Apparently TG$F told this chick who's been in the community for a bazillion years she couldn't be on the float and couldn't march with them because they were going to wear matching classy outfits and wanted to be on TV. And this chick DD walks around the city like, all the time every day, clad in nothing but a gstring and high heels and is a little nuts, used to be a sergeant in v1etnam, many a colorful story... A funny and cheerful person. I just have to point out how much it sucks that she was just dissed by her own community. And I'm meanly glad there was a commercial break in the parade coverage just as their float went by. Arrrrgh, the bitches. Love how their web site about this year's pride march is all about "inclusion" and acceptance.
As if for years there weren't parade officials trying to suppress any sort of TG presence...! For fuck's sake! Here is something on the very incident I was thinking of - when the SF pride march committee tried to exclude trans people from the march because the media would pay too much attention to flamboyance, sexiness, etc.
TGSF should get its head out of wherever it is and look at history. Who started Stonewall? Are we going to ignore that? No, sorry, whores in lingerie can't be in our revolution, even though they started it.
I take it all personally as it's just what happened to me in Aust1n with the lesbians and lefty coalition - "don't dress like a whore, don't wear your leather, you make us look bad, you steal the media attention..." Darlings - the media isn't going to pay proper attention to your issues ANYWAY so you might as well have some fun and celebrate outrageously as you choose. And my flamboyance got media coverage, sometimes good and sometimes bad - sometimes just the image alone, which you could argue would be inspiring and cool for some texas queers. and sometimes i got to speak and be quoted or the slutty outfit got a crowd of people listening to the safe sex demo. Yes, it attracted a conservative backlash. But that is no excuse for suppression.