I like saying Haberdashery

my mom is friends with this trans woman, who was really sweet and she was super cool, but then i tried to come out after my mom expressed how much she liked her trans friend and how amazing she is. i told my mom about my crippling chest dysphoria and how much i’d love to be called by he/him pronouns and my preferred name. i told her about how i’ve always felt this way and i’ve known since eighth grade.

well the thing is, her friend is a transmed.

my mom is an uninformed person on trans issues, because she didn’t really care about them until recently. she took resources from her transmed friend and it ruined my life. she went off about how i’m not really trans because i didn’t come out sooner, i have piercings, my hair is always a crazy color, i still like girly things, and my glasses are weird. she kept yelling about how i didn’t have dysphoria before, so i obviously have the wrong definition. she told me if i was trans it would’ve been diagnosed by my therapist already, and it was just a cult bandwagon phase. i was locked away from the outside world for a month.

when my next year of high school rolled around, i was out as trans. my partner provided me with a binder and all was well. i came out to all my peers at the beginning and about halfway through the school year to my teachers. it was quiet, under the table. i told them my mom didn’t know and under our school guidelines, they were not allowed to tell my mom that sort of thing. well, one of my teachers ended up being lgbtphobic and i didn’t know, and announced to the class that she didn’t “agree with the lifestyle” and that “gay marriage isn’t what god wanted.” my mom got an email that day about me being out as trans at school. i wonder who could’ve sent it?

my mom blew up. she was sending me treat after threat because i was a trender, all i did was lie for attention, that i chose to be trans because it was trendy and that real trans people wouldn’t flaunt their transness. of course, she got these resources from her transmed friend. she pulled me out of public school and cut my contact with the outside world for three whole months. i didn’t get back into school until february.

We got super gatekeepy and “you must be THIS GAY to ride this identity” and we complained at length about it being “trendy” and how girls only did it to be “cool” and to get attention.

And so among other things I know one person I love is, for example, only JUST getting to have her FIRST relationship ever with a woman at slightly older than me because this shit got into her head and she didn’t think she was “allowed”.

So watching people turn the same bullshit on even more vulnerable kids?

Shit, they’ll pay for you to learn how to do it.

I just finished high school and got a untility job in a factory and I have almost no experience. They’re gonna train me for everything plus it has full health benefits.

All of the other guys there were great at locksmithing, but none of them were trained welders, and they needed someone who could build custom doors and frames. 

They trained him to do lock stuff too, so now he can weld AND pick locks. 

The owner of the company, when he handed out Christmas bonuses, looked at him and went “Dude we literally cannot fire you because we’d be screwed so here’s your bonus and also we’re giving you a raise.”

Today is Constitution Day as well as Citizenship Day. The federal government is becoming more and more atrocious by the hour (I’m going to reblog this with examples, but we’re all aware of some) and it is imperative that we are familiar with the Bill of Rights and what those Amendments grant each person. IMO every person/family should have a hard copy of the Bill of Rights in their car and in their house. The entire Constitution is important, but the Bill of Rights especially; the government already violates multiple Amendments on the regular and we’re asked to see it as normal (things like a ‘terror watchlist’ and many other security-related post-9/11 developments are inherently 4th Amendment violations, for example). We must know our rights as that slope gets slipperier over the years.

The Constitution is not for US citizens only. It is supposed to apply to all human beings on US soil. There have been exceptions for specific issues – just like with counterterrorism and the 4th Amendment – but my point is that anyone who says an undocumented immigrant isn’t protected by the Constitution is ignorant. (And if they’re also in a government position while they say that, then they’re a threat to the country and an enemy of the people.)

Most of the Founding Fathers were racist, sexist, hypocritical, and unenlightened on many aspects of human life we now consider average. Like the child of an abusive parent becoming a different type of abuser, early America was flawed and violent as it broke away from the monarchy, though among the mess the Founders got one thing right: Distrust in government. They designed the founding documents to protect the US from both foreign threats and its own government, after seeing how Britain treated them.

full transcript of the Bill of Rights

breakdown/explanation of the Bill of Rights

full transcript of the Constitution

breakdown/explanation of the Constitution

the complete Federalist Papers: additional context from the writers of the founding documents

the ‘militia’ mentioned in the Second Amendment is not the military or police, it is armed civilians; Federalist Paper #29

why you shouldn’t talk to the police

why you shouldn’t talk to the police (short text version)

immigrants’ rights

a warrant of removal/deportation does not allow officers to enter a home without consent

Stay safe this Constitution Day: Each Amendment is intertwined with complex social and political issues, as we know, and some more than others. The Constitution was meant to be changed if needed, but we must be careful and consider all factors when allowing the current government to alter our rights in the slightest. Stay safe this Citizenship Day: If you want to be here, then you are a US American in whatever capacity you wish to be, “legal” “citizen” or not. The Constitution stands for all of us, even against our government; it was meant to do exactly that if needed, and needed it is.

“What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms.” -- Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, 1787

Way back in 1890, as part of a gun confiscation attempt to pacify the west, the US Army moved on Wounded Knee Creek and attempted to disarm the Native American population there. The Native Americans refused; notably, one man named Black Coyote did not want to give up his rifle, the rifle was accidentally fired, and a shootout began. The US Army massacred between 250 and 300 Native Americans simply because they would not comply with unconstitutional orders to give up their personal property. (source) I’m using this as an early example of federal forces infringing on Americans’ rights, and because:

Years later, it was 1973. 200 Sioux Native Americans occupied Wounded Knee, where many years prior, the massacre had been carried out by the US 7th Cavalry. They took 11 residents hostage, demanding that the Senate investigate the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Sioux reservations in South Dakota, as well as holding hearings on how many treaties between Native Americans and the government had been broken over so many years. It took 71 days to come to an end; over that time, feds shot two Sioux men and wounded several other people. “(…) leaders and their supporters surrendered after officials promised to investigate their complaints. Russell Means and Dennis Banks were arrested, but on September 16, 1973, the charges against them were dismissed by a federal judge because of the U.S. government’s unlawful handling of witnesses and evidence.” (source)

The government could have deescalated with the discussion they asked for, but they resorted to violence instead. Of course it’s not okay to take hostages and threaten people’s lives, but sometimes people do fucked up things for desperate causes, and the feds had clear opportunities to end the suffering on all sides during the occupation.

It was 1992. Randy Weaver was on his private property with his family. There was an outstanding warrant for Randy’s arrest: He’d failed to appear for a firearms charge. Randy’d had a shotgun with a barrel of a little over 17 inches instead of 18 and they were out to arrest him about it. US Marshals entered the private property; when the dog barked at them, they shot and killed it. Sammy, Randy’s 14-year-old son, shot into the woods at the then-unknown trespasser who’d killed the dog; Sammy killed an agent and one of the agents shot Sammy in the back, killing him. After that, FBI snipers surrounded their house for days. They shot and wounded Randy and they shot and killed his wife while she was standing in the doorway with a baby in her arms. (”Ruby Ridge”: source, source, source, source)

Did Randy commit a crime? Yes, technically. But was this an appropriate response from government for a ‘crime’ like cutting your barrel too short? Of course not. Killing an innocent dog and mother holding her child in a standoff is batshit no matter what the crime was. Shooting someone in the back is also regarded as lowly and cowardly in every way, and that FBI agent shot a 14-year-old in the back, at that.

Not quite as clear-cut was 1993. There was a religious sect holed up in their compound in Texas. The ATF heard they had illegal machine guns in there, but nothing was confirmed. There were rumors of child abuse and drug trafficking as well, but these were also unconfirmed. Rather than investigating members of the sect, the ATF obtained a search warrant for the compound and raided it. First they shot the dogs, in typical government fashion. The sect members fought back; four agents were killed and six members of the sect. The FBI arrived and initiated a siege that lasted 51 days, all while over 100 people were in the compound; this culminated with tear gas attacks from the FBI agents and a fire starting, supposedly by sect members. Very few members left due to the tear gas, instead hiding further in the building; once the fire started, chaos ensued and 76 people died. This included women and children and the men who weren’t in the fight at all. (”Waco Siege”: source, source, source)

People of the sect definitely seemed to be unstable, but were all 82 that died guilty of whatever the government thought they were onto about the rumors? What if they were coerced into staying inside by the leaders of the sect? No matter what laws may have been broken, no matter who started the fire, which party escalated the situation to the point of physical harm and casualties? The feds did, right from the start.

Ruby Ridge and Waco were near-certainly the social catalysts for the motivations of the 1995 Oklahoma City federal building bomber, which has led to political unrest and media accusations. Whether the left, right, middle, or unaffiliated are angry about those cases, the behavior of the federal agencies in those cases is still the original problem through which all the other problems developed.

…And now, it’s 2019 and the main government oppressor appears to be ICE. I’m sure I don’t need to link any articles about the border or the raids because Tumblr is very aware of the issues. The Fourth Amendment says:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

But Thomas Homan, acting director of ICE, said before Congress in June 2017:

“You should be uncomfortable. You should look over your shoulder. You need to be worried. No population is off the table.” (source)

He just doesn’t seem to have an attitude respectful of privacy and personal security, does he? He thinks of the civilian population as being full of potential enemies and nothing else. He’s protecting his bootlicker utopian vision of America, not America. When people like him think of ‘defending America’, they don’t think of defending the People as they are; they think of policing who the ‘People’ are allowed to be comprised of in the first place. Even if ICE claims their policies don’t violate the Constitution by being “unreasonable”, the entire outlook is unconstitutional. Telling people they shouldn’t feel secure in this country is an unconstitutional viewpoint. Laws can be whatever they are and it won’t stop them from being unconstitutional.

I could make this post miles long, so I’ll switch to bullets again for the last infodump

the CIA has to declassify the unethical, grotesque shit they do sometimes and it just kinda blows over afterward (TW for assault of all kinds mentioned in the article linked) Their website always looks nice though! They’ve got something about sharks on there right now, wow that’s great thank you CIA I seem to have magically forgotten about the torture

the CIA also planned to commit terroristic acts of violence and blame it all on Cuba in order to justify a war with Cuba – Operation Northwoods, 1962

the FBI says “don’t forget me!” For while the CIA appears to handle most of the physical atrocities, the FBI has informational atrocities covered. Their website always makes sure to tell you who the other kind of bad guys are at the moment, though!

but wait, the NSA! Because while the CIA chains people up naked and the FBI stalks First Amendment rights activists, the NSA watches. …And watches. And watches. And tracks, and tracks, and tracks, and informs and informs and informs. Whose names are they writing down? What makes them interested in you or not interested in you? Why don’t they give a shit about our right to privacy: to feel secure in our persons, houses, papers, and effects? What reason is there to trust the United States federal government?

http://thememoryhole2.org/blog/150-more-photos

http://thememoryhole2.org/blog/border-patrol-detention-centers

You can send an email or a letter, but phone calls and voicemails have greater impact.

Contact information for your senators and congresspeople is easily found online.

Go to https://www.house.gov/representatives and enter your ZIP code where it says “Find Your Representative” on the upper righthand side of the page.

Go to https://www.senate.gov and use the “Find Your Senators” pull-down menu in the upper left corner of the page.

These websites are also helpful and straightforward: https://www.callmycongress.com; https://www.contactingcongress.org; https://whoismyrepresentative.com; and https://5calls.org.

If you’re not web-savvy, you can just call the U.S. Capitol switchboard at 202-224-3121 and ask to be connected with your senator or congressperson.

from this column (26 June 2019)

Here are some more “ambiguous” phrases which courts have found DO NOT invoke your right to a lawyer:

“Maybe I should speak to my lawyer first.”

“I might like a lawyer.”

“I think I should have a lawyer present for this.”

“Could I speak to my lawyer first?”

“How long until my lawyer gets here?”

And perhaps most egregiously – “Get me a lawyer, dawg – ‘cause this is not what’s up.”

Here are the magic phrases which you need to know if you want to invoke your Miranda rights:

1) “Am I free to leave?”

It’s worth asking this even if the answer is obvious. Even if the officer does not let you leave, by forcing them to admit that you are not free to leave, you are creating a record which your attorney can use to prove that you were in custody. Miranda rights only apply if the interrogation is custodial, meaning that police officers will frequently claim that their suspects were “not in custody” to get around their Miranda rights.

2) “I am invoking my right to remain silent.”

Simply staying silent will not invoke your right to remain silent. As absurd as this is, you must explicitly say that you are invoking your right to remain silent in order to invoke that right.

3) “I am invoking my right to an attorney.”

As stated above, you must be not only clear and unambiguous, but clear and legally unambiguous. Don’t get cute. Don’t get sassy. And on the flip side, don’t get intimidated and use verbal ticks to minimize your request. Say the line with those words exactly – say it clearly, and say it once, and then say nothing else.

Because even after you’ve done all this, the police can still try to get you to talk. They’re not supposed to interrogate you, but they’re allowed to make casual conversation, and if that conversation just happens to circle back around to the thing they wanted to question you about, well, that’s really your fault for talking after you said you wouldn’t, isn’t it? Can’t possibly fault the poor officers when you initiated – if you really wanted to have your rights respected, you wouldn’t have talked to them in the first place.

The police know this, and they will mercilessly exploit this loophole. So, once you’ve successfully invoked your Miranda rights, any and all conversation you have with police officers will put those rights back into jeopardy. 

Putting it all together:

Ask: “Am I free to leave?”

If they say no, say: “I am invoking my right to remain silent and I am invoking my right to an attorney.”

And then shut up and do not say a single thing to them for any reason whatsoever until you have actually spoken to an attorney. Yes, even if it takes hours. Yes, even if they start talking to you about something else.

Finally, a very important disclaimer:

You CANNOT be legally interrogated without your parents present and/or consenting. Yes, even if it’s for a reason that’s not really to do with you (for example, if you were a pedestrian and witnessed a car accident).

Memo To The Media: Chick-fil-A Condemns, Discriminates, And Campaigns Against LGBT People

https://thinkprogress.org/memo-to-the-media-chick-fil-a-condemns-discriminates-and-campaigns-against-lgbt-people-3e2dbb7b8056/

It's too nuanced to make such a simple claim, I'm a poc and LGBT and I've experienced more hardship for being LGBT than for being a poc, and I'm sure people have had the opposite experience. Does it matter? Is the distinction important? Aren't we all fighting for a common goal?