Shit (Certain) Gays Don’t Say

Kathy, at The John’s gay marriage-primacy propaganda site, re: what must now be presumed to be a calculated, anti-trans disinformation campaign being waged by Bil Browning, Joe Jervis and The John about what, even on the face of the single poorly-sourced ‘news’ item about it in Xtra, was a non-trans-specific, alleged glitterbombing of Dan Savage by a non-trans-specific group that has in no way been confirmed as even having had any trans people whatsoever in it:

The news story does not identify the protestors as trans. They identify themselves as queer & cite many other concerns besides trans issues. There has been [no] single person identified from that group as trans at all. Of the entire huge group of six kids.

You’re purposely misrepresenting the facts when you say it does. And knowingly doing so.

Don’t support glitterbombing – It’s silly and doesn’t achieve anything.

But – I do look forward to your many articles taking gay guys to task over using the tactic.

Regarding immaturity – one merely needs to look at the guys commenting here to see the apotheosis of that quality

Well, that’s one thing that certain gays will never say.  The other, of course, is an admission that the single poorly-sourced ‘news’ item in Xtra about the Vancouver incident provides no trans-specific basis whatsoever for this headline:

VANCOUVER: Transgender Activists Glitter-Bomb Dan Savage Again

or its subtitle:

Ho hum. More misdirected anger from the Trans Mafia

Or this part of this headline:

Trans activists glitterbomb Dan Savage again

Or this part of the same headline:

this time because he supports marriage equality

Or this headline:

Trans Mafia: Savage Glitterbombed Again

Or this headline:

Transgender activists glitter bomb Dan Savage again

What is served up instead?

Actually, the best example of immaturity I’ve seen lately is sabotaging a piece of civil rights legislation that has been pending for 40 years because there weren’t enough votes to include every last little detail of restroom rules in it, something that could easily have been accomplished by administrative regulations implementing an enacted law.

The decision to adopt a perfect-or-sabotage strategy is one that I assume the transgender community made fully cognizant that the sabotage option (the only one that was ever realistic) would alienate a large segment of the LGB community. And the strategic decision was made anyway. So I won’t personally tolerate a solitary peep of complaint now about the inevitable consequences. I won’t show one more iota of concern now than the transgender community showed then.

That Rubicon was crossed in 2010.

Well, thus far, that’s the only response to Kathy – and it didn’t come from The John.

I nevertheless do look forward to the many upcoming articles from Bil Browning, Joe Jervis and The John taking themselves to task - as I look forward to the many articles from The Advocate and all of the other Gay, Inc.-approved ‘news’ sources taking the three to task – for amplifying a single ‘news’ item that, even if 100% accurate as to the literal substance underlying the exact wording that it does contain, does not say what one has to assume the three hope that their transphobia-dog-whistle-friendly readership will not bother to find out for themselves that it doesn’t say.

[Cross-posted at ENDABlog]