Visible but not lesbian
This is just maddening. White House Roundtable With Lesbian Leaders – and of course you know what’s coming next.
Yesterday [April 26], in celebration of Lesbian Day of Visibility, the White House hosted a roundtable conversation with trailblazing lesbian and LGBTQI+ senior leaders from the White House and the broader Biden-Harris Administration.
So make that with “trailblazing” men bullying their way into lesbians’ day of visibility, just as they bullied their way into Michfest and then pushed all the women out. Lesbian is one thing and T and Q and I and + are other things. Lesbian Day of Visibility should be for lesbians, not men playing games.
The roundtable included lesbian and queer advocates ,community leaders, leaders across the federal government, several of whom are the first out lesbians to hold their position, including: Ambassador Chantale Wong, Director of the Asian Development Bank, who is the first out lesbian to be confirmed by the U.S. Senate to an ambassador post; Admiral Rachel Levine, Assistant Secretary for Health, who is a lesbian and the first openly transgender woman to achieve the rank the four-star admiral in any of the country’s uniformed services…
That is, he’s a man, and has zero business being there at all. Let us know when an actual lesbian achieves the rank of four-star admiral.
Participants highlighted that lesbians who are also women and girls of color, transgender women, women with disabilities, and older women face additional intersecting challenges to achieving economic security and full inclusion.
All true except for the transgender women part. Sneaky of them to try to hide it in the middle of the list, to fool the unwary. Men dressed as women don’t belong at lesbian round table discussing the challenges lesbians face.
External participants included:
Charlotte Clymer, Transgender Activist, Military Veteran, and Board Member, LPAC Action Network
Of course. Notorious loudmouth and women-interrupter Charles Clymer was there, hogging a seat that should have gone to a woman. Of course he was.
Levine in uniform, Clymer in the pale blue jacket. Seven people visible, two of them men masquerading as women. “Lesbian Visibility Day” in a pig’s eye.
He must be a woman! He’s wearing earrings! Long, dangly earrings! How in the world could you suggest he could be a man? Don’t the earrings impress you?
I’m withholding until the appearance gold lame purse.
Ugh, Charlie Clymer is worming his way into DC politics now? That guy is absolutely horrible.
Worming his way into everything apparently.
Faux intersectionalists can claim a victory with two fewer white women at the meeting. Mind you, they’d never admit that their places were taken by two white men.
iknklast:
I’m again wearing my pink shirt, but I don’t feel much more womanly than I did yesterday. As I said previously, I need to work on my head tilt, and maybe buy some long, dangly earrings.
“Lesbian and LBGTQI+…”. What an odd way of putting it. What do they think the L stands for?
And they didn’t have anyone representing the G. Wasn’t Buttigieg available?
Would any of those women be invited to a roundtable on the Trans Day of Visibility? (Silly me, every day is trans day of visibility.)
So many questions….
It drives me crazy, this way of referring to people as All The Letters. It’s apparently become Incorrect to say “lesbian” or “gay” now, even of one single person. It’s completely idiotic to call one person LGBTQI+, and yet it’s now the etiquette.
It is maddeningly clever–there’s no way you can criticize one of the letters without seeming to attack them all.
And yes, it makes no sense to refer to one person with letters that are mostly mutually exclusive. (Just today I came across a reference to an actress who “came out as a member of the LGBTQ community”. Well, which one was it? Probably not G.)
I’m coming out as a member of the PCBGMVAF+ community. Don’t know what that is? Do your own research! It’s not my job to educate you.
I’m tempted to snarkily say “LGBTQQIP2SAA” from now on (which is apparently the full thing) when responding to these chonkwombles, just to be annoying.
I believe that they are just jealous of the people, those with a string of letters after their name, who earned those abbreviations by studying and working hard.
I just realised that I could claim to be part of the ‘disabled community’ (blech), and l could list my credentials by making a string of the initialisation of every one of my diagnosed disorders.
I won’t, though, because it would be even longer than James Garnett’s impressive string.
So, tigger, if I add my diagnosed disorders to my earned degrees, does that get me lots more credit? Cause that’s a lot of letters, but like you, I prefer not to be part of a ‘disabled’ community, but just to be me. I don’t identify with my disorders, and not totally with my degrees, though I did work for them and have justifiably pride in them. But I don’t string all the letters behind my name because I don’t need to.
The need to be ‘special’ could very well be ruining everything. Well, everything the right wing hasn’t already ruined, anyway.