Activity Stream

Posts Activity Stream

  1. UsernameOptional


    Texas, and too many Texans, don't care.  What do you expect from a state where some people actually fly the state flag ABOVE the country's flag.  YES... I have personally seen this with my own eyes.  So why would what NC experienced after their ignorance mean anything to Texas?  After all... that's TEXAS.  Everything in Texas is bigger, better, badder, different.

    <_< 

     

  2. UsernameOptional


    Zack Ford | 24 Jul 2017
    "Both laws take New Jersey in a very different direction than President Trump is trying to take the country on trans rights. Earlier this year, the administration rescinded guidance the Obama administration had issued protecting transgender students..."  --thinkprogess.org

    Chris Christie signs two pro-transgender bills into law

    ___________________________________
    This really blew me away - Christie has been such a Drumpf-kisser, and transgender anything is not on Drumpf's radar screen.  -DML

    1 person likes this
  3. Naeka


    I have very much enjoyed reading this post and it's replies.

     Here's my little bit of two cents worth.

    I grew up in a Christian home threw the Nazarene Church, and their holiness doctrine. However over the years I found that everyone even a pastor is imperfect as I had a couple non gender conflicts with two different pastors. in that I stopped attending church. for a while. but in all that time I kept my beliefs, as there were things that took place in my life, that can only be explained by Gods grace and his angels. and hence is the reason I am still here and typing this reply. I know in my heart where I stand. with God and part of my belief is, their is only one person I will be answering to and have to explain my actions to; Though he already knows my heart and soul. and its is not any one that is on this earth. and right or wrong I am living as I feel I need to it took a long time to get to this point.

    I had a emotional crisis just yesterday  and the person on the crisis's line let me know he him self was Christian and more less said that who is to say this is not Gods Path for you ? who is to say that this is a way for you to show your faith even if you don't openly tell others about your faith. there are those that will just come up and tell you that you need saved. then there are those that, if they are asked? you are more then willing to tell them of your experiences and not push the issue and let that person decide.

    I feel that everyone's path is set before them, as God knows your path, even before you know it.

     

     

  4. stephani


    As said no, they are there as a merely interactery part of social media, indicates a notice to or indication of understanding to nothing more, just ignore them if they are of concern to you. They basically are just hey I read that or I agree with that or yeah I suppose that's one way to look at things sort of interaction others can have without adding dialogue to the stream.

  5. stephani


    No matter who or what one represents your agenda will always enter into whatever you are interacting in, it's inherant . My inherant beliefs as a lesbian holds it's own agenda's for my purposes so do everyone else's no matter how much we try to remain "non bias" never happens, we all slip. 

    So the term Gay Agenda has always makes me cringe so does anything agenda, lbgtqasn get my point ever point on that star has it's own agenda's, even if you try to separate them the muddle into the discussion or debate how ever one might deem the situation, see agenda right there is it a discussion or debate. Smiles

  6. olcharlie


    JULY 24, 2017 1:57 PM

    1 person likes this
  7. patrice FAILURE TO COMPLY


    Couldn't sleep, and thought I'd browse the forum.

    Interesting opinion-editorial; extremely effective use of sarcasm to push a personal agenda which Ms. Boylan explicitly endorses.  Such an excellent wordsmith, but that is to be expected from a novelist & literature professor.

    Certainly, I am sympathetic to the special rights which she advocates for herself, and by extension the population(s) for whom she has become an advocate.  However, I don't think I could, in good conscience, accept those special rights/privileges/freedoms that I felt to have been misappropriated from the general populace.  I would emphatically renounce any desire for "...the special right to open up the newspaper and not have to read one more clever “think piece” in which the humanity of people like me is held up for public debate."<https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/24/opinion/transgender-lgbtq-rights-texas.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-left-region&region=opinion-c-col-left-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-left-region> I cannot steal others 1st amendment rights, even though doing so would most assuredly preserve my own self-serving biases and prejudices.

    I appreciated Ms. Boylan's allusion to her spouse, which suggested that they're likely still together.  Having read her autobiography, I always wondered if the marriage would survive.  Even though her spouse is a clinical social worker, relationships commonly don't survive the transition (i.e., more often than not).

    Again, very interesting article.  Best wishes to all.

    It' even later, now.  Maybe I can manage to get some rest.

     

    1 person likes this
  8. bluemoon


    Emma, that is so sweet and considerate to check, but I felt your warmth and friendliness very much came through and chrissy's too. I appreciate the interesting and heartfelt discussion and look forward to more.

    2 people like this
  9. EmmaSweet


    Hey friends, Chrissy and Blue,

    No worries or quibbles about the title of the piece, I get where you're both coming from. I really appreciate your friendliness in your feedback and hope you feel the same from me. 

    I am also a little taken aback by the title. Like I wrote, I guess I just assume that Ms. Boylan and her editors applied their best judgement, and I suppose that on balance it doesn't matter as much as the fact that such a piece was positioned at the top of the NYT's digital front page. In and of itself that speaks volumes!

    Emma

    2 people like this
  10. bluemoon


    Additional information on the use and history of the term, "gay agenda" or "homosexual agenda," which was "introduced by sectors of the Christian right (primarily in the United States) as a disparaging way to describe the advocacy of cultural acceptance and normalization of non-heterosexual orientations and relationships." The last paragraph notes, "the term is sometimes used satirically as a counterfoil by people who would normally find this term offensive."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_agenda

     

    2 people like this
  11. bluemoon


    Emma, thank you so much for posting the link to that excellent piece. I too was initially startled to see both those words in the title, "gay" and "agenda." The title seemed like such an unexpected misnomer when the text of the article was so well written and the word "gay" is not a common umbrella term for the entire LGBTX/LGBTQ community. However, it turns out that some sectors of the Christian far political right, especially in Texas, use the word "gay" exactly that way. They consider anything contrary to cis heterosexual marriage an abomination and part of the overall gay agenda. It's apparently all "gay" to them because any further specific or types just seem like mumbo jumbo. It may also be more effective to name your enemy or political rival with one simple word that everyone understands and has already formed an opinion about. The title is well crafted in response to their use of the terms and not at all the mistake in wording that it first appeared. However, the confusion and controversy here suggests that the author should have taken a few words to explain the title.

     

    2 people like this
  12. Chrissy


    Emma,

    I totally agree on your point about the term "agenda," I have no doubt she used that as a rebuke to conservatives who use it as a dirty word.

    I have to respectfully part ways with you on the use of the term "gay." I agree it is commonly used as an umbrella term for the LGBTQ community, but I think that's because of gay privilege within the "community," and it has been used to make our (transgender) issues, and us virtually invisible. I think it stands out to me as well because I don't identify as gay (or lesbian), since transitioning I identify my sexual orientation as straight. So I perhaps feel doubly-invisible as a result. It's one thing to use "gay" as a blanket term for "homosexual," I'll leave that battle for Lesbians to fight (or not) - but I can't accept it as a blanket term for all LGBTQ people, when some (many?) of us don't identity as gay or lesbian (with apologies to bisexual, pansexual, etc. individuals for being binary in my terminology). 

    The bottom line is that I plan to remain an agitator on this point :P - and I trust nobody's judgment on these issues, least of all my own!  Thomas Paine said that "eternal vigilance is the price of liberty," I think it's more appropriate to say that "eternal agitation is the price of liberty" (I suppose it depends on how much liberty you have to start with).

    xoxo

    Chrissy

    2 people like this
  13. EmmaSweet


    I pondered that too and decided that her use of the word "agenda" reminds us of how that word is used by the people who would otherwise deny us our basic rights. Maybe you're more concerned with her use of "gay" in the title. I also thought about this and felt:

    - To be gay is to be part of the overall LGBTQ community. She didn't, for example, title it "My Gay/Lesbian Agenda."

    - Yes, "gay" is more commonly used for homosexual people but the piece brings up trans-specific issues. Maybe her title will encourage more readers to read it who might otherwise not if it were titled "My Transgender Agenda."

    - Last, she is undoubtedly and well known as trans, and an outspoken spokeswoman for all of us. I'll bet she thought about this long and hard, and I trust her judgment.

    Emma

    2 people like this
  14. Chrissy


    Good piece, but why is it titled, and why does she refer to a "gay agenda"? The LGBTQ community lets that happen too often, we (transgender people, and others) become invisible by referring to it as a "gay agenda" or "gay rights movement," etc. It's especially disturbing coming from a transgender activist!

    2 people like this
  15. Sara17


    10 June 2017 | by Rafaella Gunz
    "Replacing old laws determining child protection, foster care, and adoption service, this Act requires all children’s services and judges to consider a child’s ‘race, ancestry, place of origin, color, ethnic origin, citizenship, family diversity, disability, creed, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression.’"  -- gaystarnews

    This new Canadian law considers denying a child's gender identity a form of abuse

    ​That's wonderful!  I wonder if the legislation was influenced at all by this case last year in Alberta:

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/gender-medicine-hat-child-girl-clothes-mother-custody-battle-alberta-court-1.3829930

    Sadly, since this law is specific to Ontario, it wouldn't have helped the child in that case.  But hopefully the new law would now prevent a similar thing from happening here.

    2 people like this
  16. Sara17


    I guess this is slightly older news now, but I didn't see another posting mentioning it (if I just missed it, my apologies!).

    Bill C-16, a bill to protect transgender Canadians from discrimination at the federal level, was introduced by the Trudeau government in May 2016.  Here's the legislative summary of the bill:

    The bill is intended to protect individuals from discrimination within the sphere of federal jurisdiction and from being the targets of hate propaganda, as a consequence of their gender identity or their gender expression. The bill adds “gender identity or expression” to the list of prohibited grounds of discrimination in the Canadian Human Rights Act and the list of characteristics of identifiable groups protected from hate propaganda in the Criminal Code. It also adds that evidence that an offence was motivated by bias, prejudice or hate based on a person’s gender identity or expression constitutes an aggravating circumstance for a court to consider when imposing a criminal sentence.

    The bill had been stalled in the senate for a while, but the good news is that it was finally passed by the senate (without amendment!) on June 15 of this year.  It received royal assent, and became law, on June 19!

    This has been a long time in getting here.  The NDP had been trying to get similar legislation passed as a private member's bill for roughly a decade during the years the Conservative Party was in power, but it never ended up passing.  Now that the Liberal Party formed the government in late 2015, this version was actually introduced as a government bill by Trudeau's Minister of Justice, Jody Wilson-Raybould.

    Of course, the small irony is that every province and territory ended up adopting protections for transgender Canadians before the federal government finally passed their law.  (In one case, I think New Brunswick, they beat the passage of C-16 by only a few weeks.)  But this is still an important milestone to have these protections in place at the federal level, and was a cause for celebration for transgender Canadians across the country!

     

    2 people like this
  17. EShaver


    I'm North of N Carolina now by 50 miles . I'm watching the Texas fiasco only because I contract to the Texas Historical society now and I used to own a Brick an Mortar manufacturing concern in Houston .

    Personally , I'm worried as to just how "LEGAL " my Virginia permit is . Here , I'm female . Now in N Carolina and now in Texas , am I Female or just what ? I'm really unwilling to take a chance as I have charge of a Special needs son . How's it going to look when I'm visiting or doing a job and my son is with me and I'm hauled off by police for taking a Potty break ?

    1 person likes this
  18. patrice FAILURE TO COMPLY


    A revised lawsuit says transgender people in North Carolina say are still effectively prevented from using restrooms matching their gender identity under a law that replaced the state's notorious "bathroom bill.".

    July 21, 2017, at 12:48 p.m. By JONATHAN DREW, Associated Press

    RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) — The law that replaced North Carolina's notorious "bathroom bill" sports a new look but maintains LGBT discrimination and prevents transgender people from using restrooms matching their gender identity, according to a lawsuit Friday.

    The lawsuit renews a high-profile legal battle that has thrust North Carolina into the center of the national debate over LGBT rights. The state took the "bathroom bill" off the books in late March after a yearlong backlash that hurt North Carolina's reputation and caused businesses and sports leagues to back out of lucrative events and projects.

    But lawyers from the American Civil Liberties Union and Lambda Legal said the replacement law, known as H.B. 142, continues the harms of its predecessor.

    "Legislators were forced to rewrite the law," ACLU lawyer Chris Brook told reporters Friday. "But make no mistake ... H.B. 142 is a wolf in sheep's clothing crafted to keep discrimination intact but sporting a new look."

     

    The compromise earlier this year between Republican legislative leaders and Democrats led by Gov. Roy Cooper eliminated the "bathroom bill" requirement that transgender people use restrooms in many public buildings corresponding to the sex on their birth certificates.

    But the new law makes clear that that only the General Assembly — not local government or school officials — can make rules for public restrooms from now on. Local governments are also prohibited from enacting new nondiscrimination ordinances for workplaces, hotels and restaurants until December 2020.

    More here: https://www.usnews.com/news/us/articles/2017-07-21/apnewsbreak-lawsuit-says-bathroom-bill-effects-still-felt

     

    ​Well, if that's the gist of the new bill, then this new law might not be a bad thing.  It's been my understanding that the original bathroom bill was conceived & passed in  massive reaction-formation to the city of Charlotte passing a municipal ordinance which basically gave pretty much free access to whatever restroom one wanted to use.

    Also, I've heard that some sort of public restroom law in Texas came into being secondary of some big-city school official making unilateral decisions about restrooms, locker & dressing rooms, and other stuff w/o consulting parents, teachers, school board members, etc. 

    Analogous circumstances sometimes produce analogous consequences, I think.

     

  19. olcharlie


    A revised lawsuit says transgender people in North Carolina say are still effectively prevented from using restrooms matching their gender identity under a law that replaced the state's notorious "bathroom bill.".

    July 21, 2017, at 12:48 p.m. By JONATHAN DREW, Associated Press

    RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) — The law that replaced North Carolina's notorious "bathroom bill" sports a new look but maintains LGBT discrimination and prevents transgender people from using restrooms matching their gender identity, according to a lawsuit Friday.

    The lawsuit renews a high-profile legal battle that has thrust North Carolina into the center of the national debate over LGBT rights. The state took the "bathroom bill" off the books in late March after a yearlong backlash that hurt North Carolina's reputation and caused businesses and sports leagues to back out of lucrative events and projects.

    But lawyers from the American Civil Liberties Union and Lambda Legal said the replacement law, known as H.B. 142, continues the harms of its predecessor.

    "Legislators were forced to rewrite the law," ACLU lawyer Chris Brook told reporters Friday. "But make no mistake ... H.B. 142 is a wolf in sheep's clothing crafted to keep discrimination intact but sporting a new look."

     

    The compromise earlier this year between Republican legislative leaders and Democrats led by Gov. Roy Cooper eliminated the "bathroom bill" requirement that transgender people use restrooms in many public buildings corresponding to the sex on their birth certificates.

    But the new law makes clear that that only the General Assembly — not local government or school officials — can make rules for public restrooms from now on. Local governments are also prohibited from enacting new nondiscrimination ordinances for workplaces, hotels and restaurants until December 2020.

    More here: https://www.usnews.com/news/us/articles/2017-07-21/apnewsbreak-lawsuit-says-bathroom-bill-effects-still-felt

     

  20. olcharlie


    JULY 22, 2017 11:19 PM BY CHUEYEE YANG

    Almost two years after the still unsolved slaying of a transgender woman, community members gathered Saturday in central Fresno for a vigil and die-in in a bid for justice.

    Casey or “K.C.” Haggard, 66, was “just transitioning,” said Jess Fitzpatrick, co-chairman of Trans-E-Motion, when she was fatally stabbed in 2015.

    “We’re remembering a member of our community who was violently murdered on the streets of Fresno,” Fitzpatrick said. “Although the murder was caught on camera, a suspect has yet to be arrested.”

    The vigil was hosted by Trans-E-Motion, a nonprofit that provides support and education for the transgender community.

    More here: http://www.fresnobee.com/news/local/article163156858.html

     

    1 person likes this
  21. UsernameOptional


    Hello, recent member.

    Is it possible to turn-off of the "likes" notifications? I would rather not receive such notifications. I can always ignore the little red circle, or otherwise delete said posts.

    Hi patrice... and welcome to the TG Guide Board.

    The "likes" are built into the board - not a whole lot we can do about them unless they are just flat disabled for everyone.  Because we have become such a social media society, "likes" have become nearly inseperable from so many platforms. 

    That said, we would prefer that you "ignore the little red circle" rather than delete your posts.  I can appreciate that you prefer not to be notified when someone has liked something you've posted, but deleting posts are unfair to those who have taken the time to read your OP, and then reply to that OP and subsequent posts.  It can really wreck the flow of a topic.  Sometimes, such deletions force us to have to remove entire threads - again, not fair to other members.

    I hope you understand.
    -Michael

    2 people like this