83 thoughts on “Hands Across The Aisle Press Conference

  1. Our army is rising! Excellent! Let’s keep rising, sisters! Soon, we will have the numbers to go to war against men who seek to erase us!

  2. I’m at 14:34 – wildly impressed. Ok, gotta finish. Thank you, Gallus Mag, thank you, incredible women everywhere. I appreciate you.

  3. I’ve been watching the development of this odd couple for some time now. (Conservative + radfem–and how is it radical to believe in biology? Oh well.) Let’s see, where was I? I’ve been concerned about this developing partnership for some time now. It’s true that the enemy of my enemy is my friend, but it’s also true that in these kinds of coalitions, one side usually is co-opted by the other.
    Andrea Dworkin made some piquant observations about conservation women, and I doubt their nature has changed since she made those observations. Fingers crossed that the co-opting goes the right … er, the left … way. Because mark me, co-opting is going to happen.

    1. Andrea Dworkin’s observations about conservative women in Right Wing Women were not, as you seem to be suggesting, negative observations about that might make it seem as if working with them is dangerous or useless. As I remember it Dworkin showed very clearly how conservative women are reacting rationally to the double-bind situation that is being female under patriarchy.
      It’s been a while since I read Dworkin’s RWW (years), so if I’m wrong correct me.
      I don’t feel that co-optation is much of a danger between groups who are so ideologically far from each other as radfems and Christian women are. Co-optation, imho, is much more likely when working with groups who are “closer” on the ideologicaly spectrum, like liberal feminists and radfems.
      That’s just my opinion, of course, but do you disagree? I’ve seen endless *potential* radical feminists turned into funfems instead. I’ve not yet met many Christian women with right-wing politics who I felt were on the path to radical feminism but turned away at the last second by Christ and authoritarianism.

      1. Co-optation, imho, is much more likely when working with groups who are “closer” on the ideologicaly spectrum, like liberal feminists and radfems.

        REALLY impt point re co-optation. Plus, the WoLF members strike me as particularly savvy women. And differences are emphasized at the outset. So I think this could be a useful development.
        Alliances must be formed to achieve anything, especially when your group is lacking in material resources. And it has been successfully done on other issues recently – such as right and left wingers working together to resist the Keystone pipeline and to resist corporate control of local water in some towns. So I think this could be a useful and positive development.

      2. I think it depends a lot on the nature of the connection between conservative and radical women. I would trust mutual support over any political alignments or coalitions, but sometimes the latter are necessary to facilitate and exact legislative changes.
        To me, this particular panel was effective because it was clearly framed. It did what it set out to do because it set boundaries and stayed within them. And since the panel was all women (the male moderator did no more than moderate) there was almost no question of it exceeding the bounds of propriety. In other words, everyone stayed on point. And, I’m sure that the message intended by this colloquium, was effectively delivered.
        I do agree with Gerda that the co-optation and disassociation are more likely to occur with similars than with distinctly differently aligned groups. However, on another plane, there is also this sticky question of funding. There’s not only the question of who’s backing the radical feminist, but who’s backing the conservative panel she agrees to participate in. While obviously, you cannot be too pure about this–how many bucks is involved in a setting up a panel?–it can eventually become a controlling mechanism.

      3. I won’t disagree. I’ll just say I hope you’re right. I will also point out that, competing ideologies aside, people who work together tend to adapt to one another, and that includes adapting to one another’s patterns of thought and behavior. I cite this as a simple example of human nature. Again, my hope is that radfems will be careful of this, and that any adaptation will go the correct (not right) way.
        Heritage Foundation and other conservative types reading this, please ignore. All is well. Tralala.

    2. I don’t know that you can paint all conservative women with the same brush. Although of course I am left leaning, I’m too horrified by both sides to want to be a part of either these days. You can imagine what you’d be getting lumped into if your comment was reversed, and I doubt you’d agree with the characterization you’d get as a woman on the left. The left’s new religion is identity politics, remember…

    3. Indeed “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” could just as easily be applied in reverse. Conservatives who don’t think men can become women are no less our enemies than conservatives who do.

      1. On some level this is correct. However, “conservatives who don’t think men can become women” are not trying to get into my space and redefine biology.

    1. From one of the comments:
      “It’s time the bully start facing consequences.”
      Holy shit. Being bullied is not justification for murder, nor attempted murder. The article doesn’t even provide any evidence that the shooter was bullied, beyond the say-so of the would-be-murderer and vague suggestions that their friends and family were sad about it. It terrifies me that these sorts of incidents are going to become more common, and the media will report it with, “well, she(it’ll likely be a she) called the transwoman a male, so she had it coming.”
      When ‘normal’ men shoot up businesses and schools, we say they’re mentally ill. Or Muslim. When transwomen do it, people need to learn to be nicer to them? What the fuck.

  4. That was awesome. There was one point when a parent was asking how conservative parents can navigate having a gender non conforming child where I was hoping they would say something about not showing homophobia to your (likely gay or lesbian) child, but I imagine they were being purposefully vague to keep the focus on this topic and not raise other issues. That focus is what really gave me the impression that these are true allies.
    The progressive narrative today has never been so divisive and unless you count philanthrocapitalism, it completely avoids discussion of class, which should unite people of all races and sexes. It’s pushing an agenda that knows that more division = less resistance. Hence why the shunning of people with different opinions or people who ask questions has become so commonplace. A state where even if you know 2 + 2 doesn’t equal 5, you’ll be too terrified to speak up lest they make an example of you. In this sense it is so, so important to be able to sit unashamed with people who have different beliefs. I see all of them as better people for it.
    Miriam, my heart is full of admiration for you, because I know you comment here, there’s a chance you could read this so it cannot be stated enough what an awesome role model I think you are for all women. You are badass and don’t take shit, a one-woman antidote to female socialization. 💜💜💜

  5. Thank you for posting this, Gallus. Here is a link to the Hands Across the Aisle website:
    And FB page:
    If I hadn’t spent an inordinate amount of time reading Gender Trender last summer, I never would have realized the gravity of the trans issue and I never would have joined this coalition. As a Catholic (I don’t really fit the conservative box), I may disagree with radical feminists on a variety of issues, but I’m just as passionate about defending women and children from the trans movement. I care about anyone and everyone who is hurt by the trans issue and I welcome all to join the fight. I hope our coalition will get some good attention and give us the opportunity to bring trans-critical rhetoric into the mainstream.

    1. I’m curious if reading GenderTrender had any effect on your thinking about gender itself beyond the political and social impact of the trans movement in particular? I don’t mean to single you out or put you on the spot, so feel free not to answer if you’d prefer not.

      1. I’m glad to answer as myself, not as the mouthpiece for Hands Across the Aisle. Reading GenderTrender absolutely had an effect on my thinking on gender. Listen, before 2015 I really didn’t ponder the question, “What makes you a woman?” I just was one. End of story. But after watching the trans cult burn down my kids school, I figured I’d better give sex and gender the philosophical treatment. I discovered a lot of overlap between radical feminism and a Christian (specifically Catholic) view of women: we agree that women are adult human females and that our female sex is a material reality, not a subjective feeling; we agree that women have suffered and still do suffer in myriad ways due to the very fact that we are women and that legal protections ought to recognize the specific vulnerabilities women have; we agree that women are physically different from men and have needs that can’t be met unless this fact is recognized; we agree that is sexist to deny the reality of the biological differences between men and women. Personally, I support many political causes that align with feminist activism: sexual-harassment laws, equal pay, paid maternity leave, and child care, for example. I also believe pornography is deeply harmful to women (and men), and that prostitution exploits women and is not “sex work”.
        On gender, we agree that what we do doesn’t make us who we are, i.e. driving a semi doesn’t make me a man, it makes me a female semi-truck driver. And, we agree that there is no such thing as a sex change; it’s a lie that makeup, surgery and hormones can recreate one’s body as the opposite sex.
        Per your comment below, you’re completely right that the coalition members disagree on abortion and same-sex marriage and that our focus is limited to the harm that gender identity protections cause to women. But our limited focus is the cement of the coalition and there is no way we could ever pool our resources on this issue without setting aside our differences. To quote Natasha Vargas-Cooper: “If political movements are to be viable, they must be disciplined and narrow in their objectives…Exclusion is the price of militancy and often the root of its success.” Further, collaboration within our group doesn’t necessarily = compromise. We are all fully aware of our disagreements and we’re OK with that. We can involve ourselves in all the activism we want for those other issues.
        Hands Across the Aisle would like to see an end to protections based on gender identity and a return to biological sex as the legal determinant of what man and woman are. This is a political goal. Culturally, though, our goal is to make space for voices that are critical of redefining sex as gender identity. As of right now there is practically nowhere that women on the left can speak out, and I think that’s a ridiculous injustice. And, on the right, almost no one knows that radical feminists have long made well-reasoned arguments against gender identity; I’d like for that to be heard as well.

      2. This is actually a response to biological female below. Could not find a place to nest the reply.
        “Culturally, though, our goal is to make space for voices that are critical of redefining sex as gender identity.”
        Is it? That is not what I’d have assumed from your allegiance to other, larger and more powerful, organizations. Roman Catholic Church, I’m lookin’ at you.
        But I’ll take your word that that is the goal of your particular group. As others have pointed out, alliances are often necessary to get anything done.
        The proof’s in the pudding, eh?

  6. This was excellent. Thank you for posting this web panel! I thought it one of the most thoughtful and respect filled discussions I have heard in years. Just to talk about Dworkin and “Right Wing Women,” — I believe it was written in the late 1980s. Dworkin’s genius was in centering patriarchy and how all women have to navigate that. Heterosexual women navigate patriarchy in how they deal with men. The sexual revolution was pretty much men getting sexual access to women all the time, and I’d say Robin Morgan’s “Good bye to all that” deals with left wing men brilliantly. What is central is that het women try to get the best deal in patriarchy, so being married to a “publicly solid” conservative Christian man, who take support of family seriously, is attractive.
    In terms of lesbian feminism, it is clear that Miriam was very blunt about it. I liked the way she said the word LESBIAN, recovering from calling herself gay and then getting it. I don’t think there is much chance of co-optation. That really does come from withing similar groups. Even most lesbians get conned to abandon sisterhood for gay male causes, they falsely believe that most gay men actually support lesbian spaces, they don’t. I have seen it go both ways.

  7. The thing is, let’s get back to sisterhood. The panel agrees that it will focus on the protection of ALL women and girls, that male violence is the issue the trans need to deal with. They clearly state that they don’t agree on other issues, so why waste time with that? It is creative to reach across the isle, so to speak, it is powerful when all women connect and really talk and listen.
    The male moderator even got the fact that men were asking most of the questions, he was astute enough to actually notice this, and Miriam thanked him for paying attention. This is nuanced conversation.

  8. I give right wing women a hell of a lot more credit than left wingers do. I find conversations with right wing women very productive, real, powerful and interesting. Obviously the left has sold out lesbians long ago, and the trans billionaires fund the gender clinics— didn’t know that until a woman on the panel mentioned how the 30 clinics got their money. Bruce Gender is a right wing man, who actually opposed same sex marriage AND supported Trump. But hey the trans…. WoLF women are very saavy, I trust them to get it, and they are one of the few groups trying to actually GROW radical feminism once again.

  9. There is so much to think about, but this panel gave me real hope, I felt so energized by the sincerity of the panelists. I’m tried of the GBT taking me for granted, I’m pretty fed up with how they’ve treated lesbian feminist spaces and culture for years, and I’m done with them. I am looking to women’s solidarity fueled by the women’s marches worldwide THAT was powerful. All mothers want to protect their daughters from sexual predictors, women survivors know exactly how these men operate and I’m so sick of male to trans threatening them, erasing their concerns, and not taking anything women say about rights to privacy, personal security, and protection from MEN seriously. It’s just too bad, but men cannot become women, and if they try to force their way into locker rooms or spas or the YWCA changing room, that should ring real alarm bells– but the left doesn’t really give a damn, the GBT lies or doesn’t even think about the impact of these horrifying gender laws. And North Carolina and the bathroom bill got addressed quite well.

    1. Near as I can tell (and do correct me if I am wrong) the right wing women on the panel, and the heritage foundation which provided the platform, would like to see women forced to gestate and birth the offspring of the men who choose to rape them. They would like to see Miriam and her partner denied Social Security benefits because they are a homosexual couple. They recognize no distinction between males who would like to take over a female slot on a women’s league and a girl who aspires to play football. This is because they lack a political analysis of the violent sex-based hierarchy of male domination of females and the cultural rituals (gender) which support and perpetuate and normalize it.
      They object to the legalization of male voyeurism and indecent exposure via Gender Identity statutes which erase the female sex as a legal category worthy of protections (thank goodness!) but not if those protections carry over to equality (in marriage, for example) or sovereignty over one’s own body (reproductive autonomy).
      This coalition is therefore incredibly limited, to the task of objecting to the erasure of sex as a legal status solely in relation to the nebulous and subjective transgender Gender Identity doctrine.

      1. Thank you for reminding everyone of how the right wing hates women.
        Of course, both the Left and Right wing do, but the right wing are primarily fascists who do want women subservient to men on every level. They are on a continuum with the KKK and nazi party. Otherwise, they would be something other than right wing.
        The Left wing is another kind of problem, but mostly supports Lesbian right to exist and doesn’t call for us to be incarcerated, converted, or killed.
        The key is to not fully trust any group allied with men, and that includes WoLF, which plagiarized Lesbian Feminist history (from their logo to taking the classic Women’s Liberation Front name) and which many of us believe is a recruiting front to get women to eventually join male-dominated Deep Green Resistance. (Radical Lesbian Feminist friends who tried to be in WoLF report that the DGR hierarchy has ultimate say.) I also was not thrilled with their being primarily het women who went to the last MichFest to recruit.
        But of course tenuous alliances against the trans cult could be helpful as long as no one is deluded into thinking the right wing is ever trustworthy.

      2. These are the very people who worked to turn corporations into people, elected men who are now gutting labor laws, consumer protections, attack the environment and our educational system, much less every protection females have for self-determination. Once they get total control of the Supreme Court they will keep decency down for 40 years.
        Title IX will not survive in its current form if conservatives have their way. Betsy DeVoss will work to gut Title IX so public moneys can be funneled to her Jesus schools with no equal access to resources for girls.
        Normalizing these people gives cover to the REAL targets, female legal protection and access to our tax dollars for their own businesses. This isn’t “sisterhood” these women work for the men, totally, 100%, without exception, and those men hate all of us unless we are pregnant with their white offspring and serving coffee.
        I am not anti dialogue, but normalizing the right wing will never, as in ever, ever times infinity, work in our favor. They lie. That is how they operate.

      3. I must civilly disagree with your statement: ” This coalition is therefore incredibly limited, to the task of objecting to the erasure of sex as a legal status solely in relation to the nebulous and subjective transgender Gender Identity doctrine.” We are fighting for a great deal more than that; we are fighting to keep men out of women’s shelters, women’s sections of homeless shelters, prisons, jails. We are fighting the erasure of women and women’s history–and so much more. It isn’t just about sex as a legal status–or bathrooms. Thank you.

        1. Everything you’ve listed falls under the erasure of women and replacement with Gender Identity doctrine. That is what this coalition is limited to. Because the women on the right support the rights of women and girls not to be imposed on in women’s spaces/legal status by males using Gender Identity doctrine, but they do not support the rights for example of women to choose a female spouse or the rights of women to decide whether they would like to have children or not.

      4. Now how on earth could you possibly have discerned all that from our discussion on the panel? Goodness! We are trying here, sisters. Maybe some day we can have a nuanced discussion about all you just assumed, and I hope some day we will. But I’ve gotta say, it’s at least mildly discouraging to know you’ve just put your neck on a chopping block on behalf of women who are sitting here criticizing you for opinions you’ve never professed. I promise, we’re not all monsters or idiots. We really do care about women! Work with us. We want to help! Peace and safety to every woman here. <3

        1. I was speaking about the political divide between right wing and left wing women in general terms, Kaeley. Sorry if that seemed personalized, perhaps I should have been more clear. My comments were an attempt to clarify what I meant regarding the limited (or if one prefers, focused) nature of this “alliance” – in contrast to the views of some that Radical Feminism is swinging towards the right.
          I have no idea what your personal specific views are towards, say, taxation inequality for elderly homosexual couples, or abortion rights, or anything else beyond the damaging impact on all women and girls of Gender Identity doctrine which I agree is a nonpartisan issue. And a critically important one. It’s a bit beyond the pale to suggest I implied that you or any other woman was a monster or an idiot. Seems a tad manipulative to re-frame my comments in that way. If I was a cynical person I might think that was an attempt to deflect from genuine concerns which you don’t care to address or respond to, by creating a diversion and putting me on the defensive by personalizing the discussion with an emotional appeal. 😉
          Unlike yourself, I do not find this to be discouraging because I am clear on the limited parameters of this non-partisan alliance and have no further expectation- because of the reasons already outlined in my comments.

      5. Sorry Gallas Mag I know this is not a political forum per se, so if you scrub this I understand.
        As a het married women with only wanted and completed pregnancies, I watched this shit for decades, I am way way beyond nuance.
        The radfems in here (I have learned a lot from you and thank you) want to maintain female sex definition so we can maintain personal space and control over ourselves, to liberate us.
        The right wing wants to increase female sex definition to create sex-defined laws specifically targeted at women to control our pregnancies. Moreover, women are used by right wing men who want economic advantages over everyone else, (including fouling the planet), as bait to get the misogynist pregnancy-controllers out to vote.
        I don’t think you CAN separate out abortion and body autonomy from this, the right of females to define and control their spaces and bodies is at the very heart of this. Decades of stealing time and treasure out of the female economy as we have to fight for our body autonomy over and over and over again, is not only personal, it is deeply anti-female.
        I deeply resent the right wing collectively working to stick their holier than thou noses right between the legs of all females, and use the State and Federal governments to do it. Holier than thou noses are not invited nor welcome between women’s legs, and yet the right wing feels not only welcome, but IMPELLED to stick them there. The entire premise is always religious; our pregnancies are functions of a male god, not our bodies, which is the ultimate anti-female position. The goal is more practical, economic control at our expense.
        Again, I hope you have fruitful dialogues but I am not optimistic that ultimately, right wing women will not simply demand that all of us pretend their positions are reasonable and once again, we are pretending for the needs of men.

        1. Re: “Sorry Gallas Mag I know this is not a political forum per se, so if you scrub this I understand.”
          Thanks for being so considerate. I try to keep threads (gently) on topic, and not veer into topical political discussion that readers can basically find anywhere. However, this thread is specifically addressing the prospect of an alliance between left wing and right wing women to counter harmful Gender Identity doctrine, and your comments are perfectly on point. Thank you for sharing them.

      6. That’s an important and sobering reminder, Gallus. For me in the UK, it’s easy to forget or fail to fully grasp just how incredibly far right US conservatives get.
        Do you though, have any more like ours over there, especially the more moderate ones? I might still call them all Tory bastards on principle, but they’d seem more potentially workable with. The question of abortion rights is generally not a discussion that even needs having here in England. It seems as though the stereotypical far right US conservative is in fact pretty representative or they’d never have elected Trump (who appears to horrify much of our right wing as well as the left), but maybe NACALT? It’s easy for more moderate voices to get drowned out when the discourse has become so extremely towards the far right.
        I’m still sceptical on the idea of an alliance but did not have confidence in WoLF anyway, and accept the limited scope and how that’s being made clear at least. It’s just the potential for it to backfire, and the potential for that to particularly badly effect lesbian women, but that often happens anyway no matter what women do. : /
        What strikes me is the amazing ability of right wingers to suddenly ‘get it’ when they actually want to. I’m sure some of us have ended up trying to explain feminist issues to them and found them almost always wilfully obtuse and it being like trying to nail jelly to the wall. Of course those willing to take part in such an alliance in the first place may well be more open-minded, but it isn’t just those on the right involved in this specific alliance who’ve maintained a surprising amount of clarity and incorporated feminist analysis on the transgender issue.

      7. “They recognize no distinction between males who would like to take over a female slot on a women’s league and a girl who aspires to play football.”
        This is really a stretch. This is the Heritage Foundation, not the Quiverfull movement. Even my father’s conservative Christian wife, who hated other women generally, had a degree in physical education, was quite athletic herself, and fully supported women’s sports.
        Conservatives who oppose women’s rights on that level are relatively fringe in the conservative coalition. Most of the conservative attacks on Title IX are on the basis of opposing publicly funded education and having the federal government interfere in higher education policy, not on the fundamental concept of women’s education or sports; although the fringe elements are happy to see those attacks, regardless of the reasons behind them.
        I have little doubt that relatively mainstream conservatives who oppose the annihilation of women’s rights by the trans movement (and not all of them do, some protect M2Ts as men; weird, pathetic men, but still men) are mainly following the model of women as private, rather than public, property. They seek to protect the girls and women under their care (the good girls who don’t deserve having strangers’ penises waved in their faces) from the intrusion of men who behave like men.

        1. “This is really a stretch. This is the Heritage Foundation, not the Quiverfull movement. Even my father’s conservative Christian wife, who hated other women generally, had a degree in physical education, was quite athletic herself, and fully supported women’s sports.”
          I’m talking about the failure to draw a distinction based on sex. The idea that a male taking a slot on a female sports team, preventing a girl from competing, is equivalent to a female who qualifies to compete on a male team. That women encountering a male using a female restroom or locker room is equivalent to the experience men have when a female enters the male’s. The idea that Gavin Grimm is harming males by pissing wherever she wants, as opposed to some penis-haver creeping girls out when they’re trying to change a tampon. The idea that a woman is a potential threat to men in a changing room in the men’s department. Etc.
          Women and girls don’t harm males by utilizing male spaces. They may harm themselves (potential for harm from males) but there is no equivalence. Right wingers don’t make this distinction politically.

      8. Correction: the Texas GOP “bathroom bill” does make this distinction. Keeps males out of female accommodations but does not regulate male ones. This should become the standard for all related matters.

      9. GallusMag, I apologize. I broke my own rule and neglected to give your remarks the benefit of the doubt when I took them personally. No manipulation here- just a raw response to admittedly hurt feelings, which, as I can see now, were premature.
        Thank you for your clarifying comments. I love this site and refer to it often. Thank you for all you do for women. Its substantial and inspiring. ❤

  10. This alliance is just temporary. Radfems and conservatives align with the dictionary itself on the topic of sex being a physical thing which cannot be changed or arbitrarily oriented into through sheer force of will. This alliance will quickly fall apart when the question of gender comes about, though.
    Conservatives tend to have a more biological notion of gender — not only believing that it’s linked to sex, but that it comes about only in the two pre-established flavors of “man” and “woman.” Radfems tend to believe that some of gender is biologically-determined (i.e. male propensity towards violence, female propensity towards collaboration, etc.), but that the rest of it (i.e. liking certain colors, sports, taking certain household roles, being the bread-winner or not, etc.) is entirely a matter of individual personality and is not divided on the basis of sex.
    Don’t get me wrong, it’s nice to have an alliance in such illogical times. But, it’s on such a small topic, that it would seem important to stay fixed on that topic…else these allies would become “the other side” in the blink of an eye.

    1. Small topic? You do understand that women are 50.6% of the population and that these inclusion laws impact all of us in one way or another. . .Have you thought about the fact that NOW–any man who self-identifies as a woman can get into women’s shelters, the women’s section of homeless, shelters, women’s jails and prisons. It isn’t at all about “bathrooms. It IS about male violence and the move to erase women. Please–think again, my Sister.

      1. I didn’t say insignificant. I didn’t say insubstantial. I said small. Small meaning that the size of this topic is small compared to our entire respective ideologies. Small meaning that as soon as the topic of conversation changes, we may not have them as allies anymore, and they may be our enemies instead. Not small as in it’s unimportant.
        I’m really sick of getting responses like this in feminist communities, picking apart the things I have to say. You really can’t tell who your allies are, can you? I’m absolutely against having males in female restrooms. I’m absolutely for women being given women-only spaces. I’m absolutely against people changing superficial aspects of their biology and then claiming to be the opposite sex when they don’t fit the dictionary definition of it. I’m against people trying to erase lesbians and gay men by calling them transphobes and trying to guilt them into heterosexual sex with trans persons. But, I can also see that having an ally that’s only an ally on a certain topic can be difficult both to maintain and to deal with the aftermath of, should things go south. It’s a very enemy-of-my-enemy-is-my-friend situation, and that’s not to be taken lightly. I appreciate that they’re allies, I appreciate that anyone has sense at this point in time — even in the smallest of ways. But, I also see that it’s a very delicate situation that warrants caution. After all, trans people started out claiming to be allies of the LGBQ population, too, didn’t they? And, look what’s happened? Look at all the anti-homosexual sentiment, look at all the pressure being put on masculine lesbians and feminine gay men to become trans. They were Trojan horses. The last thing I want is for that to happen again. So, we need to keep our eyes open. That is all that I was saying.

      2. I think a very important thing is that it’s not just spaces where women congregate socially, like having a meeting of a group focused on women’s political issues or a quilting club. The spaces being targeted are places where women are uniquely vulnerable, being partly or fully unclothed, and often in confined spaces, in restrooms, showers & locker rooms, or unconscious, at domestic violence and homeless shelters, that makes the issue of letting any man who announces a “woman” identity so dangerous.

  11. What an excellent panel of outstanding women. Thank you all. And, thank you, GallusMag for posting this video.
    “Inquiring front holes want to know.” BwaHahahah!
    Miriam Ben-Sholom, well, words fail. I absolutely love you, thank you and admire your wit and your grit.

    1. That was one of my favorite parts, though what was even better was a discussion we had at a party after the event when it dawned on us that it’s not even really actually the front hole; it’s the middle one. Real woman would probably get that right.

  12. In all honesty, I don’t know what to say. The Heritage Foundation makes me cringe. I’m a lifelong Green/Democrat/Independent who never voted for a Republican in my life. Sometimes I get physically ill just watching Donald Trump on television. I’m an environmentalist, and Bernie and Jill Stein supporters are my friends. I’m also anti-war, and have participated in many anti-war rallies. In fact, I was out on the street in 2003 protesting Bush’s illegal and immoral war in Iraq. I did watch the entire video, and all the women were so direct and honest. They all had horrifying personal stories to tell about the harm caused by gender identity laws and the erasure of women as a distinct class of persons. Miriam ben Shalom’s speech was especially touching, and the way she was treated by trans activists was a disgrace. Miriam is one of countless lesbians who have been silenced, harassed, and targeted by trans activists. It’s kind of strange to me because if we get rid of the horrid Heritage Foundation banner in the background, it would be just a group of women from different political backgrounds speaking honestly about their lives. Take away the Heritage Foundation banner, and just listen carefully to what each woman says. It’s not conservative or liberal in that it transcends rigid dogmatic left versus right ideology. There are some truths that women know deep down in our souls, and it goes beyond partisan politics to something much deeper. Violence against women is real, and it’s not a liberal versus conservative issue. It’s utterly disgraceful how trans activists attack female survivors of sexual assault. There are far more females with PTSD than males claiming “gender identity”, but these women have been shamed, silenced, and told that they are transphobic bigots.
    I have to hand it to the Heritage Foundation. When Miriam said she was a lesbian, no one in the audience gasped and ran screaming and running from the room. I’ll give them that, and they seemed respectful of Miriam and Mary Lou Singleton.
    This is the problem. That damn Heritage Foundation banner in the background is stuck in my mind. I wish I could just rip it down and let the women speak. As I’m listening to all these women speak from their heart, I catch myself glancing at the banner in the background, and I think to myself, “Wait, I freaking hate the Heritage Foundation”. I mean I freaking hate them. I feel as if I’m being tugged back and forth with a mixture of emotions. Then, I listen to the women, and I know that what they are saying can’t be easily defined as purely left versus right. This is a group of women speaking truth to power.
    The Heritage Foundation is dead wrong on:
    *Environmental issues including Trump’s atrocious pick to head the Environmental Protection Agency, Scott Pruitt.
    Scott Pruitt sued the EPA on behalf of corporations that pollute the air and water, and then Trump picks him to head the EPA. I think not, and environmentalists know where Pruitt is coming from. The Heritage Foundation has a history of siding with coal and oil companies, routinely discredits environmentalists, and denies the science behind climate change.
    * Abortion rights
    I’ve always been pro-choice, and conservative think tanks like the Heritage Foundation have a history of attacking reproductive rights including access to safe and legal abortion.
    * Women’s equality overall
    * Marriage equality for gay men and lesbians
    As much as I hate the Heritage Foundation, the slaughter of a lesbian family last November in Oakland, California was the final straw for me. After a transwoman was charged with shooting and stabbing a lesbian couple and their adopted son, and not one useless trans run LGBT organization would cover the story, I stopped pretending that trans activists care about lesbians. There was a complete black out at every major LGBTQI (the “L” is tolerated as long as they STFU and do as they are told). I doubt that even the most homophobic misogynist at the Heritage Foundation would go as far as slaughtering a lesbian family and trying to burn down their house. The lesbian phobic “Cotton Ceiling” and all the terrifying “TERF” death threats were bad enough. Now, transwomen slaughter lesbian families, and no trans/queer run LGBTQIA group will cover the story. A lot of sources say that Rivers was involved in anti-lesbian activity at Michigan Women’s Music Festival, yet no one on the left, and not one LGBTQIA group will dare say it was a hate motivated crime. After years of horrific “TERF” death threats as well as death and rape threats directed towards lesbians, no one on the left dares say hate crime. In states like California, when male rapists and murderers whine about their gender identity, they get taxpayer funded hormones, and are sent to women’s jails and prisons. Many, if not most, MTFs are heterosexual, and they hate on lesbians and women on an entirely different level. Lesbians have received so much unbelievable shit from trans/queer that I couldn’t post it all here.
    Since half the panel of women is liberal to moderate, why won’t left leaning organizations let these women speak? I don’t think the two conservative women on the panel would mind that much. It’s sad when the silencing of women’s voices is coming mostly from the left. Some left leaning writers like Robert Jensen and the good folks at Counterpunch have been brave enough to call it as they see it. These are traditional liberal types that are smart enough to see through neoliberal postmodern bullshit and how it harms women.
    Why do women have to kowtow to either the left or right when it sure appears that we are being screwed by both gender identity pro porn postmodern neoliberalism and the conservative Heritage Foundation?
    I believe that the majority of women in the middle don’t fully embrace everything related to gender identity ideology. Women are conditioned to put the interests of others above our own interests, and trans activists have done an excellent job of deploying often brutal and intimidating tactics to silence women who refuse to be controlled. Just look at all the TERF
    death threats and the way women are silenced and bullied. Women in Vancouver opened a women’s bookstore, and trans/queers and their allies soon followed, barging in, tearing down posters, screeching, “No TERFs” in the neighborhood.
    Finally, I can say with absolute certainty that the left will have a lot of explaining to do when the full human cost and ethical issues surrounding the sterilization/mutilation of kids with powerful drugs and surgery and the “transitioning” of disabled people comes due.
    All I can say is to hell with the Heritage Foundation since I have no use for them, but women were awesome.

    1. @SkylarkPhillips I was thinking similar, as in the bravery of the panel. It takes real guts …as in integrity in the face of the shit each has been through, to speak out and call out the t brigade on their shit, as well as the major amount of disrespect the brigade, in the main has for others.
      Something else came to mind when you mentioned the Oakland killings: is it just me, as well as others who read this site and others carefully, but is the t community actively making those who are criminals the new standard bearers? With everyone else who they have conned in lockstep? This is something to consider, especially with that month soon approaching.
      Not all are crooks, but far too many to say that these are truly ‘maginalized’. More along the lines of ‘the end justifying the means’…and the rest of the world needs to see these miscreants as angels.
      By the way, if Miriam is leading the charge to ‘drop the t’, as well as protect Title IX, etc…people had better listen. She has more legitimacy in her smallest fingers, than the punks who have gone after her.

    2. And because of all you say here is why we took an opportunity offered to us to speak out at the Heritage Foundation. They are the only org to offer us a safe place to speak up and out. Time NOW to confront these bullies and reclaim our just place in society. I will work until I no longer can to stop the erasure fo women, to stop men from going into women’s space, to keep asking what is so very wrong with having a “room of our own”.

    3. If anyone here can help us find a liberal platform for this discussion, please do let us know. I would gladly participate if invited!

    4. While I was watching this, I couldn’t help but contrast this with the hate-filled disruption of a similar conference in June, with some of the same women [trying to] talk: https://gendertrender.wordpress.com/2016/06/17/explosive-footage-of-the-women-speak-out-press-conference-and-qa/
      This is the reality. If we want to be heard, we have to go where the transactivists don’t feel empowered to shout us down and try to silence us. If that means standing in front of a curtain that says “Heritage Foundation,” so be it. Our lefty venues are too afraid to host such an event or to demand civil discourse.

      1. Exactly! I noted the difference, too. The Heritage Foundation provided a respectful venue for important voices to be heard. I lean left, but appreciated that all these women could speak without disruption. Even though this was a right leaning venue, Miriam didn’t get shut down for saying she is a lesbian. Mary Lou wasn’t shut down for being a feminist.

      2. “If we want to be heard, we have to go where the transactivists don’t feel empowered to shout us down and try to silence us. If that means standing in front of a curtain that says ‘Heritage Foundation,’ so be it. Our lefty venues are too afraid to host such an event or to demand civil discourse.”
        and furthermore, the very idea that they are “our venues” is called into question by the fact that we can’t speak in them. The traditional progressive and even radical left does not seem to be very on board with progressive or radical feminism—these spaces, in the left, are not “ours,” they’re not really our home, or else the sense of ownership and home we had around them is illusory. It’s sad but necessary to remember.
        I guess I’m not advocating that women evacuate the left but at the same time, I don’t think it would add any especial legitimacy to women’s words to be hosted in a lefty venue. Women’s words matter to us, women, and to radical and lesbian feminists, because we respect and care about women, and because we use our powers of female discernment to judge those words and find that they are important. Thats it–I for one don’t see why it matters who hosts the panels.
        The idea that this whole alliance will “backfire” seems to stem from a place of fear that others on the left—who already silence us—won’t like the “optics” of seeing us like this, in alliance with conservative women. But who gives a flying flip what optics they like. What would a “backfire” on more than “optical” terms look like? other than co-optation, which people have been discussing in this thread, and which I personally do not fear, what is there? I dont see how this could backfire, honestly. Maybe I’m being short-sighted, I dont know.

  13. Extraordinary. I’ve shared this everywhere. Brilliant discussion. Needed information. Priceless experience.
    Thank you to all of this women. Our ideologies and world perspective don’t all align, but us getting together showcases the power of sisterhood. We will win because me and others like me will never stop fighting. No. Damn Way.

  14. I have to say something about coalitions, and this one, in particular. The modern feminist movement (I think the term Second Wave is mostly used pejoratively) grew out of women speaking their truths and finding their commonalities. When that happens, the terms “right” and “left” become much less important, because women, as a class, are not represented by them. Real life, real stories, are more nuanced. Women who are mothers, whether they are lesbian or heterosexual, have common interests, for example. Women involved in advocating for safe working conditions among pink color workers don’t need to agree about who runs the universe. In this coalition, therefore, I think everyone is “radical” in some important ways, because being genuine about what motivates and inspires you is the “root” of feminist action. When the Gay Rights National Lobby used my energy to get AIDS research funded, and told me they’d be getting to lesbian custody issues, any day now, I waited. When the left opposed being drafted themselves more than supporting women like Miriam in a military career, I watched. And when the Democratic Party chose to risk marriage equality so a minority of men in dresses could use the changing rooms that suited them, I wept. But I am through with waiting, watching, and weeping. I know who I am, and who my sisters in this fight are, and I am not afraid of them. I am not afraid of the Heritage Foundation. I’m afraid of having our voices, our rationality, and our language perverted so that opposition is not only forbidden, but impossible to formulate for my children and grandchildren. I have stood for justice all my life. If this is the last stand, I know I am standing with sisters. That’s what brought me to feminism, in the first place.

    1. Thank you, thank you, thank you. It is reassuring to see another woman say the things I have been saying about what the Left and so-called Gay orgs have not given Lesbians.

  15. Let try to explain a few things. First, yes, our coalition is, by its very nature, “limited” to dealing with male violence and protecting women and girls. When Kaeley TrillerHaver and I formed this coalition, it was with the understanding that we would not mix in other issues like Gay marriage and abortion. We are working together to ensure that women and girls have safe spaces and boundaries are respected. I must say that I am somewhat shocked by the women who say this is “limited”. Really? These inclusion laws impact EVERY WOMAN in the country! That’s 50.6% of the population! One thing that all of you have thus far missed is this: many, many of the conservative women who are in our coalition have begun to see RadFems–and Lesbians as not being something to “fear”. What is happening is this: we are seeing ourselves as WOMEN, not as the labels our politics might give us. We are bonding as WOMEN but with the knowledge that we do not all agree on many issues; what is very cool is that we discuss CIVILLY outside of the Coalition site these issues. The spirit of Sisterhood is very strong and we are finding out that we may have more in common than we imagined. It is, in many ways, quite magical in the best sense of that word. You have forgotten that conservative women can learn and have their minds changed, too. They aren’t mindless stupids, let me tell you. What is also interesting is that my conservative sisters have been open, honest, transparent in every way I can think of–and speaking for myself: they have treated me with respect and consideration–even caring. It was interesting that some women in our coalition were concerned that there might have been protesters–and they were concerned for my welfare because they know I am not very tolerant of bullies or people who threaten violence. Wow. Very unusual for me because few have ever really cared that way and I did not know how to take that. . .That’s lots more than I usually get from the demagogic Left and from many Leftist women. Not a one of the conservatives has ever attempted to use me or my name or tried to force me to believe other than what I do. And not a one of them has EVER threatened MY life, threatened to kill me, called me names, or been unconscionably rude to me as have trans-activists , their men, and their handmaidens! Yes, the Heritage Foundation is not kind to LGB people. On the other hand, I haven’t seen ANY Progressive or Left organization offer us the same sort of space to speak in safety and with respect. So complain, but understand that we are not fools and we are aware of the politics of where we spoke. We took an opportunity to get OUR side of the trans issue out and to tell those who might wish to listen that this is NOT a trans issue at all–the issue is male violence and the attempts to erase women and women’s history and culture. It is even fighting what Zack Ford, a silly little Gay male blogger on Trans issues, said to one of the attendees at our panel–the idea that “women have to get used to having penises in their spaces”. As if we aren’t used to that already? It is about keeping men out of women’s shelters, prisons, homeless shelters, locker rooms, changing rooms. It is about keeping all the rights and protections we have gained, including Title IX and many more rights (Gallus Mag put out a list of all the rights women can loose–it is worth looking that up and reading it!). Trans, like the self-serving, misogynist narcissists they are have chosen to try and make it all about them. It never has been just about “bathrooms” at all. It is about saving our lives and our history so that future girls and women won’t have to worry, won’t have to be fearful, won’t have to wonder if they are safe when they go to play sports or buy clothes. Peace out. Sisters.

    1. Thank you Miriam. One of my biggest resentments against the straight male dominated left is that they believe they own feminists and they own gay rights even as they erase women and promote policies that sterilize gay children. There is this demand for tribal allegiance from feminists without a commensurate respect for our rights and our freedom. Early second wave feminists warned us about the left. Women need to stop identifying with the male left and the male right. Both have their own brand of male dominance, but male dominance is what it is.

    2. First, I want to reiterate – thank you for the work you do and the words you speak on our behalf.
      Also, I think part of the ‘problem’ with modern feminism is that it’s become the literal opposite of focused. It includes everyone (at the expense of women) and everything (also at the expense of women). I fully support a more focused approach, feminism has become the equivalent of trying to treat cancer by chicken noodle soup, a good pedicure, vitamin d and a a deep tissue massage. All good things if that’s what onenis into but having nothing to do with the cancer.
      It’s not working in its present form, why keep doing the same thing over and over? And, my feminism (and most women who are not part of the funfem feminism) is for all women- even the ones I may not agree with or understand. It’s about women so I see nothing wrong with women from all walks of life coming together to work on mutually beneficial issues.

    3. This was a wonderful discussion. This illustrates that beyond ideology, people can build alliance on a common ground of rationality and moral values. Personally, I feel betrayed by the left and I would dare to say that many conservatives feel the same about their side. People left with common sense and compassion will have to find allies in the most unlikely places or the insane will run the asylum into the ground.

    4. Thanks for this outstanding reply and thanks to you and all the women who participated in the panel. It seems that there is an increasing war on women on several fronts, and the most severe and critical to me are the transsexual appropriation of female identity and privacy and safety; the ongoing and increasing cover-up of violent sexual assaults against women in Europe by radical islamic criminals; the increase in extremely psychopathic and violent pornographic imagery on the net and its relative ease of access to boys and younger men; the lack of dignity accorded to women on the internet in general; and the collusion between many powerful people in society on local, state, and federal levels to cover up and/or minimize the alarming increase in child sex trafficking and child sex porn (which affects both sexes).
      At some point in the presentation you alluded to the powerful war against women and girls on all fronts, and these are the ones that most alarm me. There is an increasing, almost unified assault on women in the western hemisphere I have not seen in my fifty-plus years of life.
      Thus I am glad to see this unity of opposites on so many issues. Indeed, even this week Milo Yiannopoulos, hated foe of feminists and women’s rights, forcefully argued for the rights of women and children against the transsexual assault on their privacy and safety on the Bill Maher show, and even managed to communicate to millions of viewers the indisputable link between male transsexuals and sexual violence. Consider how this must have shocked the leaders of the HRC.
      This Hands Across the Aisle forum is a powerful, emotionally unified and creative front, a way to move forward, and I appreciated the friendly laughter that punctuated so many comments that highlighted the obvious ideological differences between the panelists, as humor is also a unifying element. I hope that at least one left-leaning organization will open its doors to this debate, or perhaps the panel could travel to various universities to present their points of view. As a political transpartisan, my vision is that all women will come together against this assault on women regardless of our ideological positions, which are nuanced, complex, and mutating in real life.

      1. Re: Milo- And days after that, a year old interview comes out with him promoting hebophilia (sp). Shameful on his part? yes, definitely. Coincidence? I actually don’t think it is.

    5. Are women still 50.6% of the population in the U.S.? I know for the first time women are not the majority worldwide due to male violence.

  16. There’s some precedence here in Women Against Pornography. This was an influential radical feminist org. from around 1976-1990 located in an office a block west of Times Square, which, at the earlier time was a porn capital.
    There was criticism that the city supported them as part of a gentrification program in this seedy neighborhood. And then they were hammered for participating in the Meese Commission, the purpose of which was to make a comprehensive investigation into the pornography industry and perhaps counter the liberalizing of porn laws during the Nixon admin (I think). In the proceedings, W.A.P. provided much of the critical testimony and evidence of porn’s harm.
    They were also criticized for certain timely alliances with conservative organizations which, however W.A.P. saw as groups positioning themselves beyond the idea of porn as mere obscenity. And, of, course, by the ACLU, which served as the storm troopers for the pro-sex movement; was instrumental in rescinding the Dworkin-Mackinnon Antiporn Civil Rights Ordinance; and accomplished this with the help of large donations from Playboy.
    The trans issue is almost identically situated in terms of left-right, it seems, with left-liberal judgments and assaults coming from some of the same quarters. Much of that criticism must be outright rejected, and some requires a lot of thought, balancing acts, and debate. (here it seems to be between a more personal angle as opposed to a political one, but that’s too simple, I guess)

  17. Finally we are getting to central feminism, it is about the rights, privacy, and adancement of women and girls. Robin Morgan long ago said goodbye to all that, meaning the male left of the 60s– it was the horror of those sexist awful male SDS leaders that pushed women to separate from the men and create 60s era feminism in the first place.
    The ACLU has never defended women’s rights, and supports the porn industry, and it supported neo-NAZI back in the day marching in a Jewish suburb of Chicago, Skokie to be exact.
    Leftist and rightist men are battling it out, but I find the energy now in a coalition of right wing and left wing women of all backgrounds. First of all, women can relate in many ways. When you compare Miriam’s and the gang’s press conference in Seattle and the one in D.C. you can see the difference. I don’t agree with everything any one person says, but I do find commonality. I think right wing women have a lot to learn from radical lesbian feminists, and maybe vice verse, although it is harder for right wing hetero women to meet radical lesbian feminists socially. Women can move forward and FOCUS on the rights of women and girls. That needs to be central and feminism is not all things to all people, it is simply about the liberation of women and has nothing really to do with men. As feminists and as lesbians I am tired of being held hostage to the left wing males who hate us, to the trans movement that wants to kill us and HAS KILLED us, to the democratic party that loves the trans at our expense. I am no long going along with GBT anything, I am going to focus on women’s best interests, and that has nothing to do now with GBT.

    1. “we are getting to central feminism” That’s brilliant. Not left, not right, but Central Feminism. Where better to coin this phrase than here which, along with other similar blogs, comprise Feminist Central!

  18. One of the biggest problems with the trans activists is that they don’t want privacy in accommodations like restrooms, locker rooms and so on – they want to be very publicly allowed to use the facilities of their choice to supposedly affirm their being of the sex they claim to be.

  19. I am so glad to see the civil and intelligent discourse behind biology not bigotry I have been part of this group Hands Across the aisle from the beginning and have had my fears around it as well course I am married to my partner and on her insurance so same-sex marriage is very important to me and I’ve worked done a lot of work around it and I’ve always been pro-choice so it did make me nervous and made me nervous is lesbian when some of the right-wing women got critical and just threw it in with LGBT elemeno P QRS TUV. But both sides had to work through their differences and come together around this issue with your facts every single woman and all our feminist work for 40 years I have seen lesbian Community torn to shreds I have been torn to shreds so is Miriam I’ve been kicked out of basically two communities 4 my women born women’s stance and wanting to support lesbian women and women space without male presence, I just got un friended by somebody today that I respected because she said she was coming back to calling yourself female and I said you’ve always been female.
    And I have dialogue with Miriam for a long time because of the struggles that I’ve had and her struggles especially when she was demoted from Grand Marshal last year for the pride parade because of somebody’s because of somebody so-called transphobic comments because nowadays just about anything we say is considered transphobic even talking about our own damn bodies.

  20. Most of all I will say I took it personal reading about Dana Rivers killing those two lesbians and their son in Oakland because I lived in Oakland for 30 years and it just sick and me all that violent rhetoric just like any other hate speech eventually gets acted upon and I am done with it so is Miriam so is Kaylee so is Mary Lou and so is Cam we are all done with being silenced and so many more women that I know that have suffered under this and Gallis Mag has been fantastic exposing all of this.
    Kaley really spoke to what rape survivors experience I go to the Y on a frequent basis to go swimming and I am just fearful of the day some trans shows up that has not had full transition I had to deal with them at the OSento hotubs but they were fully transitioned and I still felt uncomfortable because of that male gaze.
    But if one shows up with the penis you can bet I’m going to hit the roof and I’m going to say something and this Amazon Dyke is going to be pissed off.
    I loved how Mary Lou said that this was gender reparative therapy on steroids literally.
    What someone does after they’re 18 to their body is their business but leave the kids alone.
    Each woman brought up different points from her point of view and they really covered a wide aspect as a result of what we’re up against and I like tell Mary Lou and Miriam stressed using the logic argument first and foremost rather than religious because these feminist arguments are logical compared to the confusing illogical craziness so much of the trans are trying to sell. I myself am Dianic/Anazon Wiccan with a Jewish background and proud of my Jewish heritage but my spirituality I share only with born females and I want that respected and it isn’t anymore, so we fight very hard for women only space to have our rituals and we can’t even have women-only rituals at pantheacon anymore because of the trans crap. And it’s very very hard to find women born women’s spaces.
    And also what Mary Lou said about naming our bodies men don’t have babies females have babies and not being able to mention mother’s females babies it’s like if you really wanted to be a dude and be a dude you know don’t go and have a baby and insisted everybody referred to a generalist pronoun when it comes to having babies and breastfeeding that’s just that’s ridiculous just like insisting penis is female and that lesbians need to get over their penis phobia I mean it’s gotten to the height of Ridiculousness so these women coming together and telling their stories is so important from the lesbian point of view to the Midway point of view to the rape Survivor point of you yes we are the Warriors we know when we feel a predator or around and we know pretty much of the time that Predator is going to be some form of born male and where we feel safe and where we don’t like Kaylee said going into battle which it’s like being a woman every day you’re going into battle and trusting what we say about when and where we feel safe from where we don’t so these women stepped out and took the risk and made themselves visible and vulnerable to attack because all we have seen from the left is censorship anytime we try to bring up these issues and I watch Miriam and another debate where the trans just shot of them down and threatened them at least these people were respectful.
    No I don’t support the Heritage Foundation by any means but where else will these women going to go where they weren’t going to be Deplatformed or threatened and where they could have a forim to speak from of diversity of viewpoints.
    I am very very proud of my hands across the aisle sisters who stepped up and what they had to say thank you.

  21. I think this is wonderful. So proud of you all. I have no problem with these amazing women meeting and talking at Heritage. Because it is safe there and they deserve to speak freely in safety. The Heritage Foundation owns its own building, so not even the trans thug mob could get through. I also want to personally thank Kaeley for never once – in this appearance or in any other – straying into any anti-gay arguments or trying to link these transgender/gender identity issues to LGB rights or marriage equality. Some conservatives do that, but not you. You’re doing it right.
    I did have a suggestion regarding Heritage for Kaeley. If Heritage is genuinely supporting this coalition, then we should be bold about asking it to put its money where its mouth is. Heritage is one of the most lavishly funded political outfits in Washington DC. I hope you will consider asking Heritage Foundation to support Hands Across the Aisle with money. And Kaeley’s group, Just Want Privacy, should ask Heritage’s PAC, Heritage Action, to step up and make a generous contribution to I-1552. Kaeley, not to boast, but LGBs cleaned Joseph Backholm’s clock in fundraising in the 2012 marriage battle in Washington state. I am glad we did. Passing marriage equality was a moment of great joy for LGB people. But this time around, I don’t want to see your group struggling to keep up with transgender activist fundraising (which of course will really come from LGBs, shamed, bullied and browbeaten into giving money).
    As we learned in 2012, when it comes to raising money, if you don’t ask, you don’t get. In 2012, an R-74 volunteer shocked both sides when she scored the largest individual donation made in any marriage equality battle, a contribution from Jeff and MacKenzie Bezos. It was completely unexpected. And we never would have gotten it if that wonderful lesbian volunteer, who knew Bezos from when she worked at Amazon many years earlier, had the courage to make the ask in a very heartfelt way. So please do make the ask of Heritage.

  22. I thought this video was quite good, though I don’t agree with everything he says he does have some very pertinent thoughts re: right/left. He addresses working with a group at about the seven and a half minute mark.

  23. Just another reader thanking you for posting this. It is great to hear women speak without having to try to hear them over (under?) the trash talk of hecklers. And thank you for your clear delineation of right-wing views of women’s rights above. I do appreciate that Fox News interviewed WoLF and the woman who left ACLU — don’t think Democracy Now! did — but I have no illusions about right-wing attitudes. Once again, thank you for everything you do!
    (And thank you for sticking with a successful, easy-to-read format.)

Comments are closed.