The Massachusetts Model

"In this month of July, as we have just celebrated the Fourth of July and our Independence Day and the signing of the Declaration of Independence, we ... are reminded that the phrase, “All Men are Created Equal,” at the time really referred to only certain men, and at the time, only certain men who owned property. Much has clearly changed in this country since 1776. As our country grew, our population grew, and our Bill of Rights and the interpretation of them included a rational and evolving sense of what liberty and justice and equality for all meant." — Mass. Atty. Gen, Martha Coakley in July 8, 2009 press conference.

The year was 1989. Massachusetts passed a state law on non discrimination covering sexual orientation, giving gay and lesbian state residents protections in the workplace against unfair treatment, hiring or firing practices. Being one of the early states to enact it statewide, they were among the vanguard of the progressives.

Since that day twenty years earlier, more legislation has since been enacted covering the state's gay and lesbian residents: Adoption (1993), Hate Crimes (2002), School Bullying (2002), Marriage for in-state couples (2004) and for out-of-state couples (2008). They've also had not one, but two elected officials who were gay – Gerry Studds (1972-1997) and Barney Frank (1981-current). So-called the "most liberal state in the Union", Massachusetts had done well by its gay and lesbian residents.

Taking this into consideration, let's also take a look at the progress of Trans rights in this "most liberal state." By default, Massachusetts' Trans residents have the right to marry per the 2004 edict. Additionally by default, other non-Mass. Trans citizens may now marry there per the 2008 law. In 2009, Trans people saw the first trans-specific law passed: the right to have the new gender marker listed on their drivers license.

And that's about it currently. There's a current non discrimination bill to cover trans folks some two decades later which will go to hearings soon. Of course the same bill also went to hearings in 2007. Hopefully it passes now, but it's still a coin flip.

Twenty years after their initial rights victory, five years after winning the first-in-the-country same-sex marriage rights, and even a year after winning those rights in Mass. for same-sex couples from other states, the Trans rights push is in its early toddling steps. This in the "most liberal state" in the Union. It's a point that even the Big Gay Man on the Hill, Barney Frank, has used in his own defense to deflect crticism when he himself got cold feet on Trans inclusion in non discrimination bills.

Earlier this year MassEquality, the state's prominent LGBT advocate, made tacit promises of finally devoting attention to Trans rights in the state with its Trans rights org counterparts, Mass. Transgender Political Coalition (MTPC). Not long after, they plastered a photo of one of the Trans community's prominent Trans men, giving instructions for folks to contact them on info for Trans equality!

Shortly and subtly thereafter, they then start edging away from working on Trans issues in the state and focused more prominence on helping their neighboring states' marriage equality rights fights! They apparently discovered what Trans organizations have known for many years: big gay and lesbian money pours in on gay and lesbian issues, and magically evaporates when it's Trans issues. There's nothing sexy about Trans issues to gay and lesbian America, no pressing humanitarian (read: big media face time) need for involvement, nothing much to be gained for them personally. Why engage? Maybe another pressing G&L need may arise in the future? Perhaps divorce rights will be the next big ticket item on the agenda?

And if not, hey! There's always plenty of vacation spots to visit....

"I started looking at small companies that were running a sort of virtual reality cottage industry .... that's your dream of what it's going to be." — musician, Thomas Dolby

Of course, once all the rights for sexual orientation on their potential wish list are attained and there's nothing else left, why not give new up-and-coming gay and lesbian leaders a shot by ... coming back and getting those hapless trannies their rights! You continue keeping the org in place and keep the name recognition going! There's certainly no real urgency from a sexual orientation standpoint. They can give more young gays and lesbians an opportunity to develop leadership skills. (Something Trans people don't really need – after all, what are they going to do with them?) It spotlights again the talents and abilities of the gay and lesbian young leaders (something Trans folk have never really had, and frankly in their estimation don't need.)

It also keeps the reins firmly in gay and lesbian hands. You don't want to give trannies the keys to the bank 'cause Lord only knows how they could screw that up if given chance!

And if by chance they manage to win rights for their hapless gender-confused charges, all the better! It does so at low cost, gives these individuals a badge of honor and some pride in accomplishment, keeps the Trans community beholden to the gay and lesbian leaders and helps assuage some of that old "incrementalist" gay guilt and may help bury the legacy (which really needs sanitizing in order to look attractive in the historical annals).

To paraphrase the old adage, why teach a man to fish or give him access to fishing when you can simply just give him a fiah that you catch? Then he gets fed only at your convenience, and best of all helps keep the cottage industry under control! There's nothing like a captive audience to drum up business! If they must bring into their fold a Trans person, make sure they are agreeable and will help aggressively market the paradigm of LG first, then B, then T. A good Trans marketer in LGBT orgs can be an excellent public relations tool and adds the dual benefit of providing "cover" with the Trans and curious straight community folks.

And if they're crafty enough, they can stretch this out for quite some time and make a nice career of it! It's not like Trans people aren't familiar with the concept of gatekeepers.

After all, only a fool would give away the business secrets that make their business a success. When did Coca-Cola or Col. Sanders ever give away their secret recipes? Answer: never! It's why they're a success story for the ages!

Of course once all is acheived in Massachusetts, as we've seen, why not export this model to the other states? After all: "there's more education needed on Transgender issues ... they don't know who you are." And with any luck by these incisively-minded G&L leaders, they likely never will in our lifetimes!

As the Big Gay Man on the Hill loves to point out on progressive issues: as goes Massachusetts, thus follows the rest of the nation.

If you're Trans, you better pray, meditate like hell or scream bloody murder that it doesn't!

"The notion that you don't protect most people if you don't protect them all – that's never worked." — Rep. Barney Frank on ENDA in 2007

Contest: Hoodie Design

To my lovely readers, WWD would like to invite all of you and aspiring streetwear designers to submit a sketch for a Southpole Hoodie and win a chance to have it featured in the next collection and a full page ad in WWD.


There's just two weeks left to submit your best guys or girls hoodie design along with a 1-page essay detailing specs, design elements and fabrication.

It's Marriage Mania In Maniacal America

"I'm goin' coconuts but least I'm goin' my way.
I'll probably be here when that sun goes down.
Goin' crazy, ooh, from the heat!" — Goin' Crazy, David Lee Roth

Maybe it's just the unending heatwave in Texas, where any day below triple digits actually feels slightly chilly, but it seems to my overcooked brain that both sides on this same-sex marriage tug-of-war are coming down with a chronic case of the wackies. Or maybe it's just a sizzling hot summer everywhere and it's not just me – everyone's losing it.

Marriage mania is in full bloom, and Pennsylvania joined the litany of states pushing for marriage recognition for same-sex couples. Amazingly marriage didn't get forced down the throat of President Barack Obama when the 300 some-odd LGBT leaders and their partners were invited to the White House for a private reception. However, just this week both Massachusetts and Oregon filed suit claiming the Feds violate their federalist states' rights by DOMA's effect on their states' ability to make independent decisions on marriage rights.

Meanwhile the California suit against the Feds has gotten interesting. Initially when this was filed (including one attorney who offered to press the issue who was also part of the Bush legal team who filed suit successfully to place Bush in the presidency post-Florida 2000 election results!) it was thought that things were looking rather rosy. Even LGBT organization heads from groups such as Lambda Legal, the ACLU's LGBT Rights Project and the National Center for Lesbian Rights all stepped up and encouraged all other groups to take a back seat in order not to complicate or jeopardize the pending suit. "Ill-timed lawsuits could set the fight for marriage back."

Well that was then. This is now. It seems these same three groups are now filing amicus briefs to intervene to allow PFLAG, Lavender Seniors of the East Bay and Our Family Coalition to file suit with the Supreme Court as well. (And they all thought we Trans folk couldn't get on the same page or being politically "realistic"!

The American Foundation for Equal Rights (AFER), who was leading the charge in Federal Court, wrote a pointed letter back to the three above mentioned groups, noting how they had all initially worked collaboratively on the project and anguishing over actions and quotes in the media from these other players that they felt "undermine" the case and the goal which they were all working towards.

Not only were they there first on this suit, AFER worries that this case "could be mired in procedurally convoluted pre-trial maneuvering for years—while and gay and lesbian individuals in California continue to suffer the daily indignity of being denied their federal constitutional right to marry the person of their choosing." I've attached a photocopy of the full letter from AFER to the parties below. It's, um, interesting:


So what are they trying to do here – out-compete each other for top attention and ego strokes? Or maybe bog it down in order to slow the process (and maybe milk more donations while it continues?) No matter! At least everyone's on the same page and it's all in the firm capable hands of our professionals in leadership of the gay and lesbian community! Lord knows if Trans people got a hold of it, it'd be a confusing mess, hmmm? Yeah, that's what they say ....

"What is important in life is life, and not the result of life." — German playwright, Johann von Goethe

Of course, not to be outdone on trying to conspicuously blunder and lose, the opposition is also working hard to snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory! It was bad enough that a FOX commentator compared the same-sex marriage issue to bestiality a la Pat Robertson and so many others. That's actually old-hat stuff now! Get the latest on the intra-species marriage issue from FOX (again)!

This was actually reporting on a story of a Swedish study that found that marriage was good for couples in that it kept them from dementia and Alzheimer's disease with absolutely not connotations on same-sex couplings at all. Yet their own Freudian mentality just keeps slipping out as on FOX & Friends morning show, we heard this from one of their triad of morning hosts, Brian Kilmeade:

BRIAN KILMEADE: I'm just amazed that they thought about doing this study in the – by interviewing people in the 1970s and the 1980s.

DAVE BRIGGS: A little dated, you think?

KILMEADE: The average is 50, and they see that they keep it together. I find this – I find this somewhat ....

BRIGGS: Go ahead.

KILMEADE: Different. Leave it to the Finns and Swedes to some up with something. They literally –

GRETCHEN CARLSON: Don't look at me, pal.

KILMEADE: Because that's a – we are – we're – we're a – we're – we keep marrying other species and other ethnics and other....

CARLSON: Are you sure they're not suffering from some of the causes of dementia right now?

KILMEADE: I mean, the Swedes ....

BRIGGS: What are you getting at?

KILMEADE: See, the problem is, the Swedes have pure genes.

BRIGGS: OK.

KILMEADE: Because they marry other Swedes because that's the rule. Finland – Finns marry other Finns, so they have a pure society. In America, we marry everybody.

That's right folks! Intra-species marriage is already here in America! As Kilmeade noted: "we keep marrying other species and other ethnics ... the problem is the Swedes have pure genes (ah! gotta watch them! the Master Race people!) ... Because they marry other Swedes because that's the rule. Finland – Finns marry other Finns, so they have a pure society. In America, we marry everybody." This is rife with alarmist xenophobia!

And marrying "other species"? Really? Are they buying that Georgia freak's Obama-as-Curious-George-the-Chimp T-shirt fetish as scientific fact? What a serious media outlet FOX has turned out to be, huh? It sure sorta hearkens back to the old miscenegation days from what I can see, all this concern about America's "intra-species" marriage and breeding! Wow.

"The most perfidious way of harming a cause consists of defending it with faulty arguments." — Friedrich Nietzsche

But if that's not wacky enough, it gets crazier! From no less than Washington DC, home of Marion Barry who supports everything EXCEPT for his staunch disapproval of same-sex marriage (and subsequent arrest this week for stalking – way to drive home the point of morals, Mr. Ex-Mayor!), we have testimony on the DC consideration of accepting same-sex marriage as law of the district from Rev. Leroy Swailes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFFYYjWjVuE


This one has to be seen to be believed. I can't make this stuff up, folks! Some of the reverend's philosophical proferrings are:

"You have human rights and you have inhuman rights. When a man dealing with a man and a woman dealing with another man, that's inhuman." Make sense of that logic!

Discrimination's a negative and a postive. ... I came out of my mama's womb like I didn't have a choice. That was a negative discrimination." Yeah, I guess you didn't have a choice ... unless you managed to self-abort! Is this an advertisement for abortion?

"If you discriminate against a homosexual that's a positive. Why? Because of children. You've got people they call pedophiles.... When you look in the eyes of a child and tell them "sex is between Adam and Adam, and Eve and Eve," that's a pedophile." Wow, it's that simple? And all this time I thought it was about something physical, like molestation or at least child nudity. What was I thinking!

"This book here talk [sic] about 'All Families Are Different' has to do with what? You have God's family, which is a natural family, and you have Antichrist's family." Yeah, all Godly families have to "be like us." That's exactly what the racist white families used to think during the days of Jim Crow, too, and they believed that the Bible told them where everyone else's family fell. It must be said that Rev. Swailes is African-American though his logic is eerily familiar, harkening back to those bad old days.

One child grows up to be
Somebody that just loves to learn.
And another child grows up to be
Somebody you'd just love to burn.
Mom loves the both of them.
You see it's in the blood.
Both kids are good to Mom:
'Blood's thicker than mud'
It's a family affair...." — Family Affair, Sly & The Family Stone

"Everybody should have human rights, but you have to be human! Human means you deal with the opposite sex...." Meaning that, what? All Trans people have tails? All gays are sick little monkeys? And I'm sure he meant it in the best way possible, no offense and all!

"Homosexuality destroys (life), it'll be the extinction of the human race.... Eighty-six civilized cultures, it was the death of their cultures why? Because they gave into ... strange flesh: the same sex, which is a form of bestiality. Why is that a form of bestiality? Because a beast has four legs and one gender! If you put two men together, you have four legs and two penises. That's one gender. That's a form of bestiality." Ah! Well that explains it! Four legs and one gender is animal! So if there's a three-legged dog, or a couple who are same-sex, but one partner only has one leg, then they'd be semi-bestial, right? Or if both partners are one-legged, then same-sex marriage would be okay because they'd be human! I recalled a show on Oprah once that showed a dog born with no front legs, and it literally taught itself to walk on it's hind legs, upright! That would make him human, not animal! So then a woman could then marry that dog and not be engaging in bestiality per Swailesian logic! But what about "eunuchs, which were so born from [their] mother's womb?" Vexing! Or for that matter, how about "eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men?" Hmm ... clear as mud!

"When you separate something, you have discrimination. When I put a glass of water here and a glass of poison, which one are you going to choose? You're going to choose a glass of water. That's a form of discrimination!" Ah! I'm getting it! We discriminate against poison every time there's a glass of it on the table and we avoid drinking it! Shame on us anti-poison bigots!

"I cannot look into the eyes of a child and tell them "you have a choice to be heterosexual or homosexual." That would make me a sadist! So what is a sadist? A sadist is the one who destroyed sex! ... and I don't practice Satanism." Not sure where the satanism thing came into play – a Freudian slip? And all this time I thought sadism, named after the Marquis De Sade, was all about inflicting physical or mental cruelty! Then again, I can see how some would get confused and think it cruel to tell kids they have choices in life. Better to eliminate all choices and just pre-destine everyone's life for them from inception! It eliminates all the guesswork! Just hand them an assignment sheet saying "here is your life – don't think, just live what we tell you." Hey look, I'm supposed to be a garbageman ...!

It's a wonderful world out there, kiddies. Yes indeed, batshit crazy.

Meanwhile, halfway across the globe, Iranians are protesting and taking to the streets, risking incarceration and even their lives for defying the Ahmadinejad Administration! And here in the U.S, that saga sure fell off of the radar screen fast! What's a country got to do to get a little media time over life-and-death issues like marriage? Iran's free people need a strong advocate here – someone like Mary Cheney: she who couldn't be bothered to bring up same-sex marriage or gay rights issues in her dad & Bush's campaign, and supported her daddy and the GOP (even with the antagonistic approach the Bush Admin took on her issues) because "there are terrorists who will stop at nothing to hurt this country ... I had to support the candidate who was going to do the best job to protect this country. And no offense to John Kerry, but it wasn't him."


So now that the people of Iran are trying to oust one of the heads of Bush's Axis of Evil, and folks in America are focusing on that less important stuff like same-sex marriage, where is Mary Cheney these days?

"...things get confused out there: power, ideals, the old morality...." — G. D. Spradlin as Gen. Corman from "Apocalypse Now."

by Ed Hardy and Ferrari GTB Fiorano

The Christian Audigier style has grown so pervasive with the Ashton Kutcher set that it's long since leapt off of t-shirts and is attaching itself to automobile now.



Here is Audigier latest automotive design portfolio has emerged in the form of a Ferrari 599 GTB Fiorano. Making Lapo Elkann's ride seem reserved by comparisson, this unique Ferrari is decked out in more tattoo art than a biker rally, and goes to show that if you have the money, Audigier will be glad to "improve" your car for you.

Celebrity Fashion: Gabriel Aubry

Gabriel Aubry, if you are familiar with Halle Berry, then Gabriel should not be stranger to you.

Being Halle Berry's longtime boyfriend, and father to her daughter, Gabriel Aubry with green eyes and dirty blonde hair, he has modeled for Tommy Hilfiger, Versace, Calvin Klein and Next, hit the runway at the Louis Vuitton show in Paris last week.



According to the news, Gabriel enjoys pay rate of $30,000 a day with his profession. Anyone can confirm? and now I wonder why so many people are keen to be in modeling industry! :) Is a good industry to be in.......

Man Fashion: Raf Simon 2010 Collection

Is Raf Simon's shows again. Simon, one of my favorite designer has released his latest Spring 2010 Collection in the mid of gorgeous garden in Paris.


According to Simons, this season is based the idea of "The Second Decade", where he no longer wants to dress teenage boys and is starting to target the "high-fashion men". The sense of maturity permeates the runway in sombre, jet black suits with crisp white button downs in the beginning.


The presentation then progresses into something slightly transgressive with long open coats with arms fashioned from bronze satin and the rest from a darker, heavier knit. Sleeves are removed from the blazers to create an elongated dress vest that is layered over color block knit tops, and translucent snake print tops crawl up the models' bodies like tattoos. Snakes seem to be a recurring motif in this season’s collection as it fashioned itself metaphorically as belts, and more literally in the form of what seems like a logo on jeans.

---

Tecchnorati Tags: Man Fashion, Raf Simon, 2010 Men Collection, Fashion Designer, Paris Fashion Week

The G & The L Rises, T Sinks And Fails, And All Is AOK? BS!

"He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it." — Martin Luther King Jr.

Well it didn't take long for responses to my last blog. One person wrote me privately saying she was disappointed I didn't "understand" how "serious" the Pam's House Blend controversy was and that I should've "come down harder" on her and Autumn Sandeen for these bannings or muzzlings they enacted on their trans "members and bloggers." Then on my posting I had a response from another suggesting I sit down with Mara and patch up philosophical differences, noting she was "not a card carrying member" of either of our organizations ... preferring to contribute to NGLTF because "they promote trans-inclusion."

Two completely different perspectives saying roughly the same thing: we need to make things work in gay and lesbian organizations or functions for us in order to make gay and lesbian led-groups succeed. Talk about your WTF moments! Perhaps my point in the previous blog wasn't clear enough.


Let me restate that point: we need our voice and for that matter autonomy, respect, experience, and control of our own destiny without shackles or limitations placed on us just as they need theirs. They have theirs already. Where do you see ours in any similar measure? It doesn't happen within GLBT. And outside GLBT we get a little awareness, but most of our own seems more than happy to build up the very gay and lesbian institutions while leaving the trans ones in neglect!

How do I need to rephrase this in order for our own community to understand? Maybe I do suffer from the communication disability that the G&L leaders so famously peg on us all. Lord knows trans people can't articulate our own issues, but let me know what I need to do to get this out and I'll struggle my way through it!

In 2000, during a visit at the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) with Michael Gray and Alex Fox, I'd expressed how I personally didn't have a problem with them leaving the T out of their mission statement and their work. Yes, I meant every word of it. HRC was – is – the voice of the gay and lesbian community and Trans wasn't their forte. We in the T community needed our own voice, and needed it expressed from our perspective just as they needed and had theirs.

In the next two years, they first amended their mission, then worked with a new upstart individual to create another Trans organization that would supplant NTAC and its independent voice. This new group would help them by humiliating those of us who weren't working "with our (so-called) allies," and isolating those of us trans people who apparently weren't our own allies for wanting to speak to our own issues. It was better addressed by the "allies" as their "professionals" and by this logic knew our own issues and could address them better than we did. HRC was "the 800 lb. gorilla in the room ... (that) must be dealt with."

Even after the new group moved away from being such fans of HRC, they still had to be friends with them as they "had to work in the same space."


That latter sentiment is pure BS. None of these so-called allies is required to "work in the same space" as NTAC or other Trans organizations kept out of the mainstream of the entitled Queer movement. None of them have ever gone through "proper channels" on anything with us, not even any of the newer Trans organizations now or in the future. Why lend credibility to any of that?

"I would like to be open with the public. I would like to not keep secrets or be careful when I talk. I don't want to have to plan things...I want to be outspoken. I want to say my opinions and I hope they're taken in the right way. I don't want to stop being free. And I won't." — actress, Angelina Jolie

Gay and Lesbian America are quite well established and are perfectly positioned for, and awash in successful ventures. They even have us (with our limited resources) giving them a hand to build up theirs.

Now take a look at Trans America and our own ventures. Where in the hell do you see anything of theirs reciprocated back to us in whatever configuration? There is no similar effort to build our functions nor any dollar-for-dollar return on funding, much much much less anything commensurate (considering the size of their community comparative to our small and quite limited cumulative income levels between our two communities).

And after so many years of demonstrated history, noticing the all-too-obvious patterns, we trans people are insistent upon building up gay and lesbian institutions for what again? Their outspoken leaders are ballyhooed and given prominence. Our outspoken leaders are shamed into silence – and they even enlist some of our own to assist in doing so!

It's been clear to many of us for most of this decade that there's nothing in this "LGBT movement" for Trans folk. We're appends that they begrudge but tolerate as they must appear politically correct. So these leaders do enough for appearance's sake, manage us best as they can and seek out ways to make it pay for itself.

Their leaders are heroes. Our leaders are zeroes – mere trash to be tossed. Not much unlike how Sylvia Rivera and Marsha P. Johnson were considered back in their day, as only in death were they fondly remembered. We're every bit as useful and wanted to them as sand off the beach tracked into their shiny vehicles.

Make no mistake: Sylvia and many of the trans leaders and rioters of those days despise the movement for its hypocrisy and hard-heartedness. And though we must recapture our own voice, our outspoken leadership are and will continue to be as welcomed and as necessary as sand tracked into their vehicle after coming in off of the beach.

As Barney Frank, the Big Gay Man On The Hill, has noted so many times: they don't know who [trans] are. And as it's always a Barney, or a Joe Solmonese or a Matt Foreman or a Rea Carey or a GLAAD or someone similar who's always our prominent face to the rest of the world in politics, media and representation, that's who America will always believe we are.

And yes, in case you haven't noticed, they're all gay or lesbian. And yes, if that's who some of you trans folks wish to build up and promote, then I don't want to hear a word when we get ditched (due to insufficient education on Trans) and subsequently assumed and developed as a future cottage industry for these very same folks to continue validating themselves while continuing to keep us at bay and voiceless. Look around your NGLTF: how many trans people have they hired onto their staff historically? How many in any of these groups were leaders or highly visible throughout the years? If you can't answer those questions, then you haven't been paying attention anyway.

"All people saw on television were a few of my outspoken supporters out front; and they came away thinking that was me." — Sen. George McGovern about his presidential campaign in 1972

Ten years ago, I was one of the so-called "moderate voices of reason." My goal was to try to get us to some understanding of the needs of both sides and get these established groups to understand us as equals and to forge actual egalitarian ideals in our pursuit of rights as painlessly as possible. For my troubles, I ended up being written off as a radical protester and an enemy to be isolated and buried a few years hence. Yes I was naive and paid a price most severe.

Well, I'm not buried any more, and am in no mind to play "compromising" games that again rip our voices away from us. Giving up your right to voice your displeasure is and absolute zero sum game. You get less than nothing: helping them make their job easier is your only result.

Meanwhile, the State of Massachusetts announced today that they are suing the federal government over same-sex marriage and DOMA's infringement over the their state law per federalism. Meanwhile, trans people in that same state still have no hate crimes protection, no employment non discrimination and few if any job prospects. So do you think our voices have been heard? Do you really think that we actually matter? Or maybe fear and poverty aren't so bad, hmm?


This deep-seated mistrust of G&L institutions and functions didn't form in a vacuum and didn't happen overnight. This has been roiling underneath for quite some time. And it's about to boil over....

"When you got nothing, you got nothing to lose." — Like A Rolling Stone, Bob Dylan