Her full statement:

“In today’s hyperpartisan political environment, I view any attempt to alter our state constitution with a critical eye. Amendment One has far-reaching negative consequences for our families, our children and our communities. North Carolina is one of the most business-friendly states in the nation, and this amendment would harm our state’s ability to recruit the innovators and businesses that are driving our economic recovery. Jobs are my number one priority, and we cannot afford to take our eye off the ball and give businesses a reason to grow and expand elsewhere. The people I hear from everyday - the families that make up the fabric of the Old North State – tell me they are sick and tired of watching their jobs and their livelihoods fall victim to divisive partisan posturing. In North Carolina we say our state is “Where the weak grow strong and the strong grow great.” Amendment One harms our state’s resolve to make all people and all families great, and as a proud daughter of North Carolina, I urge all North Carolinians to join me in opposing it.” – Senator Kay R. Hagan

Senator Hagan’s statement of support comes just days after the Wake County Board of Commissioners passed a resolution in support of amendment one. If you are interested, you can check out and sign this petition letting the Wake County Board of Commissioners know we are opposed to amendment one. The amendment will appear on the May 8th ballot.

At this point in my life, most of my co-workers and close friends are on the same page with accepting and understanding that I’m trans and a woman. Whether or not I “pass” and whether or not any of my co-workers or close friends actually believe I’m trans or a woman is besides the point. We have relationships that permit accepting me as (one type of) woman. I’ve also been invited to and attended two Dianic-inspired women’s only ceremonies near where I live. A lot of the women there hadn’t done ritual with a trans woman before, but we communicated from a place of love and trust, and everyone seemed to get something positive out of sharing those experiences.

Even though the phrase “genetic women” triggered me (as have other things she’s allegedly said in the past), I understand where she is coming from and what she is seeking to preserve. I understand there are some Dianic rites that are specifically for women with wombs. I completely support that. I don’t need to be at a skyclad womb blessing–seriously–I have no need to be there. And conferences like PantheaCon are likely the only place some women are going to have access to rites like that. I also value women’s space that is open to trans women, and I know there are lots of non-trans and trans women doing work out there to create these spaces. My understanding is there was one such ritual at PantheaCon in addition to Z Budapest’s ritual. That absolutely rocks!!

I envision a future where there is diversity such as this in the women’s groups at PantheaCon and other similar events. There not only should be diverse spaces specifically for women, but there must be. I likewise see an understanding that some groups of women come to ritual from different experiences of being women. Let’s celebrate it all! Certainly there are benefits too from lesbian-only circles, trans woman-only circles, etc. Outside of circle is structured in such a way that women are frequently set up to fight against one another or otherwise ignore the possibility of unity. I propose finding a place of mutual respect to work from, so that all women’s groups can be stronger together. I believe in celebrating Z. Budapest’s tradition and contributions to feminism and women’s spirituality. I wish she would find a better way to say “genetic women only,” but that’s something that could be easily resolved by dialogue between trans and non-trans women. After reading about her apology for any offense, I believe in moving forward. From here, I believe we can grow many kinds of needed ritual spaces.

As this issue continues to travel around the Pagan blogosphere, I am hoping that PantheaCon will continue to welcome her and provide space for women seeking such rituals. I am also praying for women’s pagan groups everywhere to speak up on this issue and others that may arise. We need to talk more about participating in ritual as trans people, or in a space that welcomes trans people. We can avoid misunderstandings by talking openly with each other and helping one another find ritual space. As long as PantheaCon has diverse women’s rituals, with at least some welcoming or being led by trans women, I don’t see a reason for disagreement regarding who Z Budapest chooses to include. She is a lifelong cultivator of women’s space and consciousness, and welcome in any circle I lead.

Sending Peace and Love to All Women

“One of the stories is of a trans man, as you’ve mentioned. Obviously you were glitter bombed by trans activists while taping Savage U.
[Laughs] You know, I have been glitter bombed a few times, only once was it a trans person.

Really?
My trans friends really want me to emphasize that only once was it a trans person.”

In case that still wasn’t completely clear:

“But for those trans activists that are making the case about your priorities, do you really think they are against marriage?
None of them were trans — the folks who came to the Vancouver speech.”

There. Dan Savage even said it. He wasn’t glittered by trans people. It is the media that turns these activists into “trans” people and therefore spokepeople for the trans community. Many trans women have called out LGBT+ blogs for posting articles mislabeling these activists as trans. The media needs to stop sensationally reporting on trans issues. Misrepresentation of who trans people are and what we stand for accounts for an enormous amount of internal conflict in the LGBT+ community.

While we’re at The Advocate, let’s put to rest the argument that Dan Savage doesn’t speak for the LGBT+ community or isn’t seen in that role. First sentence (I added the bold): “When MTV premiers a one-hour special tonight called It Gets Better, host Dan Savage will yet again become the face of the LGBT adult world as it delivers a message to young people.”

The face of the LGBT adult world as it delivers a message to young people.

That is why Savage’s public statements/language/actions are so closely scrutinized. That is why award-winning LGBT+ blogs and other news are expected to be accountable in their reporting. They are “the face of the LGBT adult world” and when they screw up, that’s the message they send to young people. Savage even references the “Trans Mafia” post on Bilerico and talks about how gay bloggers want to avoid trans issues “[b]ecause if I get a noun wrong or a pronoun wrong, I am going to get called Hitler and glitter bombed and screamed at.” Since only one trans person has glitter bombed Savage according to Savage himself, I’m not sure how likely that scenario is, but I don’t know that I have a problem with the gay bloggers in reference avoiding trans issues.

We are capable of reporting on our issues, organizing for our own causes, etc. Allies should function in a secondary, not primary capacity as speakers for our movement. Part of the problem now is that some gay magazines, blogs, and public figures are unwilling to take responsibility for getting trans issues incorrect. If you are an ally, take our objections seriously because they are very serious to us.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) posted the following picture of the hearing this morning, later commenting at a press conference, “I think it’s really curiouser and curiouser that as we get further into this debate, the Republican leadership of this Congress thinks it’s appropriate to have a hearing on the subject of women’s health and can purposely exclude women from the panel.”:

It does appear two women who oppose contraceptive access were later scheduled to testify at the hearing, but this doesn’t change the fact that progressive women have been blocked from providing testimony nor excuse the fact that every other witness is male, and not an expert on the issues being discussed.

Committee Chairman Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) actually refused to allow a progressive woman and college student to testify at the hearing. Three House Democrats walked out of the meeting in protest, including Delegate Eleanor Norton (D-DC) who characterized the hearing as being conducted like an “autocratic regime.”

ThinkProgress has a video clip:

Because in a strikingly similar dispute I think we should all be familiar with by now, trans women and their allies have asked several blogs to change some words and none of them will (except maybe for one writer who would be completely off the hook if that “trans activist” tag would disappear).

Cassie Peterson writes, “This is not just some minor semantic quarrel. Your choice has bigger implications.”

Why is it then that words matter when “gay” is used instead of “queer” but not when “trans” is used instead of “queer”? I find it questionable that Bilerico has published this piece describing a person objecting to mislabeling as “rightfully upset” when in the past several weeks trans women raising questions and objections in similar label disputes have been characterized as conspiracy theorists and part of a mafia. Can Bilerico really call out the New Yorker as “not cool” when Bilerico won’t even go as far as the New Yorker and apologize in a similar dispute?

As a result of the editorial choices of Bilerico and a handful of other sites, trans women in particular have been subjected to transphobic and misogynist comments on articles falsely assigning blame to our community for a recent glittering of Dan Savage by a group of self-described queer activists. The mislabeling of these activists as “trans” on Bilerico and other sites has fueled transphobia, trans misogyny, and animosity between non-trans LGB+ and trans communities. This includes a horrific comment on Towleroad:

Queerty even explicitly endorses the use of “shemale” to describe trans women (“go find a hot shemale and get yourself laid! (and send some photos).”), and both that slur and others appear in the comments. Indeed, the choice of words on these sites does have bigger implications.

Why is Bilerico sympathetic to objections involving “gay” instead of “queer” but apathetic to objections involving “trans” instead of “queer”?

Ironically, he charges Love with not “sticking with the facts” something he himself is being criticized for as a result of his unrepentant attitude towards mislabeling the activists who allegedly glittered Savage as trans. This issue has been covered ad nauseam.

In previous weeks, Browning has used his website to call me a “hypocritical idiot” in an entry titled “The Stupid Burns Files: No 3842” and has identified Katrina Rose as the leader of an imaginary “trans mafia” in an entry titled “Another Rabid Conspiracy Theory.” He is yet to apologize for, retract, or correct any of several articles on his website unfairly scolding the trans* community for the glittering of Dan Savage.

Browning’s disrespect towards women of transsexual history is not isolated. In October 2011 he twice mislabeled Ashley Love as “transgender,” tagged her as a “notorious troublemaker,” and characterized her work in bringing attention to the lack of representation of trans women of color at the NAACP’s past conference as “[crashing] a panel discussion he was moderating” and “trying to get everyone pissed off at Don Lemon.” That entry was titled “OWS: Ashley Love Strikes Again.” Lemon has gone on to blame a child’s transness on her mother and suggest that she shouldn’t express herself truly (another issue GLAAD was silent on).

The mislabeling of Ashley Love as “transgender” parallels the labeling of the queer activist group The Homomiltia as “trans activists” because it is apparent Browning disapproves of both and uses trans language to express this. Love is outspoken about not identifying with the term transgender, just as The Homomilitia cited transphobia as one of many issues they have with Savage and never self-identified as trans. Browning’s reassignment of trans or transgender labels in both cases is an act of cissexism by denying self-identity to either Ashley Love or The Homomilitia in favor of what he wants to call them.

Browning’s tendency to dismiss trans women is echoed in his comment from June of 2011 which is hopefully well known by now.

When outsiders to the trans community see response to transphobic slurs or discussions as excessive it is precisely because GLAAD and self-professed LGBTQ news blogs in the public eye refuse to treat us with respect or remain accountable for content regarding our communities. GLAAD’s choice to honor a website edited by a person with a history of disrespect towards women of transsexual history is scandalous.

GLAAD’s choice to award Bilerico is an endorsement of “cue the outraged trans women” and all the reasons those women are in queue. GLAAD’s choice to award Bilerico is an endorsement of the mislabeling of a transsexual activist as “transgender.” GLAAD’s choice to award Bilerico is an endorsement of fact-free reporting on “trans activists” and the “trans community” which has inevitably encouraged more transphobia as expressed in comments like this one on another site GLAAD is awarding:

Even if political solidarity is shelved, we deserve mutual respect. The demeaning language as a result of inaccurate reporting on the glitter incident, the demeaning language used against those who call out this behavior, and the expected nature of this disrespect are characteristic of the accepted transphobia permeating LGBT+ spaces.

We should be beyond this. “Eff those trannies right in their fake gashes” should not be on an LGBT news blog in 2012. Fact-free claims about the trans community should not remain on LGBTQ news blogs after they have been called out. If activists want to talk about “it gets better,” then let’s make it better now by being accountable and sensitive to issues of representation and self-determination.

Among the places identified are several that I’m familiar with. The Catawba-Wateree River Basin, the North Carolina Piedmont, Chilhowee Mountain, the Southern Appalachian mountains in Tennessee and Virginia, as well as the Chesapeake Bay are all sites I’ve grown up around and spent time enjoying. I find it can still be difficult to bring environmental justice issues into social justice movements, but for me, these places are just as deserving of our time and attention. When the complications of politics weigh me down, it’s the mountains I depend on and take respite in.

These places are part of our ecosystem; our lives are interdependent. The destruction of mountains is not only a form of cultural and environmental erasure, but results in health crises for already economically-devastated areas. For instance, coal ash pollution and misuse of waterways by corporations are an identified threat to the Catawba-Wateree River Basin in North and South Carolina. According to the SELC, “five of the most hazardous coal ash ponds in the United States are on the Catawba-Wateree River and its tributaries, including a site that has discharged arsenic-laden pollution for years.” From a feminist perspective, this is an added burden for working class women and their families who likely do not have access to adequate health care or a means to relocate.

In North Carolina, our state legislature has cut significant funding from our state’s environmental agency perhaps making us more vulnerable to eventually concede our groundwater to hydraulic fracturing. The same state legislature has slashed jobs and funding for health care, both disproportionately affecting women and people of color. The NCGA has furthermore extended its attack into our personal lives. In May, they’re putting an amendment on the ballot to ban any recognition of same-sex couples and over-ride the domestic partner registries of local jurisdictions. Lesbian couples have played a significant role in challenging this legislation with direct action since its introduction last year. Rounding out this state war against women, redistricting is predicted to make it less likely for even conservative women to be elected to public office here. The point I’m intending to make is that the same people who disregard social injustice, disregard environmental health.

When we talk about North Carolina as our home, as the place we deserve to marry, work, and live freely in, I think we likewise need to remember the North Carolina that is the Piedmont, the Blue Ridge, and part of an ecosystem that transcends state boundaries. A healthy land, the preservation of these ten places the SELC identifies as well as many more are all vital to our shared life here. Threats to these places challenge our heritage and create additional health costs to our communities.

For more information on the Southern Environmental Law Center’s Top 10 List, click here

“Government agencies have cleared an administrative measure that would bar federal dollars from going to companies without LGBT-inclusive non-discrimination protections, according to three informed sources familiar with the process, and have sent their recommendation to the White House for final approval.”

A study based on data from the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission’s 2009 reports found that “[a] federal executive order that requires contractors to prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity would protect up to 16.5 million more workers than are already protected by state or private anti-discrimination policies.” The study also draws attention to a similar potential executive order requiring contractors to extend health care benefits to same-sex partners.

I looked around for a statistical breakdown on how these issues affect women specifically, but I wasn’t able to find anything. I am familiar with the sexist and racist employment crisis in my own state, North Carolina, particularly following the 2011 job cuts, so I can imagine that women and other minorities are likewise disproportionately affected by discrimination this executive order would prohibit. While certainly both measures would help millions, they are still only a small step in terms of the worker rights needed in this country. That being said, both would go a long way in setting a standard of justice and equality for LGBT+ people, and they are causes I support.

As lots of folks have noted, FDR issued a similar executive order proceeding the Civil Rights Act. Of course, to get Obama to issue such an order requires enough of us drawing attention to its importance to get his notice. Hey trans* community, I’m talking to us! Last night, Obama raised $1.4 million at a fundraiser hosted by a married lesbian couple. I’m not going to ask the trans* community to put aside more urgent causes that need our financial support more than a presidential candidate, but I am going to ask us to match that donation by getting involved in the calls for this executive order (starting with this petition).

I understand our economic vulnerabilities as a community. If $1.4 million is the going rate for an “I’m evolving” IOU on marriage, it’s time we consider alternative strategies. I can’t afford to buy our way to equality, but I can’t afford to deal with discrimination for any longer either. Now is the time for the Obama administration to set a firm standard that worker protections are due LGBT+ people and cannot be delayed. Now is the time for LGBT+ workers to make it clear we are due workplace protections and cannot continue to wait for them.

I do not trust the mainstream movement to push for a federal contractor ENDA, same-sex partner benefits order, or an omnibus civil rights bill. These campaigns require our involvement at the person-to-person level. If we want to turn the tide back to civil rights protections, we have an opportunity to get on the map here. The workplace non-discrimination order sitting at the White House is a step in that direction. To everyone righteously outraged at the lack of attention to working class LGBT+s, this executive order is a doorway into a more worker-oriented movement. Ask your representatives to join you in calling for this executive order.

**SIGN PETITION HERE**

In her straightforward analysis of our state’s political situation, Rep. Ross characterized the last session as “the most disastrous session since women got the right to vote.”

Rep. Ross talked about The News & Observer report from over the weekend that 58% of folks whose state jobs were cut last year are women and 40% are other minorities. NC Policy Watch additionally has an article up describing how redistricting has forced many women not to seek re-election, a point Rep. Ross also covered.

Listen:

If ever there has been a time for North Carolina women to organize together, it is most definitely now.

“Anti-marriage” because maybe you’ve seen the advertisements all over his page (and we’ll be exploring activism by association momentarily).

As it turns out, anyone who opposes transphobia is a “trans activist” according to Bil Browning. Even when transphobia is the last item on a list of concerns that cover rape-apologism, fat-shaming, serophobia, racism, and about everything else. Even when there is no demonstrable evidence that anyone involved is actually trans, transsexual, two-spirit, transgender, a crossdresser, or even a drag queen.

I’ve taken this logic to suggest that anyone who advertises against marriage equality is by default an anti-marriage activist.

Additionally, as it turns out, requesting journalism be fact-based and differentiate between all trans people and activists-inspired-by-the-previous-actions-of-anonymous-alleged-trans-people (sometime within a week of reporting) makes you part of the Trans Mafia–apparently a group of trans women led by Kat Rose “who know no bounds to their pack mentality and conspiracy theories” (who knew?). See how making it about the “Trans Mafia” guides the conversation away from the reasons Savage was glittered and the facts surrounding that incident (or the accepted common use of glittering as a tactic by gay and queer activists who don’t see another way to get their point across)?

After playing hooky (and actually making an open thread about it), Browning finally addressed the misinformation on his site, but instead of apologizing, retracting, or correcting, he claims he was talking about activists who associate with trans issues, not activists who were transgender.

Decide for yourself:

I’m personally done chasing this one around the room. There are no allies here. There probably never will be, and frankly, I don’t see why there should be. There is no alliance, solidarity, or accountability. Browning knows he’s in a position of power (GLAAD seems to have no problem with) where it really doesn’t matter what he meant when he (or anyone else) wrote about trans activists, enemies of the trans community and the Trans Mafia in his post berating the trans community for glittering Savage (I guess Kat Rose coordinated the whole thing, being the Mafia leader, huh?). And I get that we can go back and forth on who’s the biggest bully, but really this is so immature, I’m ashamed and embarrassed for the grown adults perpetuating it.

No, I don’t think the Browning, Towle, Jervis, Aravosis, Avery, Becker, Polaski ring of misinformation has anything to do with any gender identity law. But I do think it has a lot to do with basic respect that seems to be perpetually missing in action.

Claiming they are “trans activists” by virtue of opposing transphobia is a line of crap. More importantly, it’s a convenient excuse to weasel out of talking about serophobia, rape-apologism, racism, and all the other real live problems in our community. I guess that’s what Vote for Marriage NC is paying for.

When Joe Jervis objected to the way I characterized his actions on Twitter, you might have noticed I tried to clarify immediately and apologized for being unclear in my original post (my comment was within 20 minutes of his objection). When Bil Browning discovered there was a misogynist ad on my site, I took it upon myself to resolve the issue (the same day he pointed it out).

Why is it that none of these men will just admit that they’ve made a harmful mistake and move on? Why do they continue to deny any wrongdoing? Why is the LGBT+ community structured in such a way that they are permitted to do so?

I’d like to reiterate again that I have no understanding for why any self-respecting trans woman would write for his site, and I have no understanding why GLAAD silently endorses this behavior. This is a shining example of why many trans women, myself now definitely included, want very little (if anything) to do with the gay or LGBT+ communities. There is no alliance, no solidarity, no accountability.

This–opens the door for this–

Apparently ENDO didn’t get the memo that “trans activists” means activists talking about trans issues, not the “trannies” themselves (“shemales” as Avery calls us in his article–because 22 year old trans women just have to put up with that language since teh poor 22 year old college mens can’t handle respecting women they sleep with). I wonder if everyone else was clear on that…. My guess is no.

Honestly, I don’t feel safe in LGBT+ and gay spaces, especially when rape-apologism is overshadowed and permitted by more than one person’s transphobia, and anti-defamation organizations reward inciting such hate. If the possibility of getting glittered keeps you away from trans issues, shit, I’m really sorry someone dumped confetti on Dan Savage. After reading a person (presumably involved in gay or LGBT+ activism) encourage the rape and dehumanization of trans women as a comment on a dishonest article about this incident (and after watching all the derails around the dishonesty of that reporting), I don’t know that I’ll go back to activist spaces where men hold unchecked power either. This incident has served to greatly clarify that for me.