DYKE MARCH - Anti Male Hate Riot Season Opens

**Ohso** · 7th-December-2009

WND Exclusive QUEERLY BELOVED

Lesbian awarded custody of Christian's only child
Decision sets up showdown over claim from ex-partner
December 05, 2009 By Bob Unruh © 2009 WorldNetDaily

A Vermont court ordered a Christian child taken away from her mother and given to a lesbian ex-partner, setting up, according to a lawyer for the Christian family, a dispute that the U.S. Supreme Court likely will have to resolve.

Mathew Staver, founder of Liberty Counsel, told WND the recent order from the Vermont judge that Lisa Miller turn over her young daughter, Isabella, to the lesbian ex-partner, Janet Jenkins, on New Year's Day is being appealed.

In the interim, a separate court hearing on the dispute is scheduled to be heard in a Virginia court during this coming week. "We're arguing that the state of Virginia cannot enforce an out of state, Vermont, civil union because it's contrary to Virginia law," Staver said.

Ultimately, he said, the issue probably will have to be resolved by the U.S. Supreme Court, because the case is being moved along parallel tracks in both Vermont, where Jenkins lives, and Virginia, where the Millers live

He said it is possible that the final results from each state will be opposing rulings. "That is a direct appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court," Staver explained.

WND has reported on the case multiple times, including just weeks ago when the American Civil Liberties Union, on behalf of Jenkins, went to court in Virginia demanding that Miller be jailed for refusing to allow her daughter, 6, to be on unsupervised visits with Jenkins.

Jenkins has stated she believes it is not good for a child to be raised in a Christian atmosphere.

Miller had refused because of issues over previous visits, including statements by Isabella that she was compelled to bathe naked with Jenkins.

The dispute is over Jenkins' demands for visitation and/or custody of Isabella, with whom she has neither a blood nor an adoptive relationship.

Liberty Counsel has argued that Virginia courts cannot enforce child custody orders arising from Vermont same-sex civil unions since the state doesn't recognize that status. Last year, a judge in Vermont gave Jenkins visitation rights with Miller's daughter. Then just days ago, the judge ordered custody transferred to Jenkins.

Liberty Counsel said, "Unrefuted testimony has shown that for the last five years, Janet has neither attempted to phone nor write Isabella. She has never sent Isabella a card of any kind for any occasion. Janet has refused to attend Isabella's Christmas plays because she does not want to be around a Christian environment. She has also said that it is not in Isabella's best interest to be raised in a Christian home."

Virginia court rulings have declared Miller to be the sole parent.

Isabella was born to Miller from artificial insemination when Miller and Jenkins were living together. They obtained a civil union from Vermont, but Jenkins never adopted the baby.

The relationship terminated when Miller became a Christian and quit the lesbian lifestyle.

Even on the pro-homosexual "Queerty" website, the Vermont court decision startled some. "What kind of monster takes a child away from their mother. … This is a human rights violation for the child," said one person.

"It's easy to pick on the biological mother. We don't like her religious beliefs, we don't like her politics. But the fact remains that [this] is dangerous precedent for mothers, who [are] under increasing pressure to 'cooperate' with ex's regarding their children, REGARDLESS of the ex's history of abuse, alcoholism, and abuse.
Please familiarize yourself with the fathers rights movement and their war on women – just because you don't identify yourself as heterosexual doesn't mean that you aren't in their crosshairs," added another.

The case earlier was complicated when Jenkins' Virginia attorney withdrew "after he was indicted for obstructing justice and tampering with evidence regarding a murder that occurred in his home, where his college male friend was sodomized and killed,"
Liberty Counsel said.

**Ohso** · 13th-December-2009

Quote from Ohso

SF DYKE MARCH - Anti Male Hate Riot
*Note Lit Torches in Broad Daylight!

However - The statement that “guys are welcome” is NOT TRUE! The actual quote by Lisa Roth “is found in her Letter to the S.F. Chronicle of 7/1/98, where she Explicitly Bans Men from the Streets.

“Many thanks for running a great picture of the 6th Annual Dyke March on the front page of Sunday's paper, but I must correct an error. I never said, "Guys are welcome." I said, "Guys are welcome to stand on the side and cheer” The Dyke March is a "woman only" event, organized by women for women and about women. As we said at our rally, the Annual San Francisco Dyke March is the best live girl show in town. We've got no permit, no politicians, no corporate sponsors and No Men. We are fierce and feisty and fat and feminist.” Lisa Roth - S. F. Dyke March Organizing Com. / Damn Lesbians

[/QUOTE]

Compare - Oh Lurkers of the Net...
Torch Carrying Protestors take over the Public Streets in San Francisco and Ban Male Citizens during the Annual Frisco Dyke March / Anti Male Hate Riot - Refusing to even apply for a Permit or Pay Fees or Costs...

- and the Old Media refuses to even report on it, despite the annual Saturday Night gridlock created and Big Bill to the Taxpayers. They do however run big happy pictures of the following Sunday 'pride' parade, and will warn about staying away from Halloween in the Castro - But Never - Ever - a Mention of the Dyke March outside of Frisco media.

I suppose it would just be rong to print such stories - unless of course the Torch Carrying Mob is heading for the Chancellors house, which then makes it 'News' = in a way that the Dyke March could Never Be Allowed to Become.

After all - they need to keep the 'Vanilla' (suburban voters / taxpayers) Clueless, lest they fail to vote as told next election.

Ohso

In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. George Orwell

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Torch-carrying protesters storm UC Berkeley chancellor's home; 8 arrested

By Kelly Rayburn - Oakland Tribune 12/12/2009 * Governor calls attack on UC Berkeley chancellor's home a 'type of terrorism'

BERKELEY — As many as 70 protesters, many carrying torches and smashing windows, attempted to storm UC Berkeley Chancellor Robert Birgeneau's on-campus residence late Friday in a violent act condemned by university officials and student activists alike. Eight people, including two UC Berkeley students, were arrested on suspicion of rioting, threatening an educational official, attempted burglary, attempted arson, felony vandalism and assault with a deadly weapon on a police officer, the university said.

Some protesters threw incendiary objects at the house in an attack... chanted "No justice, no peace,"... smashed lights, shattered windows, scattered trash and flipped over planters, Mogulof said.

Friday night's incident followed the arrest of 66 people earlier in the day on trespassing charges after students and other protesters had occupied ... It may have been the most serious incident at the chancellor's residence since 1992, when activist Rosebud Denovo was killed by police after breaking into the home, which was then occupied by Chancellor Chang-Lin Tien.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger issued a statement calling Friday's protest "terrorism" and said "those who participated will be prosecuted under the fullest extent of the law." UC President Mark Yudof called the attack "appalling" and said the "matter is now appropriately in the hands of law enforcement authorities."

**Ohso** · 4th-January-2010

Fathers for Life' had a compilation of Dyke Exterminationist quotes that recently resurfaced in relation to the death of Misandrist Harpy Mary Daly.

Those who want to pretend that being a Dyke is about 'happy love' - and not Separatist / Exterminatoinist Misandry, need to square away such positions with the stated goals of their leaders...

Or just ignore the whole thing and Bash Men for fun and profit.

Ohso
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. George Orwell

BTW -the last lines about 'deconstructing men' are in accord with the demand that Men (inherited immutable XY DNA proven Males) be defined to include Self Mutilating Steroid Abusing Dyke Misandrists acting out a grotesque mockery of male gender - and that all other Men be forced to publicly admit they are no different in gender from a fanatic misandrist Dyke Hatemonger.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Why have any men at all?

If you think that feminism is benign and has the welfare of all of humanity and equal rights for all at heart, consider what would happen if a man, an academician at any university, would dare to state this:

Why have any women at all? Every culture must begin to affirm the male future. Species responsibility must be returned to men in every culture. The proportion of women must be reduced to and maintained at approximately ten percent of the human race.

Do you think that man would not be hauled in front of a human rights tribunal, that he would be able to keep on teaching, that he would remain in his job, that he would retain tenure at his university?
Of course not! However, with the sexes reversed, that is exactly what Sally Miller Gearhart stated in an article she wrote. She obviously didn't express a sentiment that was entirely her own. As you can see in the transcript from an interview shown below, the sentiment is shared, amongst others, by Prof. Mary Daly, a prominent feminist who after much trying to refuse to oblige, resigned in protest — so they say — from her teaching position because her university board (Boston College) demanded that she open her women's studies classes to male students.

"`Why have any men at all?' wrote Sally Miller Gearhart in a 1982 manifesto titled `The Future–If There Is One–Is Female.' Gearhart is an advocate of ovular merging, a process that involves the mating of two eggs, which has been successfully accomplished with mice. Only female offspring are produced. I've always worried that one day women would figure out how to get along without us and they would be able to reproduce unilaterally, like sponges. It's not genocide, exactly. It's more like job attrition, the way employers cut back positions without actually firing anyone. `A 75 per cent female to 25 percent male ratio could be achieved in one generation if one half of a population reproduced heterosexually and one half by ovular merging.' according to Gearhart.
`Such a prospect is attractive to women who feel that if they bear sons, no amount of love and care and non-sexist training will save those sons from culture where male violence is institutionalized.'" Footnote60

Footnote 60: Lawrence Wright, "Women & Men," Utne Reader (January/February 1993), p. 55.
[http://www.xenos.org/ministries/c&c/menwomn.htm]

Radical feminist Sally Miller Gearhart has a theory that the only way to save the world is to reduce the number of men to ten percent of the total population and at that moment, I have to admit I was beginning to wonder if maybe she might be on to something.

[http://www.wie.org/j16/editorial.html]

Mary DalyNo Man's Land
Excerpts from an Interview by Susan Bridle

[http://www.wie.org/j16/daly2.html]
WIE: Which brings us to another question I wanted to ask you. Sally Miller Gearhart, in her article "The Future—If There Is One—Is Female" writes: "At least three further requirements supplement the strategies of environmentalists if we were to create and preserve a less violent world.

1) Every culture must begin to affirm the female future.

2) Species responsibility must be returned to women in every culture.

3) The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately ten percent of the human race."

What do you think about this statement?
MD: I think it’s not a bad idea at all. If life is to survive on this planet, there must be a decontamination of the Earth. I think this will be accompanied by an evolutionary process that will result in a drastic reduction of the population of males. People are afraid to say that kind of stuff anymore.
WIE: Yes. I find myself now thinking that’s a bit shocking.
MD: Well, it’s shocking that it would be shocking.
WIE: So it doesn’t sound like your vision of a separate nation for women is something you see as an interim stage that would eventually lead to men and women living together in true equality.
MD: No. That’s a very old question. I answered that to audiences twenty-five, thirty years ago. I just don’t think that way. See, right now, I would be totally joyous to have a great community of women—whether men are somewhere out on the periphery or not. I don’t have this goal of: "Oh, then we can all get together again!" That doesn’t seem to be a very promising future. So why would I think about it? I think it’s pretty evident that men are not central to my thought. [Note]

[http://www.wie.org/j16/daly2.html]

It seems that John Wyndham got it quite right when he described a society that is exactly like that, a society comprised of harpies like Mary Daly.
Check: Consider Her Ways

Authority Is Not a Luxury:

"Courageous Dialogue" in the Feminist Classroom

Kimberly Gunter
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

"Sally Miller Gearhart (1979) even states that "any intent to persuade is an act of violence" (p. 195)"

Mind you, it is not the act of persuading that is so bad but the intent to do so. That is the criminalization of thoughts, no less. Not even George Orwell could have dreamed of it all. My, my, what progress 30 years of feminization have brought us.

The opinions for the marginalization and eradication of men, if not merely the nature of men, that are expressed in the various quotation shown on this page are not isolated at all. They are part of a deliberate agenda.

...It is time that government had a strategy on changing men away from power and oppression as part of its strategy for women and gender justice. ...

...one further likely and paradoxical implication of the naming of men is that the deconstruction of men may be opened up more fully. Changing future agendas for women involves changing men; changing men involves deconstructing men and reducing men’s power; and, in the longer term still, this may even involve the abolition of ’men’ as such a ubiquitously important social category. Is it time at last for men to change, and both to develop and be subject to new agendas?

Those two quotes are from the excerpt shown below, from the EuroPRO-Fem european menprofeminist network. Pro-feminist men are disproportionately homosexual activists or homosexualist men (men who promote homosexualism although they may not even be homosexual) who for a variety of reasons hate their own maleness and that of other men.

It cannot be stressed enough that these people believe that the attributes of men and women are not biological consequences but social constructs, and that what has been constructed can be deconstructed. Of course the most thorough method of deconstruction is total eradication: the abolition of men. The write-up calls for men to develop and be subject to new agendas. Is there any doubt that one of these agendas is not merely to change men but to eliminate at least 80 percent of them?

Why not? Mary Daly says: "I think it’s not a bad idea at all. If life is to survive on this planet, there must be a decontamination of the Earth." And that is why there are men and homsexualist men who sidle up to feminists. They know that all this rhetoric of men having the power in society is nothing more than a polemic. They know it's not true. They know that women (or more correctly, redfems) have the power. They want no more and nothing less than to be amongst the 20 percent of men who'll survive and thereby get a chance to vie for a place in the sun that shines in the feminist paradise.

A CRISIS IN MASCULINITY
OR NEW AGENDAS FOR MEN?

[Excerpt]

CONCLUSION: POLITICS AND PRACTICE

Men’s societal dominance continues; yet at the same time certain groups of men are facing considerable change from previous social patterns and arrangements - at home, work and elsewhere. Despite the extent of the changes and challenges outlined, it is premature to talk of a widespread ‘crisis of masculinity’. Individual men and certain groups of men may be facing, even confronting, change, like it or not, and they may indeed be changing, but this has to be put in the context of the stubborn stability of men’s structural power. For some relatively less powerful groups of men, the combination of lack of educational success, reduction in traditional jobs, avoidance of ‘women’s’ work, and their own more damaging actions (to both themselves and others) may indeed constitute a material crisis for them and others around them. But this generally may not (yet) match closely with an ideological crisis in how men are assumed to be. The contradictions between the material and the ideological state of men and masculinities may be growing but are not yet at crisis point for most men, and certainly not for men in general.

All of the issues that I have discussed here are important for what it means to be a ‘man’ in this society. They have, however, all often remain neglected in what is generally defined as ‘politics’. Transforming what is understood by politics is part of transforming men. All of these issues are also both profoundly structural and intensely personal. Each can also prompt great depths of negativity - feelings of hopelessness, terribleness, desperation - as well as being arenas of possible positive change and hope. Each is a way of unifying men as a class, with different interests to women and dividing men from each other - old from young, heterosexual from gay, healthy from unwell, and so on. Each is a way of oppressing women, children and young people, and a way of relating to other men. And each represents an avenue for men opposing oppression, supporting feminist initiatives, and changing men.

Policies and practices are needed that address these issues in all policy arenas; they need to name men and the persistence of men’s powers, without stereotyping men. In doing this, there are dangers that an increased focus on men may divert attention from women and women’s agendas by arguing that men should have even more resources for solving these problems. So vigilance is necessary in this respect.

However, it is useful to bear in mind that a critical focus on men is not in men’s general interest, just as it is not in the interests of other dominant groups to focus critically on them. This will involve debate, clear policy statements, publications and other materials, education and teaching, professional interventions, pro-feminist ’menswork’ and ’boyswork’, and research. It is time that government had a strategy on changing men away from power and oppression as part of its strategy for women and gender justice. In particular a distinction needs to be drawn between support between and for men that encourages domination and support between and for men that diminishes domination. The latter kind on initiatives are necessary not only in the state but throughout all areas of social life society, in business, community, media, religion, sport and other public and indeed private forums.

Finally, one further likely and paradoxical implication of the naming of men is that the deconstruction of men may be opened up more fully. Changing future agendas for women involves changing men; changing men involves deconstructing men and reducing men’s power; and, in the longer term still, this may even involve the abolition of ’men’ as such a ubiquitously important social category. Is it time at last for men to change, and both to develop and be subject to new agendas?

**Meadester** · 9th-January-2010

Quote from Ohso

Fathers for Life' had a compilation of Dyke Exterminationist quotes that recently resurfaced in relation to the death of Misandrist Harpy Mary Daly.

Those who want to pretend that being a Dyke is about 'happy love' - and not Separatist / Exterminatoinist Misandry, need to square away such positions with the stated goals of their leaders...

Mary Daly was not the leader of all lesbians any more than ohso is the leader of all heterosexual men. It is fun, though, to see the Mary Dalys and ohsos of the world play off each other to score identical propaganda points.

**Ohso** · 9th-January-2010

Illinois Judge Takes Children from Dad to Live with Mom, Lesbian Lover

By Kathleen Gilbert CHAMPAIGN, Illinois, January 8, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) -
A county court has granted the request of an Illinois lesbian woman that she take custody of her two young children, who will now go to live with her and her homosexual lover, 1,800 miles away from her ex-husband with whom the children had been living.

Taro Iwata, who lives in Champaign, IL, reportedly plans to appeal the decision to take their two young children to live with ex-wife Karen Kelsky in Eugene, Oregon. Iwata's lawyer, Jason Craddock, says Champaign County Judge John Kennedy found that Kelsky, an associate professor of East Asian Languages and Culture and Anthropology at the University of Illinois and an activist on homosexual issues, would provide a preferable home for the children because the relationship between Kelsky and her partner, deemed equivalent to heterosexual marriage, would be beneficial to the children's quality of life.

The children, according to Craddock, enjoy a significantly closer relationship with their father than with Kelsky.

"Even from a 'coldly' legal standpoint, this decision is subversive," said Craddock, according to the Illinois Family Institute.

"It flies squarely in the face of decades of removal jurisprudence in Illinois, as Illinois courts historically and consistently give great weight to the relationship enjoyed between children and their non-custodial parents, and typically allow removal only where the visitation time would either remain the same or increase after the move," he continued.
"Also, Illinois courts have never allowed removal where a custodial parent desired to move to a place in order to move in with a paramour or when such a move would lower the family's standard of living. ...

"This decision clearly constitutes an activist decision, with Judge Kennedy going boldly where the Illinois legislature expressly declined to go before." The Illinois House of Representatives last year struck down a civil unions measure that would have extended some marriage privileges to homosexual couples.

Laurie Higgins of the Illinois Family Institute called the decision "lurid."

"Perhaps most troubling of all is that [Kennedy] has arrogantly decided that subordinating the relationship of father and children to the profoundly disordered relationship of mother and homosexual partner serves the best interests of the children," wrote Higgins. "It's a wonder that Kennedy can sleep at night."

Contact information:

Hon. John R. Kennedy
Courtroom F
Champaign county circuit court
101 East Main Street
Urbana, IL 61801-2703
(217) 384-3867

**Ohso** · 13th-January-2010

I just found that when doing a search for "Dyke March" (having had another similarly named thread destroyed by censors on another board) that search engines identify this thread title first as "USA" (like the little flag icon provided) and then "Dyke March".

Hence - it didn't show up on my search engine, and is excluded from the list unless you know to use that prefix.

Any body know a way I can change it back to no prefix?

Ohso
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. George Orwell

**Ohso** · 21st-January-2010

Last time I checked the SF Dyke March still refused to apply for a permit, let alone pay any of the costs of policing their gridlock of the City on a busy Saturday. Of course the media refused to even print the route, let alone warn the citizens of the chaos to follow.

But then it is Frisco, and if naught else ole Sodom by the Sea is notorious for its perverted take on 'tolerance', amongst other things.

Ohso
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. George Orwell
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Forced to hire cops, Dyke March issues appeal for donations

DYKE MARCH / Police presence will cost at least $1,000, but cash-strapped event says it's a fair expense - Neil McKinnon / Ottawa / Thursday, July 09, 2009

GROWING PAINS. Police presence was always required at the Dyke March, but this is the first year organizers must pay for cops.

For the first time in its six years, the Dyke March has to pony up cash to have police officers supervise the event. Organizers say it's an unexpected yet fair expense and they are looking to the community for help.

"[Raising extra money for police officers] is going to be a challenge," says Dyke March treasurer Catherine Purdie.

After all, for the already cash-strapped event it's an extra $500 per officer, and organizers must hire a minimum of two officers. Although this is the first year the Dyke March must pay for officers, the city says police presence was always required but it wasn't paid for before because it slipped through the cracks.

"If we were a protest, we wouldn't have to pay. But we're not a protest," says Purdie. "We're not asking the city for anything different than any other group. I think the city is very supportive of the queer community in Ottawa. We're working very closely with [the city] and they're helping us out a lot.
They're giving us shortcuts. The real story is the Dyke March is going to happen and it's going to be better than previous years."

Purdies also points out that by having officers present, the Dyke March could not be sued if someone is injured along the way.

Organizations like the Dyke March have to decide whether they want to grow or stay small, says special events Sgt Denis Charbonneau.

"[The Dyke March] used to be a sidewalk march," says Charbonneau. "It's certainly not the size of [Capital Pride] but they're taking up major intersections and using props like motorcycles.
The march is growing. If you grow, you need officers. And it's grown to the point where they have to hire police officers."...

**Ohso** · 22nd-January-2010

The following excerpts are provided as further insight in to the Separatist / Exterminatnionist Misandry at the core of the 'Dyke March' agendas... And whether it is better to keep themselves 'pure' by endorsing the WBW (womyn born womyn) 'ideal' - or allow infiltration by Men (with or without disguise) Pretending to be Womyn / Dykes...

Needless to say - Men (XY DNA) who do not pretend / mutilate themselves in a grotesque mockery of the opposite gender (there are only two), are simply not allowed under any circumstances.

Ohso
Not merely the validity of experience but the very existence of external reality was tacitly denied by their philosophy. The heresy of heresies was common sense. George Orwell 1984 on the Thought Police.
.................................................. .................................................. ......

When Is A Dyke Unwelcome At A Dyke March?
by: Autumn Sandeen Jun 11, 2007

When is a dyke unwelcome at a dyke march? When she's a musical performer named Bitch and she advocates for the "Womyn-Born-Womyn (WBW) only space" of the Michigan Womyns Music Festival (MWMF)...

Kathy Belge has a good breakdown of the differing viewpoints that go into the how the diversity model and womyn-born-womyn feminist model are clashing in her article Michigan Womyns Music Festival And Trans Women; Transsexual Women and the Michigan Womyn's Music Festival.

The MWMF controversies that Kathy Belge explained though, have spilled over into this past weekend's Boston Dyke March... Bitch was invited to be a performer at Boston Dyke March, then at the eleventh hour disinvited because of previous statement in support of the "Womyn-Born-Womyn (WBW) only space" concept.

What were those statements? In an interview with Kathy Beige, Bitch said:

KB: Do you get shit from the trans community for playing at Michigan?

B: Yes, from parts of the trans community.... And it's not trans people being marginalized. Its people who were born as men. The festival is for people who suffered a girlhood. That's all it is. Theyre not trying to redefine what women are. I think it's really ironic, I dont see nearly as much activism around all male gatherings... It is so the patriarchy. Im so over it. I think it?s totally the patriarchy and its complete ageism.

KB: How so?

B: Because going to Michigan is like going to another country. These visionaries set up Michigan for six f**king days out of the year. It?s not like theyre trying to make a city. They want to have a party with only these kinds of people. Theyre our elders. They had a vision...If my elders want to say for these six days only these kinds of women can come, then I need to respect that. It is so against our nature to respect women for having boundaries...

I had the same experiences as a white girl at Michigan. I felt blown away that I couldn't go to the women of color events. I felt very entitled about it and very pissed off. And then I had to be schooled about it...

And at the Indigo Girls website, Bitch was quoted as saying to Amy:

AR: So, alright...I want to know how you feel about Michigan's "women-born women only "...

Bitch. I'd say my stance basically is that I support the policy. I support women making their own boundaries for something they've created and how they want it to go down in the world. I came upon that after years of debating with myself and with other people. It just dawned on me that in our society it's so hard for us to accept women saying no to people. And that feels like the root of the issue for me - that this is a private gathering in a way, and it was set up by a small group of people who have this ideal that they want it to be like that, and I think that's OK. Also, I can't ignore the politics of entitlement around it, you know, how a lot of the issue, and I have noticed this in talking with my friends out at Camp Trans, a lot of the issues are around people born males. So, I find in this patriarchal system that so much of women's energy goes towards making men feel comfortable and satisfying men. This is hard to say... I'm not convinced that if there were problems with people born women being excluded from this space...I'm not so convinced that so many people would rally around them, trying to help them. I think there's a lot of entitlement at work. When I see protesters at my shows, generally the majority is not trans people. The majority of the protesters are fem girls, usually white students, and there's usually one M to F - it's all about them. So I can't ignore that dynamic and I think it's hard for people to tolerate, when they're raised in the patriarchy, it's hard for people to tolerate women saying no...

I see the type of feminism that seeks to provide separate spaces for particular types of women based on race, natal sex, and past girlhood as clashing frequently in the future with the type of diversity that tries to turn all events into inclusive spaces...

"Womyn-born-womyn only" space advocates will have to come up with a better plain English narrative that explains the need for these spaces if they don't want to lose more battles to the diversity model. Bitch and her separate space allies just lost a very public battle at the Boston Dyke March because they don't have a persuasive narrative for the broader LGBT community.

---------

When Is A Dyke Unwelcome At A Dyke March? | 3 comments

Separatism 101
`When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, `it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less.'

`The question is,' said Alice, `whether you CAN make words mean so many different things.'

`The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, `which is to be master - - that's all.'
Lewis Carroll, Through The Looking Glass.

Autumn, The fact that in describing Lesbian Separatism you invoke Plessy v. Ferguson (the landmark 1896 case that institionalize the doctrine of separate but equal for whites and blacks),is asking your readers to step through the looking glass.

You might argue that the "equal" part of separate but equal was also a trip through the looking glass in which "equal" means "inferior" That said, it is important to remember that the laws of racial segregation that followed slavery were created by white men to create and maintain an unjust system of power inbalance by which African Americans suffered, and continue to suffer, and by which the shifting categories of White have benefitted.

When Lesbian Separatism appeared as a theory and pratice, in the 1970's, it was invoked by a few Lesbians as a way to think about the world, to combat sexism and Lesbophobia....
In the 90's, Lisa Vogel and Boo Price, who owned the Michigan Women's Music Festival, had to make a decision...

They decided to draw the line at women born women. Or, womyn born womyn. They could have included mtf people. Possibly they could have avoided a whole lot of hoo ha, but they didn't, and they have stuck to their clearly stated policy ever since.

The question of where to draw the line is tricky... Sure, mtfs could be included at women only events. But, pre or post op? Do they have to pass totally as women. How can this be determined? How far along in trasition? Can they present fully as male but claim to be female anyway?

Or only post op, but what does that mean about the gender of pre op folks? Should it be only mtf, since they are women. Or can ftm people come as well, since they spent a chunk of their lives growing up as women and some as Lesbians?

Suddenly, the problem of the gender line is exposed.

But what if women still want to gather with each other for a week or an afternoon?
What if women with female bodies of origin want to hang out and celebrate, commiserate, educate or whatever, with women who have spent their entire lives as women?

Is it wrong? Is it wrong when women of color want to gather without white women? Or when jews or Navajo or muslims or pagans want to gather together alone in shared and peaceful ritual?

Just don't call it a Dyke March. We spent way too much time reclaiming that word to have it stolen out from under us. Because if all Lesbians who have perfomed at Michigan are to be banned from queer events in the future, there will be no more Lesbian Performers at Dyke events. If that is not straight from Humpty Dumpty, I don't know what is.

I don't know about you, but it seems to me that it is Lesbians who are being made invisible, once again.

I suggest that you read as much as you can about Lesbian Separatism. Not just secondary sources, but primary documents as well. Separatism was a complex issue in its heyday, well worth the investigation.
Yeah, the gross miscomprehension of what constitutes discrimination is depressing. Oppression arises from the systematic and instutionalized misinformation and denial of access to survival resources for a target group. One target group is women, and women get to define themselves. Definitions can and do vary, but disagreements about definition is not discrimination. If someone in a target group doesn't want to hear what you have to say or meet with you, you have to respect their boundary.

This confusion lead to the creation of such silliness as "reverse racism" where Allen Bakke sued the University of California system because people of color were given admission ahead of him, a white man. It is not discriminatory to prioritize a target group for the purpose of their self-actualization. Discrimination is when poor kids don't get lunch at school, not when a middle-class kid doesn't get dessert.
.......................

I'm not arguing with Liza's history of how the woman-born-woman policy got solidified, but the fact is, I went to the early Michigan Festivals...

One-third of the lesbians who came out in that era had children from prior heterosexual relationships, i.e., were mothers themselves, and from the beginning Michigan had a focus on our daughters being there with us. Reproductive and biological rights were the glue that bound feminist politics together, including for lesbians -- we were women before we were queer.

Don't try to revise this reality and make it about men or trans. It was about putting ourselves first. And that mean disentangling the conditioning we had received as little girls from our mothers. There's really one definition that fits this group, and we used it.

**wobs** · 22nd-January-2010

Cheers for that Ohso.

Identity politics is a bitch isn't it.

**Ohso** · 9th-February-2010

Obama Panders to the Feminists
by Phyllis Schlafly 2/9/10

Barack Obama's "spread the wealth around" doesn't mean only higher taxes on taxpayers and more handouts to non-taxpayers. More especially, it means transfers of financial goodies to the president's political allies.
The American people were rightfully outraged when it became known that Sens. Mary Landrieu and Ben Nelson were rewarded for voting for Obamacare with hundreds of thousands of dollars of benefits given uniquely to their states, Louisiana and Nebraska. Now we find that President Obama is paying off the feminists big-time for their support of his election.

When Obama presented his multitrillion dollar budget, he declared with great fanfare that he was calling for a freeze in discretionary spending. Feminists immediately had a tantrum to complain that the freeze exempted funding for the military, intelligence and homeland security.

Now we learn that all feminist programs and organizations will also be exempted from the freeze. Instead, they will get what White House spokesman Kate Bedingfield admits are "significant funding increases."
A White House document titled "Opportunity and Progress for Women and Girls" describes 15 federal programs that will receive increased funding to appease the feminists. Chief among them is the Violence Against Women project, which is targeted for a 22 percent increase, an extra $117 million more than current funding, which is already close to $1 billion a year.

That earmark is a Joe Biden project known as feminist pork because the money goes right into the hands of radical feminist centers where they teach their anti-male, anti-marriage ideology, counsel women to get divorces and urge criminal prosecution against a man no matter how slight or unverified the alleged offense.

The "Women and Girls" document reveals that Obama's budget would appropriate $50 million to give grants to incentivize the states to adopt paid family leave. That longtime feminist goal would be very costly to small business and result in a loss of jobs.

To please the feminists, other spending that will be exempted from Obama's freeze includes an additional $400 million for the discretionary nutrition program for low-income women and an increase of $10 million for family planning.

Of course, Obama's budget will increase funding for daycare, one of the most favorite feminist objectives. Head Start, which already receives $9 billion a year, is scheduled for additional funding of nearly $1 billion, despite the fact that recent studies show that Head Start provides little or no beneficial results toward the stated goal of helping disadvantaged children catch up with other children.

Obama's budget also provides an additional $1.6 billion for the Child Care and Development Fund as part of the reauthorization of government spending for daycare. The feminists believe that childcare should be taken over by government in order to overcome society's expectation that mothers should care for their own babies.

Obama's budget increases funding for a new program to recruit undergraduate students from underrepresented groups in science and technology careers. The budget also increases funding for a special program to give women (instead of men) more jobs in academic science and engineering careers.

Obama's State of the Union speech continued his pandering to the feminists. He said, "We are going to crack down on violations of equal-pay laws so that women get equal pay for an equal day's work." Equal pay for equal work has been U.S. law since 1963, so there's nothing new about the law or its enforcement. Isn't his Equal Employment Opportunity (EEOC) agency already cracking down against violations -- and if not, why not?

Obama's statement was just a throw-away line to feed the feminist myth that women are victims of employment discrimination. It was also designed to try to validate the false feminist slogan that women are paid only 77 cents for work that earns a dollar for men.

That's not true because equal pay ought to be paid for equal work, and most women don't work as many hours or in as dangerous or unpleasant jobs as men. Women prefer inside work in air-conditioned offices.

Obama hasn't yet gone as far as Norway, which passed a law requiring that women must comprise 40 percent of all companies' corporate boards. U.S. feminists probably would like that rule -- they pretend to see no hypocrisy in touting gender-neutrality while demanding affirmative action for females.

Rush Limbaugh got it right when he commented on Obama's State of the Union speech as "from the 1970s ... totally cliched." Half of American women are in the workforce today, while male unemployment is setting new records.

Phyllis Schlafly is a national leader of the pro-family movement, a nationally syndicated columnist and author of Feminist Fantasies.

**Ohso** · 24th-February-2010

Arrest Warrant Issued for Lisa Miller in Vermont

By Matthew Cullinan Hoffman RUTLAND, VERMONT, February 23, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) -
A Vermont judge has issued an arrest warrant for Lisa Miller for failing to transfer custody of her daughter to her former lesbian partner.

Miller, an ex-lesbian who has returned to her childhood faith in Jesus Christ, has been ordered to give up her daughter to her former partner Janet Jenkins, whom she says she left after years of abuse.

After years of legal struggles to prevent unauthorized visits of her daughter, Isabella, with Jenkins, Miller severed contact with her attorneys and disappeared in November of last year.

Jenkins has no relation to Miller's daughter Isabella, 7, who was conceived by artificial insemination while Jenkins and Miller were in a Vermont civil union.

Jenkins has repeatedly requested jail time for Miller, who has resisted the unsupervised visitation dates decreed by Vermont Judge Richard Cohen.

A judge in Bedford County Virginia last week refused to issue an arrest warrant for Miller, due to the fact that she had not been legally subpoenaed.

**shaazam** · 24th-February-2010

the next queer parade is due in Sydney and no doubt will be followed by much carpet munching - some wil make a fist of it - and buggery engendering every know STDs the queers fly in from overseas to attend the Gay Mardi Gras bringing the latest diseases in with them and the whole disaster is enthusiastically promoted by the Media

**Ohso** · 6th-March-2010

Lisa Miller's Daughter Appeared Traumatized by Visits with Lesbian 'Mother,' Court Documents Reveal

By Matthew Cullinan Hoffman RUTLAND, VERMONT, March 3, 2010 (LifeSiteNews) - The daughter of ex-lesbian Lisa Miller appeared to have suffered emotional trauma following forced visits with Miller's ex-partner, according to sworn testimony submitted to a Vermont court.

The affidavits, recently obtained by LifeSiteNews, give credence to claims by Miller that her daughter was being emotionally harmed by the visitations with her ex-partner Janet Jenkins, which were ordered by Vermont judge Richard Cohen following the breakup of the couple in 2003.

Despite expert testimony and other witnesses, as well as testimony from Miller herself, Cohen continued to order unsupervised visits with Jenkins, and even ordered a permanent custody of transfer in 2009.

Miller appears to have gone into hiding with her daughter in anticipation of the ruling, where she remains after a warrant was issued for her arrest in the state of Vermont.

Experts note symptoms of trauma in Miller's daughter

Clinical Therapist Sylvia Haydash, who had two clinical sessions with Isabella and observed her for an hour on another occasion, concluded that the visits were doing serious harm to the child, causing anxiety, renewed bed-wetting, and general psychological regression.

"Isabella appears to have been traumatized by the limited visitation thus far, a serious consequence, taking Isabella in a negative direction as compared to Isabella’s condition before the recent visitations where she was a child that was well-adjusted, flourishing, above-the-curve developmentally, verbally gifted, and readily able to separate from Lisa and meet with other people," wrote Haydash in her sworn testimony of June, 2007.

Gwen Corley, a social worker who also observed Isabella, noted similar trauma. "Isabella suffers from sleep disturbance and nightmares, having difficulty sleeping through the night," she told the court in September of the same year.

She added that "Isabella also talks about death, and has expressed fear that if her mother Lisa dies she will be at risk. Without prompting, Isabella has said she is afraid that Janet Jenkins may take her away from Lisa."

A friend of Lisa Miller, who said she had cared for Isabella while her mother was out of the house, was also disturbed by behavioral changes she saw in the child.

"[Isabella] has told me she does not like to talk about her visits with Janet because it makes her cry," she wrote to the court.

Further visits could cause "permanent damage"

Both Haydash and Corley warned the court against further unsupervised visits with Jenkins, over concern that Isabella could suffer irreparable harm if they continued.

"At this point, after only two supervised two-hour visits, and the resulting regressive behaviors, it is my clinical opinion that leaving Isabella unsupervised with Janet for visitations would needlessly exacerbate Isabella’s trauma," wrote Haydash.

"I further believe that unsupervised visits would be detrimental to Isabella at this time and could cause permanent damage to normal development," she added.

Corley concluded that "the distance from Virginia to Vermont, and the time it takes to travel back in forth, coupled with these emotional concerns, are simply too great to require a five year old to make the trip during the school year ... in my professional opinion it would be detrimental to Isabella's emotional well-being for her to travel back and forth to Vermont during the school year."

Moreover, even the legal advocate appointed by the Vermont court for Isabella agreed that transferring custody might be harmful to the child, and acknowledged that "the position of my client [Isabella] is that Virginia is her home and she wants to stay there" and that she is a "thriving and happy go lucky kid."

While claiming that Jenkins had "a right to a relationship" with Isabella, her advocate told the court that "I certainly can extend to the Court that Isabella's doing well, that she does want to stay where she's at" and expressed concern that there was "a real risk that we have, turning her world upside down and changing, you know Virginia to Vermont."

Expert opinions ignored by court

The expert testimony submitted to the Vermont court in 2007 is in agreement with statements made by Miller herself to the press regarding the traumatic impact of the visits on her daughter.

In interviews with numerous media outlets, including LifeSiteNews, Miller stated publicly that her daughter had spoken of wishing to die after her visits with Jenkins, and had even put a comb to her neck saying she wanted to kill herself. She had also complained of being forced to bathe naked with Jenkins, according to Miller.

The expert testimony submitted to the court, along with Miller's own testimony that her daughter was suffering from emotional trauma due to the visits, did not dissuade Cohen from continuing to order unsupervised visits with Jenkins.

After years of resistance to such visits by Miller, Cohen finally ordered a permanent custody transfer of Isabella to Jenkins in November of last year. However, Miller had by that time disappeared with her child, in an apparent attempt to protect her from the court and Jenkins.

Isabella Miller was conceived by artificial insemination while Miller and Jenkins were in a Vermont "civil union" in 2002. Jenkins has no biological relationship with Isabella, and her name is not on her birth certificate.

Although an arrest warrant has been issued for Miller in Vermont, a Virginia court recently refused to do the same, noting that Miller has not been subpoenaed since her disappearance.

Previous LifeSiteNews coverage:

Arrest Warrant Issued for Lisa Miller in Vermont
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/feb/10022310.html

Lisa Miller Safe for Now: Virginia Judge Refuses to Issue Arrest Warrant
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/feb/10021807.html

Lesbian Janet Jenkins Begins Media Campaign to Gain Custody of Ex-Partner's Child
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/feb/10020306.html

Judge Gives Miller 30 Days to Transfer Daughter to Former Lesbian Lover or Face Arrest
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/jan/10012901.html

Exclusive Interview with Lisa Miller, Ex-Lesbian Fighting for Custody of Own Child against "Civil Union" Partner
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/oct/08102707.html

**Meadester** · 6th-March-2010

High-Profile Ohio Lesbian Custody Battle Again Highlights Injustices Faced by Noncustodial Parents

February 22nd, 2010 by Glenn Sacks, MA for Fathers & Families

We've often discussed the issue of lesbian “social mothers”–women who agreed to employ a sperm donor so that they could have children with their lesbian partners, who are the biological mothers. Disputes between lesbian biological mothers and social mothers are now becoming routine. When the relationship goes sour, often the lesbian biological mom drives her ex out of their child's life, exactly as heterosexual mothers often do to their ex-husbands. (emphasis added)

The most high-profile of the cases is the Lisa Miller-Janet Jenkins custody battle, which Ned Holstein, MD and I highlighted in our MSN.com column With Gay Marriage Comes Gay Divorce: The Rise of Lesbian Custody Battles. Because of Miller's relentless refusal to allow Jenkins to co-parent the daughter they had together, the Vermont court eventually ordered Miller to surrender the child to Jenkins. Rather than do so, Miller abducted the child and disappeared.

Jenkins discussed the case on ABC a few weeks ago and did a very creditable job of describing how noncustodial parents--male or female, straight or gay--are mistreated. To watch, click here. To listen to Holstein discuss the case on the Mike McConnell Show, click here.

The newest case getting media attention is in Ohio, pitting lesbian biological mom (Kelly Mullen) and sperm donor (Scott Liming) against social mom Michele Hobbs. The child, 4-year-old Lucy Mullen, has resided with Kelly since the breakup of the Mullen/Hobbs relationship.

Liming was originally intended to be simply a sperm donor. However, after the girl's birth, to his credit, he fell for the little girl and decided he wanted to have an active role in the child's life. The girl spends every Monday with Liming. Hobbs hasn't been allowed to see the girl since Christmas.

I have been approached by both sides (Mullen/Liming and Hobbs) in the case, have spoken at length with Liming and Hobbs, and have read some of the case's documentation. I've concluded that Hobbs is correct, for various reasons, including:

1) It is clear from the evidence, and courts have concluded, that 4-year-old Lucy Mullen and Michele Hobbs are closely bonded in a parent/child-type relationship.

2) It is clear from the evidence, and courts have concluded, that Mullen and Hobbs had this child with every intention that they would raise her together.

3) There is nothing in the record which indicates that Hobbs is anything but a fit parent. I listened to Liming's attempts to malign her and suffice it to say that there's nothing there, and the vilification sounds exactly like what divorcing mothers and their allies often do to perfectly decent fathers.

4) Like most noncustodial fathers, Hobbs doesn't seek sole custody nor does she seek to exclude Mullen from their daughter's life. She simply wants shared custody, but Mullen/Liming have fought a long, expensive legal battle to prevent it.

5) While Mullen/Liming vilify Hobbs, Hobbs freely acknowledges that Liming is a good father and says she wants to preserve his current role in the girl's life.

6) Liming is now denying that he was a sperm donor, instead asserting that he is a real parent. Yet on July 16, 2004, at the outset, Liming signed a standard sperm donor agreement which read in part:

"Each party acknowledges and agrees that the relinquishment of all rights, as stated above, is final and irrevocable. DONOR further understands that his waiver shall prohibit and action for custody, guardianship, or visitation in any future situation, including in the event of the RECEIPIENT's death or disability, unless any child is no longer in the custody of DONOR or DONOR's partner, Michele Hobbs..."

Liming's sperm donor agreement can be found here.