Last night, I was at a Christmas party, and this nice gentleman struck up a conversation with me. Asked what I do. I told him. He said he works in the Trump administration. He then says: "I vote Republican, but I'm socially liberal." Let's discuss this for a second.
I get that there are folks in D.C. who work in the Trump administration who don't support Trump but want to serve our country capably. I recognize that nuance. I also get there are some conservatives who don't support Trump at all and walk the walk on social equality.
But this gentleman put to me that a) he's a Republican, b) works in the administration, and c) regrettably votes for the GOP, BUT... wants me to know that he's on my side.
That is a summary of the first 90 seconds of our conversation.
And I got the sense he wanted me, a trans woman, to absolve him. I didn't percolate this subject. I didn't initiate a conversation with him. He drove this thing and then launched into the apologetics around voting for the GOP.
So, I'm just going to put this out there to other folks who feel guilty about supporting the Republican Party but call themselves "socially liberal". Because you folks really need to hear this.
If you support a party that is anti-LGBTQ and anti-woman and xenophobic and white supremacist because you think your taxes are too high, you are not "socially liberal".
If you support a party led by a coward who defends kidnapping children away from their parents and locking them in oversized dog kennels, you are not "socially liberal".
If you have a friend or relative who is LGBTQ, whom you love and with whom you get along, but you support a party that openly and viciously calls for discrimination against LGBTQ people, you are not "socially liberal".
If you love watching "Queer Eye" and "RuPaul's Drag Race", but you support a party that says trans people should be banned from the military and LGBTQ children should suffer the abuse of "conversion therapy", you are not "socially liberal".
If you "have a black friend" but support a party that blatantly defends the harassment, assault, and murder of people of color in this country by our law enforcement and disenfranchises them at the polls and mocks their advocacy, you are not "socially liberal".
If you need three dozen women to come forward about their encounters of sexual harassment, assault, and rape by an elected official--let alone a "president"--before you'll consider that even one woman is telling the truth, you are not "socially liberal".
If you support fiscal policies that have drastic sociopolitical consequences for the most vulnerable people in our country--regardless of background--you are not "socially liberal".
And if you're like the gentleman last night who copped out with "Well, I'm actually a libertarian" because that is somehow meant to encapsulate sympathy for my plight without bearing responsibility for complicity in the machinations that create it, you are an enormous asshole.
I did not start this conversation last night. I tried to steer clear of politics. I gave him several ways out, but there is little as enraging as someone who votes for the Republican Party but claims to care about my rights and that of others.
And to engage in this weird request-for-absolution/pseudo-therapy with a stranger (whom the GOP is oppressing) at a party--where if I get angry, I'll come across as making a scene but if I say nothing, I'll hate myself for it later--is beyond shitty.
"I'm Republican, but I don't support Trump."
Stop saying this. Everything is on fire, and if you vote for the Republican Party, you are voting for violent hatred and discrimination. You are complicit. You are supporting white supremacy. You are voting for my oppression. /thread
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Hey y’all, my girlfriends and I are running together tomorrow in our undies for @CupidsUndieRun in downtown D.C. to raise money for research to help end neurofibromatosis (NF)! If you can spare a modest donation, help us out! Donate here: my.cupids.org/CharlotteClymer
Wow, y’all are amazing. Already five donations to help the Children’s Tumor Foundation research neurofibromatosis!
Everyone who donates below will receive the RT of your choice on a tweet (and a follow of course).
This isn't about "free speech". The government is not punishing Joe Rogan. Private citizens are deciding they no longer want to give their own money and content to Spotify while Joe Rogan fans apparently believe that he and Spotify are entitled to our money and artists' content.
Comedians should be able to say just about whatever they want without fear of being arrested or otherwise punished by the government.
But that doesn't mean Rogan or any other comedian is entitled to the platforms we use, the money we spend, or, least of all, our agreement.
Rogan's fans aren't angry because Rogan's "truth telling" is being attacked. They're angry because they're seriously under the belief that "free speech" somehow means Rogan is exempt from criticism and consequences (and by extension, his fans) just by virtue of having an opinion.
I ended my Spotify subscription. It's a bummer, but there are too many other great music streaming apps out there to continue paying for this service without the guilt of where my money is going (and not going, e.g. artists). And I don't think I'll miss it. Easy decision.
It took me less than five minutes to cancel my Spotify subscription (via desktop) and sign-up for Apple Music, which has a 3-month free trial going. If you're looking for a way to put a bit of cash back in your personal budget for 3 months and listen to tunes, there you go.
There are many other options, and it's easy to switch from Spotify. Check out this helpful article from @joshgnosis:
Here's the fun bind that trans people are in when it comes to conversations about why people cared about Rogan spreading COVID disinfo enough to boycott but not enough about Rogan attacking trans rights to boycott:
If trans people speak out against Rogan, not really knowing if cis people are going to back us up, we risk being viciously harassed, and thus, we are challenged to wonder if speaking out risks more than it helps.
But if trans people don't speak out against Rogan and cis people claim not to have known about his extensive history of anti-trans propaganda, cis folks can say "well, hey, we didn't know. No one told us."
For about a year and a half, I worked at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum here in D.C. as a visitor services representative. On my first day, I was walking with my supervisor, who nudged me at one point and said: "See that guy? That's Henry. Make sure you talk to him." (thread)
Henry Greenbaum was born in Poland in 1928. His father passed away early in the war, his mother and two of his sisters were murdered at Treblinka, and three more of his sisters died in a nearby labor camp. Only Henry, his sister Dina, and brothers Zachary and David survived.
Henry survived that labor camp and then time at Auschwitz and then Flossenbürg and had he and his fellow Survivors not been liberated enroute on their death march, he would have likely been murdered at Dachau.
The D.A.R.E. program, as numerous studies have found, was abysmally ineffective. That's unsurprising to those of us who went through it as kids. It was very well funded window dressing for incompetent politicians who failed to understand root causes or didn't care about them.
In fact, some studies have shown that children who went through the D.A.R.E. program were more likely to use drugs than those who hadn't been in the program.
I don't pretend to know how "Euphoria" influences teens, but it's incredibly rich for a failed and harmful program that came out of a failed and harmful War on Drugs started by a failed and harmful presidency to lecture a TV show on what kids really need.