While doing my usual “scroll through Facebook to make sure the world still exists” thing this morning, I stumbled across two interesting things from the very same source: The Blaze. For those who don’t remember, The Blaze is a cable news network started by former Fox host Glenn Beck, a Mormon with a decently good head on his shoulders, but with a lot of socially conservative leanings that I can’t get on board with. Conservatism, as we understand it in the U.S. today, conflicts with itself–they want “small government,” except that they want the government to impose social conservatism.
First I saw this well-phrased, well-written emotional appeal to the American public to stop the divide, to reach across the aisle, and to heal the country:
Well, I’m sorry, Glenn, but you don’t get to be the Voice of Reason right now.
I’ve noticed many people on the left and right pulling this schtick, where, after years, if not decades, of peddling divisiveness and hysteria (remember The Blaze and Michelle Bachman’s attempts to link President Obama to the Muslim Brotherhood?) and then, when you see that the mess you’ve been creating is getting ready to implode or explode, pull a 180 and try to take the highroad, saying, “We have to stop this!”
You. We have to stop you.
You, Glenn Beck. You, Rachel Maddow. You, Milo Whateveranis. You, The Young Turks. You people now trying to act like this mess isn’t of your making–you are the ones who must be stopped, because this mess is of your making.
This random guy being attacked by his own allies because of his appearance? You created this. You paved the road here, you sat us down in the vehicle, and you drove along that road until we reached this point. You did it knowingly and deliberately, to boost your ratings, and now you’re saying “No, we shouldn’t be divided. We’re all humans”? Where was that spiel when you were trying to link Obama to the Muslim Brotherhood?
You monsters did this. You created the circumstances, you lied, you manipulated the facts, and you misled everyone, waiting to release critical information until the most opportune moment, and this hysteria that you’ve created is a direct result of all of that. I wrote about how the news purposely and deliberately withheld information about rotting farms across the country until the most opportune time, and they decided that time was when they could blame it on Trump’s immigration policies instead of droughts, wildfires, and government interventions paying farmers to grow crops regardless of whether the crops survive. All of this has been happening for years. But now that the media can blame it on Trump and ask if he’s going to claim responsibility for the famine–because, yes, people really are that hysterical–we hear about it.
And what about the fact that critically important news items seem to pop up and vanish just as quickly, keeping the masses in a paralytic state of paranoid fear? This was the entire point of your attempts to link Obama to the Muslim Brotherhood. You know it, I know it, and everyone knows it. You rode that “Obama is a Muslim Kenyan” line every bit as hard as Donald Trump. In fact, I lost a longtime friend with whom I used to play in a rockband, because of his constant peddling of Glenn Beck bullshit, telling me that I needed to be afraid of the Muslims who were infiltrating our government. You did that, Glenn. You took over his mind and replaced his rationality with fear by exploiting his vulnerabilities.
And now you want to say “We’re all humans”?
No, because you’re not. You’re not a human. You’re an immoral monster. You’re a disgusting, mutant salesman obsessed with your sales numbers, and you didn’t give a damn how much damage you cause to humans while you attempt to sate your ravenous hunger.
The alt-right for years, Glenn–for years has been calling Obama a Muslim and a Kenyan hellbent on destroying America from within. If that sounds familiar, it’s because you have a documentary that asserts that very thing. You can’t just distance yourself from it now that it’s grown beyond your control, because you planted the seeds that became that tree. And you’re still doing so, you slimy toad.
What is this shit, Glenn? That article was released yesterday. Yesterday, Glenn! On your website.
This diehard, rightist propagandist, wacky, inaccurate, nonsensical article propagating the notion that transsexualism is a new thing that should be condemned rather than allowed appeared yesterday, 24 hours ago, on your website. And now you want to say “We’re all humans”? What about transsexuals like me, Glenn? Are we “all humans” too? Because this article on your website from yesterday suggests otherwise. “Trans people should get back in the closet and shut up,” is what this article from yesterday on your website asserts.
You want to dance in Romulan territory while proclaiming your neutrality, and it doesn’t work that way. Libertarians are in the neutral zone. You, though? You cast your lot with the Romulans a long time ago, just as the leftists cast their lot with the Federation. And I’m over here like, “No… Why did we let people like Glenn Beck push this to the point of war?”
Now we jump from war with Syria (which, it’s time to confess, we are fighting) to war with North Korea to trans military bans to Nazis to possible trade wars with China to raging anarcho-communists in the blink of an eye. You won’t let people sit down and take a deep breath and remind themselves that “We’re all humans,” because you’re too busy peddling fear trying to keep their eyeballs glued to their television screen and listening to you prattle on about Obama’s ties to the freaking Muslim Brotherhood.
You don’t have the right to stand there and appeal for calm now, Glenn. Neither you, the Nazis, or Antifa have the right to do that. You’ve all taken your sides. Maybe you didn’t have the foresight to see where it would go. Maybe you didn’t realize what you were doing. I could accept that. But you’re still responsible for his mess. You can’t just pretend like that isn’t true. If you want to call for calm and unity now, that’s great–you can join the call of libertarians and anarcho-capitalists who have been calling for calm, liberty, tolerance, and love for years. At this point, though, you’re tainted by the circumstances you’ve created, and you owe the world an apology if you want to change your tune now.
You directly contributed to this. In fact, wasn’t it because you wanted more leniency to say wild, speculative things that you formed The Blaze in the first place? And you continue to dance in the redzone of conservatism–the very same redzone that created the alt-right that morphed into Neo-Nazism, as that lunatic article from yesterday shows. Of course, trans people have always existed, Glenn. The only question was whether we had to pretend otherwise, or whether we could embrace it. Through most of human history, it was “pretend otherwise.” This led to many suicides and many problems–like with a guy you may have heard of named J. Edgar Hoover.
If you want to appeal for calm, that’s great, but you’ve got to extract yourself from either side. You have to get out of the left versus right paradigm entirely, or you’re not appealing for calm. You’re appealing for victory for your side. “Conservatives have the high-road because conservatives are calling for calm… It’s the leftists who are calling for violence still.”
You made this bed. Either set it ablaze or lie down in it.
Following Brexit, many Remain advocates wanted to vote again, because so many people hadn’t voted at all–this despite the Brexit vote having the highest turnout in the UK since the 90s. As I pointed out then, those people did vote. They simply voted “Indifferent / Doesn’t Matter To Me.” There’s no other way to slice it; refraining from voting is voting for “it doesn’t make a difference to me.” A second round of voting, then, is nothing more than an attempt to let these people change their votes after the fact, from “indifferent” to “leave” or “remain,” and, they presume, the lion’s share of them would change from “indifferent” to “remain” if they’d known Leave had a chance of winning.
But I’m a believer in consequences and giving things a chance. The Brexit issue is complicated, isn’t it? What if most people would now change their vote from Indifferent to Remain, and the previous vote was nullified. If I love democracy so much*, then wouldn’t I be glad to see that? Yes, and no. See, it’s a matter of bailing out, isn’t it? Brexit took a gamble; I think they should have to bear the responsibility of seeing it through before they change their minds. Isn’t that pig-headedness, though? “Stay the course” and all that?
Kinda, except that, in regard to Brexit, we haven’t even begun to see what consequences it will have. The consequences so far are completely reactionary and are the case of self-fulfilling prophecies. People expecting the UK markets to crash pulled their money out of the UK, which caused the pound to fall, which caused more people to pull money out, which caused the pound to fall further. It’s a self-fulling prophecy all the way, and a simple matter of confidence.
The average person wants nothing more than to get on with their life and be left alone. They don’t want to be told how racist they are because they live in a rural area with a very low minority population and happen to not have any friends who are black. They don’t want to be called racist because their jobs were outsourced to Mexico and India thanks to the Minimum Wage. They don’t want to be called sexist because they are from a world where husbands are somewhat subservient to their wives, and where the wives want to be somewhat subservient to their husbands. The wives don’t want to be called “female misogynists”** because they love and support their husbands, are housewives, and all that. They don’t want to be told how homophobic they are because they’re grossed out by two dudes kissing, and they don’t want to be told how transphobic they are because they think penises belong in tidy-whities, not panties.
They just want to work, support themselves and their families, and enjoy life in the way that they enjoy life.
Democrats, you lost these people because of the above paragraph. I implore you to stop doing that. They’re not the ones who divided America into “white working class people without college degrees” and a coalition of “blacks, women, LGBTQ people, Muslims, and Hispanics” and then pitted those two sides against each other. You did that. What did you expect to happen? Did you expect they would just let you assault them and their values in perpetuity without ever striking back? You did, and I know you did–you thought they couldn’t fight back. As Trae Crowder said, “This is our world now, and you’re not getting it back.”
And so now, instead of realizing that insults, ignorance, and attacks are not the way you will win these people over, you double down on the offensive, hateful rhetoric, saying that you are not failing to understand these people. But yes… You are. If you are equating fifty percent of the population to this racist, homophobic, Islamophobic, misogynistic straw man that you’ve built up in your echo chamber, then yes, you most certainly have failed to understand.
I will never stop talking about the tragedy in Orlando, when a Muslim terrorist murdered 49 people, and I will never stop talking about the way that mainstream conservatives extended the olive branch to the LGBTQ community. “You’re one of us, an American,” they said. For fuck’s sake, bridges in Little Rock, Arkansas were lit up in the colors of the rainbow. All over the United States, including places deep in the Bible Belt, there was loud outcry and support for the LGBTQ community. And, because one tragedy was just not enough, liberals and the LGBTQ community slapped back the proffered hand of peace and shouted, “No! We are not one of you! You are just as bad! You did the Crusades!” as though an idiot preacher like Steven Anderson saying mean things is actually as bad as murdering almost fifty people.
Recently, Donald Trump was on 60 Minutes, and the host asked him about overturning Roe v. Wade. Trump responded that he would certainly appoint conservative judges, and that the matter of abortion should go back to the states. The host then replied, “But then some women won’t be able to get abortions.”
Trump rightly pointed out, “Yes, they can, but they’ll have to go to another state to do it.”
Conservatives in Mississippi don’t want to ban abortions in California. You get that, right? They think it’s abhorrent, unforgivable, and murder, but they have no desire to govern California. Let the Californians govern California. The conservatives in Kentucky have no desire to outlaw gay marriage in New York. They think it’s weird and gross, but they have no desire to govern New York. Let the New York people govern New York. This is where the Great Divide truly occurs, because liberals are not willing to compromise, as the 60 Minutes interview clearly showed.
That a woman might actually have to drive to another state to get an abortion… is unacceptable to the liberal. They see it as a violation of the woman’s rights. They see it as oppression. The liberal does want the people of California to tell Mississippi that they must allow abortions and gay marriage, but the conservative does not want the people of Mississippi to tell California that they must not allow abortions and gay marriage. This is what is meant by “small government.” The liberal, whose entire worldview is built upon big government being the answer to all of life’s problems, is no longer capable of understanding that.
The liberal doesn’t hear “The woman can still get an abortion. She just has to drive to a different state.”
The liberal hears “The woman is being oppressed, and her right to choose is being thwarted by hillbillies.”
Of course, I’m against all of it. I think this should be a matter between a woman and her doctor, and no one else, but this means that the doctor would have to be allowed to say, “No. I don’t perform abortions. Here’s a pamphlet for adoption agencies.”
And I just lost the liberal again, didn’t I? It sounds great to leave the matter between the woman and her doctor, right up until we allow the doctor to determine what the doctor does and doesn’t do. So what, the doctor doesn’t want to perform abortions? Doesn’t the woman have the right to have an abortion? Doesn’t the doctor have the right to not be enslaved and ordered to do things he doesn’t want to do?
Yesterday, I spoke with someone on Facebook who insisted that the Confederate Flag is a flag of white supremacy. Now, my grandfather owns a store with “Confederate State” in the title. I know these kind of people very well, and I know exactly why they fly the Confederate Flag. When she said that she “guesses” she doesn’t know what the flag means, I suggested that she ask someone who actually flies the flag what it means. Her response?
Congratulations, lady, on ensuring that compromise is impossible.
She believes that people who fly the Confederate Flag are white supremacists, and she will not ask them what the flag actually means because they are white supremacists and she doesn’t listen to what white supremacists have to say. It is circular reasoning; it is the reasoning of the echo chamber, of the safe space, as she and the other liberals sit in their self-imposed isolation chamber telling themselves how racist, homophobic, islamophobic, transphobic, misogynistic, and evil everyone else, and then refusing to listen to what those people have to say because they don’t listen to racist, homophobic, islamophobic, transphobic, misogynistic, and evil people.
Just read this article. It equates to “I understand them perfectly. They’re racist, homophobic, islamophobic, transphobic, misogynistic evil hillbillies carrying a gun in one hand and a Bible in the other.” So I want to address that article’s author quickly, since I’m sure they’ll be notified I linked to their blog.
Look, asshole. I’m from Mississippi. I’m a transgender atheist born and raised in Mississippi, surrounded by fundamentalist Christians in a way that you can’t understand, regardless of where you’re from. My family has actual compounds for when the Antichrist takes over, okay? I have spent more than my fair share of time criticizing them and trying to reason with them. And you don’t know what you’re talking about.
It is not racist to not have any black friends, although I would point out that the people in the south are substantially less racist than the people everywhere else. Look, the town I live in is 70% black. And when I went to Vegas in 2015, I encountered tons of people who assumed that I was racist because I’m white and from Mississippi. That’s absurd! We can’t be racist. You, in Michigan, with your 2% black population–you have no idea what it’s like to actually live among high concentrations of non-white people. You’re not afforded the luxury of racism in such an environment. If I didn’t want a black cashier, a black dude at the gas station, a black woman doing my taxes, or whatever else, then I wouldn’t be able to get anything done.
It is not racist to recognize that there are some pretty big cultural differences between white people and black people. I’ve dated black girls. Hell, I lived with a black couple when I was 18. I can tell you from firsthand experience that there are major cultural differences, but none that can’t be bridged. I can tell you this, too–I’ve never had my ass kicked in dominoes/bones like that, or Spades. This is a statement of fact: the black people with whom I’ve played dominoes and spades would crush any of the white people I’ve ever played with; they take it to an entirely new level. It’s like checkers and chess, really.
Every Thanksgiving–prior to when my family stopped inviting me because I’m transgender–my family, after eating, plays Spades. We’ve never played dominoes, but we’ve played a ton of poker and Spades. And my dad may be the only one who could even compete with any of the black people I’ve ever played with, and I’ve no doubt that my father would ultimately lose. I was playing checkers while they played chess. Is that racist of me to say? Probably, but it’s more a matter of culture than anything, and I don’t care if it’s considered racist or not; it’s my experience and a statement of fact regarding my experience. As I’ve said elsewhere, we can’t let ourselves get into the mindset of calling facts racist.
I have nothing in my heart but love for everyone. I don’t care what the hell their skin color is, or how different their culture is from mine. If I can bridge the gap, then I’m going to. If I can’t, then… that sucks, but that’s life sometimes. I would ask the liberal how many black friends they have. I’m being honest here. I have many liberal friends on Facebook, and, to my knowledge, they don’t have any black friends. The only black dude some of them know is one they’ve all nicknamed “Nigger Dave.” No, I’m not kidding. And these people are as far north as you can get without crossing into Canada. And they’re millennials. And they’re liberal.
For years, the singer in my rock band was a black lesbian. Did I ever care? No. Why would I? She remains the best singer I have ever heard, a truly talented musician who should indisputably be on the radio.
I don’t give a shit what her skin color is, what her sexual orientation is, or anything else. She’s my friend, and she’s fucking amazing.
I can’t say that this is true of every Mississippian, and goodness knows I have no idea what it’s like to be black–or anything but “me,” actually–
–and I’d certainly never suggest she’s never experienced racism in Mississippi, or homophobia in Mississippi. I have absolutely no doubt that she has, and that’s fucked up. My point is that, per capita, far less racism goes on in the south simply because of pragmatism.
It is not homophobic to be grossed out by gay people and to not want to be friends with them. It is not transphobic to not want to associate what what you consider to be a guy wearing girls’ clothes. It is not transphobic to think of a transgender person as a guy wearing girls’ clothes. People have different worldviews. You have to tolerate them. As long as they’re not forcing people to bow to their worldviews, tolerate them. Is it messed up? Sure, so don’t be friends with them. That’s where your rights end.
There are millions and millions of us who just don’t care. And that’s okay! I know the liberal response to that–I’ve addressed it before. You’re not allowed to be neutral on LGBT issues. If you’re straight and you’re pro-LGBT, then you’re an Ally. If you’re straight and not pro-LGBT, then you’re homophobic. Neutrality is no longer acceptable to the left. Compromise is no longer acceptable to the left.
Allowing conservatives to ban abortion in some states, thereby forcing women to have to go through all the trouble of driving to a different state*^ is not acceptable to the liberal, because all they can do is think of that straw woman who can somehow afford an abortion but not the gas to drive to it. But that gets into its own problem, doesn’t it? They don’t think the woman should have to pay for the abortion; they think the doctor should be their slave, not getting paid and not getting a choice about the work he/she does.
You have the right to FREEDOM not FREESTUFF.
Conservatives don’t want to take your birth control pills away. They just don’t want to pay for them, just like you don’t want to pay for the Westboro Baptist Church. They don’t want to take your abortions away. They just don’t want to pay for them.
Governmentally, Donald Trump’s presidency is bad. There is nothing about Trump’s policies for me to really get behind. However, every indication that I’ve seen suggests that Trump is going to spend most of his time attempting to bridge the gap between conservatives and liberals. He is, after all, a deal maker–much adieu has been made about his ability to make deals.
The problem, as I see it, is that liberals aren’t willing to compromise, and so there can be no deal. And even if Trump does manage to miraculously work out a compromise where liberal states get to be liberal while conservative states get to be conservative, without a pervasive ideologically awakening to the ideas of self-governance and liberty, I don’t see it lasting beyond the next president, because as soon as liberals are back in power they will start forcing Mississippi to allow gay marriage and abortions all over again, taking us right back to where we are now.
It all starts with compromise, and compromise starts with understanding, tolerance, and empathy. But evidently it’s not enough that they lost the House of Representatives, the Senate, the Supreme Court, the White House, 900 federal positions, and lots of governorships because of their unwillingness to tolerate and their unwillingness to compromise.
I’ve spoke before about how the people advocating that Mississippi employers and clients should be forced to accept me as transgender aren’t doing me any favors, because their dislike will have resentment piled on top of it. Their dislike of me will move from the open, where all they can do is shun me, into the shadows, where they can do whatever they can get away with. If you take away someone’s ability to say “I hate you” and condemn that person for saying it, yes, you drive them into the shadows to express their hatred, with resentment and bitterness added to it.
If you want to reach these people, then follow my lead. Your methods won’t work and, in the end, will only get people killed.
You have to reach these people on a personal level, by alleviating their fears and showing them that you are just a human being, just like them. You can’t do that if you treat them like they aren’t a human being worthy of respect and compassion.
Tolerance starts with you, not them.
* I hate democracy. I hate democratic republics, too. They’re the best of a terrible situation. As Churchill said, “Democracy is the worst form of government, except all the others that we’ve tried.” He’s exactly right. Democracy sucks, and republics suck. If we are going to have a state, though, it must be a republic.
** “Female misogynists.” You’re really a jerk if you say something like that sincerely. You couldn’t more transparently say that “Everyone who disagrees with me is a misogynist” if you tried. I’m with you in that there is a lot of self-hate here in the United States, but you’re not thinking big enough if you think it’s as simple as women who vote for Trump hate themselves.
*^ This is already necessary in many cases. I had to drive my sister to Little Rock to get an abortion a few years ago, because she had already gone past the point at which Mississippi would allow one. It was not the end of the world.
It strikes me as very distressing that we can treat blacks, hispanics, LGBT people, and women as unified, monolithic voting blocs who speak, act, and move with a single voice, rather than as individuals with their own beliefs, hopes, and desires. It’s even more alarming because Republicans are frequently criticized of being intolerant of all of these groups, while all of these groups scream that these characteristics shouldn’t matter, and while liberals are clearly the ones treating everyone who categorizes one way or another as though they are a resource to be tallied on the page.
I sit in shock every single time I read it. Yesterday morning while scrolling through my News Feed, I found a friend of a friend asking whether transgenderism and homosexuality were mental illnesses. Indeed, he repeated the question today. Each time, the answers were filled with almost supreme stupidity–a stupidity matched only by Shit Kyle Wagner Says. Yet, none of the comments or posts on the linked page are dumb enough to warrant their own article. None come anywhere close to being as supremely insultingly and offensive to such a raw degree as the inane spiel I linked above and that I’ll type out here for those who can’t load images:
It’s fascinating to me that the vast majority people [sic] I see advocating voting for a third party, rather than Hillary, are straight, white, and predominantly men. There’s a reason why women, racial minorities, and members of the LGBT community are overwhelmingly in support of Hillary. Voting for her is the only way to ensure our own liberty, and in some cases our lives.
You do NOT get to call yourself an Ally to the LGBT community if you don’t vote for her.
You do NOT get to call yourself an Ally to the Black, Hispanic, and Muslim communities if you don’t vote for her.
You do NOT get to call yourself a Feminist if you don’t vote for her.
Voting 3rd party for the General Presidential Election is literally throwing your vote away. Your “protest” vote does nothing to help any 3rd party, because that’s not how the Electoral College works. Vote Green Party or Libertarian at the local and state levels, where the change you’re looking for can actually take root [bold emphasis added].
Voting 3rd party in this election is saying that your personal outrage at her “scandals” or your anger at Bernie losing, is more important than the rights and lives of women, LGBT people, and the Black, Hispanic, and Muslim communities.
Voting 3rd party is an insult to me, and everyone else who will have to fear a Supreme Court that Trump chooses. The radically conservative Supreme Court he’s promising to deliver could undo decades of social progress, and could last for decades to come. If he delivers on his campaign promises, LGBT rights, women’s rights, the safety and security of the Black, Hispanic, and Muslim communities, is all at stake.
Trump WILL win if the liberal base gets divided. And it will be YOUR fault.
But I get it. You “can’t stand” Hillary. That’s totally more important than all of the people you’re putting in danger.
Good god, it’s so supremely arrogant, entitled, and offensive. I’m genuinely not sure where to start.
Notice, though, that the post specifically precludes the possibility that any black person, Hispanic person, Muslim, or LGBT person could somehow not support Hillary. You can’t call yourself an Ally, but can I still call myself Transsexual, if I don’t vote for Hillary? Can black people still call themselves black if they don’t vote for Hillary? Can Muslims still call themselves Muslims?
Oh. No. We can’t still call ourselves these things we might be: http://www.infowars.com/wow-african-american-reporter-called-race-traitor-by-hillary-supporter-presidential-debate-coverage/
You’re a “race traitor” if you’re black and don’t support Hillary. I imagine that I’m an insult to the LGBT community for not supporting Hillary. I’ve been told that before, specifically because I wouldn’t march in lockstep with the rest of the LGBT community screaming about the evil, offensive Christians while licking the feet of the Muslims who hate you far more than Christians do.
You are a totalitarian, authoritarian piece of shit demanding absolute obedience and compliance with what you want, and calling people traitors and enemies if they break the stride of your Liberal Supremacy March.
I have no love for Trump. In fact, I can’t stand Trump. But you people are constantly screaming about how much like Hitler he is while you undergo the exact same bullshit that Hitler did.
I cannot stand you. You are the worst kind of human being, so thoroughly convinced of your own self-righteousness and moral supremacy that you cannot see the moral atrocities you commit in the name of that self-righteousness and arrogance. I recently remarked that you and the liberals like you are doing nothing more than continuing the Manifest Destiny as set out by Andrew Jackson–and, don’t worry, I’m going to explain this remark. Your arrogance is supreme and knows no bounds. Everyone must bow to your compassion, your wisdom, your rightness. And if they don’t–
Well, there’s always the Bastille.
Recently the entire nation of Canada purportedly banned members of the Westboro Baptist Church from entering. I’ve got friends on Facebook celebrating this and remarking how much they love Canada. I’m sure you would totally agree, in fact. But I’ve got some bad news for you, sunshine–this is not what you’d expect to see… If you are cheering for how Canada is refusing to allow members of the WBC to enter their country while condemning Trump for saying the exact same thing about Muslims, then you are a vile and disgusting hypocrite. Just because one is your pet religion and the other is not–when the reality is that, on average, Muslims are far more hostile toward LGBT people than even the Westboro Baptist Church.
It’s been a long time since a member of the Westboro Baptist Church shot up a club and killed 49 people in Orlando, you piece of shit.
One of the funniest thing about a Trump presidency is the people who say that he hates India and China because he wants to work out deals that are in the best interests of the United States, and that he’s not going to put Indian or Chinese interests first in his negotiations. People act like he’s basically declaring war on them. We have this idea that it’s bad–it’s awful–if we put American interests first. Why?
Are you seriously naive enough to believe that India doesn’t put India’s interests first? That China doesn’t put China’s interests first?
Of course you’re not. You know that India puts India first. This is why your position is one of such arrogant. You have the position that the Indians are incapable of looking out for their own best interests against our glorious awesomeness, that the Chinese are incapable of looking out for their own best interests against our marvelous and benevolent might. We have to look out for their best interests, rather than our own, because they’re too stupid to refuse a deal that isn’t in their own best interests. We have to put Iran’s interests first in our nuclear agreement with them because they’re too dumb to say “No” to a deal that isn’t in their best interests, thereby demanding that we draft a better one.
You let India worry about India. India doesn’t need you, Glorious Whitey, looking out for it.
You are showcasing White Man’s Burden through and through. It has morphed, somewhat. It is now more like White Person’s Burden, but it’s the same thing. All these poor brown people–whatever would they do without us protecting them and putting their interests first? They would never survive, the silly barbarians. Because we’re just so great, so powerful, so unstoppable that if we dared put our own best interests first–even for a second–we would steamroll them right out of existence without a whimper from them.
How can we not see this in the spiel I posted above?
It’s specifically targeting allies of these various groups. It lays out the stakes: “Their very lives will be in danger! The lives of women, blacks, hispanics, LGBT people, and Muslims! TRUMP WILL DESTROY THEM ALL and the women, blacks, hispanics, LGBT people, and Muslims couldn’t possibly stand against Mighty Whitey!”
Fuck you, you racist, arrogant piece of shit.
You are not superior to me.
You are not superior to any black person. Black people do not need Mighty Whitey as a goddamned savior.
Muslims don’t need you to be their goddamned savior.
Hispanics don’t need you to be their goddamned savior.
LGBT people have gone so far past equality and into oppression of religious people that I’m not even going to address that, you narcissistic idiot. I am a resident of the state of Mississippi, and I am transgender. I have lived a life of such horror, discrimination, and grotesque abuse that I’ve literally written a book about–look for it to be in stores pretty soon. And I can tell you this: Hillary is not going to do one tiny fucking thing to help people in that situation, and neither will Trump, and you know what else?
You want to know what will help transgender kids who grew up in the circumstances I grew up in? Not legislation. Not oppression. Not laws. A simple book telling them how to survive, telling them that they can survive. Not you in all your sanctimonious brow-beating to support your candidate who quite clearly wants war with Russia.
What a fantastic idea, of course. We love everyone else so much that we want a war with Russia!
I would rather die than vote for Hillary. I would. If you put a gun to my head and told me that you would pull the trigger if I didn’t support Hillary, I would not hesitate to tell you to pull the trigger. And I can prove it–I do live where my life is in danger. It’s a reality that entitled maggots like you cannot understand, comprehend, or even fathom. I sleep with a loaded shotgun on the headboard of my bed because I know–I know–that the next time someone pulls into my driveway in a drunken rampage at 3 in the morning, no amount of laws will protect me.
Click that link if you want to know why laws, voting, legislation, and police have almost no bearing to my life, and will never change that need to sleep with a loaded gun within arm’s reach. You are insane if you think that any law will protect me.
I haven’t said nearly everything that I want to say. I assure you that I’ll be revisiting this later today, or tomorrow, so stay tuned for that. I’ll give it a separate post, though. The fallacious position this person spouts cannot be allowed to stand by any reasonable person, and I will not allow it to.
I’ll summarize this: The crap we’re discussing can easily be summarized this way:
If you don’t march in lockstep with me, then you are a heretic.
Only in a society that has totally lost its mind would it be beneficial to be a victim.
And that is precisely what we find in the United States today. Liberals would not be bending over backward to characterize everyone* as victims if it wasn’t beneficial for those people, and therefore beneficial to the Democrat Party. “Vote for us!” they cry. “We know you’ve been victimized, and we have a goody bag for you! Yeah, you’d be basically selling your soul to a set of ideas that are demonstrably unsound, but we’ll pat you on the back and say ‘You poor victim’ and that will make everything better! We promise like totes 4 real!
I often find myself at the forefront of an extended trail of butthurt, and I don’t mean this in the way most people do. When most people say “butthurt” online, they mean “You dared defend your position from my straw men? U R CLEIRLY BUTTHURT LOL,” but I mean it in the sense of… actual butthurt, people who are offended by things that they shouldn’t be offended by.
If there’s any word that I despise, it’s “offended,” because we throw it around casually, without ever stopping to consider what it means to be offended. To be offended is to have some offense done to you, to be made a victim by something.
I do blame liberals for fostering this victim mentality. Everyone wants to be a victim. I would wager that it’s related to a Martyr Complex, but that’s just speculation on my part. Ha, that’s funny. I’ve never looked into the Martyr Complex before, and it lists “related to the Victim Complex” right there. Just watch how this screaming, petulant baby above whines about how offended he is by someone’s sign–so offended by those evil, mean words that he’s willing to physically assault someone and actually victimize them.
I guess that little bitch missed all the after-school specials that beat into my generation’s head that “No matter what someone says, it doesn’t justify hitting them.”
People are always so surprised to learn that I’m not a liberal, because we’ve gotten so used to people believing themselves to be victims, and there is no political party that panders to victims quite like the Democrat Party. I was ten minutes into one of the Sanders/Clinton Debates when I realized that it had taken me forty minutes to get that far in, because I kept pausing the video to rant about why they were wrong.
Seriously, though, the first ten minutes of the debate, at least, was unbridled pandering.
“You poor poor people…”
“You poor black people…”
“You poor LGBT people…”
“You poor Hispanic people…”
“You poor Muslims…”
I find pandering to be tremendously insulting. I don’t need your fucking sympathy or your goddamned handouts. Sure, I’ve been through some rough shit, and I’ve got a GoFundMe campaign asking for help to leave the state of Mississippi so that I can put my college degree to use. However, that’s a far cry from accepting help from the state; people who choose to can voluntarily give to my campaign, if they deem it to be a good cause. If not, they can ignore it. Of course, they don’t ignore it. I’ve had to delete at least a dozen comments on Twitter, Facebook, Youtube, and GFM itself of people who didn’t read anything I said on the matter.
The reality is that there are poor places in the country from where escaping can be inordinately difficult. Rural Mississippi is certainly one of those, but I don’t intend to get into all of that. Besides, I just interviewed for a job last Monday (and just sent a follow-up email and “Thank you” letter since I haven’t heard back), and it looks like I’ve found an agent for my novel Dancing in Hellfire. In fact, my life here in rural Mississippi has been so difficult from the age of two that I was able to fill an entire book with it.
The only thing I’m a victim of is random chance, that I was born to drug-addicted fundamentalist Christians in rural Mississippi while being transgender. I can’t even make the argument that I’m a victim of my father and mother, because they, too, were victims of a cycle of drugs, abuse, and poverty that goes back generations. Victims, themselves, of random chance.
It wasn’t long ago that I received a friend request from a transgender girl who was clearly a Wiccan and ultra-feminist. That’s a bit redundant, I know. Have you ever met a Wiccan who was not an ultra-feminist? No? Nor have I. I’ve actually remarked in the past that, regardless of what they say, Wicca is a religion for pissed off feminists. I deleted this line from Dancing in Hellfire, because the manuscript will cause enough controversy on its own because of the constant attacks against fundamentalist Christianity; there’s no need to add to that.
Anyway, she asked me why I call myself a “shemale.”
Goddamn, that’s a common question, and it’s one that transgender people evidently can’t resist asking me. What the fuck business it of anyone’s? Wouldn’t it make just as much sense to ask me why I call myself a musician, or why I call myself an author? And, to be clear, I have only met one transgender person who did not ask me that question.
One person on Youtube, shortly after I launched my channel, saw fit to inform me that she was also transgender, and was “deeply offended” that I would use such a word, how it was an insult to her and to all transgender people.
Yes. What I call myself is an insult to others.
Makes perfect sense.
Bitch, you and I are different people. What I do in my little world doesn’t affect you in your little world. What I call myself has absolutely nothing to do with you. If you call yourself a shemale, then you could be affected if you don’t think I’m hot enough or something, but if you don’t call yourself a shemale, then it has literally nothing to do with you. Literally. You are offended and insulted by something that has literally no impact on you.
Anyway, so this Wiccan chick–Gretchen something or other, yes, as full Wiccan as you can go short of calling herself Mistress Diana–said that she’d “been meaning to ask” why I call myself a shemale. I gave a two-part answer, with my usual reasons, though I left off the fact that I love shemales. During my answer, I mentioned the “ultra politically correct culture,” and she asked what I meant by that. That immediately told me what I was dealing with.
Is there someone out there who doesn’t know what is meant by that? It’s the fucking culture that makes it unacceptable to say “midget” instead of “little person.” It’s the fucking culture that has white people trying to figure out what they’re supposed to call black people. It’s the fucking culture that leaves me having to explain that I’m a non-op transgender woman instead of just “I’m a shemale.” It is the culture that condemns Trump for referring to an explosion as a bomb. It is the culture that makes it unforgivable to “mock a disabled reporter.”
Speaking of that last one, notice the wording here. It’s not that Trump “mocked a reporter’s disabilities.” Trump didn’t do that, of course, and I haven’t seen the video of him allegedly mocking the reporter because I don’t care to. Being disabled has its own challenges, but everyone has challenges and, in nearly all cases, I don’t think having this set of challenges to deal with, as opposed to that set of challenges, should set someone up as special and immune from offense and insult.
The wording is important, because it’s clear: Why did Trump mock a disabled reporter? There is a subtle, but important, distinction from “Why did Trump mock a reporter’s disabilities?” On the former, it is unacceptable to mock a reporter who is disabled. In the latter, it is unacceptable to mock someone’s disabilities. Do you see the difference? Under the first, Trump could mock the guy’s hair, reporting capabilities, journalistic integrity, or any other thing that is fair game for being mocked. Under the latter, a disabled reporter can be terrible at his job, lack journalistic integrity, and have ridiculous hair, but it’s not okay to mock him for it.
Here we have another one:
I still marvel at the biased wording.
An entire research paper on subconsciously programming people could be written from this one question alone. I’ll try to stay at no more than a paragraph.
“Muslim parents”? What does their religion have to do with anything? Is that a factor in whether or not they can be criticized? “Of course not,” any sane, rational, and healthy mind would think. So why is it mentioned? It’s there to inform your opinion, to call up that liberalism that lists Muslims as a protected class, making it wrong to criticize them, just like its wrong to mock the disabled reporter. It’s no surprise that my answer has zero upvotes–the question is too biased for most non-liberals to touch it, and it’s written in such a way as to get liberals to answer and have a little circle jerk over the issue.
“Fallen war soldier” is equally emotional and yet another attempt to subtly manipulate you into being outraged that Trump would dare do it. It could only have been worse if the question had “fallen war hero” instead, and, in fact, I’m going to look to see if that edit has been suggested. Apparently, someone has attempted to remove the bias, and that is the result. Jesus. The only way to remove the bias from this question is to change it to “Why did Trump criticize the Khan family?”
In effect, this question is asking, “Why doesn’t Trump agree that Muslims who are the parents of a ‘fallen war soldier’ who died in Iraq should never, ever, ever be criticized?”
To that, of course, the answer is a question. “Why should any of those things affect whether or not they can be criticized?”
This is how liberals work. They create all of these social rules that protect various groups–their groups–from criticism. You can’t mock a disabled reporter! He’s disabled, and that means you can never, ever, ever mock him–even if your mockery has nothing to do with his being disabled. You can’t criticize the parents of a fallen war soldier when they’re Muslims and their child died in Iraq! Never, ever, ever!
You can’t criticize:
That list isn’t all-inclusive. But, once again, there is an enormous difference between criticizing someone who happens to be transgender and criticizing someone because they are transgender. There’s an enormous difference between mocking someone who happens to be disabled and mocking someone because they are disabled. Intellectually, we all accept this and know it to be true, even liberals.
But liberals won’t apply it.
Just see the question above.
They will say until the end of time that it’s okay to criticize anyone regardless of their gender. But then you have liberals in the media calling conservative journalists sexist because they said something negative about Hillary. I’ve seen people say in the same comment that Trump is an orange oompa-loompa and a sexist because he said Rosie O’Donnel is a pig. Um…
As I’ve said before, yes, Trump is a sexist. So am I. So are you. Every single goddamned one of us is sexy and judges people initially based on their physical appearance. Every single goddamned person on the planet, bar none, no exceptions and no caveats. Yes, you reading this: you’re sexist too. Are you a straight man? Then you’re sexist, because sex is a factor in determining who you have relationships with. Are you a gay woman? Then you’re sexist, because sex is a factor in determining who you have relationships with. Unless you’re bisexual, you’re ipso facto sexist, and, even then, I don’t think you get to escape the label. I’m bisexual, at the end of the day, but absolutely consider sex as a factor and have a strong inclination toward women, such that I’ve never had a successful relationship with a guy and don’t particularly want one.
Every single goddamned human being who ever lived was sexist.
Part of the problem is that we no longer are aware that there is an enormous difference between “tolerance” and “acceptance.” Liberals have corrupted the word to the extent that if you don’t accept someone, then they consider you intolerant of them. Saying “I don’t like gay people” becomes intolerant, even though it isn’t–it’s simply unaccepting, and that’s okay, because no one has to accept anyone. To be intolerant is to attempt to use force, violence, and/or coercion to put a stop to behavior that you don’t it, or against people who have characteristics that you don’t like. But to simply not like those characteristics? That’s not intolerant.
As you can see, I’ve discussed the matter before.
This is clearly going to be part of a series on Liberal Butthurt, because there’s so much ground to cover that one article alone can’t do it. Let’s end this on a positive note.
Without using force, violence, and coercion against you, no one can make you a victim. You do not have to be a victim of anything or anyone. Stand up tall, stand up straight, and say it with me now: “I am not a victim.”
* Excluding white people, Christians, and men.
Oh! The Wiccan chick, the story I tried to tell twice and kept getting distracted. Evidently, she didn’t like my answer, so she blocked me. Yes, because I use words to describe myself that she doesn’t approve of, she blocked me. She didn’t reply, she didn’t say another word. She just… blocked me.
Two roads diverged in a yellow wood, and I took the one less traveled by…
I hate Robert Frost.
That’s not true. I like Robert Frost quite a lot, and he’s a fantastic poet. I hate the effects that Robert Frost had on poetry, as I think a generation of people who grew up knowing nothing more about poetry than “Robert Frost and Edgar Allan Poe” did a great deal of damage to poetry as a whole, and that’s obviously not Frost’s fault. I would love for American students to have to spend a decade studying the Romantics, because that was some of the best poetry in human history. But that’s actually not what I want to talk about. Just a completely unrelated prologue, in fact.
I began to drop the hints to my colleague today that I am taking steps to move, but it was only something I weakly alluded to. When I left last year, he was the last person to find out. He won’t be the last person to learn of it this time, but I’m still not going to tell him until I’m much closer to the funding goal. That’s a link to the GoFundMe campaign, which you are free to share or donate to, to help me change my life for the better forever.
At any rate, I simply made it a point to bring up Mississippi’s latest piece of bullshit legislation, and my observation that the state is taking babysteps toward theocracy. But just a little while ago a friend shared something on Facebook that I found really interesting.
Diabetes rates across the U.S.
But we’re just getting started. Of course, I’ve already shared this one that drags in religion–particularly southern baptists–as well.
Of course, poverty is worse here:
We’re the blue one. The ONLY blue one.
It’s really hard to put into perspective how much Mississippi truly freaking sucks. Teen pregnancy? Yep, we’re full up on that, too. Might have something to do with the fact that our schools only teach abstinence for sex ed.
Of course, we also have some of the lowest high school graduation rates in the country–and I’m a statistic on one of those, because I didn’t graduate high school. I instead earned my GED and later went to college. Still. Interesting, Nevada is just as bad as Mississippi in this respect.
Oh, good. We also have gonorrhea.
The short version is that this place sucks.
It sucks even more than I thought it sucked, and I’ve always known that it sucks really bad. It’s not hard to look outside my window and see the boards on buildings, the empty, crack and grass-filled parking lots. Hell, even our banks close up and get out of dodge.
That building in the foreground used to be a bank.
On a given day, I don’t notice on this. And I’ve never had an encounter with gonorrhea, so I’d never notice that anyway. But on any given day, I just see the overabundance of churches. That’s the only real evidence that, just below the surface, this state is sick as hell–horrendously sick, on the verge of catastrophic illness. Beneath the dazzling veneer of the holy churches is a society of petty, petulant, and bitter people, convinced that their problems are caused by:
Icky brown people.
Them dang Spics done took ‘er jobs!
It’s them dang ‘um queers o’er thar that’s the problem.
Them boys wanna dress lock girls, what’d’ey ‘xpect was gun happen?
Obama’s gonna take our gerns!
And I know I’m sounding like the Liberal Redneck here, and I can appreciate the irony of that, but there’s a few important points to consider:
He made his statements about specific people, specific individuals.
I’ve frequently said this isn’t true of all of them.
Yet… with Mississippi’s Anti-Gay legislation on top of their latest “put God back in school!” legislation, with the fact that…
these people went HEAVY Trump (as I predicted, btw)…
It’s certainly true of a majority of them.
They’re looking for someone to blame, and Trump didn’t tell them to blame Mexicans and gays. I know Trump likes to credit himself for bringing immigration up to the surface, but who is he kidding? Immigration never really stopped being a large issue anywhere in the world. That we in the U.S. went a few months without talking about doesn’t mean that Trump created the issue. These people–not all the people here, but the majority to which I’m referring–have always said that Mexicans, gays, black people, etc. were the problem.
My mistake was in thinking that the moderates had more sway than they actually do. Clearly, the moderates are powerless here. Our state legislature has proven itself firmly in the grips of religious zealots, and our Governor has proven himself firmly on their side. Rather than veto this horrific legislation, Phil Bryant proudly signs it into law. I spoke in the podcast last night about how this state has lost its mind. But it’s not like Mississippi ever had very far to go to lose its mind. The only thing that has really changed is that the moderates and reasonable people have been swept aside, and the religious extremists have taken over.
There are dark days ahead for Mississippi, and I’m not referring to my suspicion that secession and civil war are inevitable. I mean only that Mississippi has made it clear: Mississippi is committed to pursuing this path of Christian theocracy, where the moral proclamations of a single religion dictate the law. If I hadn’t decided Saturday that it was truly time to leave, then I would be making that decision now. Mississippi already has among the lowest Average Incomes in the country:
I was unable to find one that didn’t specifically apply to millennials.
When you add in the gonorrhea, the high school dropouts, the teen pregnancy, the high religious rates, the diabetes, and all the other shit, you have a place that is held together only by its religion. So it should be no surprise that Mississippi–which, I think we can all agree, is objectively the worst state in the United States–also has the highest rates of religiosity. What else do these people have, except their hope that they will have a better life in the next world?
Mississippi sucks, and I’m trying to leave it. Unfortunately, most of the problems affecting the statistics above also affect me (except, again, the gonorrhea one :D), and it’s largely irrelevant here that I’m a college graduate with a good work ethic. This is a place where you either work at a gas station, or at an assembly line in a factory (and there are only two factories nearby, both of which only hire through temp agencies and won’t hire someone with a college degree in an unrelated field). This isn’t a place where you get a college degree in I.T. and then stay here, working in your new field. No, as I’ve come to realize, the only option is leaving. And I need help to make that happen. So I ask humbly that you consider helping me with that, in whatever way you can, from donating to liking and sharing–it all helps.
Thank you for reading, and thank you for your time.
As an atheistic transgender lesbian and resident of the state of Mississippi, no one could conceivably be more affected by the new law than I. For those who aren’t aware, the Mississippi Congress recently passed a law allowing business owners to refuse to serve customers on religious grounds, and it’s no secret that this is intended to allow Christians to refuse to serve homosexuals. Now, before we continue, I want to reiterate that I am an atheistic shemale lesbian in Mississippi, and that literally no one could possibly be more impacted by this bill than I will be.
And yet… I stand 100% in support of the legislation.
The fact is that Liberty means that people must be allowed to do things that we don’t like, as long as those things don’t involve force, violence, and coercion. This means that religious people must tolerate homosexuals, and not force homosexuals to be straight, not attack homosexuals, and not attempt to coerce. On the whole, religious people are tolerant of homosexuals.
Americans go wrong–especially on the Left–because they no longer know that there is a difference between tolerance and acceptance, but they are very different things. The LGBT community, and left in general, demands acceptance, but they are not entitled to acceptance, and they do not have the right to be accepted. To tolerate something is to grit your teeth, to hate every moment of it, and to do everything you can to put a stop to it while stopping short of using force, violence, and coercion. Once you use force, violence, or coercion to put a stop to it, you cross the line and become intolerant.
What people need to remember is that the religious business owners in question… are people, and people have rights. Among those rights is the right to religious freedom, the right to express religious beliefs, and the right to act in accordance with religious beliefs, but always stopping short of violence, force, and coercion, because no one has the right to use force, violence, and coercion. As long as they are not using force, violence, and coercion, though, they are not hindering anyone else’s rights and therefore must be tolerated.
It is the left and the LGBT community that is being intolerant here, attempting to use force to get their way, attempting to use the force that is the government to force religious people to act against their religious beliefs. And this is wrong. It is wrong to put a gun to people’s heads and say, “No. You will violate your religious beliefs.” I shouldn’t have to point out that it’s wrong to do that.
It’s a person on the other end of that business, and you do not have the right to force that person to do what you want them to do. You don’t have the right to force someone to be friends with you, if you’re gay, and if they don’t like gay people. They have the right to not associate with gay people, and I don’t think anyone would question that. The lines don’t get muddier when that person in question happens to own a business. They still have the same rights, and they still have the right to not associate with gay people. And you have the right to take your business elsewhere.
Why would you want to do business with someone who hates you anyway? That’s insane. So you want to have the government put a gun to these people’s heads and sell you a cake even though they hate you? I hope they spit in that cake, because you’re violating their rights by doing so.
Liberty is a very simple thing, but it’s the left and LGBT community being intolerant here, and refusing to tolerate the religious behavior of people on the right. Just as you do not have the right to force someone to be your friend, neither do you have the right to force that someone to do business with you. That person is still a person, after all. If you want to force businesses to do business with you against their religious beliefs, then you are the one in the wrong. And I say this as someone who is imminently affected by this legislation.
We must have liberty, and liberty is a two-way street. I’ll acknowledge their right to run their lives as they want, if they acknowledge my right to run my life as I want. And, realistically, religious people have, on the whole, agreed to allow us to live our lives as we want. It’s time to stop making demands of them. It’s time to stop demanding them to give everything; it’s time to meet them in the middle. Live and let live, after all.
The bottom line is that these conservatives don’t want to do business with us. These people don’t want to be our friends, and they don’t want to do business with us. Suck it up, kiddy–not everyone in the world is going to like you and want to be your friend. Put your Big Girl Panties on, shrug, and walk away. We’re not going to win them over by putting guns to their heads and forcing them to violate their beliefs.
Trying will only make them angrier, will only make them more resentful, and will only push them closer to people like Trump. We are making them resentful by doing this, by using the government as the tool of oppression against them, violating their rights and beliefs, and proclaiming, as we put guns to their heads and say “I don’t care what you want, you’re going to do what I want!” that we are the side of justice and truth. You cannot be on the side of justice, truth, and compassion while putting guns to people’s heads and saying, “You can’t do what you want to do. If you do what you want to do, if you don’t do what I want you to do, then I will throw you in prison for the rest of your life and leave you to rot.”
Pushing them with these mechanisms of force and violence, calling them bigots and hateful when they’re merely religious, and refusing to tolerate their dislike of us, will only succeed in making them angrier, and more convinced that we are the spawn of the devil. If they believe that we are spawn of the devil sent to Earth to corrupt, what do you think they will believe after we put guns to their heads and force them to violate their religious beliefs? We only reinforce their resentment, and they are resentful. They are certainly resentful at this point–the white conservative male is horrendously under assault in the country, and is not allowed to say it without being called a bigot in at least three ways. But the left’s brand of oppression has not won. Liberty and reason can prevail.
You just have to see sense. So what these people don’t like us? So what they don’t want to be our friends? So what they don’t want to sell us cakes? Plenty of people do like us. Plenty of people want to be our friends. Plenty of people will sell us cakes. We have to be the bigger person here and say, “I don’t agree, obviously, but I respect your right to do as you think as best. I still love you.”
“You homophobic monster! You’re just enshrining your hate in legislation, you bigots!” is not the appropriate response. “You must serve us! Uncle Sam! Uncle Sam! The mean conservative doesn’t want to be my friend! Get your gun! Make them be my friend! Make them sell me things! Because they should have to respect everyone, even when they disagree!”
This is why I say that the left is rife with hypocrisy.
Turn your volume down.
Again, this really does affect me. I’m a resident of Mississippi, and I’m an unemployed transgender lesbian who can’t find a legitimate job because the state discriminates against transgender people. My life is unnecessarily difficult because of the fact that I’m transgender, and a lot of places here won’t hire me because of that. If you like my writings and podcasts, please consider supporting me on Patreon, where any amount of support earns you some goodies. 😀
“Are you a transsexual?” someone asked me yesterday over the Internet. To be honest, they said “are u a transsexual” but it pains me to see such lazy writing–yes, even on the Internet and in a YouTube comment, I think the bare minimum should involve putting a question mark at the end of an inquiry. But I’m pretty out of touch with the way most people communicate, because I’ve never even texted someone anything like “im goin 2 the show wbu”.
I use on YouTube the same pic that I use for my Gravatar–this one. As you can see, there’s nothing in particular about that pic that says “transgender” one way or another. Facial features are among the most difficult ways to identify someone’s gender, because there aren’t any facial features that are predominantly male or predominantly female. While I’m not the hottest chick out there, nothing in that pic indicates I may be transgender.
I’ve tied my various online accounts together pretty well: Quora, Twitter, Facebook, Youtube, Google+, WordPress… All in the name of making it easier for people to follow me if they’re interested in doing so. It’s not hard, for someone who cares to, to take the path that starts at Facebook and ends with my Google+/YouTube profile, and that’s by design.
Judging just off the comment, I’m guessing that this is one of the Rand Paul supporters who happened to stumble across me again, a month or so after their initial bout of stupidity and ignorance, and he couldn’t resist the urge to pose the question to me again, since I ignored it everywhere else. We were initially having a decent conversation–though I was the only person defending my position, and everyone else was assaulting it and not listening, because a few logical steps is just too much to ask the average person to take–and then the discussion suddenly and inexplicably turned to my gender–as though it was in any way relevant to the topic. Things soon spiraled downward, as they tend to do, and I was briefly followed to various other places, but not in a way that was overwhelming or particularly bothersome. It was just annoying.
Clearly, this person doesn’t have much exposure to liberal issues, because “transsexual” has fallen out of use, and has been out of use in the U.S. for the past decade–it has gone the way of “transvestite,” and only someone pretty out of touch would use it. It’s almost like the transgender equivalent of “queer,” in fact. Now, you know me. I call myself a shemale, so I’m not going to get worked up over someone being politically incorrect. That’s not my point. My point is that he simply used a word that indicates he comes from a conservative background. A liberal would have said “transgender,” in the same way that a liberal would say “little person” or “homosexual” instead of “midget” or “gay.”
I would actually make the case that I’m transgender and not transsexual, but I’m not sure I would really want to use that fine of a comb to untangle the issue. Since it doesn’t matter anyway, my point is simply that he used a version of the label that indicates a rightwing mentality. And that’s fine. Hey, I’m an anarchist. In many ways, I’m on the extreme Conservative side.
People have a hard time characterizing my political leanings. Despite extensive conversations with a colleague, he told me last week that he wouldn’t know how to answer if someone asked him what my political ideology was. I don’t know why–it’s really simple. I think people should be allowed to do anything they want to do, as long as they don’t do anything that forcefully prevents anyone else from doing what the other person wants to do. I think that the state (what you’d know as “the government”) should be abolished, because, by definition, all it does is forcefully inhibit people from doing what they want to do, and we have forms of government that do not require force (namely: economics). When it comes to social matters, I am extreme left: people can say whatever they want to say, marry whoever they want to marry, smoke all the pot they want, and whatever else. I don’t care, because it’s not my business. It doesn’t affect me, and I have no right to force other people to behave as I want them to. Because of this, I am extreme right when it comes to the state (again, what you’d know as “the government”), because the state is a tool that people use specifically to force other people to behave as they want. There are two aspects to this: social and governmental.
Generally speaking, conservatives want Big Government, and they want to use that Big Government to enforce their conservative social ideas. They want to use the state to force people to not have homosexual marriages and to not get abortions, for example. Generally speaking, liberals want Big Government, and they want to use that Big Government to enforce their liberal social ideas. They want to use the state to force people to serve homosexual weddings, to force religious institutions to provide birth control, for example.
Goddamn, I didn’t mean to get off onto all of that.
Our society is obsessed with labels. It doesn’t matter who you are; there are a few dozen labels that can be applied to you right now based on your beliefs, ideas, and practices. Labels have several problems. Labels create stereotypes. After all, a label is really only a category, and members of a category, by definition, all share some traits. These shared traits become the stereotype. Even if the shared traits are predominantly positive, it’s still a stereotype and it’s still a negative thing. When we use a label on a person, we immediately create a mental image of what that person is like. Every word in the opening paragraph of annoyingly written one-word “sentences” will form an image in the reader’s head no matter how open-minded and tolerant the reader is. This is the purpose of labels and categories, after all. This is also the danger of labels and categories.
The use of labels prevents us from recognizing a very important fact: the person we’re affixing the label to is an Individual, not a group. We are all Individuals. We are not groups. Because of this fixation our society has with labels, categories, and groups, we long ago abandoned the idea of Individual Rights and stealthily swapped it out for Group Rights. There is no greater threat to Liberty than the use of labels and groups.
We talk about homosexual marriage and we debate whether or not it should be allowed. This overlooks the very important fact that what we’re really talking about is an Individual. We refer to people as adjectives, not as Individuals, and in this we err. The question is not whether gays should be allowed to marry; the question is: Should this Individual be allowed to marry? The answer to this question is an immediate and resounding, “Yes.” “Yes,” however, isn’t the right answer. The right answer is: “All Individuals should be allowed to do the same thing that all other Individuals do.”
There’s no such thing as a homosexual. There’s no such thing as an Atheist. There’s no such thing as a Christian. There’s no such thing as a Mexican. There’s no such thing as a Statist, Corporatist, Democrat, Conservative, or Libertarian. There are only Individuals. There may be an Individual who is a male and who is attracted to males, but this Individual is not a homosexual. “Homosexual” is simply a label we use to describe this Individual so that we can readily identify certain characteristics the Individual has. Labels should be used for nothing else. Labels should never be used to dictate one’s rights.
An Individual’s preferences in religion, politics, government, sexual orientation, or whatever should have no bearing on what an Individual is allowed to do. When we allow these preferences to dictate an Individual’s rights, then we immediately move from a system based on Individual Rights and to a system based on Group Rights. From there, it’s just a matter of time before the Majority is dictating its preferences onto the Minority.
Gay/Lesbian marriage is the finest example of this problem. As a society, we are arguing about whether the group we call “homosexuals” should be allowed to marry. We’ve missed the point entirely. The only reason that can be given as to why “homosexuals” should not be allowed to marry is that certain people believe it is a sin, it is wrong, it is an abomination, or it is “spitting in the face of ‘God!’” (Which of these reasons you get depends on how far into the South you are when you ask). There’s simply no other reason that can be given as to why homosexuals should not be allowed to marry.
Plato long ago recognized that Democracy has a severe flaw: it can devolve into a dictatorship over minorities by the majority. In the case of “homosexual marriage,” this is what is happening. A marriage between two men is only going to affect the two men who married; a marriage between two women is only going to affect the two women who married. It does not affect bystanders in the tiniest way.
Why should groups who are unaffected by the actions of another group be allowed to dictate whether those actions are allowed? There is a flip side to this argument that is largely unrecognized, though: If “heterosexuals” can marry but “homosexuals” cannot, then Individuals that belong to the Heterosexual Group have more rights than Individuals who belong to other groups. With this scenario, one Individual has more rights than another Individual.
With this set-up, the group with the most rights will be the majority. This is a clear problem in a nation built upon the idea that “all men are created equal.” Equal rights is one of the fundamental pillars of our nations; through our entire history as a nation, we have said that everyone should have equal rights. We have never, though, practiced what we preached by allowing everyone to have equal rights.
Rights have been divided among racial lines in the past. Black Americans had fewer rights than White Americans. Rights have been divided among gender lines in the past. Female Americans have had fewer rights than Male Americans. We did not “create equality” when we abolished these separations in regard to Rights; we simply went from very broad categories to smaller categories.
Now Rights are divided among sexual orientation, age, religious preferences, and all sorts of other asinine things. Sexual orientation is now the most dominant and most severe example in our culture. We went from a society in which “blacks” couldn’t marry “whites” to a society in which “homosexuals” couldn’t marry “homosexuals.” We still discriminate just as strongly and passionately as we did in the days of segregation. The only difference between discrimination today and discrimination then is that the groups to which we show discrimination are smaller and more narrowly-defined. We’re still discriminating.
And we always will be. The idea of groups will never go away, nor should it. The ability to classify and categorize is an evolutionary advantage that has helped us survive and thrive on a planet largely hostile to our existence in a universe largely hostile to our existence. We’ve categorized bears as dangerous, thus we avoid bears. We’ve categorized lightning as dangerous, thus we do not climb telephone poles during storms. The ability to classify and categorize is important to our survival, and we shouldn’t stop classifying ourselves. Categories and classifications make it easier for us to identify certain characteristics which make our lives easier. Classification is key to our lives.
The only way we should not use categorization is in regard to Rights. We can eliminate this problem quite easily by recognizing that humans are never adjectives. This isn’t “a homosexual” about whom we’re saying must be denied the right to marry. This is an Individual who happens to either have male characteristics while preferring relationships with other Individuals who have male characteristics or female characteristics while preferring relationships with other Individuals who have female characteristics. That’s what this is about: an Individual who has certain characteristics.
When we divide rights based upon groups, we end up with a culture full of groups who all claim, “The characteristics of our members are the only appropriate characteristics, and anyone who does not have these characteristics can be denied whatever rights we wish to deny them.” This is what is happening in the “homosexual marriage” debate. The group who numbers as the majority is claiming, “The heterosexuality of our members is the only appropriate option and anyone who is not a heterosexual can be denied their right to do what heterosexuals are allowed to do.”
Since we can divide Individuals into groups based on any arbitrary and irrelevant characteristic we want, our society can create a lot of problems by using Group Rights. Since 90% of Individuals are right-handed, why don’t we pass a law which says that “lefties” can’t attend public schools? Since Christianity is the dominant religion in the U.S., why don’t “Christians” pass a law which says that all “non-Christians” can’t vote? These issues are absurd, of course, and the latter is protected by the fact that, thankfully, most Individuals who are Christians still appreciate the right to religious freedom.
One day homosexuality could become the preference of the majority of Individuals. The percentage of Individuals who are homosexuals has been steadily climbing for decades now, after all, so it is quite possible that this percentage will climb so much that homosexuality is the majority. At that time, “homosexuals” could make it illegal for heterosexuals to marry. This scenario isn’t exactly implausible.
The “heterosexuals” want to deny rights based on sexual orientation right now because they are safely the majority. This is true of all groups who want to deny rights based on an Individual’s categorization into one group or another: they are all currently the majority. Majorities change. After all, once upon a time the majority believed that Zeus was real. Once upon a time, the majority believed that the Earth was the center of existence. Once upon a time, the majority believed that illnesses were sent directly from Yahweh and that the best cure was prayer, not medicine.
Simply because a group is a majority right now doesn’t mean they always will be, and when they are no longer a majority, their rights are likely to be restricted as strongly as they once restricted the rights of other groups. “Heterosexuals” may one day find that they are not allowed to marry. “Whites” may one day find that they are not allowed to vote and must use separate facilities. “Men” may one day find that they are not allowed to vote and only make about 50% of the money “women” make for doing the same job. Tables turn.
The best way to protect our rights is by making sure that everyone has the same rights. After all, if everyone has the same rights, then it doesn’t matter who is the majority, because the majority won’t have the power to dictate the rights allowed to the minority. Protecting ourselves (if we are the majority) in the future, in case we become a minority, is not the only reason we should make sure everyone has the same rights, though. It’s the right thing to do. Tolerance is the right thing to do, and it is nothing but intolerant to deny one group or another certain rights.
There will always be groups. There will always be adjectives which we use to strip away the personhood of someone. There will always be gays, straights, blacks, whites, Christians, Atheists, Republicans, Conservatives, Democrats, and Liberals. The concept of groups will never vanish from our society. The concept of Group Rights, however, must vanish from our society, because it is deeply flawed.
We are not gays. We are not straights. We are not blacks. We are not whites. We are not Christians. We are not Atheists. We are not Republicans. We are not Conservatives. We are not Democrats. We are not Liberals. We are not Statists. We are not Corporatists. We are not Libertarians. We are not Rationalists.
We are Individuals with characteristics that are most easily identified and explained by using one of the above labels. We have preferences, beliefs, ideas, philosophies, moralities, codes, and principles. But we, as Individuals, each define our own preferences, beliefs, ideas, philosophies, moralities, codes and principles—they do not define us.
A few months ago, I sent a friend request on Facebook to this teenager I know. He’s the son of this couple who are some of my clients, and they manage a hardwood company, more or less, and he’s about the gayest person I’ve ever met. I don’t mean that as an insult by any means, but you immediately knew what I meant, didn’t you? I value clear and effective communication far more than I value political correctness. So yeah, this teen is, by a wide margin, the gayest person I’ve ever seen.
And his parents are in absolute denial about it. He and I have had a very brief conversation, and it was after this that I sent him the friend request, though I retracted it after a few hours, because I realized… that his parents screen his communications almost entirely, so he can’t befriend someone on Facebook without them knowing. I just wanted to tell him, because I wasn’t able to during our conversation… that things do get better. He will get out of that house, and he will be free.
He’s homeschooled, and he wants nothing more than to go back to school. His parents say that it was because he was bullied, but that’s not the case at all. They did it because they want to control what things can influence him. He can use his mom’s phone to some degree, but you’d better believe she reads all communications, and his laptop was taken away from him for an entire year. They’re essentially trying to shelter and oppress the gay out of him, as my grandmother and dad tried to oppress and shelter the transgender out of me.
Dear parents reading, that never works.
You cannot change your child’s sexual orientation, gender, or anything else by oppressing them. At best, you will corrupt them, twist them, and destroy them by forcing them to not merely live a lie to you, but to live a lie to themselves. But the truth will always come forward; it cannot be hidden forever, and it cannot be repressed forever. If your child is gay, deal with it, accept it, and move on, because there’s nothing you can do to change it. And anything you do to try to change it will be destructive, and it may very well grow into bitterness, resentment, and hatred.
It is only because I pity my father and grandmother that I do not hate them for what they did to me. By all rights, they should have sat me down and told me, “Look, you’re wearing girls’ clothes. If that’s what you want to do, then do it. Whatever makes you happy. Fuck whatever anyone else says. We have your back, no matter what, because you’re our <child/grandchild> and we love you.” But they didn’t. They threatened me, grounded me, nearly assaulted me with violence on a few occasions, oppressing me and forcing inner conflict into me until I could only resolve it by living a lie and by lying to myself, culminating in nearly two decades–twenty goddamned years–of wasted time that I will never get back.
I will never be an 18 year old chick partying with her friends on a Friday night. I will never be a bridesmaid at a friend’s wedding. I will never have any of the things that a teenage and young adult female gets to have; those things were stolen from me. I will not get to be a gorgeous, sexy, young minx. Well, I will, because I’m not actually that old, I’m only in my freaking twenties, thank the fucking gods, but still. I did have a lot of time stolen from me.
And I am angry about this, parents out there reading this. I am bitter. I am pissed. I resent them. I hate their religion, and I hate their god*. It is only because I pity my dad and grandmother that I don’t hate them. So think about that–I am what your kids will become. They will either pity you for being so misguided by fucked up religions and ideologies that you would literally oppress your child, or they will come to hate you for oppressing them. It will not end well, and they will not stay “changed.” You cannot pray the gay away, and fuck you for trying to.
Take a good, long, and hard look at this website, parents. I am the result of that religious brainwashing, that religiously motivated oppression, and that bullshit that places loyalty to the tribe over love for the children. And, of course, at every point in this, my dad and grandmother would have said that they only wanted what was best for me, and that is why they did what they did. And they would still insist on that to this day. If you’re oppressing your kids for being LGBT, then chances are that you’ll say the same.
But you’re full of shit, if that’s the case. You’re completely full of shit.
Because the simple fact is that I’ve been transgender since I learned to walk. One of my earliest memories is of hiding all of my underwear so that I could wear my sister’s panties. Based on the timeline I’ve constructed for Dancing in Hellfire, I could not have been older than four, and I was almost certainly three years old. For all intents and purposes, that is “since birth.” There was no cultural influence that could have corrupted me; at that age, there is no way that the devil’s evil television and mainstream media could have deceived me into believing I was transgender. I was three. My exposure to culture consisted of practically nothing; we didn’t even have cable then, and no one on television was talking about homosexuality or transgenderism in 1989 anyway. So there is literally no way that the devil you believe in could have corrupted me into sin.
This means, beyond any doubt whatsoever, that your god made me this way. So what is the argument here? That your god made me desperately and sincerely feel as though I should be a girl because he expected me to resist the temptation to sin at the age of three? Is that the contention? Your god made me transgender at the age of three because he wanted me to resist the sin? I have to quote Maynard James Keenan here when I say, if that’s the case, then “Fuck your god.”
This is Christianity in a nutshell, isn’t it?
That’s the equivalent of starving a child, poisoning their dinner, and then putting the poisoned dinner in front of the child without even telling them not to eat it. Because I was three, remember? No one had yet beat into my head that it was, for unknown reasons, a sin for me to wear softer, polyester underwear instead of coarser, cotton underwear. No pastor, parent, or teacher had told me that it was a sin for a man to dress like a woman. So I had no idea that the dinner was poisoned.
And it’s entirely accurate to say that I was starving to wear girl’s clothes and to be a girl; I always have been. There’s a reason that it has always popped back up in my life and that I’ve never succeeded in repressing it for more than a few months. And believe me–I’ve tried. My ex-wife and I had been together for like five years before I just straight told her that I was about to put on a pair of her underwear. Until that point, I’d hidden it pretty well, but I still had to do it occasionally, after she went to bed, or when she was gone. It’s a deep, pervasive hunger that has always been there.
I wouldn’t expect you to understand that. Honestly, I wouldn’t, and I don’t expect people like my dad and grandmother to understand what I mean when I say that. But it’s true–it might be the truest thing that I’ve ever said. To deny me that was to starve my soul**. Even people who aren’t like my dad and grandmother won’t necessarily get it–many of my friends have expressed the sentiment that they don’t care why it matters to me. They don’t mind that it obviously matters to me, but they don’t understand why it matters to me.
Why does it matter to me? I don’t know. It certainly doesn’t matter to most people, since most people are born the correct gender and don’t run into any problems there. Why does it matter to you what kind of music you listen to? What kind of movies you watch? “It just does.” And it does, parents. Whether your kid is gay, bisexual, transgender, or lesbian, it matters.
Put it like this. Why does it matter to you whether you’re getting oral sex from a man or a woman? It feels the same, doesn’t it? You can’t tell whether it’s a man’s tongue or a woman’s tongue. So why does it matter? Who knows? But it does matter.
My ex-wife frequently called me gay because I like butts so much–seriously–and, according to her, I might as well like guys, too, then, since guys also have butts. It’s hard to even know where to begin dissecting that particular illogic, isn’t it? Guys also have hands, so if I want to hold her hand I might as well just hold hands with a guy, right? Guys also have lips, so if I want to kiss her then I might as well just kiss a guy, right? But no… It matters. Some people find it strange, considering that I’m transgender, but I’m solely interested in women, and I have no attraction whatsoever to men. I wouldn’t touch a guy sexually, I wouldn’t hold a guy’s hand, and I wouldn’t kiss a guy; the thought actually repulses me^.
These things matter.
So no, you can’t simply make your gay son kiss a few girls and hope he’s cured. If he’s gay, then he’s gay, and he’s just as repulsed by the thought of kissing a girl as I am by the thought of kissing a guy. We have no control over this. It’s not something that we can help, and it’s not something that can be changed. It is simply who we are.
To the Teens
I’m so sorry.
I’m sorry for the situation you’re in, and I’m sorry for what I’m about to tell you. But the simple truth is that… you’re going to have to live a lie to some degree. You’re going to have to hide who you are, keep secrets, and deal with oppression. They’re your parents, and you’re the kid. Sadly, American society has absolutely no respect for the rights of anyone under 18–your parents can oppress you all they want, can invade your privacy all they want, and can go all in with their attempts to destroy who you are.
But if I could say one thing to you, and only one thing, it would be this:
It gets better.
It sucks, and it’s going to continue to suck for a long time. You’ll be miserable, and you’ll likely fall into depression throughout all of your teenage years. You will probably be forced to lie to them, to hide things from them, and to have a false identity just to keep them off your back for five freaking minutes. I get it, man. Believe me, I get it. I totally get it.
But stay true to yourself. Don’t lose sight of who you are, and don’t ever forget that you’re simply wearing a false identity. Don’t ever forget that you’re simply wearing a mask to appease the oppressive adults in your life, and that the day will come when you can remove that mask. Because that day will come. Hang in there. You can always reach out to me. My goal is to create an Internet web of people who are there for LGBT teens in the south, or anywhere with oppressive parents, so that you can be reminded by me, or someone like me, that itwill get better. No matter how much it sucks, no matter how bad it gets, and no matter how depressed you become, don’t lose sight of that fact. Once you graduate high school and turn 18, go to college, and be yourself. Remove the masks.
A lot of people will say to go ahead and forcefully come out, make your parents accept you, but that isn’t always an option. Consider your needs, first and foremost. Ask yourself that one simple question: “Will my parents kick me out? Will they send me away?” You know your situation better than anyone. Go with your gut.
Those same people will probably say “If they can’t accept you, then screw them. You don’t need them anyway.” I don’t understand why people say things like that. A few months ago, someone told me that about my clients. Since my clients will drop me the moment that this transition can no longer be hidden, he said “fuck them,” and that I don’t need them. I honestly don’t know what world these people live in, but it’s not the real world. Back in real world, I do need those clients. Those clients keep my bills paid, keep me fed, and keep a roof over my head. This isn’t a movie where you can just be yourself and saw the hearts of the ignorant, convincing them to come around to the side of tolerance and understanding. The real world doesn’t work that way. Ignorant people will remain ignorant, and you will, in many case, need those ignorant people.
Work hard so that you don’t need those ignorant people. And the moment that you don’t need them, then you can tell them to deal with you on your terms. Yeah, if I was making even $2000 a month from writing, I could tell my clients, “I’m transgender. And if I’m going to continue working for you, you need to understand that all future service calls will be done by me ‘as a female.’ And if that’s a problem, then we need to our separate ways.” But back in the real world, I can’t afford to do that. Thanks to how the Vegas bullshit made me lose 90% of my clients, I need my clients more than ever.
And the fact is that, yeah, you do need your parents right now. You might have a friend whose parents wouldn’t care, who you could stay with instead, but before you take a leap like that, you need to put a great deal of thought into things. I would say that if it is possible for you to be you, then do it, no matter the cost, as long as you can survive. If you can’t survive, then… you’ve just gotta wear the mask. And I’m sorry to say that, but…
Wear the mask. Don’t become the mask.
* Though I do hate their god, this is unrelated to my being an atheist.
** I don’t believe in souls, either, but, again, I value effective communication, and you immediately know what I mean when I say this.
^ Homosexuality doesn’t repulse me, to be clear. Obviously, it doesn’t. The thought repulses me because I’m not attracted to guys in the slightest. As far as my sexual orientation goes, there’s no difference for me between the thought of kissing a guy and the thought of kissing a dog. That’s not meant as an insult to men–I’m not comparing men to dogs. I’m simply making the point about the significance of orientation.
I have to take a moment to gush about how great my friends are–and how great I am at choosing friends. They say you can choose your friends and not your family, and that’s obviously true, and the past six months have shown me that and why it’s so important to have good friends.
Considering that my family is awful and exactly what you’d expect southern fundamentalist Christians to be, I knew I was going to be leaning heavily on friends to keep me going. For all intents and purposes, I no longer really have family. Though most of my family still doesn’t know, they will soon, and they’ll turn their backs on me much faster and easier than my sister did. Strangers say, “You don’t know that. Your family may surprise you.”
None of my friends say that, though, because my friends know how my family is; they know how their families are, and this isn’t a movie where the side of tolerance and openness triumphs over bigotry and closed minds; this is Earth, the United States, the South, Mississippi. The only state in the union to keep the confederate flag as part of its state flag. And I’ve often spoken against the way the media and television portray the South, because my friends and I are such enormous exceptions to how the area is portrayed, but that doesn’t change that the average person IS pretty close to how Family Guy portrays them.
When I began coming out as transgender, I added my friends on Facebook slowly. It was because I didn’t want to overload myself, and I knew everyone would have questions. And they did have questions, but I also knew that none of them would take issue with it.
Among the most amusing replies was when I was talking to DB, and we were talking about an old friend of ours, DC.
“Oh shit heads up DC and CP are married and get this they are Bible thumpers now and they live close to there. I’ve tried to stay in contact with DC but he’s just weird now and he always blows me off he’s not rude just not pursuing the friendship so fuck it.”
To which I replied:
“‘Daniel is just weird now,’ said Dustin to the shemale lesbian.”
Other friends were more direct in the conversation.
“So that’s where the hell you went off to. Well, don’t let anyone get in the way of what your heart is obviously telling you to do.” And that was it in regard to that. All I did was add him as a friend, and that’s what he said.
“I think everyone should be free to express themselves without fear of persecution, no matter how they do it, as long as it doesn’t hurt anyone else. Staying true to my own personal views, I must even include religion. Of course you know I’m not religious myself, but if a person is for whatever reason, I think they are entitled to that. As long as it doesn’t become an organization that tries to push those beliefs on others or does anything else that “inconveniences” others, for lack of a better way of putting it, I think that’s ok. Same goes for anything else an individual feels they have to do to express themselves or feel whole. There isn’t a single, solitary thing wrong with what you’re doing and if ever necessary for whatever reason, I’d be prepared to publicly support you.”
My friends have all been really great. I even preemptively attempted to explain to one of my oldest friends, and he cut me off with:
“It’s all good. You don’t owe me any kind of explanation. Just as long as you’re doing what YOU want to do.”
My friends stand as a stark contrast to my family, but I couldn’t choose my family. I did choose my friends, and I fucking chose well. Longtime friend and colleague JM was going to be the last to know about it, and asked pointedly in response to something I’d sent him if I have an interest in cross dressers or in cross dressing. To clarify, he is a friend, and our relationship is far beyond “just business.” And he said:
“For what it’s worth, I’m glad you told me that, and I don’t care. Really. I’d rather you express it than suppress it and get sick. Who knows why we like and don’t like what we do and don’t. Billions have been made speculating, but in the end, fuck knows. That’s who.”
So I just wanted to give a shout out to the important people in my life and say “thank you.” It could definitely be a lot lonelier, but it isn’t–because of wonderful friends.
Though they are great friends, none of them can employ a transgender person. Though it will be possible for me to secure clients who are unaware that I’m transgender, losing my current clients is going to be devastating financially. Any help that can be provided would be appreciated, especially sharing the url: