The Gay, Inc Dictionary

Like the Religious Reich and the conservafool movement, Gay Inc. twists words and phrases for propaganda value and effect as well to pimp its message.  As a TransGriot public service, it's time to enlighten you on some of the ones you'll see crop us in the Gayosphere, their press releases  and other Internet discourse.


ally  a cis or trans person that unquestioningly follows their lead on marriage equality issues or agrees with their 'incremental progress' approach for trans rights.


crumbs  any gay or lesbian favorable law or policy change that benefits either them or the trans community and isn't same gender marriage or DOMA repeal


discrimination free zone   A jurisdiction that has a GL only protective law on the books and marriage equality, but no trans rights coverage

equality   the push to have gay and lesbian people acquire the same white privilege infused 'special right' to discriminate against other marginalized groups


hater  a cis or gay lesbian trans person that questions the 'all marriage all the time' strategy or disagrees with their 'incremental progress' approach for trans rights.

homophobe: cis or trans person who calls out gay people for their shady and questionably ethical behavior in online discourse


homophobia  Any commentary by cis or trans people that brings up their history of stabbing transpeople in the back on civil rights issues or criticizes their nekulturny or shady behavior.

incremental progress   Political strategy of pushing inadequate, flawed or unjust trans rights bills compiled by Gay, Inc 'equality' orgs that not only stretches out the time it takes to pass such legislation, it doesn't fix the problems that plague transpeople

just like you  see 'equality' definition.    The dog whistle codeword for the strategy. 


out of state activists   people, bloggers or national organizations who oppose bad trans legislation authored by GL people

playing by the rules  The demand that legislators stop what they're doing to see Gay, Inc lobbyists, friendly legislators or allies pushing legislation of importance to the GL community while ignoring trans lobbyists, friendly legislators and cis, trans or GL allies opposed to that legislation

Not An April Fool's Joke

Kat Rose of ENDAblog brought this to my attention.  It's a  response to a comment I left over at Pam's House Blend on one of the ongoing contentious Maryland HB 235 threads popping up on an TBLG blog near You.    Kat's post was entitled Sadly Not An April Fool's Joke  and was highlighting Autumn Sandeen's response to the one sentence one I'd left on Autumn's original PHB post. . 

Hey, I have love and respect for Autumn.   On this HB 235 issue, we're on opposite sides. .

And this was my PHB response to the comment.  Enjoy.

If we in the trans community and more specifically, white trans people in positions of influence in GL orgs keep accepting piss poor bills written by our so-called ‘allies’ because we’re desperate to have anything that covers trans people, what does that say about us as a community, Autumn?


Morgan Meneses-Sheets and EQ MD had the choice of either accepting a civil unions bill or same gender marriage. She and EQ MD chose ‘marriage or bust’.
We know how that worked out. But they chose the hard route. Why is that route NOT acceptable for trans legislation? Can somebody on the Yes for HB 235 side explain to me in a cogent manner why it’s okay for GL people to demand first class legislation and we trans people can’t?

Why is it a problem when transpeople, and especially trans people of color continually tell you and point out from our perspective and lived experience as lifelong marginalized people (not Johnny and Janie come latelies to minority status who grew up ensconced in white privilege) that incremental rights for transpeople is not an option?

If you give the haters a millimeter to discriminate with loophole filled legislation, they will take it and run with it.
The people that are taking the brunt of the anti-trans violence don’t look like the staff of EQ MD.

It is why I and others are insistent that trans rights bills be comprehensive, airtight and the best we can possibly write because we are not going to get many opportunities to pass trans specific legislation despite the spin coming from EQ MD and you HB 235 supporters.

2012 is an election year. How likely is any civil rights legislation going to get done when the legislators will be facing the voters that November?

So why waste those opportunities with piss poor bills that don’t FIX the problems that ail our community?