Baltimore Pride 2018 (USA) @GLCCB @GLCCBPride

On July 18, 2018, the GLCCB and Baltimore Pride published the following garbage statement regarding Baltimore Pride 2018 on their respective Facebook pages:


Screen Shot 2018-07-18 at 7.51.17 PM.png

Characterizing the signs three women carried at Baltimore Pride as “hate speech” and “transphobia” is inaccurate and irresponsible. While there’s no single, agreed-upon definition of what constitutes “hate speech,” statements such as “dykes don’t like dick,” “lesbian not queer,” and “woman is not a feeling” don’t even come close to that standard. These are not targeted statements regarding any group or class of persons, they’re not reasonably interpreted as inciting violence, and they aren’t expressing any sort of hatred.

Also, they claim to “have identified the group responsible for inviting these individuals to march” … but actually they didn’t identify the group? What’s with that?

Are they actually saying they were unaware people would show up to the pride parade carrying signs expressing opinions about sexual orientation? Isn’t that … what a lot of people do at pride parades? Hm.

Most troubling, however, is the statement that they intend to identify “ways that we can quickly extract any individuals who attempt to disrupt Pride, should they infiltrate our celebrations in future.” Partially because it’s a terribly constructed sentence, but mostly because it’s complete garbage. These women didn’t “disrupt” or “infiltrate” the parade. The parade continued without interruption or incident, except that after it was over some people took to the internet to complain about the women who dared to express opinions they didn’t like. Also, they admit the women invited, so obviously there was no infiltration. Who gets to decide which individuals need to be “extract[ed]” from the event? What kind of fascist garbage is that? And are they suggesting that if women carry signs expressing, for example, their sexual orientation as “lesbian not queer” at future pride parades they will be forcibly removed from an event advertised as  “a safe space for people of all … sexual orientations” that takes place in public? Really?

In 2018, Baltimore Pride is no longer about celebrating “the freedom of all people to proudly express their sexual and gender identities.” It appears to be about punishing women who dare to express their ideas in public.

Here are the people responsible for this garbage statement:

GLCCB Board of Directors: Merrick Moses, Emma Mays, Kayla Tullis, David Sugar, April Rancier, and Chris Weis.

Baltimore Pride Committee: Mimi Demmisew, Lakesha Davis, Monte Ephraim, Tanisha Jackson, Aisha Jackson, Chris Weis, Alexander Li, Carly Saunders, Raychyl Am Segovia, Kate Bowers, Liezell, Bradshaw, Bill Redmond-Palmer, Lynora Lawless, Leila Younes, Jake Quimby, D’Arcy Rossiter, Chonda Bond, David Sugar, Shelese Greene

Screen Shot 2018-07-18 at 9.08.49 PMScreen Shot 2018-07-18 at 9.08.57 PM

Screen Shot 2018-07-18 at 9.09.06 PM

Baltimore Pride 2018 — Gender Identity Watch

Rich Allison (USA)

Rich Allison is a men’s rights activist who has brought at least 13 lawsuits against female-focused businesses, alleging discrimination against men in violation of California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act because he’s upset he’s not invited to ladies’ night and doesn’t qualify for privately offered diversity scholarships aimed at getting women involved in industries that are already dominated by men. He was inspired to get involved in the men’s rights movement after he saw a T-Mobile ad he didn’t like featuring Sarah Silverman during the Super Bowl.

In his youth, Mr. Allison attended a boys’ prep school in Connecticut before moving to California. One reasonably wonders whether he’s planning to file suit against his former school next. Further, was the value of being educated in an environment focused on supporting his development as a young man simply lost on him? How sad.

He spends his time filing these lawsuits to deal with his emotions regarding his former military service, and also to remind women that civil rights laws were written to guarantee “full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges or services” for everyone, including men’s rights activists.

A Fight for Men’s Rights, in California Courts — New York Times

Get the L Out at Pride in London Parade (U.K.) @PrideinLondon #GetTheLOut


On July 7, 2018, “a group of lesbian and feminist individuals and organisations, opposing the increasingly anti-lesbian and misogynistic LGBT movement and the erasure of lesbians” called Get the L Out protested and marched in the Pride in London Parade.

According to the group’s website:

Why We Protest

We believe that lesbian rights are under attack by the trans movement and we encourage lesbians everywhere to leave the LGBT and form their own independent movement, as well as to be vocal and take action against the proposed changes to the GRA.

The group arrived before the parade started at the beginning of the parade line-up with large banners reading “Lesbian = Female Homosexual,” “Transactivism Erases Lesbians” and “Lesbian Not Queer.” When parade organizers asked them to put their signs away and leave, several women laid down in the street with their banners in protest, delaying the parade’s start about ten minutes. According to Pride in London, the group asked to march behind the rainbow flag at the start of the parade, but organizers instead chose to move them in front of the flag. They marched the entire parade route, handing out the following fliers:


Get the L Out (front)


Get the L Out (back)


We support Get the L Out and their pro-lesbian action against trans activist garbage at the Pride in London Parade.

Why “Get the L Out”?

Lesbian activists block Pride in London parade to protest against trans women — Gay Star News

Pride in London Parade (video) — Pink News

What Really Happened with Lesbian Protestors at Pride London Yesterday?


McAdams v. Marquette University (USA)


John McAdams, a former Marquette University professor who wrote a blog post  criticizing a student instructor he believed shut down debate against gay marriage wrongfully lost his job because of what he published. The 120-page decision concluded that the private Catholic school breached its contract with professor McAdams that guaranteed academic freedom and that he should be immediately reinstated.

We agree, and as a lesbian, I don’t want professors trying to protect gay people from arguments against the gay rights movement. If our movement is sound, it should stand on its own merit.

Wisconsin high court sides with fired conservative professor

Marquette Warrior_ Marquette Philosophy Instructor_ “Gay Rights” Can_t Be Discussed in Class Since Any Disagreement Would Offend Gay Students



Vanna Belton and ‪@FlavorBaltimore ‬

Vanna Belton

Vanna Belton is an owner of Flavor, a restaurant and bar that caters to lesbians in Baltimore. She apparently claims to have worked to get a woman fired for marching at Baltimore Pride while carrying a sign Belton does not like. Below is a message she allegedly sent to a member of the Bmore Queer Facebook group, a cesspool of garbage. We redacted information that could be used to harass a woman who exercised her right to free speech. Continue reading

Alysha Davila

Alysha Davila (Xochi Mochi) is a woman involved with a man who wants lesbians to die for rejecting her political beliefs. This post appears in Bmore Queer, a Facebook group in which non-gay people regularly post stuff like this.

Davila is upset that lesbians marched at Baltimore Pride carrying signs she didn’t like. We redacted the names of the women from this post. Continue reading

Bray v. Starbucks (USA) @starbucks

On December 27, 2017, the Minnesota Court of Appeals reversed in part a summary-judgment dismissal of a case alleging discrimination on the basis of transgender status, finding a genuine issue of material fact. The case was remanded to the district court for further proceedings regarding the alleged discrimination under the Minnesota Human Rights Act.

The case was brought by Paul Allen Bray, who identifies as a “transgender/transsexual male,” against Starbucks, alleging that an employee disclosed Bray’s transgender status to another employee, who subsequently “began to treat him differently.”

Court reinstates transgender man’s discrimination suit against Starbucks — Pink News

Bray v. Starbucks — unpublished opinion