I'm not saying its a bad idea, in fact its a great idea. Every year put 100 people front and center who have contributed to transgender progress in highly positives way. But what about those who just managed to make it one more year struggling in some back ally, eating out of a garbage can?
A person can be nominated via web form by anyone. And for or the narcissists in the crowd, you can even nominate yourself. According to the Trans 100
about page you need to be pretty active and a sucessfull advocate. Hard to do when you are in the ally but that doesn't lessen your value my friend.
Someone, most likely GLAAD staff then selects "Curators" from the trans community who vote anonymously sending those selections back to GLAAD.
Getting the curated message out.
A recent
Rolling Stones article first quotes Hayden Mora of the Human Rights Campaign, then Tiq Milan, GLAAD's senior media strategist and a host of high profile trans people who were selected to be honored.
That's brilliant message control.
But what about the selections that GLAAD disproves of?
Controlling the message
Trans man Mark Angelo Cummings said he was told he was selected but after he made a statement critical of
Janet Mock for her interview by Pierce Morgan, he was deselected. Cummings feels strongly that his criticism of Mock was the sole reason for him not being a trans 100 honoree.
The facebook status Cummings posted on his profile..
I am seeing a very strange twist in our community, and why are we all of a sudden admiring individuals who have recently come out as advocates with little to no experience in that role. One is an actress, the other stealth for many years working at Peoples magazine behind a cubicle and now decides to write a book and is identifying as a fierce advocate? Both trans woman of color, which seems to be a very prominent twist these days as if they are the only ones in the trans community who have suffered and constantly harp on how bad they have it, leaving behind the rest of us. Separating themselves, creating their own groups and associations and hijacking the community at large.
Now all of sudden we see this rage, this uproar, this hatred towards "Cis" Gender individuals, there years of hurt is coming out in their attempt to advocate and it is creating one ugly picture. in addition, they are leading a war path, a path that will lead us into an abyss. I believe we need to stop this movement before it back fires and redirect our efforts to showing love and compassion and stop seeing color.... Mark Angelo Cummings.
Since that time Cummings has been demonized, called a racist and has been the subject of intense ridicule by
trans people of color., That lends a lot of credence to his belief that he wasn't selected because of his views critical of a person of color by GLAAD.
To be clear I do not agree with Cummings about his criticism of Mock. I thought she is brilliant and an amazing trans representative. However, taking what Cummings said out of context, labeling him a racist and troll him over the Internet and getting things he posted taken down, is censorship. That is wrong, highly destructive and counter intuitive.
And so are the Parker Marie Malloy led Twitter gang bangs of cis and trans people.
And what of others who call the Trans100 out for being problematic? They are berated, intimidated and if not picked as a GLAAD Trans100, told they are questioning the process simply out of sour grapes, or worst.
That happened to me.
Recently, after I had cross posted Mark Cummings arctile from FB "Trans Role Models" which was subsequently deleted by the page mods, I was attacked via PMs and simultaneously on the article by Parker Marie Malloy. During this attack, I was baited into saying something about a Monica Roberts
for which I applogized for saying. But the one who baited me immediately
broadcast my faux pas on social media in a straw man attack accusing me of being a white supremacist racist. Really!?!
The only reason I posted Cumming's article was because I wanted to spark a debate about the Trans 100 selection process but for others, they saw it as an opening.
Silencing those who question the Trans100.
After the conflagration that Parker began I was removed as a contributor at the TransAdvocate without so much as a word. Roberts is an editor at that publication so its really not hard to figure out why I was dumped. That and both Melloy and Roberts are Trans100 receipents. That and, well Roberts always intensly disliked me for some reason.
And Parkers attack wasn't just some serendipitous event.
That was a premeditated malicious attack on my being in which this person got a whole gang come after me. Those people have no idea who I am or what I have done, or what I am doing, and they could not care less. They have a victim. Incredibly, I have on multiple times defended that same person when people accused her of using these exact same Nazi tactics, and had just done so a few weeks ago after a
Huffpost Gay video was posted ridiculing her..
I have a suggestion for GLAAD. Why not take nominations just like you have but make a completely random selection. That would be a true trans 100 everyone could get behind. Even me.
I have a suggestion for people who use words that offend in wide racial brush strokes. That's not going to help the trans agenda. You are ostracizing people. Attacking those with these tactics is only going to tear our community apart and set our agenda back.
And my advice to my new antagonist Parker Marie Malloy? People have told me since that you have attacked them in much the same fashion. Like chicken little sooner or later no one will listen. You have great writing skills. Don't waste it on foolish, childish, hateful games.
