Category Archives: transgender

The Transvestite Mayor Caption Contest

This is the 198th world-famous FOTM Caption Contest!

Here’s the pic:

For more about Lozano, see “Texas mayor is a homosexual transvestite who wears 4″ high heels”.

You know the drill:

  • Enter the contest by submitting your caption as a comment on this thread (scroll down until you see the “LEAVE A REPLY” box).
  • The winner of the Caption Contest will get a gorgeous Award Certificate of Excellence and a year’s free subscription to FOTM:D
  • FOTM writers will vote for the winner.
  • Any captions proffered by FOTM writers, no matter how brilliant (ha ha), will not be considered. :(

This contest will be closed in a week, at the end of next Tuesday, April 30, 2019.

To get the contest going, here’s my caption:

Lozano: “So you think Texas is conservative? What special kind of stupid are you?”

For the winner of our last Caption Contest, click here.

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

CDC: 1 out of 7 ‘transgender women’ have HIV

In past years, the federal government’s Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has published on “transgender people” being “at higher risk” for HIV — especially “transgender women”, i.e., men who identify as women, and black “transgenders”. CDC defines “transgender people” as “people whose gender identity or expression is different from their sex assigned at birth” and “gender identity” as a “person’s internal understanding of their own gender.”

According to the latest CDC publication, an April 2019 fact-sheet on “HIV and Transgender People“:

  • As many as 14% of U.S. “transgender women” have HIV.
  • A vast majority of the 2,351 transgender people in the U.S. diagnosed with HIV in the years 2009-2014 were “transgender women”:
    • 84% (N=1,974) of transgenders with HIV are “transgender women”, i.e., biological males.
    • 15.35% (N=361) of transgenders with HIV are “transgender men”, i.e., biological females.
  • As many as 44% of black “transgender women” have HIV, the highest percentage among all “transgender women”.
  • Blacks also make up a majority of “transgenders” with HIV:
    • 58% of “transgender men” with HIV.
    • 51% of “transgender women” with HIV.

A recent study by a team of four CDC scientists reinforces and confirms the CDC fact sheet.

The scientists published their findings in “Estimating the Prevalence of HIV and Sexual Behaviors Among the US Transgender Population: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis, 2006-2017,” American Journal of Public Health, Nov. 29, 2018. Below is the Abstract of the article:

Transgender women (transwomen) in the United States have been shown to have high HIV risk with Black and Hispanic transwomen being particularly vulnerable. Growing research on transgender men (transmen) also shows increased HIV risk and burden, although not as much is known for this transgender population. […]

We reviewed 88 studies, the majority of which were cross-sectional surveys. Overall laboratory-confirmed estimated prevalence of HIV infection was 9.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 6.0%, 13.7%; κ = 24). Among transwomen and transmen, HIV infection prevalence estimates were 14.1% (95% CI = 8.7%, 22.2%; κ = 13) and 3.2% (95% CI = 1.4%, 7.1%; κ = 8), respectively. Self-reported HIV infection was 16.1% (95% CI = 12.0%, 21.2%; κ = 44), 21.0% (95% CI = 15.9%, 27.2%; κ = 30), and 1.2% (95% CI = 0.4%, 3.1%; κ = 7) for overall, transwomen, and transmen, respectively. HIV infection estimates were highest among Blacks (44.2%; 95% CI = 23.2%, 67.5%; κ = 4). Overall, participation in sex work was 31.0% (95% CI = 23.9%, 39.0%; κ = 39). Transwomen (37.9%; 95% CI = 29.0%, 47.7%; κ = 29) reported higher participation in sex work than transmen (13.1%; 95% CI = 6.6%, 24.3%; κ = 10; P = .001).

H/t Big Lug

See also:

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Hollyweird’s Charlize Theron says her child came out as “trans” at three years old

CENTURY CITY, CA – APRIL 18: Charlize Theron, Jackson Theron and Sean Penn attend the generationOn West Coast Block Party on April 18, 2015 in Beverly Hills, California. (Photo by JB Lacroix/WireImage)

A three-year-old has NO CONCEPT of who they are let alone the capacity to understand what “gender identity” means. Bad parenting to let children lead their life by their feeeeeeeeelings instead of facts.

From NBC News: Academy Award-winner Charlize Theron reportedly shared that her oldest child is transgender.

Her daughter Jackson, 7, was assigned male at birth but revealed she’s a girl four years ago, Theron said, according to an interview published Thursday in the Daily Mail.

“I thought she was a boy, too,” Theron, 43, reportedly said in the interview. “Until she looked at me at 3 years old and said, ‘I am not a boy!’”

The actress has two children: Jackson and August, 4.

NBC News was unable to confirm the veracity of the Daily Mail article. (Since when does NBC care about facts? Never stopped them from reporting baloney on President Trump.)

Theron has a legacy of LGBTQ activism, particularly when it comes to advocating for marriage equality. In 2009, she announced on “The View” that she would not marry her then-boyfriend, Stuart Townsend, until everyone had the right to marry in the United States.

“I think it would be exactly the same if we were married, but for me to go through that kind of ceremony, because I have so many friends who are gays and lesbians who would so badly want to get married, that I wouldn’t be able to sleep with myself,” she said at the time.

Read the whole story here.

Apparently Theron said, “They were born who they are and exactly where in the world both of them get to find themselves as they grow up, and who they want to be, is not for me to decide.”

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Medical tolerance: Steven Crowder poses as “pregnant transgender” at baby-killers Planned Parenthood

The insanity continues…

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Pelosi reveals liberal leftist agenda in Equality Act remarks

At the March 13 Democrat press conference that introduced H.R. 5 – Equality Act, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi revealed a litany of  liberal, leftist goals she hoped Democrats would achieve. Rep. David Cicilline (D-RI), gave the initial remarks. Pelosi  gave the hallmark Democrat speech.

The following text is the official transcript of Pelosi’s remarks. The bold face highlighted text marks are mine.

# # #

Pelosi Remarks at Press Event Introducing H.R. 5, The Equality Act

March 13, 2019

Washington, D.C. – Speaker Nancy Pelosi joined Democratic leaders of the House and Senate for a press event introducing H.R. 5, the Equality Act, which amends the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to explicitly prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in education, employment, housing, credit, federal jury service, public accommodations and the use of federal funds. Below are the Speaker’s remarks

Speaker Pelosi. Senator Merkley! Thank you, Senator Merkley, I accept your kind words on behalf of our House Democrats who, overwhelmingly, support this legislation and I thank David Cicilline and the Members of the Task Force for their work to bring us to this day.

I remember full-well the day you described in the LBJ Room when we stood there, you taking the lead in the Senate, David in the House, and right between the two of you, John Lewis, John Lewis giving his imprimatur to the path that we were going down.

[Applause]

So, I thank you. It is a pleasure to welcome back Senator Schumer when he gets here, a former Member, and Senator Baldwin, a former Member of whom we are very proud, and thank you for your leadership, as well as Senator Booker, not of this House but certainly of this Congress who we are very proud of as well. I am proud to join all of you.

As I was listening to the comments that were being made, Congressman Cicilline – I think I decided to call you Chairman, you call everyone Chairman in the Majority – and Senator Merkley, I was thinking back on the path to this day.

When we first got the Majority, we said we had four goals we wanted to achieve. One was to pass the hate crimes legislation. Senator Baldwin was very much a part of that in the House, and Senator Schumer of course in the Senate, and then Senator Baldwin in both houses.

The next was supposed to be ENDA, end discrimination in the workplace, but we all came to the conclusion, led by the outside groups, that we should do the repeal of ‘Don’t Act Don’t Tell’ next. So, that rose to number two on the agenda, not in terms of importance but in terms of chronology and in getting the votes. So then, with the help of so many of you, we repealed ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.’

[Applause]

Next was marriage equality, which the courts happily recognized – marriage equality. So, we had one left, ENDA. But everybody just said, why should we be ending discrimination in the workplace? What about in every place – in housing, in every place?’

So, that’s when Mr. Cicilline stepped forward and said, ‘We’ll open the Civil Rights Act.’ Not a small thing to do, and that’s why Mr. Lewis and the Congressional Black Caucus and all of our Members were so important in getting behind that fully so here we are today.

Here we are today. We are proud to stand with Members from both sides of the Capitol to take a momentous step towards full equality for LGBTQ Americans and for our country. We take great pride in serving with a record-breaking ten LGBTQ Members in the Congress. We are happy about that.

[Applause]

Let us once again salute David Cicilline, a champion for equality. Thank you, Senator Merkley, for your tireless leadership in the Senate.

Our inside maneuvering, though, is only possible because of the success of the outside mobilization, so I want to join David Cicilline and Senator Merkley in acknowledging the work of our outside friends who made this possible.

[Applause]

Advocates and allies have always made the difference: in passing fully-inclusive hate crime legislation, repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Act, defeating the discriminatory Defense of Marriage Act – remember that horrible thing? And more. Forget about it.

Again, your mobilizing and organizing will make the difference, once again, so I thank all of you for that. Let me just say on that score, that many of you have reported to us that many in corporate America and in the business community are behind the Equality Act, and I think that is going to be very important.

[Applause]

Our Founders, in their wisdom, wrote in our beautiful preamble to the Constitution ‘the blessings of liberty.’ They talked about the blessings of liberty which were to be the birthright of all Americans. That’s why I am especially upset that, last night, we were all sickened and saddened to see the President revive his hateful transgender service ban. No one with the strength and bravery to serve in the military should be turned away – turned away – so sad.

I had some trans in uniform folks here for the State of the Union Address, and they were so saddened because they have a high percentage of participation in our military, and to have that not get its full respect and, in fact, lessened by the President’s actions – so, we have important work to do in fighting to defeat this disgusting ban and we will succeed.

[Applause]

While the President betrays our values with his ban, the Congress is bringing our nation closer to equal liberty and justice for all with the Equality Act. Sexual orientation and gender identity deserve full civil rights protections – in the workplace and in every place, education, housing, credit, jury service – you want jury service? In public accommodations. That is why we are proud to stand with Members of the Congressional Black Caucus, many of whom are here with us, Bobby Scott, Sheila Jackson Lee. You will be hearing from Bobby Scott.

We are proud, as David said, that this bill has nearly 240 bipartisan co-sponsors in the House. We look forward to a swift, strong and successful vote on this bill. And now, it would have been my pleasure – did he come? Okay, Chuck is on the way.

[Laughter]

Is that okay? He will be here shortly. I am pleased to welcome back to the House side, a place where we took great pride, where she was first lesbian to be elected to the Congress of the United States. How proud we are of Tammy Baldwin.

~ Grif

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Democrats file legislation to force all Americans to accept the LGBTQ agenda

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi March 13 introduced the so-called Equality Act, a bill that would add “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” as protected classes under federal civil rights law.

The legislation, known as the Equality Act would specifically include all LGBTQ definitions and would penalize everyday Americans for their beliefs about marriage and biological sex. Similar sexual orientation and gender identity laws at the state and local level have already been used in this way.

While liberal Democrats and some liberal Republicans in the House of Representatives are lauding the proposed legislation, some conservatives are calling it a “frontal assault on religious liberty.”

If the Equality Act becomes law, it would impact essentially every part of American life. It would force employers and workers to conform to new sexual norms or else lose their businesses and jobs. It would force hospitals and insurers to provide and pay for these therapies against any moral or medical objections. It would force parents to provide sexual reassignment treatments for their children who are confused about their sexual identity. It would force religious institutions that provide adoptions to permit same sex couples to adopt children, and the list goes on.

Monica Burke, a research assistant in the DeVos Center for Religion and Civil Society at The Heritage Foundation, in a critique of the proposed legislation noted that most Americans “don’t want a nationwide bathroom requirement, health care mandate, or “preferred pronoun” law based on gender identity, but congressional Democrats seem to think it’s time to impose them.”

Burke’s critique in The Daily Signal:

Nancy Pelosi delivered . . . on her promise to introduce the so-called Equality Act, which would elevate sexual orientation and gender identity to protected classes in federal anti-discrimination law.

Although that may sound nice in theory, in practice sexual orientation and gender identity policies at the state and local level have caused profound harms to Americans from all walks of life.

How might a sexual orientation and gender identity law on the federal level, as introduced in the House and Senate, affect you and your community? Here are seven ways:

1.   It would penalize Americans who don’t affirm new sexual norms or gender ideology.

Jack Phillips’ case went all the way to the Supreme Court after the Colorado Civil Rights Commission accused the bakery owner of discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation when the self-described cake artist declined to create a custom cake to celebrate a same-sex wedding.

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Phillips, owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop, but left the law in question, the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act, intact. Until last week, Phillips was in court again defending himself against the same agency under the same law.

The day after the Supreme Court ruled in Phillips’ case, Autumn Scardina, a lawyer who identifies as transgender, requested that he create a “gender transition cake.” After Phillips declined, the state Civil Rights Commission found probable cause under the law that the baker had discriminated on the basis of gender identity.

Thankfully, the commission dropped the case, and Phillips agreed to drop his own lawsuit accusing the state agency of harassing him for his Christian beliefs.

Phillips is just one of many Americans who have lost income because of their belief that marriage is between one man and one woman. Others cases involve florists, bakers, photographers, wedding venue owners, videographers, web designers, calligraphers, and public servants.

These cases are just the beginning. The same policies used to silence disagreement over marriage can be used to silence disagreement over the biological reality of sex.

2.  It would compel speech.

Virginia high school teacher Peter Vlaming lost his job for something he did not say.

A county school board voted unanimously to fire the veteran teacher over the objections of his students after he refused to comply with administrators’ orders to use masculine pronouns in referring to a female student who identifies as transgender.

Vlaming did his best to accommodate the student without violating his religious belief that God created human beings male and female, using the student’s new name and simply refraining from using pronouns altogether.

Unfortunately, the school still considered this a violation of its anti-discrimination policy.

Incidents like these would increase under federal policy proposed in the Equality Act. Both federal and private employers could face costly lawsuits if they fail to implement strict preferred pronoun policies. Employees could be disciplined if they fail to comply, regardless of their scientific or moral objections.

3 . It could shut down charities.

Foster care and adoption agencies, drug rehabilitation centers, and homeless centers already face challenges under state and local policies on sexual orientation and gender identity.

In Philadelphia, just days after the city put out an urgent call for 300 additional families to foster children, the city halted child placements by Catholic Social Services because of the organization’s belief that every child deserves both a mother and a father.

Although same-sex couples have the opportunity to foster children through the state or every other agency in Philadelphia, the city canceled its contract with Catholic Social Services. The agency’s approved foster homes remain available while children languish on the waiting list.

A federal sexual orientation and gender identity law would make this situation a national phenomenon, which would spell disaster for the 437,500 children in foster care nationwide.

Other charities would be affected, too.

In Anchorage, Alaska, a biological male born Timothy Paul Coyle goes by the name of Samantha Amanda Coyle. On two occasions, Coyle tried to gain access to the city’s Downtown Soup Kitchen Hope Center, a shelter for homeless, abused, and trafficked women.

In one attempt, authorities said, Coyle was inebriated and had gotten into a fight with a staffer at another shelter, so Hope Center staff paid Coyle’s fare to the emergency room to receive medical attention. Coyle sued the center for “gender identity discrimination.”

A federal sexual orientation and gender identity law could force any social service organization to open up private facilities—including single-sex bathrooms, showers, and sleeping areas—to members of the opposite sex.

4.  It would allow more biological males to defeat girls in sports.

Two biological males who identify and compete as women easily defeated all of their female competitors in an event at the Connecticut State Track Championships. Transgender athlete Terry Miller broke the state record in the girls’100-meter dash. Andraya Yearwood, also transgender, took second place.

Selina Soule, a female runner, not only lost to the biological males in the championships but also lost out on valuable opportunities to be seen by college coaches and chosen for scholarships.

Soule said about the 100-meter event: “We all know the outcome of the race before it even starts; it’s demoralizing.”

A federal sexual orientation and gender identity law would defeat the purpose of Title IX of the Civil Rights Act, which is supposed to guarantee women equal educational and athletic opportunities.

Under radical gender identity policies, female athletes have sustained gruesome injuries at the hands of male competitors. In high school wrestling, female athletes have forfeited rather than compete against transgender athletes on testosterone.

A federal law could set girls’ and women’s sports back permanently at every level.

5.  It could be used to coerce medical professionals.

Under state sexual orientation and gender identity laws, individuals who identify as transgender have sued Catholic hospitals in California and New Jersey for declining to perform hysterectomies on otherwise healthy women who wanted to pursue gender transition.

If these lawsuits succeed, medical professionals would be pressured to treat patients according to ideology rather than their best medical judgment.

The Obama administration tried to coerce medical professionals into offering transition-affirming therapies through a regulation in the Affordable Care Act, popularly known as Obamacare.

That move was stopped in the 11th hour by a federal judge. However, that could all be set back in motion if a national law imposes a nationwide health care mandate regarding gender identity.

6.  It could lead to more parents losing custody of their children.

The politicization of medicine according to gender ideology will create more conflicts among parents, doctors, and the government. A federal sexual orientation and gender identity law would jeopardize parental rights nationwide.

In fact, the current issue of the American Journal of Bioethics includes an article arguing that the state should overrule the parents of transgender children who do not consent to give them puberty-blocking drugs.

This has already happened. In Ohio, a judge removed a biological girl from her parents’ custody after they declined to help her “transition” to male with testosterone supplements.

After the Cincinnati Children’s Hospital’s Transgender Health Clinic recommended these treatments for the girl’s gender dysphoria, the parents wanted to pursue counseling instead. Then the county’s family services agency charged the parents with abuse and neglect, and the judge terminated their custody.

Similar cases are proceeding through the courts with children as young as 6 years old.

Meanwhile, studies show that 80 to 95 percent of children no longer experience gender dysphoria after puberty. Politicizing medicine could have serious consequences for children who are exposed to the unnecessary medical risks of drastic therapies.

A federal sexual orientation and gender identity law would make these cases more common.

7.  It would enable sexual assault.

A complaint under investigation by federal education officials alleges that a boy who identifies as “gender fluid” at Oakhurst Elementary School in Decatur, Georgia, sexually assaulted Pascha Thomas’ 5-year-old daughter in a girls’ restroom. The boy had access to the girls’ restroom because of Decatur City Schools’ transgender restroom policy.

School authorities refused to change the policy even after Thomas reported the assault. Eventually, she decided to remove her daughter from school for the girl’s emotional well-being and physical safety.

A federal sexual orientation and gender identity law would give male sexual predators who self-identify as females access to private facilities, increasing the likelihood of these tragic incidents.

It could also make victims less likely to report sexual misconduct and police less likely to get involved, for fear of being accused of discrimination.

The proposed Equality Act could impose a nationwide bathroom policy that would leave women and children in particular vulnerable to predators. It actually would promote inequality by elevating the ideologies of special-interest groups to the level of protected groups in civil rights law.

This extreme and dangerous legislation would create unprecedented harms to businesses, charities, medical professionals, women and children, and entire families.

Texas fights back

Meanwhile, as congressional Democrats are advocating for the hamstringing of religious belief, Texas is pushing forward with new legislation that, if passed, will ultimately protect religious freedom—in Texas, at least. From Christian Ellis, CBN News, March 25:

The Republican-controlled state senate in Texas is considering SB 17. The bill would allow state license holders like lawyers, health care professionals, and counselors to serve clients based on their religious beliefs without any adverse actions from licensing boards.

Texas Lt. Gov Dan Patrick (R) announced the bill as one of his top priorities for the 2019 Legislative Session. The bill was designated a priority as “a result of requests and recommendations from senators and the people of Texas.”

“They strengthen our support for life, liberty and Texas values, increase protections for taxpayers,” wrote Patrick.

SB 17’s section on religious freedom reads:

“State agency that issues a license or otherwise regulates a business, occupation, or profession may not adopt any rule, regulation, or policy or impose a penalty that:

(1) limits an applicant’s ability to obtain, maintain, or renew a license based on a sincerely held religious belief of the applicant; or

(2) burdens an applicant’s or a license holder’s:

(A) free exercise of religion, regardless of whether the burden is the result of a rule generally applicable to all applicants or license holders;

(B) freedom of speech regarding a sincerely held religious belief; or

(C) membership in any religious organization.”

Conservatives across the state expect the bill to pass as the Republican party has control over the state’s House, Senate, and governorship. However, opponents like the National Association of Social Workers Texas have stated they will argue against the bill in the hearing, calling it “discriminatory”.

The organization states the bill runs “counter to the NASW Code of Ethics for all professionals, and will deny services to already marginalized persons in the LGBTQ community or women seeking access to reproductive care and services.”

SB 17 comes at a crucial time when religious freedom faces ongoing threats across the country, and as a new threat emerges in the Democrat-controlled US House of Representatives. This month, Democrats introduced an updated version of their Equality Act that elevates protections for sexual orientation over protections for religious liberty. The bill could threaten ministries with legal consequences if they denied an LGBTQ individual from working for their institution.

“Every American should be treated with dignity and respect, but our laws need to protect the constitutionally guaranteed rights that we have,” Greg Baylor from the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) told CBN News.

“Now under the Equality Act we will have a nationwide law,” continued Baylor. “We will see a proliferation of instances where Christians and others are being coerced to violate their beliefs in order to comply with such a law.”

While Democrats are indicating the Equality Act is a big part of their agenda, they do not currently control the US Senate, so the measure is not expected to pass unless they gain control of both houses of Congress in the 2020 election.

While Democrat liberals are planning an assault on religion, Texas is pushing forward with new legislation that, if passed, will ultimately protect religious freedom.

The Republican-controlled state senate in Texas is considering SB 17. The bill would allow state license holders like lawyers, health care professionals, and counselors to serve clients based on their religious beliefs without any adverse actions from licensing boards.

Texas Lt. Gov Dan Patrick (R) announced the bill as one of his top priorities for the 2019 Legislative Session. The bill was designated a priority as “a result of requests and recommendations from senators and the people of Texas.”

~ Grif

Note from Eowyn: H.R. 5 – Equality Act was introduced by Rep. David Cicilline (D-RI) on March 13, 2019. See also “Coming to America: Canadian man fined $55,000 for ‘misgendering’ a ‘transgender’“.

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Teen Vogue asks, “Is there something called biological sex?”

Yes, there is. The answer is rooted in real “science” and “biology.”

But according to Teen Vogue, “who you are is who you say you are.”

Who I say I am…trans species!

Who I say I am…genderless alien!

Who I say I am…trans abled!

I can’t even with these people and their feeeeeeeeeeeeelings.

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Obama’s half-brother Malik asks if Michelle is really a man

Malik Obama is Barack Obama’s older half-brother. The two share the same biological father, Kenyan Barack Obama Sr.; Malik’s mother was Obama Sr.’s first wife, Kezia.

Born and raised in Nairobi, Kenya, Malik met Barack for the first time in 1985. The brothers were best men at each other’s weddings. Barack brought Michelle to Kenya three years later, and they met with Malik again while meeting many other relatives for the first time.

Although Malik lives in the Obamas’ ancestral home in Nairobi, he is a frequent visitor to the United States, and a consultant in Washington, D.C., for several months each year. Malik has dual citizenship in Kenya and the United States. In the 2016 presidential election, Malik was vocal in his support of Donald Trump, and attended the third presidential debate as one of Trump’s guests.

Given who he is, it is noteworthy that Malik Obama is publicly questioning whether former First Lady Michelle Obama is actually a man.

On March 14, 2019, Malik Obama tweeted a 3-word question: “Is Michelle Michael?

Regular readers of FOTM already know the answer to that question because we’ve seen with our own eyes Mooch’s “package” swinging in its pants while dancing on the Ellen DeGeneres Show, which was aired on CBS on March 16, 2015.

And then there’s Mooch’s package again swinging in his white camisole jumpsuit as he bounces down the stairs of daughter Malia’s Harvard University dorm on August 22, 2017. See “Michelle Obama is a man: See the junk moving in his pants“.

What’s that swinging in Michelle Obama’s pants?

It runs in the family: Half-brother Malik Obama himself is something of a fraud. See “Tax-exempt charity of Obama’s half-brother is a fraud“.

H/t Bongiornoc

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

New Pentagon transgender rule to set limit on troops transitioning; must serve as their birth gender

From Fox News: The Defense Department has approved a new policy that will largely bar transgender troops and military recruits from transitioning to another sex, and require most individuals to serve in their birth gender.

The memo outlining the new policy was obtained Tuesday by The Associated Press, and it comes after a lengthy and complicated legal battle. It falls short of the all-out transgender ban that was initially ordered by President Donald Trump. But it will likely force the military to eventually discharge transgender individuals who need hormone treatments or surgery and can’t or won’t serve in their birth gender.

The order says the military services must implement the new policy in 30 days, giving some individuals a short window of time to qualify for gender transition if needed. And it allows service secretaries to waive the policy on a case-by-case basis.

Under the new rules, currently serving transgender troops and anyone who has signed an enlistment contract by April 12 may continue with plans for hormone treatments and gender transition if they have been diagnosed with gender dysphoria.

But after April 12, no one with gender dysphoria who is taking hormones or has transitioned to another gender will be allowed to enlist. And any currently serving troops diagnosed with gender dysphoria after April 12 will have to serve in their birth gender and will be barred from taking hormones or getting transition surgery.

The memo lays out guidelines for discharging service members based on the new policy. It says a service member can be discharged based on a diagnosis of gender dysphoria if he or she is “unable or unwilling to adhere to all applicable standards, including the standards associated with his or her biological sex, or seeks transition to another gender.”

It adds that troops must be formally counseled and given a chance to change their decision before the discharge is finalized.

In a statement Tuesday night, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called the ban “cowardly.”

“The President’s revival of his bigoted, disgusting ban on transgender servicemembers is a stunning attack on the patriots who keep us safe and on the most fundamental ideals of our nation,” the California Democrat said. “The President’s years-long insistence on his cowardly ban makes clear that prejudice, not patriotism, guides his decisions.”

Palm Center, a California research institute, protested the new policy Tuesday. Director Aaron Belkin said, “The Trump administration is determined to bring back ‘don’t ask, don’t tell,’ a policy that forced service members to choose between serving their country and telling the truth about who they were.”

The final legal injunction blocking the new policy was lifted last week, allowing the Pentagon to move forward. But restrictions on transgender troops are likely to face ongoing legal challenges and have been slammed by members of Congress as discriminatory and self-defeating.

The memo was signed by David L. Norquist, who is currently serving as the deputy defense secretary.

Rep. Jackie Speier, D-Calif., said in February that barring service by transgender individuals “would cost us recruits at a time when so few Americans are willing to serve.” She spoke at a hearing in which transgender troops testified that transitioning to another sex made them stronger and more effective members of the military.

Until a few years ago service members could be discharged from the military for being transgender, but that changed under the Obama administration. Then-Defense Secretary Ash Carter announced in 2016 that transgender people already serving in the military would be allowed to serve openly. And the military set July 1, 2017, as the date when transgender individuals would be allowed to enlist.

After Trump took office, however, his administration delayed the enlistment date and called for additional study to determine if allowing transgender individuals to serve would affect military readiness or effectiveness.

A few weeks later, Trump caught military leaders by surprise, tweeting that the government won’t accept or allow transgender individuals to serve “in any capacity” in the military. “Our military must be focused on decisive and overwhelming victory and cannot be burdened with the tremendous medical costs and disruption that transgender in the military would entail,” he wrote.

His demand for a ban triggered a legal and moral quagmire, as the Pentagon faced the prospect of throwing out service members who had willingly come forward as transgender after being promised they would be protected and allowed to serve. And as legal battles blocked the ban from taking effect, the Obama-era policy continued and transgender individuals were allowed to begin enlisting in the military a little more than a year ago.

An estimated 14,700 troops on active duty and in the Reserves identify as transgender, but not all seek treatment. Since July 2016, more than 1,500 service members were diagnosed with gender dysphoria; as of Feb. 1, there were 1,071 currently serving. According to the Pentagon, the department has spent about $8 million on transgender care since 2016. The military’s annual health care budget tops $50 billion.

Last year, all four service chiefs told Congress that they had seen no discipline, morale or unit readiness problems with transgender troops serving openly in the military. But they also acknowledged that some commanders were spending a lot of time with transgender individuals who were working through medical requirements and other transition issues.

The five transgender troops who testified in February said their medical transitions took anywhere from four weeks to four months and they did most of it on their own time. All said they were fit to return to deploying afterward.

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

‘Child Abuse’? Massachusetts Therapy Ban Means Parents Could Lose Their Kids if They Try to Help Them

Massachusetts lawmakers are considering a therapy ban that would not only make it illegal to counsel children about unwanted same-sex attraction or gender confusion, but also punish parents who allow it by taking custody of their children.

Andrew Beckwith, president of the Massachusetts Family Institute, told CBN News that the bill “categorizes the treatment itself as child abuse.”

It appears that Massachusetts is the first state to consider defining such therapy as abusive and allow for the option of taking away parental custody.

“This is a bill that would allow the state to take, for example, your daughter, and make her someone else’s son,” Beckwith said.

According to the Human Rights Campaign, a powerful LGBTQ advocacy organization, 15 states and Washington, DC have already passed therapy bans for youth. Beckwith says Massachusetts could be the first to add the abuse definition. Lawmakers in Maine and Colorado are also considering therapy bans for youth right now. LGBTQ advocates have argued for years that therapy that allows youth to discuss their concerns about unwanted same-sex desires or gender identity issues is harmful.

Massachusetts lawmakers first introduced a youth therapy ban bill in 2013. Beckwith says proponents appear to have an “aggressive timeline” right now, because last year lawmakers couldn’t agree on the abuse provision and delayed a vote until the end of the session in June.

This year, according to Beckwith, they’re already taking action. Lawmakers held a hearing on March 5 to consider testimony from those the measure would impact.

Parental custody is already an issue in transgender cases involving children across the country. Recently, Ohio officials stripped parental rights from a couple that opposed medical treatment for their teenage daughter who wanted to become a boy. In Texas, a divorced father and mother are fighting over medical treatment for their 6-year-old son. The mother says he identifies as a girl and wants to pursue medical treatments to help him change. The father says the boy identifies as a boy and opposes the treatments.

The Massachusetts Senate’s bill S.70, titled “Relative to abusive practices to change sexual orientation and gender identity,” was reported favorably by committee Monday, March 11, and referred to the committee on Senate Rules.

Hearings on Massachusetts House Bill H.110, “An Act banning conversion therapy,” was extended for additional testimony. A new date for the extended hearings has not been set. The House version of the bill would “prohibit practices by health care providers that attempt to change sexual orientation or gender identity. Children, Families and Persons with Disabilities.”

~ Grif

Please follow and like us:
0