Friday, November 16, 2007

The Opposition Continues to Express Themselves

Oh, here's a nice one, a letter to Montgomery County Council member Duchy Trachtenberg, sent the day after the Council voted unanimously to adopt the new nondiscrimination wording. Just a little something to contemplate for your Friday.
Dear Ms, Miss, Mrs, or transgendered whatever, Trachtenberg,

Your actions and those of your fellow County Council members indicate that the county name needs to change to MontGomorrah County. Your constituents don't want your sexually deviant bills, so what motivates them?

I would suggest that you are a secret "transgendered person."

In my lifetime society in the United States of America has moved further and further from the high ideals of our Founding Fathers, and closer and closer to the final decadence that brought down the Roman Empire. Led in these days by the deviant whackoes of Southern California and MontGomorrah County.

Robert N. Cadwalader

Is that right? "Whackoes?" I usually write it wackos.

[Note, the guy's phone number was on his email, I deleted it out of a sad sense of pity for him. I can't explain it.]

Re-reading this ... has existed now for almost exactly three years, within a couple of weeks of that. We didn't start out as crusaders for liberal sex ed or any kind of special political agenda. We started out as a small group of parents concerned that our county was going to be taken over by people who were incapable of reasoning, people with no appreciation for facts, for science, for the power of objectivity, reasoning, compassion.

The school district had proposed a perfectly reasonable curriculum and then all hell broke loose, as these ... wackos ... ranted about the sodomites, the deviants, the sin in our hearts that needed to be suppressed, the destruction of the family as an institution, the gay agenda.

They were organizing into a legal team, a fund-raising team, a media team, a church outreach team ... officers, agendas, publicity, and they were going to try to recall the entire school board for adopting an innocuous curriculum that addressed the issue of sexual orientation in an objective and low-key way.

I don't think we would have minded if a reasonable person had suggested that this-or-that was too much, or that something-or-other might work better in a later grade, or whatever. But their reflex was to recall the entire board. Their goal was a coup, wholesale takeover of the school district.

This letter represents the kind of talk we heard that day, December 4th, 2004, that motivated us to organize, to start this web site, to hold the forums and work with journalists and address the school board again and again. This isn't a fluke, not just some nutty guy shooting his mouth off. If you don't remain vigilant, these people will take over.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Andrea- not anon
But of course, these are not reasonable normal people. They are clearly the lunatic fringe although they claim we are. They reveal it in their writing, in their public actions and in their obsessions. How often have we seen recently that those most hateful and obsessed in areas of sexuality turn out to be acting out privately what they are screaming against in public?

November 16, 2007 8:25 AM  
Blogger Tish said...

The single nicest thing any transgender person has ever done for me was to introduce herself, shake my hand, and start a conversation. We were both sitting at one of those big tables for ten at a fundraiser dinner. She could have avoided me, she could have ignored me, she could have been formally polite, but she decided to treat me like a real person. She was the first transgender person I met, and she and her lovely wife have been my good friends for many years.

The saddest thing about all of this is knowing that the Cadwaladers and Galadoras and Espinosas will never give themselves the chance to know any transgender person as a person. Rather than respecting the inherent value of each person as a person, they will continue to see all Transgender people as transgender only. As long as they don't let themselves know any actual human beings, they can go on hating the caracatures they've created and everyone loses.

November 16, 2007 9:15 AM  
Anonymous Friend in Virginia said...

So, the County unanimously passes legislation to protect one of the most vulnerable groups in our society, and this is supposed to be contrary to the ideals of the Founding Fathers?

What planet is this guy on?

November 16, 2007 9:52 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"So, the County unanimously passes legislation to protect one of the most vulnerable groups in our society, and this is supposed to be contrary to the ideals of the Founding Fathers?"

You think that George Washington would be in favor of protecting guys who dress like girls from any type of social ostracism?

Oh yeah, I always thought he'd be way into the whole gender liberty thing. Be whatever sex you want and, if anyone doesn't like it, well... that's a hate crime!

November 16, 2007 10:08 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Except for the accusation that someone is a "secret transgender", I don't see what is so horrible about what Mr Cadwalader said. Pretending it is so, is all part of the TTF's PR strategy. Remember they were briefed on strategy by weel-known gay advocacy lunatic fringe groups when they started out.

Jimi H

Also, having once lived in Southern California myself, I think the characterization of it is misguided. Outside of West Hollywood, Southern California is a fairly conservative place.

November 16, 2007 10:17 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Andrea- not anon
So these nuts speak on behalf of God and the Founding fathers. Who knew? I bet Thomas Jefferson and the Lord are laughing out loud at the CRC clowns.

And what a proud moment for CRC- one of their supporters screaming out "Heil Hitler" at a public meeting. I'm sure Theresa or Precious can explain why that was acceptable.

November 16, 2007 10:17 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The problem with these nut cases who join organizations like PFOX, CRC, WCTU, etc. is that they love the idea of living in the 18th century and would be quite happy to take all of civilization back to that romanticized (and totally unreal) Eden in America. They cannot accept change, are intolerant of difference, many are victims of religious brain-washing, and quite a few are psychoneurotics much in need of professional therapy. Anyone as obsessed with sex as much as they are are teetering on the verge of mental collapse when their tight little worlds seemingly fall apart.They simply fear life!
The phrase "Anonymous" has used: "social ostracism" shows their very contempt for democracy with its insistence on equal rights for all citizens. How sad.

November 16, 2007 10:37 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"The phrase "Anonymous" has used: "social ostracism" shows their very contempt for democracy with its insistence on equal rights for all citizens. How sad."

What's sad is your misunderstanding of the purpose and role of government. No one is guaranteed social acceptability. If you want people to like you, it is your obligation to be likable and no one has any obligation to embrace you unless you have convinced them that you are embraceable.

November 16, 2007 10:49 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

To "Anonymous": You have misrepresented what I said (you're up to your old tricks again). I did not say anything about "social acceptance"...I pointed out one of the basic tenets of a democracy which you obviously cannot grasp or are opposed to. "Equal Rights Under the Law"...the democratic foundation of our nation.
You have hit the nail on the are really so unembraceable as to be noxious and pitiable. Go get your own Blog site where you can spew your hate and ignorance.

November 16, 2007 11:22 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Allow me to correct a mistake I made in the previous post: it should read "Equal Justice Under the Law"....I wanted to do that before the various CRC "Anonymi" jump all over it and try to prove their erudition. LOL

November 16, 2007 11:40 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"You have misrepresented what I said (you're up to your old tricks again). I did not say anything about "social acceptance"...I pointed out one of the basic tenets of a democracy which you obviously cannot grasp or are opposed to."

Well, here's what you said:

"The phrase "Anonymous" has used: "social ostracism" shows their very contempt for democracy with its insistence on equal rights for all citizens."

I don't need to add anymore. That you can't keep track of what you say is a fact that speaks for itself>

November 16, 2007 12:19 PM  
Blogger Dana Beyer, M.D. said...

Actually, Anon, I don't think you should speak for the Honorable General Washington. He was born shortly after the service of the 3rd Earl of Clarendon, Edward Hyde, who was Colonial Governor of New York and New Jersey. You have no idea what he thought of Mr. Hyde or any others, for that matter. Based on his religious beliefs he would almost certainly have thought little of you.

November 16, 2007 2:19 PM  
Blogger Dana Beyer, M.D. said...


Not liking me is not a hate crime. Not serving me in a restaurant would be an act of discrimination, not a hate crime. Assaulting me would be a hate crime.

You could use some remedial schooling.

November 16, 2007 2:24 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey Dana.
Since you know this law, is calling you a "he" now a hate crime ?

November 16, 2007 6:29 PM  
Blogger Dana Beyer, M.D. said...

Only if calling you an idiot is.

November 16, 2007 6:41 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mr./Ms/Mrs. Anonymous: Here is what I said: "The phrase "Anonymous" has used: "social ostracism" shows their very contempt for democracy with its insistence on equal rights for all citizens. How sad." Note that I was quoting you and not using the phrase as my own. You are a dunderhead!

November 16, 2007 8:39 PM  
Anonymous Joe R said...

I took it upon myself to email ROBERT CADWALADER- I suggest you all do the same - flood his inbox with emails. I have a child that is intersexed. Although not trans, I have had to educate myself about this. Coming from a conservative background that wasn't easy but I did it for my child and its made me a better man- more sensitive. Its really opened my heart and mind up. Now Im thankful God gave me my child instead of to the likes of robert or someone like him (he doesnt even live in the county). These people have no idea what its like to be so severely judged and the last group of people that its acceptable to discriminate against. I fear for my child, for being called a freak before they are called by their first name and thats just sad. Its sad that we judge because of insecurities instead of getting to know someone for who they are- especially a child. Its so unfair. I see the world in a whole new ugly light. When I see what theyre doing in Montgomery it gives me hope that maybe my child wont be so bad off. that maybe when Im not around and eventually gone either laws will protect them or other people will look out for my child. I am so angry over that post ( and people like Regins Griggs- who Ive unfortunately become familiar with) but under the anger is sadness for the tough life my child has to face because of pure ignorance which can be easily remedy but people refuse to do it.
I sincerely thank all of you for making the world better for my kid.

November 17, 2007 1:13 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey Joe

Could you tell us more about your child's situation? I wasn't clear from reading your sentence- do people call them a freak or do you fear they will? If they do, how do they know the child is "intersexed"? How else is life tough?

Just asking for a little more information to prevent people from judging "because of insecurities."

November 17, 2007 4:09 AM  
Anonymous Aunt Bea said...

Anon asked how do they know the child is "intersexed

Anon apparently has no knowledge or understanding of the condition called "intersexuality." Not everything is as black and white as Anon likes it.

From Wikipedia:

Intersexuality is the state of a person whose sex chromosomes, genitalia and/or secondary sex characteristics are determined to be neither exclusively male nor female. A person with intersex may have biological characteristics of both the male and female sexes. A medical definition of intersexuality is "conditions in which chromosomal sex is inconsistent with phenotypic sex, or in which the phenotype is not classifiable as either male or female".

Anon said Just asking for a little more information

There's a lot more information about intersexuality here:

Anon continued prevent people from judging

That's why the new health education curriculum "Respect for Difference in Human Sexuality" is so important. It will help MCPS student understand that everybody deserves respect regardless of their gender identity. It teaches that stereotyping and discrimination against minorities are unacceptable. Of course I expect CRC types will continue to opt out so they may remain ignorant and continue to feel free to judge and discriminate against others. But the vast majority of MCPS student who will be granted parental permission to take the course will help increase the level of tolerance and understanding here in the MC community.

November 17, 2007 8:59 AM  
Blogger JimK said...

I would add that if Anon had taken 10th grade sex-ed in Montgomery County, starting this semester, he/she would have known what "intersex" means.


November 17, 2007 9:03 AM  
Blogger Tish said...

Dear Joe R,

I understand your anger at Cadwalader, but rather than flooding his email (some bugs aren't worth squashing) would you please send a brief note to County Executive Leggett? Tell him how much you appreciate this action by the council, say that you see this as a positive step for your child and others who are like your child, and ask him to sign the bill when it comes across his desk.

November 17, 2007 10:35 AM  
Blogger Tish said...

I messed up the HTML syntax, so here is the email address for Ike Leggett for you to cut and paste:

November 17, 2007 10:37 AM  
Blogger Christine said...

Thanks Tish. I just sent Ike my note and encourage others to let him know how you feel. Be sure to include your MoCo address.

November 17, 2007 11:19 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"I would add that if Anon had taken 10th grade sex-ed in Montgomery County, starting this semester, he/she would have known what "intersex" means."

I already knew what intersexed means. Believe it or not, I remember learning about in a biology class in public school in the 70s.

I still have the same question for the guy.

BTW, I was a couple of feet from Leggett at a parade this morning and yelled "could you please veto that bathroom bill"? He looked puzzled for a second then made a big smile and gave me a thumbs up.

All the people around me agreed with me and starting yelling about it too. He kept smilin' and wavin'. I don't usually engage in political activity other than voting. I think I convinced him though.

November 17, 2007 2:28 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"stereotyping and discrimination against minorities are unacceptable"

Since TTF's definition of minority is anyone who feels different from the majority of people, we're all minorities. So, by definition, you can't give special protection to everyone. If you discriminate against everyone it's not discrimination. It's your special right to protection.

November 17, 2007 2:33 PM  
Anonymous Emproph said...

Anonymous said...
If you discriminate against everyone it's not discrimination. It's your special right to protection."

Wouldn’t you be discriminating against your own protection at that point?

November 17, 2007 3:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

andrea- not anon
N. anon- It wasn't Ike's thumb he was pointing up for you.

November 19, 2007 3:58 PM  
Blogger Peter said...

Here’s how the law defines “gender identity.”

“Gender identity means an individual’s actual or perceived gender, including a person’s gender-related appearance, expression, image, identity, or behavior, whether or not those gender-related characteristics differ from the characteristics customarily associated with the person’s assigned sex at birth.”

So if a person considers himself transgendered–whether or not that is clear to others–he suddenly has carte blanche to invade the privacy of women, even if his self-perceived identity is not apparent to others. His word is the first and final authority on whether he feels he should be allowed to use the women’s facilities. It is impossible for the law to determine whether he indeed considers himself a woman, or whether he might have other motives.

Concerned MoCo residents like me don't oppose this law because we hate practitioners of alternative lifestyles--we oppose it because it it removes natural protections from our wives, mothers, and sisters.

February 12, 2008 11:26 PM  
Blogger JimK said...

Peter - as it is now, a man who wants to go into the ladies room doesn't even have to claim to be transgender. He can just go in, there's no law against it. Under the new law, if a person - even a male person claiming to be transgender - goes into the ladies room to look at the women, he can be arrested.

The stuff about your wives. mothers, and sisters is pure BS.


February 13, 2008 7:23 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What "natural protections" are being removed? Where in Maryland State or Montgomery County law does it say that only females may enter ladies restrooms and only males may enter mens restrooms? And what would such a man-made law have to do with what's natural anyway? In nature, we all pee under the same unisex bush, Peter.

February 13, 2008 4:09 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home