Gay activist who helped win marriage equality in Florida found dead in landfill

[Glennfs]

Just in this thread alone, you did jerk your knees and rush to overdefensiveness, accusing ProfX and Libertas of saying something about rightwingers that they never said.

Given the history of conservative antigay, race-based vigilantism, I guess I can see where that is a sore spot for you.

So if the rest of what I said is inaccurate or sounds exaggerated to you, now’s a fine time to correct the record. Think of it as a rare opportunity a lot of you clowns around here have been waiting for: a chance to correct carmenjonze.

Please state for the record your actual position on lynching in the US and the historical efforts to pass lynch law.

Years ago when I looked up the numbers I was surprised they weren't much higher. Had I or anyone else here had to guess I am pretty sure they would have guessed much higher
Which is not to underscore the seriousness of lynchings. The fact that we had an era of lynchings is a stain on the history of our nation.
Back to the subject of this thread and prof X link. There wasn't even one example in 5 years of any of the murders being a hate crime. However there were many that were crimes if passion.

[carmenjonze]

Years ago when I looked up the numbers

Where did you look them up and what did you find?

I was surprised they weren't much higher. Had I or anyone else here had to guess I am pretty sure they would have guessed much higher
Which is not to underscore the seriousness of lynchings. The fact that we had an era of lynchings is a stain on the history of our nation.

Congratulations, that era is a major part of the legacy of white conservatism.

But I notice you skipped over something. Why do you suppose lynch law was never passed?

Why do you think African Americans saw the need to press for passage of anti-lynching legislation?

What do you think of their efforts?

Back to the subject of this thread and prof X link. There wasn't even one example in 5 years of any of the murders being a hate crime.

Please state your position on hate crime laws.

However there were many that were crimes if passion.

Like Strom Thurmond raping a girl employed by his trashy family?

The subject of the thread is simply a guy who was key to passing marriage equality laws is dead and it’s suspected that it was murder. That’s it. Maybe take a moment to think about why you’re so defensive with a need to vindicate rightwing reputations when it comes to murdering minorities.

[carmenjonze]

“If you’re white, you don’t get the vaccine or if you’re white, you don’t get therapeutics …You get it based on race. In fact, in New York state, if you’re white, you have to go to the back of the line to get medical help. Think of it. If you’re white, you go right to the back of the line.”

— the leader of the party you willingly belong to.

[gounion]

Years ago when I looked up the numbers I was surprised they weren't much higher. Had I or anyone else here had to guess I am pretty sure they would have guessed much higher
Which is not to underscore the seriousness of lynchings. The fact that we had an era of lynchings is a stain on the history of our nation.
Back to the subject of this thread and prof X link. There wasn't even one example in 5 years of any of the murders being a hate crime. However there were many that were crimes if passion.

Carmen's questions to this statement are reasonable and deserve a real answer. You up to it?

[carmenjonze]

Carmen's questions to this statement are reasonable and deserve a real answer. You up to it?

Donald Trump, another conservative white male sexual batterer like Strom Thurmond (R - Dead), loves the unereducated. It's easy to see why.

Ignorant anti-LGBTQ men like Glennfs are why the GOP thrives. You already know this, but your buddy is eager to dismiss and absolve what cishetero men inflict on both cis and trans women, and it shows.

Glennfs is another one of these functionally-illiterate confederates who can barely string together two coherent sentences. He also has a vested interest in defending confederate white males like Strom Thurmond who took advantage of a young Black girl, and he defends this as "love" and passionately lifts up Strom Thurmond as some example of white-male benevolence. Yet he sees trans girls and women on the sports team as the predators.

Simon Legree whites like him have a really nasty history of this level of perversion, yet continue to devise law after law criminalizing us as the perverts.

So no, Glennfs is incapable of coming up with rational answers to these questions. Not intellectually, not politically. And he never will be, either. He's too far gone.

[Glennfs]

Where did you look them up and what did you find?



Congratulations, that era is a major part of the legacy of white conservatism.

But I notice you skipped over something. Why do you suppose lynch law was never passed?

Why do you think African Americans saw the need to press for passage of anti-lynching legislation?

What do you think of their efforts?



Please state your position on hate crime laws.



Like Strom Thurmond raping a girl employed by his trashy family?

The subject of the thread is simply a guy who was key to passing marriage equality laws is dead and it’s suspected that it was murder. That’s it. Maybe take a moment to think about why you’re so defensive with a need to vindicate rightwing reputations when it comes to murdering minorities.

1 The numbers presented by the SPLC. From a lifetime of hearing about lynchings I assumed the numbers would have been at least 10x higher.
2 Not at all while that is your opinion lynchings have absolutely zero to do with conservativism. Also there is no such thing as white conservatism
3 I wasn't aware of that fact and it is just another part of a terrible era in our country's history. Thankfully that is in the past and in today's USA there has never been a better place or time to be a minority citizen m
4 I 7sed to be opposed to hate crimes because they seemed to be the new Jim Crow with whites being on the short end this time.
However I have changed my opinion about them and as long as they are equally enforced against all hate crimes I fully support them
5 we do not know the circumstances around Strom Thurmond getting the maid pregnant. However if we look at the situation objectively based on the standards of that era.
Thurmond went above and beyond anything he would have had to do. Fact is all he needed to do was deny it and the woman involved would have been in big trouble. Instead he supported and provided for the mother and daughter.

Also Thurmond voted for the voting rights act and was one of the first senators to hire African American advisers.

Again we need to judge Thurmond based on the standards of his era not the standards of today's

[Glennfs]

Carmen's questions to this statement are reasonable and deserve a real answer. You up to it?

Answered every one of them even though you rarely if ever answer a person's question directly at you.

[carmenjonze]

Look at all the dirty white supremacism in this post.

1 The numbers presented by the SPLC. From a lifetime of hearing about lynchings I assumed the numbers would have been at least 10x higher.

Link?

2 Not at all while that is your opinion lynchings have absolutely zero to do with conservativism. Also there is no such thing as white conservatism

sure, it doesn't. Are you saying you yourself do not exist?

White conservatism is the concerted political efforts of white conservatives to subject the country to white supremacism. It includes but is not limited to: exclusion of every race but so-called whites, disenfranchisement of everyone but whites, limiting immigration to everyone but western Europeans, the vigilante violence to back it up, and the numero uno tactic in your arsenal, commiebaiting anyone who works to end these policies. You yourself still do this.

3 I wasn't aware of that fact and it is just another part of a terrible era in our country's history. Thankfully that is in the past and in today's USA there has never been a better place or time to be a minority citizen m

Three hots and a cot.

This is more baldfaced white supremacism. You haven't been anywhere else, nor have you been a minority citizen in this country. Don't ever tell "minorities" how to feel about this country's treatment of minorities, ever again.

4 I 7sed to be opposed to hate crimes because they seemed to be the new Jim Crow with whites being on the short end this time.
However I have changed my opinion about them and as long as they are equally enforced against all hate crimes I fully support them

This comment only reveals your continued disrespect for what "Jim Crow" actually was. Hate crimes were never limited to so-called whites, and they still aren't.

You, however, are so race-paranoid you actually believe racism against whites is accepted by the general public.

5 we do not know the circumstances around Strom Thurmond getting the maid pregnant. However if we look at the situation objectively based on the standards of that era.
Thurmond went above and beyond anything he would have had to do. Fact is all he needed to do was deny it and the woman involved would have been in big trouble. Instead he supported and provided for the mother and daughter.

Also Thurmond voted for the voting rights act and was one of the first senators to hire African American advisers.

Again we need to judge Thurmond based on the standards of his era not the standards of today's

"Today's standards" include dismissal and downplaying of adult male predation on girls. You're not capable of looking at Strom Thurmond objectively, because you're too emotionally invested in defending him.

[carmenjonze]

Answered every one of them even though you rarely if ever answer a person's question directly at you.

Looks to me like you threw a bunch of the same old repeated trash at the wall, hoping something would stick. Maybe you thought no one would notice that you once again skipped over the key questions, dunno. Here they are, again.

• Why do you suppose African Americans saw the need to press for passage of anti-lynching legislation?

• Why do you think anti-lynching law was never passed?

• What do you think of their efforts?

[carmenjonze]

This could just as easily go in White Conservatism is Destroying This Country, since white conservatism is predicated on patriarchy, forced heterosexuality, and elimination of LGBTQs.

Oh yes, and book-burning.

Oklahoma bill gives parents the right to have a book removed from a school library - McAlester News

An Oklahoma lawmaker wants to give parents the right to compel public school libraries to remove books that contains objectionable content of a sexual nature or addresses sexual preferences or sexual and gender identity.

Under Senate Bill 1142, if just one parent objects to a book it must be removed within 30 days. If it is not, the librarian must be fired and cannot work for any public school for two years. Parents can also collect at least $10,000 per day from school districts if the book is not removed as requested.

Critics of the measure say it’s unconstitutional, potentially causing chaos by giving a single parent the power to strip school library shelves. They also said the measure is targeting LGBTQ+ books.

State Sen. Rob Standridge, R-Norman, though, said parents and grandparents of public school students have been complaining for a couple of years now about books with sexual content on school library shelves. He said the books being promoted to school children are different than those in bookstores or even his local public library.

A few of the books he said he has concerns about include the “Trans Teen Survival Guide,” “Quick and Easy Guide to Queer and Trans Identities, “A Quick and Easy Guide to They/Them Pronouns,” and “The Art of Drag.”

“I just think that those are overly sexualized,” Standridge said. “I think parents and grandparents, guardians should have a say on whether their kids are exposed to those books. If they want them, they can take (their children) to their local library.”

While he acknowledged all the books on the list address LGBTQ+ issues, Standridge said he hasn’t seen any examples of heterosexual books that fall into the category. However, if a school was loaning out “Fifty Shades of Grey,” his bill would cover that as well. He also said he’s not worried that schools would have to also remove “The Bible,” for example, given that the Old Testament’s “Song of Songs” contains graphic sexual depictions, because he contends that schools don’t have Bibles on library shelves.

I will eat my hat if Oklahoma public school libraries don't have Bibles on their shelves.

Standridge said if a district refuses to remove a book, a parent would have to sue and get an arbiter.

[gounion]

1 The numbers presented by the SPLC. From a lifetime of hearing about lynchings I assumed the numbers would have been at least 10x higher.
2 Not at all while that is your opinion lynchings have absolutely zero to do with conservativism. Also there is no such thing as white conservatism
3 I wasn't aware of that fact and it is just another part of a terrible era in our country's history. Thankfully that is in the past and in today's USA there has never been a better place or time to be a minority citizen m
4 I 7sed to be opposed to hate crimes because they seemed to be the new Jim Crow with whites being on the short end this time.
However I have changed my opinion about them and as long as they are equally enforced against all hate crimes I fully support them
5 we do not know the circumstances around Strom Thurmond getting the maid pregnant. However if we look at the situation objectively based on the standards of that era.
Thurmond went above and beyond anything he would have had to do. Fact is all he needed to do was deny it and the woman involved would have been in big trouble. Instead he supported and provided for the mother and daughter.

Also Thurmond voted for the voting rights act and was one of the first senators to hire African American advisers.

Again we need to judge Thurmond based on the standards of his era not the standards of today's

Glenn, you really made yourself look bad here, and proved most of what Carmen says about you.

You're just like the righties who say being forced to wear a mask is just like the holocaust.

You're experiencing Jim Crow? That shows you don't know what happened to blacks during Jim Crow, or you just don't care.

And you're so paternalistic, acting like blacks should be GRATEFUL for how they're treated by cops. You're saying, yeah, they're still second-class citizens, but they should be glad that it's not worse.

And yes, there ARE places where blacks are treated better than here. I have LOTS of minority friends in Canada, and they are MUCH better integrated into society there than they are here. They aren't in danger every time they are pulled over by a cop. And they aren't ran down and murdered by racist idiots pissed that they're jogging in their town.

And no, you didn't answer every one. You didn't explain why the GOP doesn't want to pass anti-lynching laws.

[carmenjonze]

Glenn, you really made yourself look bad here, and proved most of what Carmen says about you.

You're just like the righties who say being forced to wear a mask is just like the holocaust.

You're experiencing Jim Crow? That shows you don't know what happened to blacks during Jim Crow, or you just don't care.

He knows, but comes from a sociopathic culture that's on display every day here.

Lol typical white conservative: they're so superior, they now think of themselves as the world's most downtrodden and discriminated against, über Alles. :problem:

And you're so paternalistic, acting like blacks should be GRATEFUL for how they're treated by cops. You're saying, yeah, they're still second-class citizens, but they should be glad that it's not worse.

And yes, there ARE places where blacks are treated better than here. I have LOTS of minority friends in Canada, and they are MUCH better integrated into society there than they are here. They aren't in danger every time they are pulled over by a cop. And they aren't ran down and murdered by racist idiots pissed that they're jogging in their town.

And no, you didn't answer every one. You didn't explain why the GOP doesn't want to pass anti-lynching laws.

Well..he did say "minorities," not "blacks."

And that makes the hole he keeps digging for himself MUCH deeper, every time he obnoxiously dictates what "minorities" are to think of their own histories of enduring white-conservative violence, mob rule, mass murder, rampant discrimination, and genocidal policies.

They really do think they've done us a favor with their centuries of disenfranchisement and government-forced mistreatment . Incredibly, they called their barbarity a "civilizing mission."

The one question Glennfs keeps trying to avoid is the q. of what he thinks (i.e. the century-old white-conservative party line) about the efforts of people like Ida B. Wells and the NAACP to stop lynching and pass anti-lynching legislation. It's directly connected to this thread topic and the anti-trans defensiveness he's displayed in this thread.

[carmenjonze]

... we need to judge Thurmond based on the standards of his era not the standards of today's

THAT word, again.

These are the standards you support, this very day. You know..."today."

Lindsey Graham presidential campaign, 2016/Gay rights - Ballotpedia

• On September 1, 2015, Lindsey Graham called on a Kentucky clerk who refused to give out same-sex marriage licenses to “comply with the law or resign.” He also stated, “The rule of law is the rule of law,” and said that while he himself supports traditional marriage and appreciates “her conviction” he believes “she’s accepted a job in which she has to apply the law to everyone.”[2][3]

• On June 28, 2015, Lindsey Graham advocated for Republicans to yield on the issue of same-sex marriage for political reasons during an appearance on NBC's "Meet the Press." Graham explained, "I don't believe there is any chance for a constitutional amendment defining marriage between one man and one woman to get a two-thirds vote in the House or the Senate and be ratified by three-fourths of the states. In my view, you can put it in the platform, but it will, in my view, hurt us in 2016, because it's a process that's not going to bear fruit."[4]

• Follow the Supreme Court's decision in Obergefell v. Hodges on June 26, 2015, Graham released the following statement: "I am a proud defender of traditional marriage and believe the people of each state should have the right to determine their marriage laws. However, the Supreme Court has ruled that state bans on gay marriage are unconstitutional, and I will respect the Court's decision. Furthermore, given the quickly changing tide of public opinion on this issue, I do not believe that an attempt to amend the U.S. Constitution could possibly gain the support of three-fourths of the states or a supermajority in the U.S. Congress. Rather than pursing a divisive effort that would be doomed to fail, I am committing myself to ensuring the protection of religious liberties of all Americans. No person of faith should ever be forced by the federal government to take action that goes against his or her conscience or the tenets of their religion. As president, I would staunchly defend religious liberty in this nation and would devote the necessary federal resources to the protection of all Americans from any effort to hinder the free and full exercise of their rights. While we have differences, it is time for us to move forward together respectfully and as one people."[5]

• In November 2013, Graham voted against S.815 - the Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2013, which "Prohibits covered entities (employers, employment agencies, labor organizations, or joint labor-management committees) from engaging in employment discrimination on the basis of an individual's actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity."[6]

• In 2013, Graham said, "I believe in traditional marriage – between a man and a woman, without animosity. I don’t mind if people are able to transfer their property, visit their loved ones in hospitals, but marriage to me, I’ve stayed with the concept of traditional marriage."[7]

• Graham co-sponsored H.R.3396 - the Defense of Marriage Act, which defined marriage as "as only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife." It became law on September 21, 1996.[8]

[carmenjonze]

You enthusiastically vote for this person, then lie to yourself that you somehow support LGBTQ rights.

With "support" like that, who needs Lavender Scares and Briggs Initiatives? :problem:

GLAAD Accountability Project: Lindsey Graham - GLAAD

—10.11.20—Responds to LGBTQ voter asking about how his marriage to his husband and other LGBTQ rights will be defended, Sen. Graham defends people opposed to marriage equality as “not bigots” and “not neanderthals” and tells the voter, “I’ve tried to be tolerant.”

—10.12.20—Opens hastened confirmation hearings of Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the U.S. Supreme Court with active COVID-19 infections among Judiciary Committee members. Chairman Graham refuses to take a COVID-19 test to ensure the safety of a debate with his challenger or the safety of the confirmation hearings. Sen. Graham had pledged in 2016 that Supreme Court nominations should not be made in an election year. Millions of Americans are early voting in the 2020 election, and polls show Americans want the winner of the 2020 election to nominate the next Supreme Court justice. Chairman Graham asks Barrett how landmark rulings like Obergefell could be overturned.

—10.14.20—In day three of the Barrett hearings, attempts to link the Court’s landmark marriage equality ruling to legalizing polygamy. Chairman Graham had also attempted this question and linkage in 2015.

—06.03.20—Signs brief to U.S. Supreme Court to defend taxpayer-funded agency’s right to discriminate against qualified same-sex couples looking to become foster parents, Fulton v. City of Philadelphia.

—03.15.19—Graham did not return a reporter’s request for comment regarding whether he, as head of the Senate Judiciary Committee, would allow consideration of the Equality Act, offering LGBTQ people protection against discrimination in areas like public accommodations, employment, housing, and credit.

—06.17.15—Co-sponsored the First Amendment Defense Act, which seeks to create an exemption to nondiscrimination protections for LGBTQ people by those citing a religious-based objection to marriage equality.

—01.28.15—While questioning Loretta Lynch during her attorney general nomination hearing, Graham compared same-sex marriage to polygamy. “What legal rationale would be in play that would prohibit polygamy?” he asked. “Could you try to articulate how one could be banned under the Constitution and the other not?”

[carmenjonze]

Another homophobic whackjob you zealously support, then look right in the mirror and tell yourself you support LGBTQ rights.

GLAAD Accountability Project: Tim Scott - GLAAD

—Newsweek reports that he “considers homosexuality a morally wrong choice, like adultery. ‘We are by nature sinful,’ he said sadly. All these positions stem from what he calls ‘timeless principles.’”

—Voted against Employment Nondiscrimination Act, which would have granted basic job protections to LGBTQ people.

Tim Scott on Civil Rights - On The Issues

Government shouldn't redefine marriage
Question topic: Marriage is a union of one man and one woman. No government has the authority to alter this definition.

Scott: Agree


Sanctity of traditional marriage: one man one woman
Tim Scott believes in the sanctity of traditional marriage between a man and a woman and opposes gay marriage.


Voted NO on reauthorizing the Violence Against Women Act.


Opposes same-sex marriage.
Scott supports the PVS survey question on same-sex marriage


State definition of marriage supersedes federal gay marriage.
Scott co-sponsored State Marriage Defense Act


Respect faith-based opposition to same-sex marriage.
Scott co-sponsored respecting faith-based opposition to same-sex marriage

Congressional Summary: The First Amendment Defense Act (FADA) prohibits the federal government from taking discriminatory action against a person on the basis that such person believes or acts in accordance with a religious belief or moral conviction that:

• marriage is or should be recognized as the union of one man and one woman, or
• sexual relations are properly reserved to such a marriage.

...

• allow federal contractors, including those that provide homeless shelters or drug treatment programs, to turn away LGBT people
• permit a university to fire an unmarried teacher simply for becoming pregnant
• permit federal employees to refuse to process tax returns, visa applications, or Social Security checks for all married same-sex couples

You support these trashy misogynist, anti-LGBTQ politicians and policies with your trashy vote. You don't have to do it, but you choose violence, anyway. Just like a Good Citizen.

[carmenjonze]

Glennfs became known on RFL 1.0 for being one of the most virulent defenders of these idiotic, pointless GOP bathroom bills, which he then started claiming he no longer supports. I don't believe that, and here's why. Can't believe anything coming out of the mouth of a confederate, ever.

The Anti-Trans Bathroom Nightmare Has Its Roots in Racial Segregation - Slate

The conservative idea that civil rights protections sexually endanger women and children in public bathrooms is not new. In fact, conservative sexual thought has been in the toilet since the 1940s. During the World War II era, conservatives began employing the idea that social equality for African-Americans would lead to sexual danger for white women in bathrooms. In the decades since, conservatives used this trope to negate the civil rights claims of women and sexual minorities. Placing Houston’s rejection of HERO within the history of discrimination against racial minorities, sexual minorities, and women reveals a broader pattern: When previously marginalized groups demanded access to public accommodations, conservatives responded with toilet talk to stall these groups’ aspirations for social equality.

Since World War II, public bathrooms have figured centrally in African-American civil rights struggles for racial integration in the workplace and in schools. Integrating these spaces in the Southern United States meant doing away with Jim Crow laws that mandated, among other things, separate public bathrooms for blacks and whites. Whites defended these segregated spaces with violence. And, with varying degrees of cynicism, segregationists often interpreted demands for racial equality as black male demands for interracial sexual contact with white women. In 1941, when President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed Executive Order 8802, which prohibited “discrimination in the employment of workers in defense industries or government,” the government established the Fair Employment Practices Committee to enforce this order. Historian Eileen Boris has shown how Southern Democrats fought the FEPC, viewing it as an attempt to “saddle social equality upon Dixie,” and lead to, in the words of one senator from Georgia, “social equality and intermingling and amalgamation of the races.”

While segregationists frequently claimed racial integration would grant black men sexual access to white women, white women also emphasized that contact with black women in bathrooms would infect them with venereal diseases. White women refused to share bathrooms with black women throughout the South and also in places like Detroit, which was flooded with white and black Southern transplants during the war years. Claiming that racial integration with blacks would cause them to catch syphilis from shared toilet seats and towels in public restrooms, white women engaged in numerous labor strikes and walkouts to resist FEPC policies. Their black co-workers doubtlessly faced harassment and intimidation throughout these conflicts. As Boris notes, “the toilet and bathroom, places for the most private bodily functions, became sites of conflict; their integration starkly symbolized social equality.”

Karen is one of the country's fiercest defenders of white supremacism, famously crying about nonexistant predators. Probably because they have even more to prove than the men. :problem:

[marindem01]

You Glenn, sometimes its just a damn simple pleasure to sit back and watch Carmen serve your ass on a silver platter.

[carmenjonze]

As [Eileen] Boris notes, “the toilet and bathroom, places for the most private bodily functions, became sites of conflict; their integration starkly symbolized social equality.”

The article referenced for this information is behind a paywall unless you have academic or public library access to it. (I happen to have both.) Though denialists like Glennfs may wish to write off even his own bathroom bill support behavior to an earlier point in history, today's current bathroom discrimination bills passed by conservatives and propped up by TERFS indeed have a long history of segregationism and white supremacism. There is a direct continuity into their present-day so-called standards.

"You Wouldn't Want One of 'Em Dancing with Your Wife": Racialized Bodies on the Job in World War II" - by Eileen Boris in American Quarterly, 1998

Concepts of purity that distinguished white women from African Americans lay
behind discriminatory acts.81 White workers based moral judgments on physical
appearance; as one woman admitted, "I always thought colored people were not
clean and smelled bad and weren't as good as white people." Manuals for managers
attempted to counter notions fanned by racist southern politicians "that Negroes
have a peculiar body odor; that it is unpleasant to remain in close proximity to
them" and "that there is an extraordinarily high incidence of social disease
among Negroes." Syphilis rates were high among whites as well as blacks in areas
of "low economic status." Still some employers acted as if high black rates of
syphilis were "a well-known scientific fact."

A hospital in Oakland, California, for example, refused to hire "experienced
Negro girls" as dieticians because "Negroes couldn't pass Wassermann tests." A
New York State handbook re- minded managers that "the possibility of acquiring a
venereal disease by contact with a toilet is exceeding remote." Such manuals
also pointed out that black women and men not only cleaned public and private
toilets but care for children, prepare food, and "handle much of the linen and
make up the beds of many white Americans." A domestic's touch could be ignored
in ways that bodily closeness at the job apparently could not; private service
work reinforced racialized gender hierarchies in ways that public intimacy
undermined them.82 Despite the attempt by some managers to alleviate fears, "the
cleanliness taboo" generated resistance to using the same toilet, shower, and
locker room facilities, especially on the part of white women.83

Sometimes these resisters merely threatened to leave work to see if they could
push management to remove black women, but "had no intention of really going
through with their threat because they knew it might jeopardize their own jobs,"
as happened at a Buffalo, New York aircraft factory.84 Other times they shut
down production. Fifteen hundred United Automobile Union members walked out in
the spring of 1944 when Chevrolet Motors refused "to rehire seven woman workers
who had balked at working alongside four Negro women," who presumably would use
the same toilets. When more than half the labor force of the U.S. Rubber Company
in Detroit struck a few months before, they demanded that black women machinists
"be transferred" or the company provide separate toilets for them. In contrast,
lack of racial friction at Pullman's railroad operations may have derived from
company adherence to segregated toilets and related facilities

[carmenjonze]

You Glenn, sometimes its just a damn simple pleasure to sit back and watch Carmen serve your ass on a silver platter.

Haha this guy is so delusional he actually had the idea that hate crimes legislation was "Jim Crow" against whites. Today, he attempts to distance himself from that position, hoping that "minorities" and normal white people are the ones convicted of hate crimes, like he accuses me and GoU of so-called racism.

Like the South African government accused Jimmy Carter of "anti-White racism." viewtopic.php?p=13618#p13618

Lol all while believing the equally delusional idea that the general public is accepting of racism against whites.

This type of race paranoia is straight out of Birth of a Nation.

[carmenjonze]

Lol Glennfs sounds like Newt Gingrich calling the Jan. 6 committee a lynchmob.

Newt Gingrich says that Jan. 6 Committee is ‘basically a lynch mob’ that could go to jail if Republicans get power - BI

Oh my goodness! Don't tell me a "lynchmob" could actually go to jail, for once!?! :problem:

Hey, Newt! The committee investigating conservative white-on-white crime is not a "lynchmob." These are actual lynchmobs.

https://withoutsanctuary.org/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1DB-bDXe6o

These conservative whites constantly desecrate the memories of those their ancestors mass murdered and tried to summarily remove from American political & social life. Then people like Glennfs want to tell us that ohhh, that's all in the past; be grateful we haven't inflicted even more of this barbarity on you over the past generation. Even as they kill people for taking down some slavedriver statue.

These white cons want their Jan. 6 crimes covered up just like they want their 17th-20th century crimes covered up by banning CRT and 1619. Lol somebody posts something about a prominent gay man likely being murdered and first thing out of Glennfs's confederate mouth is IT WAS NOT A RIGHTWINGER THAT DID IT!! IT WAS NOT!!!! SO STOP SAYING THAT!!!!1!

Even though nobody's said that...

[carmenjonze]

House committee in Florida passes 'Don't Say Gay' bill - The Hill

A Florida House committee on Thursday passed a bill seeking to ban discussions of sexuality and gender identity in school classrooms, which LGBTQ+ advocates say will effectively “erase” LGBTQ+ history, culture, and students.

The Parental Rights in Education bill, also known as the “Don’t Say Gay” bill, passed Thursday in the House Education and Employment Committee largely along party lines.

“This bill is about defending the most awesome responsibility a person can have: being a parent,” Florida state Rep. Joe Harding (R), who first introduced the bill, said Thursday. “That job can only be given to you by above.”

Harding’s bill, along with its companion bill introduced Tuesday by Florida state Sen. Dennis Baxley (R), would block teachers in Florida from talking about LGBTQ+ topics that are not “age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students.”

These are the same types of people complaining that woke marxismsocialismcommunism Toni Morrison books in the school library makes white children hate themselves, or something.

Glennfs gleefully supports lawmakers who make these kinds of laws, then insists that he is pro-gay or whatever. :problem:

[carmenjonze]

Today in What God Damn Century Is This, Again...

Lesbian Sues U.S. Army and Air Force Over Boss’ Demand She Grow Her Hair and Wear Makeup - Daily Beast

Kristin M. Kingrey of the West Virginia Air National Guard says a threat her career would be jeopardized if she didn’t look “more feminine” came true when she lost out on two jobs.

For nearly 14 years, Tech. Sgt. Kristin M. Kingrey has served her country as a member of the West Virginia Air National Guard. Now Kingrey, a 37-year-old lesbian, is suing the Army and Air Force, claiming a senior male leader said she should grow her hair, wear makeup, “and ultimately appear more feminine,” or prepare to face the negative professional consequences.

Kingrey told The Daily Beast that after the remarks were made a job she had successfully applied for was suddenly withdrawn, and the Guard also refused to hire her for a position she was qualified for, “despite her satisfactory performance as a federal employee,” as her lawsuit, filed in a federal court, states.

When the comment was allegedly made, it was not the first time. “From 2016 to 2018, I was constantly being pulled into my seniors’ offices being told my hair was out of regs (non-regulation),” Kingrey told The Daily Beast. “It crossed a line into harassment, and I carried on my person a copy of our regulations in regards to female hair length because I was not breaking any rules.”

Kingrey, from Charleston, West Virginia, believes that sexism and homophobia are key parts of her case—she was signaled out as a woman, and a lesbian woman specifically. Hers comports to a stereotypical lesbian appearance, she says, and her boss wanted her appearance to be more conventionally “feminine.”

The lawsuit, filed on Nov. 23 last year, claims Kingrey was subject to “continued harassment, discrimination, and retaliation based upon her sex—including her sexual orientation and perceived gender nonconformity.”