Why do Queers want to kill other Queers ?

The Orange Man announced on el 26 de julio de 2017/the 26th of July 2017 that transgender people cannot serve in the US Military in “any capacity.”

Hola a todos. To begin with, why would Queers (which includes trans) want to serve in the US Military Industrial Complex?

Part of the job includes killing innocent people, including other Queers, in parts of el mundo/the world for US Imperiali$m. Why would Queers want to do that? By serving in the US military, one is being an accomplice to the stealing of oil (I’m thinking about the US terrorist attack on Iraq for oil despite the lies told as the reasons for that attack; Saddam Hussein’s nonexistent weapons of mass destruction), the stealing of precious minerals of Afghanistan (I’m thinking of the US terrorist attack on Afghanistan and the lies told for that), the stealing of the natural resources of other countries per the PNAC agenda, as well as many heinous and barbaric acts of violence around the world caused by the US Military Industrial Complex. The PNAC agenda is the neocon’s blueprint for US Empire building and world domination particularly in the Middle East.

Why would Queers want anything to do with that? Or have they never considered this?

Do Queers really want to kill other innocent Queers in combat? Queers live all over el mundo/the world — including the closet cases with wives and children — and one should never assume that when one kills someone in combat that they are killing a breeder. A gay serviceperson says to himself: “Damn, I just killed another gay boy; a member of the Queer community. How could I possibly do that? What is wrong with me? What has happened to my moral compass?” Is that a question that Queers ever ask themselves in the US military? I suspect the Queer community has never thought about any of this.

All they’ve thought about is trying to be more and more like the breeders — with marriage and military being the main goals of the corporate-hijacked former Gay and Lesbian Rights Movement — and in this instance, joining the barbaric US Military Industrial Complex Killing Machine. Related: What was the ultimate goal of the Gay Rights Movement?

Contrary to “mainstream” D and R partisan thinking, being part of the US Military Industrial Complex has nothing to do with “patriotism” or “protecting the country” or “being a more full-fledged Amurrrrrrrrrkkkan” (ugly nationalism) or “protecting our freedoms” (our remaining freedoms are guaranteed in the US Constitution), or “protecting the flag” or any of that feel-good pabulum that the sheeple are fed by corrupt D and R corporate parasite politicians. Being part of the military and that macho environment has to do with US Imperiali$m and Empire building and nothing more, which partisans can’t bear to hear because they have fallen for the feel-good pabulum spewed by their corporate and imperialistic parties. And since 2000, The Terror CardTM has been the main marketing tool to keep the gullible public afraid of their own shadow in the name of “Terror, Terror, Terror” 24 hours a day. The Terror CardTM is played constantly so that the sheeple will continue in their support of a bloated military budget (pouring billions down a bottomless pit while the nation crumbles from within), their support of draconian laws, policies and the erosion of human rights and civil liberties worldwide.

What happened to Queers’ keen bull-shit detectors that they had throughout the decades of the former Gay and Lesbian Rights Movement? In those days, Queers didn’t fall for this shit. They saw right through it for what it was. Queers of the original Gay and Lesbian Rights Movement wanted nothing whatsoever to do with the US Military Industrial Complex. They/We were for peace, not the barbarism of US Empire building and world domination.

But the thinking these days seems to be: “If I describe myself as ‘normal’ and use that offensive word from the past (which implies that some Queers are not ‘normal’), and if I do my best to ‘act straight,’ and not remotely ‘radical’ in any way or ‘fem’ and try my best to be one of the obnoxious (and often drunk) breeder jock bros, maybe the straights will then accept me.” (roll eyes). Queers: please go back to being yourselves rather than this phony jock bro act many of you like to put on. And stop calling yourself “normal,” which for some guys is code for masculine. These days even with my very reliable gaydar, it’s not easy for me to tell who is Queer and who’s a breeder because Queers are trying to “act straight.” And by “acting straight,” Queers are telling the world that in their mind being straight/a breeder is the preferred sexuality, which is nonsense, otherwise Queers wouldn’t be trying to “act straight.” Have you never considered that either?

Because of our history, Queers have been through a lot with our struggles and are often more mature than breeders, which is why I find Queers who are seemingly desperate to be part of the US Military Industrial Complex barbarism quite suspect, shallow, and their thinking is not very well thought out. What happened? What caused such a major seismic shift change in the Queer community? It’s as if Queers are trying to erase their past — as if ashamed of it — and their struggles in order to be accepted by the “mainstream”/by breeders.

It seems that the main goals of the former Gay and Lesbian Rights Movement — after it was hijacked by corporatists — was marriage and military. Well, some of us Queers don’t support marriage or military because both are conservative “institutions.”

A peaceful protest at Castro/Market Streets in San Francisco

Surprisingly, there was a protest against this policy barring transgenders from being able to serve in the MIC. I say “surprisingly” because protesters were shunned, highly frowned upon and sneered at in the conservative Castro during the years of the Obama regime. I personally witnessed that. The thinking was solely partisan and the unspoken message was: “We must not be critical of our messiah Obama.” During the Obama years, I asked here on mi diario/my diary pink barrio: What will happen when a Republican is back en la casa blanca? Will the protests resume?

Estimates I saw for this protest last night were that “hundreds” showed up. It looked rather large from different angles, but after I got a closer look the crowd I saw listening to feel-good speeches mostly filled the Harvey Milk Plaza and that was it. Castro Street next to the plaza stayed open even though a little bit of the crowd spilled onto the street and down the sidewalk. It was a mix of guys and females, about half and half. It was a “scripted”/planned protest with (what I call) “canned” applause, the type of protest that turns me and others off where people applaud on cue. The “host” speaker introduced one guest speaker after the other who pumped up the crowd with feel-good pabulum. An example:

Referring to the gathered protesters: “We are very special people.” Cheering and applause.
“I’d like to introduce [Democratic Party politician's name].” Cheering and applause.

Someone gave a personal testimonial followed by applause.

It went like that. It was as if they were trying to counter something bad that had happened with positive, feel-good clichés followed by perfunctory applause. My thought about it was: Something bad has happened today yet the atmosphere here doesn’t feel like that. This is very strange. The atmosphere did not feel depressed at all to me. Odd.

When I arrived I heard a guy, a senior citizen, say to a woman, also a senior citizen, “There are more of us than there are them.” (roll eyes). Sigh. Oh lord. I’ve heard that cliché so many times. And considering his age, I would have hoped he would have known better. I didn’t hear any response from her. It’s such a meaningless cliché in this situation because “they” are the ones in power, meaning El Hombre Naranja/The Orange Man and his despicable regime. So it doesn’t matter how many there are of us when they establish the policies. Their guns are far more powerful than ours. So this nonsense about “there are more of us than there are them” is moot. It’s as ludicrous as that slogan, “Love always wins.” That cliché is best reserved for a greeting card, because I see no sign of that in reality. History shows that just the opposite is the case. More feel-good pabulum.

There were cops all over the place for this peaceful protest. As the crowd began their walk down Market Street, I left when I heard the tired and overused: “Whose streets?” Response: “Our streets.” The concept of whose streets they were/are didn’t make any sense in this context. As I recall, that chant was used during the protests against the police “back in the day.” That chant would have been appropriate if one were protesting the police, but not for a transgender ban in the military. Whose streets they are has nothing to do with this transgender ban. And if the streets were truly “our streets” we wouldn’t need to buy a permit or permission from the City government to protest. The crowd for this protest looked and sounded like the usual “scripted” protest crowd who enjoys listening to empty feel-good clichés intended to pump them up.

A sign in the window of one gay bar read, “The T in LGBT is not silent.”

In a way, the protest felt more like the Old City. It felt less heteronormative than usual with some gay guys holding hands, something I don’t see much of around here anymore. But some of us are so tired of hearing immature-sounding “scripted,” pabulum protests. I’ve been to a few protests like that — “tell the children what they want to hear” is how it comes off, and I and the people I know have no interest or patience for that — with perfunctory on-cue applause merely intended to pump up the crowd. Then the protesters begin walking down Market Street to the empty Federal Building in Civic Center at around 7pm at night during the workweek when nobody is there except the cleaning crew. So what exactly is that going to accomplish? It certainly won’t change this new policy from El Hombre Naranja.

Had Obama done this, there would have been no protests because what I heard of this protest was very partisan. Where were these protesters during the 8 years of the Obama regime? They were mostly silent (which is what I can’t stand about Democrats), no matter what Obama did — they felt they couldn’t be critical of their Obama, or they became hypocrites and approved of what he was doing even though they opposed the same policies under illegitimate George W Bush. And these protesters are still mostly silent. They only protest when it’s Queer/GTBQL-related, and something major such as this transgender ban. To my knowledge, there have been about two protests like this one in six months despite all that’s happened during time under El Hombre Naranja.

But if someone took away people’s phones/the Millennials’ phones, there would be millions and millions in the streets. But two hundred or so people aren’t going to do anything. There needs to be millions and millions. And how many of these protesters are supporting major corporations and corporate banks with their spending habits? I suspect most are. They are feeding the corporation$.

This act banning transgender people from the US military is just the beginning, probably to appease the closet cases of the regime of El Hombre Naranja. I have no doubt that the rest of the gay community is next to be banned from the MIC, perhaps soon or before the end of this year (2017). And when will this regime start coming for GTBQL couples who are married? All the regime would need to do is to get copies of marriage licence certificates, which is one of the reasons why some of us — who looked to the future of what could happen — had no interest in same-sex marriage for ourselves. Related: Breeder Marriage Proposals.

Can El Hombre Naranja dissolve all gay marriages by executive order? Can he end gay marriage in the US by executive order? One should put nothing past these basura.

It looks like Sessions is trying to salvage his job as Attorney General: Justice Department brief argues against protections for LGBTQ Queer/GTBQL workers. Chau.—el barrio rosa

Previously:

“Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” continues

Gay Men Glorify War and Nationalism

Transgender And In The US Military?

The Queer Equality March began with the US National Anthem? WTF?

What is an Obamabot?

6 comments on “Why do Queers want to kill other Queers ?

  1. castro local

    if you think that the castro is heteronormative (which it is), upper market is even worse….it’s even more so.

    1. el barrio rosa Post author

      Hola castro local,

      That’s true. Upper Market also has a different feel to it than The Castro. I can sometimes look at people in The Castro without getting a nasty look because I glanced at them. I don’t do that in Upper Market from experience of doing so because it doesn’t work. Up there can be snooty and snotty, especially the bougi and elitist homeowners who think they have special rights just because they own some old, over-priced moldy home. Stop to briefly look at someone’s flowers or holiday lights and you can get this snooty, “May I help you?” ‘Yeah, you can fuck off’ is what I feel like telling them. What are they doing? Standing at the window 24-hours doing surveillance of their home? I feel like asking Mr/Ms Paranoid: Didn’t you put flowers out here (or holiday lights) for people to look at, idiot? Note to self: Don’t look at people’s flowers or lights other than a few seconds and keep walking while you do. Lots of wealthy breeders with their screaming babies living up there. When I’m over at a friend’s apartment up there the couples we see walking down the street are usually straight (him-tall/her-short and the usual holding hands). Not like it used to be. People sometimes talk about Manhattan/NYC being unfriendly. NYC doesn’t have anything on SF when it comes to unfriendly, and many of these new residents are real snots. When they started invading here a real estate guy told me he couldn’t stand working with them because of their awful personalities, so snotty. He was starting to get out of the business because of it. Chau.

  2. D8

    I read that “furious gay rights advocates see the Orange Man’s ‘true colors.’”
    Even CJ has had a rude awakening.

    Why didn’t they see his true colors during the campaign like many of us did?

    1. el barrio rosa Post author

      Hola D8, “Why didn’t they see his true colors during the campaign like many of us did?”

      I suspect that’s a rhetorical question on your part. Most of his supporters are just as loco and stupid as he is. Like attracts like. I read a headline earlier this week that said that a poll was taken and about half of his supporters believe that he won the popular vote. Like I said: Loco. Also, some Queers (or fake-Queers?) fell for that stunt where he held up a Rainbow Flag, upside down. I just remembered that I wrote about that (at that link). As always, I appreciate everyone’s friendly comments and for not using his real name in your comment. Muchas gracias. Chau.

  3. E in Sunnyvale

    I’m surprised there even WAS a protest, considering how things go in The City these days.

    At any rate, I’m quite anti-military, and I agree: why would we want to go kill people? I don’t. But I think the most offensive part of the Orange Man-child’s bigoted and discriminatory ban on trans people is that, even thought I don’t WANT to be in the military, I’ve lost the RIGHT to be in the military. Trans comedian Patti Harrison recently made this point on a TV show, and followed it up with: “(the Orange Man-child) probably thinks trans people means those cars that turn into robots…”)

Fin. The End.