A senior GLBT reflects on a life cross-dressed

From our friend Rick Vanderslice, who continues to host his daily radio program via Skype while living in Buenos Aires, comes this article in an English-language newspaper in Argentina, profiling “90-year-old transvestite Malva,” who has recently published a memoir. The terminology seems less enlightened than our own, but the information is still interesting.

—  Arnold Wayne Jones

Transgender? Transsexual? The power of words in self-determination

Nikki Araguz

Early this week, we had a What’s Brewing post here on Instant Tea that included information about what was at the time a pending ruling from state District Judge Randy Clapp in Wharton on a lawsuit challenging Nikki Araguz’s right to the pension of her husband, a Wharton firefighter who had been killed in the line of duty.

In that first post, we used the term “transgender” to refer to Araguz, which is the general umbrella term that we use here at the Voice. We based that on conversations with advocates in the trans community who told us that “transgender” is an umbrella term that includes all those who are gender variant, while “transsexual” specifically refers to those who have fully transitioned or are in the process of transitioning.

So I was surprised to see comments to that first blog about Nikki Araguz taking us to task for describing her as “transgender” instead of using the term “transsexual,” and pointing out that Araguz had, in her personal blog, asked that the media refer to her as transsexual instead of transgender.

—  admin

Khloe Brushes Off Transvestite Comments

Khloe Kardashian X390 (GETTY) | ADVOCATE.COMKhloe Kardashian sometimes has a hard time keeping up with her famous siblings.
Advocate.com: Daily News

—  David Taffet

GLAAD Nominates Atlanta Journal-Constitution For ‘Outstanding’ Use Of ‘Transvestite,’ Ignoring Pride

We've already noted that all it takes to get a GLAAD Media Award nomination is to spit out some piece of gay-related content of middling quality, which explains why GLAAD gave Burlesque the only award nomination it'll receive — not counting its bribe-y Golden Globe nomination — besides its Razzie. But how does that explain GLAAD's "Outstanding Newspaper Overall Coverage" selection of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, a newspaper that has both ignored Atlanta's LGBT Pride celebrations (among the largest in the state and country) as well as the community at large, notes GA Voice. Oh, and then there's AJC's use of the word "transvestite" in an article, a practice GLAAD expressly forbids in its style guide. But hey, this is the same Gay Inc. organization that ignored Kirby Dick's Outrage! documentary exposing anti-gay closeted politicians, so really, the nominating standards are already suspect. If you're a glass half-full type, then find solace in GLAAD at least having the good sense not to nominate the Washington Post.

Permalink | Post a comment | Add to , , , , , , , , , , ,


—  admin

Did Dallas evangelist and Christian TV mogul Marcus Lamb have an affair with a transsexual?

Marcus and Joni Lamb

Marcus and Joni Lamb, co-founders of North Texas-based Daystar, America’s second-largest Christian TV network, announced Tuesday on the air that Marcus Lamb cheated on his wife a few years ago. In admitting Marcus Lamb’s marital infidelity, the Lambs also alleged an extortion attempt, saying someone has demanded $7.5 million of “God’s money” to keep the scandal out of the media.

None of this is terribly shocking, and you may be wondering why we’re even bothering to repeat it on this LGBT blog. Well, for one thing it’s yet another example of religious hypocrisy, and for another some leading anti-gay figures, including Robert Jeffress of First Baptist Church of Dallas, appear on Daystar. But what really caught our attention was the following quote from one of the couple’s marriage counselors, Fred Kendall, who reportedly provided some of the few details about the affair:

“He had one inappropriate period of misbehavior with one person, and it wasn’t a man. It wasn’t a transvestite. It was with a woman,” Kendall said.

We have absolutely no idea why Kendall felt compelled to point out that the affair wasn’t with a man or a transvestite — as if this somehow makes it any better — but we’d like to point out that his statement leaves open the possibility that the affair was with a transsexual woman.

OK, that’s all, carry on now.

—  John Wright

What About “Transvestite Clothing” In The Military?

Eek-gads, what a 22-second Moment of Zen we have here from Sen. John McCain from the 1993 Armed Services Committee hearings on Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell:

Sen McCain had it clarified for him that marching in a “homosexual parade” wouldn’t be proof that a servicemember was a “homosexual.” Then, Sen. McCain asked a follow up question about crossdressing in a “homosexual parade”:

Well, how about, General Powell, if they went in transvestite clothing?

The Wonk Room goes a bit further in what was said in the Senate Armed Services Committee, (July 20, 1993) Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell hearings after that question from Sen. John McCain:

SEN. MCCAIN: Well, how about, General Powell, if they went in transvestite clothing?

GEN. POWELL: I think that would be something that I as a commander would find troubling and I would begin to wonder about that situation, but just the attendance solely at the parade –

SEN. MCCAIN: This policy says marching in a gay rights rally in civilian clothes will not in and of themselves constitute credible evidence that would provide a basis for initiating an investigation.

GEN. POWELL: I would still take a hard look at it to see whether the costuming that was used started to slop over the good browns of ordered discipline.

SEN. MCCAIN: According to this regulation, you can’t.

GEN. POWELL: But Senator, this is the problem we’ve had with the regulations that exist now. We are in court now, and as the Attorney General says –

SEN. MCCAIN: I’m not — (inaudible word ) — the present regulations; we’re examining the proposed regulations.

“Transvestite clothing”? I don’t know if the term transvestite was an pejorative in the United States then, but it certainly would be considered a pejorative by many trans people in the United States now.

But more on point, repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell won’t allow transsexual people to serve openly; repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell won’t allow crossdressers to serve openly; repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell won’t allow those who perform drag frequently to serve openly. I didn’t take to the White House fence on April 20th and November 15th this year because the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT) will allow trans people to serve openly — the National Center For Transgender Equality, the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, and I am very aware that it won’t. But, let’s not let that get in the way of hyperbole and outright lies from many voices on the religious right regarding transsexual people, crossdressing people, and drag performers being able to sensationally and flamboyantly serve openly in the five military services should DADT be repealed.

From Accuracy In Media‘s Cliff Kincaid:

The MASH television spectacle of Corporal Klinger wearing women’s dresses to get out of the military may now give way to the Pentagon actually permitting transgendered male soldiers to openly wear women’s military uniforms. This is what repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” could mean.

While some might scoff at the idea of transgendered soldiers ever serving in the Armed Forces, the transgendered are an essential component of the so-called LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered) community pushing repeal of the military’s homosexual exclusion policy.

Don’t forget that the Obama Administration has already claimed credit for the first openly transgendered appointee to the federal bureaucracy-a man/woman at the Commerce Department named…Amanda Simpson…

From the Center For Military Readiness‘s Elaine Donnelly:

If [Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell] is repealed and the military cannot exercise “discrimination” based on sexual orientation in accepting applicants, gender-confused people will join in significant numbers, and have access to the military and veterans’ medical systems for their transgender operations. (The Palm Center recently posted a study on the transgender cause titled Summary and Analysis of the 2008 Transgender American Veterans Association Survey.) Defense and Veterans Affairs Department-funded medical coverage is a big deal for the TAVA.

A number of practical questions come to mind-where should “transitioning” individuals be housed-in the men’s quarters or the women’s? Who gets to decide what a person’s gender is-and when? And what about women who don’t want pre-surgical men sharing their private quarters, or families who are not comfortable with transgender people teaching their kids in DoD schools and child care centers-the largest institutions of their kind in the world? The opposition’s policy seems to be “don’t ask, don’t tell.

From WorldNetDaily‘s David A. Noebel:

Now it’s 2010, and President Obama, a man steeped in radical left-wing politics and a kind of Students-for-a-Democratic-Society commander in chief, wants to allow “open” homosexuals in the United States military. Open homosexuality would have to include the GLBTQ gamut – gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender and queer. Lambda Legal and the ACLU will insist on it. And Sen. Lieberman already proposed on March 8 a bill “legalizing bisexual behavior in the U.S. Military.”

Allowing “gays in the military,” therefore, is misleading. Once gays are openly recruited and accepted in the military, their “cousins” will follow suit (lesbian, bisexual, transgender, transsexual, intersexual, queer, etc.)…

…The United States is currently involved in two wars. Is the president out to destroy our military? Can any thinking American wish to see an “open” cross-dressing homosexual Army general trying to gain the trust of his troops (or for that matter, the nation)? Have we as a nation fallen so far that we need to apologize to Sodom?

From WorldNetDaily‘s Mychal Massie:

Is cross-dressing in fatigues next?

From a Robert A. Knight commentary in the Washington Times:

Forcing open homosexuality on the armed forces would destroy the volunteer military and bring back the compulsory draft. Since women are now deployed close to combat, and the only legal reason they are not eligible is their combat exemption, a new draft could include our daughters. And some would face pressure to have on-base abortions in order to complete their tours of duty.

Chaplains would be the first victims of Mr. Obama’s homosexualization of the military, followed by anyone who violated “zero tolerance” policies for homosexual acceptance. Bible-believing Christians would quickly find themselves unwelcome in Barney Frank’s new pansexual, cross-dressing military.

Other fallout includes family housing, reduction in retention, recruitment and unit cohesion, an increase in homosexual sexual assaults and a boost to overturning the federal Defense of Marriage Act.

From OneNewsNow‘s Chad Groening:

Representative Alcee Hastings (D-Florida) has introduced what he calls the “Honest and Open Testimony Act,” which would allow homosexual and transgender members of the military to openly testify in congressional hearings without fear of retribution. Under the 1993 law passed by Congress, such individuals are not eligible for military service in the first place — but due to Bill Clinton’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” directive, they are able to serve as long as they do not reveal their sexual orientation.

Pam’s House Blend quoted Rep. Duncan Hunter Jr. {from an NPR interview (emphasis added)}:

Interviewer: Today we turn to California Congressman Duncan Hunter. He’s a Republican, and a former U.S. Marine who served in Afghanistan and Iraq. Congressman Hunter, welcome to the program.

Rep. Duncan Hunter: Great to be with you.

Interviewer: You are not in favor of repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. Why not?

Rep. Duncan Hunter: No, because I think that it’s bad for the cohesiveness and the unity of the military units. And, especially for those in close combat — in close quarters — in country right now. It’s not the time to do it. I think the military is not civilian life. I think the folks who have been in the military, that have been in those very close situations with each other — there has to be a special bond there. I think that bond is broken if you open up the military to transgenders; to hermaphrodites; to gays and lesbians.

Interviewer: Transgenders and hermaphrodites.

Rep. Duncan Hunter: That’s going to be part of this whole thing. It’s not just gays and lesbians, it’s the whole gay, lesbian, transgender, bisexual community. If you’re going to let anybody in, no matter what preference — what sexual preference — they have, that means the military is going to probably let everybody in. It’s going to be like civilian life. And, I think that would be detrimental for the military.

There are some on the religious right who know that repeal of DADT won’t result in transgender people being able to serve openly in the five military services. From the Traditional Values Coalition (note how Lafferty stoops to using the extreme pejorative “she-male” to make her point, however):

What was conspicuously absent in the discussion of DADT, was any mention of transgendered individuals serving openly in the military. This omission is significant because the LGBTQ movement has fully embraced the gaggle of cross-dressers, drag queens, transsexuals and she-males (males with female breasts and male genitals).

These transgendered individuals have a mental disorder known as a Gender Identity Disorder and/or Transvestic Fetishism.

Transgenders are lobbying to serve openly in the military, but they face the obstacle of the military still considering sex change operations and transsexualism to be evidence of disordered thinking.

The LGBTQ movement has deliberately left transgendered persons out of any military discussion because they know this is a “bridge too far” for them to accomplish right now. They will first get their gay, lesbian and bisexual goals done and then come back later to demand that she-males and other mentally disordered persons be permitted to “serve” in the military.

Peter LaBarbera of Americans For Truth About Homosexuality has something to say about this too:

Ultimately, homosexual activists hope to make the military “transgender-friendly,” but to crusade for that now would complicate their plans to push the Armed Forces to accept people openly practicing homosexuality.

When Andrea Lafferty and Peter LaBarbera are the ones who publicly state that repeal DADT won’t allow transgender people (and non-transgender crossdressing people) to serve openly — while others on the religious right stoop to hyperbole and lies — well, that says something about the moral character of most of the public voices on the religious right.

For those who are trans and closeted in the military services, you should be sure to read the advice of the National Center For Transgender Equality regarding coming out as trans while serving in the military, as well as the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network’s take on what can happen if a trans person comes out while serving in the military. What the religious right says about trans people serving openly is hyperbole and lies, so don’t assume that what the religious right states about trans people being able to serve openly if DADT is repealed is gospel.
Pam’s House Blend – Front Page

—  admin

Murdered British Spy Gareth Williams Was Not Gay, A Transvestite, Or Into S&M With Escorts

And this is how you basically confirm murdered British spy Gareth Williams was all of these things: "Scotland Yard also denied a series of sexual allegations made against Williams by the security services sources who claimed that he was gay, a transvestite, possessed bondage paraphernalia and was linked to male escorts. … There was no evidence of contact with male escorts, and no S&M gear was found in his apartment. Claims that Williams was stabbed and dismembered were also untrue, they said."

Permalink | 1 comment | Add to del.icio.us
Tagged: , , , ,


—  John Wright