Mini-Post: There Is A Pattern Here

Hitler did it. Mussolini did it. Mao Zedong did it. Putin is doing it. Orban is doing it. Kim Jong Un is doing it. Trump is doing it. What? He is threatening to take away a person's citizenship.

Let that sink in for a moment.

What do Rosie O’Donnell, Lula, John Brennan, and James Comey have in common?

The Poisoning of Presidential Power

Robert Reich

Jul 15, 2025

Three examples from just the last week.

On Saturday, Trump said, “Because of the fact that Rosie O’Donnell is not in the best interests of our Great Country, I am giving serious consideration to taking away her Citizenship.”

He called O’Donnell a “threat to humanity” and said she should remain in Ireland, where she moved in January after Trump won a second term.

O’Donnell responded on Instagram: “The president of the USA has always hated the fact that I see him for who he is — a criminal con man sexual abusing liar out to harm our nation to serve himself.”

A central feature of Trump’s second term is his poisoning of the power of the presidency for personal ends, such as wanting to get even with O’Donnell for having expressed negative views about him.

All the dictators did it. It is one of the traits of dictator is to quell the opposition! Not just those who Trump threaten are in fear but all others who are like her, a naturalized US citizen are worried. That is the nature of an authoritarian. Rule by fear. Not just about what Trump can do, But what his Gestapo can do.

Tyrants view educated citizens as their enemy. Slaveholders stopped the enslaved from learning to read. Nazis burned books. Dictators censor media. That’s why Trump is attacking the Dept. of Education, science, and the arts – to prevent us from learning. It's fascism.

-----------------

Robert Reich

Attack... Attack... Attack...

We survived attacks by Senator Joseph McCarthy in the 1950s,

We survived attacks by Anita Bryant in the 1970s,

We have survived all the attacks and we will survive this one by Trump but it will not be easy! Some will not make it to the other side. He has sunk his teeth in to us and it has become personal with him.

History:

President Bill Clinton in 1996 signed into law the Female Genital Mutilation, it was for a good purpose which was for the practice of female genital mutilation, particularly in immigrant communities where it was being practiced as a cultural or religious rite on girls under the age of 15.

Now Trump has weaponized the law against us. In January Trump signed another one of his EOs...

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered:

Section 1.  Policy and Purpose.  Across the country today, medical professionals are maiming and sterilizing a growing number of impressionable children under the radical and false claim that adults can change a child’s sex through a series of irreversible medical interventions.  This dangerous trend will be a stain on our Nation’s history, and it must end.

Countless children soon regret that they have been mutilated and begin to grasp the horrifying tragedy that they will never be able to conceive children of their own or nurture their children through breastfeeding.  Moreover, these vulnerable youths’ medical bills may rise throughout their lifetimes, as they are often trapped with lifelong medical complications, a losing war with their own bodies, and, tragically, sterilization.

The who thing is based on lies!

---

I had minor surgery yesterday morning so for the next couple of days the posts are all pre-written.

We Been Though This...

Yes, we have but not everyone made it through it. With healthcare for us under attack with states passing laws outlawing care for minors and some threatening adult trans people with healthcare bans. Many times medical providers can also refuse to treat us.

Back in 1995, Tyra a 24 year old trans woman was seriously injured in a car accident near Marshall Heights in D.C. When paramedics arrived, and upon learning she was transgender, withdrew and mocked her on the way to DC General Hospital. She died from her injuries!

Then there was the case of Robert Eads, a trans man who died of breast cancer that all the doctors refused to treat.

Even I write sometimes about getting through this, but we always have to remember that not everyone will break on thought to the other side.

Going Back To The Basis

There are many discussions on what influenced trans rights the most!

The is probably the first trial here in the United State involving us! And it is probably the first case of the "Gay Panic" defense... Pitts (son of James Pitts) flirted (“gallanted”) with John Gray, who was dressed in women’s clothes and assumed to be female when he found out that Gray was crossdressing he bobbed her over the head. 1696 the jury ruled in favor of Gray nullifying the Massachusetts’s cross-dressing law.

Some of the other cases that got us to where we were (I will not say "Where we are..." because we have had terrible rulings lately.).

Going back to the 70s...

In the 1973 ruling of Anonymous vs. New York the court ruled against us saying the legislature only has the right to allow us to change our gender markers and name on out birth certificates. And that lead Connecticut and other states to pass laws in our favor. The states of Texas, Utah, Arizona, Montana, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Oklahoma all allowed us to change our gender markers and name on out birth certificates. Why, because they wanted us to become productive members of society. But now because political ideology they are scrambling to change them!

In 1976 we got the right to marry in the case of M.T. v. J.T. (1976) in the New Jersey Superior Court.

The Republicans have a very short memory... for example with all their attacks on trans athletes they forgot our early case of a trans athlete. Renee Richards v. United States Tennis Association (1977) – New Jersey Superior Court ruled in Renee Richards favor allowing her to play on the women's Tennis team.

The the keystone case of Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins was heard by the Supreme Court in 1989. This is the biggie! The case that many of the other cases hinge upon. And it wasn't even a trans case but rather a case involving a dress, high heels, and make up. According to the legal website Justia...

Discrimination against an employee on the basis of sex stereotyping--that is, a person's nonconformity to social or other expectations of that person's gender--constitutes impermissible sex discrimination, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The employer bears the burden of proving that the adverse employment action would have been the same if sex discrimination had not occurred.

They told her that if she dressed a little more "womanly" and behaved a little more "womanly" she would get the promotion! The Supreme Court blog pit it this way...

(c) The District Court's finding that sex stereotyping was permitted to play a part in evaluating respondent as a candidate for partnership was not clearly erroneous. This finding is not undermined by the fact that many of the suspect comments made about respondent were made by partners who were supporters, rather than detractors. Pp. 490 U. S. 255-258.

Under that ruling... Sex stereotyping = sex discrimination under Title VII and for trans people it is definitely a case of stereotyping.

This was a really, really great influence on all of our court case. We see it referenced in the cases of:

• Smith v. City of Salem (6th Circuit, 2004)
• Schroer v. Billington (D.D.C., 2008)
• Glenn v. Brumby (11th Circuit, 2011)
• Macy v. Holder (EEOC, 2012)
• Bostock v. Clayton County (U.S. Supreme Court, 2020)

Will Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins be overturned?

In Bostock v. Clayton County, Justice Neil Gorsuch (a Trump appointee) cited Price Waterhouse to support the idea that discrimination based on gender identity is sex discrimination.

But there’s concern now that the Court might chip away at those protections—by limiting what counts as “sex discrimination,” creating religious exemptions, or narrowing what is considered “stereotyping.”

We’re not there yet, but the risk is real.

The Eye's Have It

Not "The ayes have it" but rather Eye.

This morning I am in surgery to have my cataract removed... so I will have two bionic eyes.

So all the blogs for the next couple of days have been pre-written. I might do some Mini posts but the longer articles will be prewritten. 

---

Update: 2:15 PM

The surgery went good, check-up tomorrow.

P'town!

[Editorial]

Many of you have heard of the bias incidents that happened in P'town last week, and many have said that it is hate crime, as much as I wish it was true... it isn't.

Three Charged After Homophobic Slur Incident in Provincetown

Instinct

July 10, 2025 by Eugene Sun

It was a typical summer evening in Provincetown: the breeze was salty, the vibes were high, and somewhere on Commercial Street, a drag queen was probably doing a death drop in heels. Tourists were juggling soft-serve and shopping bags. The soundtrack? Donna Summer, obviously. Then—like a record scratch you didn’t ask for—a car tore through town, and suddenly the air was filled with slurs, air horns, and a whole lot of ugliness.

[...]

The ringleaders (allegedly) are Ryan Mahimtura of Framingham, Henry Ward of Hudson, and an unnamed minor also from Hudson. All three are facing two counts of disorderly conduct, and according to Provincetown police, that may just be the start.

Well I doubt very much that they will be charged with a hate crime.

Why?

Because no threats were made and the courts have ruled in the past that all that crap is covered by the First Amendment. No matter how vile, if they don't make threats of violence or actual physical violence then I don't think it is not going to be a hate crime. However, maybe how the air horn was used could have a factor in the case, I would think like if they held it near an ear that might cause injury.

[/Editorial]

The New Pope!

With the new Pope coming from America he brings with him some interesting ideas!

Pope Leo names LGBTQ+ inclusion champion Oregon bishop

The National Catholic Reporter

By Aleja Hertzler-McCain

July 11, 2025

Bishop-designate Thomas Hennen was appointed by Pope Leo XIV to lead the Diocese of Baker, Oregon, on July 10. At age 47, Hennen will be the youngest bishop leading a U.S. diocese.

Hennen's ministry to LGBTQ+ people has seen mixed reactions about his pastoral approach.

[...]

Bishop-designate Thomas Hennen was appointed by Pope Leo XIV to lead the Diocese of Baker, Oregon, on July 10. At age 47, Hennen will be the youngest bishop leading a U.S. diocese.

Hennen's ministry to LGBTQ+ people has seen mixed reactions about his pastoral approach.

Hmm... very interesting!

But some voices on both the left and the right have claimed Hennen's bishop appointment as a win for greater LGBTQ+ inclusion in the church, particularly because of his participation on a Davenport diocesan committee that in 2023 released guidelines for pastoral issues surrounding "sexual and gender minorities," which were praised by some LGBTQ+ Catholics and advocates.

And us?

"Our transgender siblings should be treated with respect, compassion and sensitivity," Hennen said in an article in the diocesan newspaper. "Are there some appropriate accommodations that we could make as a Church that neither 'sell out' on our beliefs nor slam the door in the face of transgender persons? I think there may be."

Meanwhile the conservative Bishops don't like this one bit...

Bishop Joseph Strickland — who was removed as leader of the Diocese of Tyler, Texas, by Pope Francis, after Strickland made accusations against the pope and allegedly mismanaged the diocese — reacted to Hennen's appointment on X, saying that Leo was "doubling down" on Francis' promotion of "the Lavender Mafia — a clandestine network within the Church hierarchy that protects and advances a homosexual ideology while masquerading under the banner of compassion."

I think that this new pope bears watching, time will tell! To see if it is all lip service? To see how he handles the conservative Bishops? And to see how he treat us trans people, how supportive of us he is.

New Ways Ministry writes,

Since the beginning of Pope Leo XIV’s papacy, very little has been known about the pope’s approach to LGBTQ+ issues. However, Leo’s latest episcopal  appointment may provide insight into the pontiff’s leanings on LGBTQ+ pastoral care.

[...]

Hennen’s LGBTQ+ record includes participation at a 2023 diocesan assembly on LGBTQ+ ministry. At the meeting, Hennan alluded to his work with the apostolate Courage, sharing how that collaboration was his first real pastoral exposure to LGBTQ+ people. Courage is an apostolate that has as one of its goals  promoting celibacy  for gay and lesbian Catholics. This ministry is controversial, with many Catholics criticizing its narrow approach. Dignity/Detroit executive director Frank D’Amore compared the group to an “insulting” 12-step program, while former Irish Prime Minister Mary McAleese called Courage “Machiavellian, dangerous and deliberately specious”. 

Discussing his work with Courage, Hennen shared that he was initially afraid of stigma and unsure how he would relate to a group made up primarily of gay men. But after meeting the attendees, Hennan learned that “I am not very different from these people. I am very much like these people.” Hennan added that he was “amazed” and “edified” by their faith. In his remarks, Hennan used the acronym “LGBTQ+” as well as the term“same-sex attraction,” often seen by gay/lesbian people as a belittling term.

And trans people? I see a lot about gay men, but how does that care over to us?

At the time they were issued Brennan explained to the Davenport diocese’s newspaper, The Catholic Messenger, that the process of listening to transgender people transformed the entire endeavor:

“The more we talked about it and met with people who are transgender or whose loved ones are transgender, we came to understand them a little better and how they were feeling. It was very humanizing. Our approach to this issue has evolved. We’re probably leaning toward developing a statement rather than a policy.” 

Interestingly, those comments align with the bishop-elect’s description of his time with Courage, where personal encounters with LGBTQ+ people released him from pre-conceived notions and defensive stances.

I just don't know, he seems open to us but what make me wonder is "Courage is an apostolate that has as one of its goals  promoting celibacy  for gay and lesbian Catholics.' So are we supposed to keep our legs crossed and stay in the closet?