "articulate" I am -- racism is a part of my lived experience -- and has been since I was a very young girl. No amount of liberal hand wringing is going to change that and so I will just nod at the commentary and accept that there will be no substantive change in my lifetime. Today it's not the Derbyshire's of the world that we have to fear, but those who declare themselves to be decidedly not racist, even as they do everything in their power to ensure that yet another generation of Black children grows up with the stigma of being "othered" in a White supremacist world.