Why I won't be attending LTUE 2022 (and likely won't be invited back)

 It pains me to make this announcement, but I will not be attending this year's Life, the Universe, & Everything Symposium (LTUE) this year due to the new COVID policy they enacted after they had made their panel selections and I had made my travel arrangements. 

For those who are curious, the policy -- which has proven so divisive that the page has restricted who can comment -- can be found here. 

My letter to the LTUE committee in response to this new policy was this:

Here is the response to my letter, which came a few hours later. This makes it sound like they are willing to have a dialog with me, and perhaps reach a compromise.

Just for the sake of completeness, here is my reply to the LTUE committee accepting their offer.

Finally, here is their response. You can clearly see that this is not an invitation to dialog, but rather a very firm "No, we aren't interested in what you have to say, and we aren't changing our minds."

Since it was clear they had no interest in discussion or compromise, I have decided to go public with this exchange.

For those of you who have read this far, let me explain why I am taking this position:

1. My medical records, be they proof of vaccination or the results of a test, are my own business and no one else's. I may, if I wish, share them with medical personnel who are bound by HIPAA regulations. People who run conventions like LTUE are not bound by HIPAA, so in addition to it being none of their business there is no incentive to them to keep my medical information private.
2. This policy has the potential to harm transgender people. Not every transgender person is able to legally change their name; many still have to file paperwork under their legal birth name. Having to show a test or vaccination paperwork is bad enough, but when the name on the paperwork doesn't match the name of the person submitting it, identification will inevitably need to be produced, forcing the transgender person to "deadname" themselves.
3. This policy of "papers, please" makes every Jewish person I know uncomfortable for plainly obvious reasons.
4. Neither the state of Utah nor the hotel where the symposium is being held require the measures LTUE is now requiring. This is something I researched before I booked my flight, as did most people. If this policy had simply been announced well ahead of time, before people made non-refundable travel arrangements, then those of us who objected to it would simply not have attended. However, announcing it a mere month before the symposium is more than an inconvenience; it is a financial hardship for many, and rude besides. Furthermore, LTUE is refusing to issue refunds to those who have purchased memberships, which I am fairly certain is illegal. It's definitely unethical.
5. LTUE is held every mid-February -- in other words, during cold and flu season. COVID is also firmly entrenched in the biosphere, meaning that it's going to be a part of our lives from now on, persistent and mutating. If I let this go unchallenged, then expect every LTUE from now on to require such proof.
6. None of this even addresses the utter lunacy of the rest of the policy. They will enforce mask-wearing... except that panelists will take theirs off for speaking! Every LTUE panel I've been on has had speakers sitting next to each other, often sharing microphones. Furthermore, they say they will enforce social distancing, while at the same time not reducing the number of people admitted to the symposium or the number of seats in rooms! This is not a policy grounded in sense. They want to have their proverbial cake (COVID restrictions) and eat it too (full panels and rooms).

I'm sure some of you will think I am in the wrong. That I am being unreasonable. That's your right, just as it's my right to say "No, I will NOT bend the knee. My medical records are private, and to demand them before granting access to a convention is as disgusting as it is to demand a transwoman show her ID before allowing her to use the women's restroom."

I fully expect that this will result in me never being invited to another LTUE Symposium ever again. That will be unfortunate, but it is far more important to me that I be able to live with myself. I became an advocate for the marginalized and unheard in 2016, and even though this is a different situation, the result is the same: I must speak up for those unable to speak for themselves.

It's Been a Week

And it shows no signs of stopping. Fortunately, I'm feeling fighty and so far I've come out on top each time. Let's play the highlight reel, shall we?

I spent a good chunk of last weekend arguing with some hard-right Christians, and by that I mean they are the type who think it's the height of discourse to shout questions at me, ignore my answers, and then post memes such as a picture of an electrified Pence with the word "REPENT" at the bottom. Remarkable, truly remarkable, gentlemen; shouting at people is clearly the best way to get them to agree with you!

I spent far too much time trying to use logic and Biblical citations for my argument, but they weren't interested in listening. Instead, with the perfect clarity of hindsight, I should have said this:

"I already told you that I accepted Christ as my savior. If you don't think that I'm saved, then your problem isn't with me; your problem is that you think my queerness is somehow more powerful that Christ's love and redemptive sacrifice. Your failure of faith does not require me to justify myself to you."

I'll keep this in my back pocket for next time, and perhaps it will bypass a lot of the BS in the future.

However, this ties into an old hobby horse of mine: people who claim that the Bible condemns all non-cishet people. I've previously dismantled the various claims which people like to trot out, but last weekend brought me to a level of rage where I lost my decorum and basically told people to nut up or shut up.

If you use the Old Testament as justification for why I and other queer people need to repent and "stop being queer", then you can be sure I'm gong to ask why you aren't following Leviticus 20:13 which calls for the death of all homosexuals.

Look, cupcake, you don't get to cherry pick the Bible like that. If you're bound by the Old Law, then you have to follow ALL OF IT. No bacon cheeseburgers, no shellfish, no mixing of fabrics, no getting tattoos, no shaving your face, no associating with menstruating women if you're a man, no wearing trousers if you're a woman, and most importantly, you've got put abominations like me to death.

What, you don't want to go to jail for murder? Well, that's certainly a dilemma. It looks like you only have three choices:

1. Do the deed, be punished here on Earth (maybe even being put to death), but at least you'll get your eternal reward;
2. Not follow God's Law, in which case you're sinning every day you don't put queer people to death. That won't look good for you come the Final Judgement;
3. or maybe realize that you're no longer bound by Levitical law, either because you're a Christian and Christ abolished all that, or because you're Jewish and with the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem the old nation of Israel ceased to exist and with it the laws that governed it.

Regardless of what you choose, though, I'm not going to let you beat me over the head with Lev 18:22 if you don't have the courage to follow up with Lev 20:13. And if you do have the courage... well, that's why I carry a gun for self-defense.

It's neither classy nor ladylike, but there's something so viscerally cathartic about looking at someone and saying "Do it, pussy-boy. Or don't you have the balls?"


Speaking of pussy-boys, I'd like to point out that Chris Hill hasn't fulfilled his promise to pay $100 to anyone who glitter-bombed the Nov 9 rally in Washington DC. Here's a screenshot of my comments -- three weeks ago, and today -- on his video.

For someone who makes such a big deal about integrity, he seems unlikely to honor his promise. Not being a man of your word is quite a terrible thing among three percenters (III%), and every time he makes a video I'm going to make sure that everyone knows about this.


And then there's this guy.

"I don't care what you do at home but this is too much." 

Translation: "Queer people make me intensely uncomfortable so I wish they'd just shut up and go back into the closet where I don't have to acknowledge their existence."

I'm the 'drag queen' he's talking about, by the way, despite having been told that I'm a transwoman and not a drag queen. He's upset that I spoke at the Nov. 9 Declaration of Restoration, and I know that because one of his other identities said so.

Yes, I said other identities. He has three: David Wright III, David A. Wright III, and David Allen. Presumably he has so many because he keeps catching 30-day bans?

I didn't even bother to engage this guy. Flak is always heaviest right over the target, and if I'm catching crap from the likes of him then I know I'm where I need to be. People like this you don't debate; you just sass them and show that you won't be pushed around. I'm certain that it infuriates them when I refuse to shut up or be ashamed.

Now that the far toxic right has discovered me, I can compare with them the far toxic left. As expected, the far toxic left hates me because I'm pro-gun, and the far toxic right hates me because I'm transgender. What's interesting, though, is how they express their hatred of me.

The far toxic left prefers to unperson me: they call me a traitor, say that I'm not a "true" transwoman, and either ignore me or block me. While this approach has a certain purity which I find refreshing, it does rather put the lie to their desire for a conversation about guns.

The far toxic right, on the other hand, will pretend to engage in conversation but will simply shout their beliefs over and over without listening to what I say. This is far more frustrating because I can't tell the difference between far right and far toxic right until I've already engaged in conversation, and I have a certain stubbornness where I convince myself that if I can just get this one point through to them then surely they'll see the error of their ways, when in fact I'm just playing chess with a pigeon.

The far toxic left wants my body to die because I believe in armed self-defense and they'd prefer I was disarmed so I can be victimized by criminals, all in the name of making society better.

The far toxic right wants my soul to die because they can't see past my plumbing and they'd prefer I be forced into their version of what I should be, regardless of how miserable that would make my existence, all in the name of making society better.

It's funny, though: prior to my transition, when I was a straight male, I had a hell of a time getting women interested in my genitalia. Now that I'm a trans lesbian, suddenly everybody -- men, women, gay, straight, and all the in-betweens -- is suddenly very concerned about what I may be packing under my dress, and not in a fun "You're cute, let's get naked" way.

Sugarplums, I hate to break it to you like this, but if what I have between my legs is causing you anxiety, that says way more about you than it does about me... and not in a good way. And if you want to hurt me, you've got to try harder than calling me fat and ugly. These are names that I call myself every morning...

...and then I get all glam'd up and look & feel fabulous for the rest of the the day!

Owning It, Part II

I'm back from the NRA Annual Meeting, and am pleased to report that the post-con drama has splashed on someone else this year.

However, some of you will remember what happened last year, and how I made a promise that

Perhaps I will become the poster girl for all the queer, transvestite and transgender gunnies out there (oh, they do exist, and probably in greater numbers than any of you imagine). And once again, I will be doing it to promote our cause, showing that gun owners, as a whole, are accepting of alternative sexualities and genders and lifestyles

It's not quite a year later, but behold the fruits of my labor: a poster inspired by my idea, and exucted by none other than Oleg Volk.

http://olegvolk.net/blog/2015/04/15/strength-in-diversity/

Now, I rather doubt this picture will "break the internet". I do, however, hope it causes more than a few brains to implode (or explode; I'm not picky). I would LOVE for this poster to be used as rhetorical ammunition against the folks who believe that “Guns are only for straight white males.” This ought to shut them up fast, and maybe get them to re-think their positions.

Inasmuch as you need my permission to post this picture to chat rooms, Facebook statuses and other online arguments, you have it. If they express doubts, just send them here and I'll happily tell them:

That's me, in the middle: the witch* with the beard.

Yes, I am biologically male. Yes, I identify as a woman and wear women's clothing whenever possible.

Yes, I am also pro-gun, pro-self-defense, and pro-liberty.

I do not see any conflict between these two viewpoints.

It is my sincere hope that this will encourage a change of thought from the folks who believe that "Guns are only for straight white males," because clearly they aren't.

For those who would like to learn more about me and my situation, I encourage you to read these blog posts as they will hopefully address most of your questions:

1. Confession Time
2. Duality
3. My Origin Story

If you have any other questions about who I am or how I identify, I will be happy to answer them as I consider this a "teachable moment." Any legitimate question, no matter how poorly phrased, is welcome.

So, there you have it: I've taken last year's mockery and turned it into a powerful message about the diversity and inclusion of the gun community. 

Your move, haters.



* It’s the costume I wore on Halloween of last year. The convergence of “witch costume” and “Avada Kedavra on my rifle” was just too rich to ignore.

Owning It

Warning:  In this post I talk about gender and identity issues. Folks with nervous dispositions or Victorian levels of morality may not be comfortable with what I have to say. 

It has come to my attention that some folks took exception to my presence at the NRA Annual Meeting. (No, I'm not going to link to the post(s) in question as I don't believe in feeding the trolls, but those who are suitably curious should be able to find it without too much trouble.)  Sure, the words are couched in terms of "We don't like how Erin acted in this situation," but I find it a bit curious that:

1. No one said anything about this to me, personally, either while I was "disturbing them" or afterwards.  All of this only came to light once people were safely ensconced behind their computer screens, miles away. Since no one communicated their displeasure to me until well after the fact, despite me being right there, I can only assume people are upset that I can't read their minds. 
2. The words "attention whore" are being bandied about by people who weren't even present.
3. These same people are calling me "he" -- in one notable case, right on my Facebook page. I even gave her the benefit of the doubt that it might have been a typo and asked her to "please change that pronoun, thank you very much."  I was told, quite specifically, "Not going to happen."

And yet they claim that it's my behavior which is inexcusable. Harrumph, I say. One does not descend to this level of rudeness out of dissatisfaction with my sense of propriety.  Instead, I say it's pretty clear to me that these people are disgusted by my mere existence. It's the only reason I can think of for people -- who have not met me, and to the best of my knowledge I have neither offended nor interacted negatively with -- have decided to eschew basic human courtesy by insulting me and choosing to use terms with which I do not identify.

And you know what?  Good.  This means I stand for something they find uncomfortable, and rather than attack my position and look like a bigot,  they have chosen to attack me personally and couch their petty hatred in socially acceptable terms.

There's a saying that you can judge someone by the quality of their enemies, and given the levels of pettiness to which my opponents are stooping, I'd say I come out looking pretty good in comparison.

I could argue the applicability of being called an attention whore by other bloggers (who, by definition, are just ordinary folks who expect other people to look at them, follow them, and read what they write -- pot, meet kettle), but instead of refuting their points I'm going to do something they won't expect:  I'm going to own it.

Hi, my name is Erin Palette, and I'm a genderqueer attention whore.

Squeaky still needs our help, by the way. 

I want people to look at me, listen to what I have to say, and think about my words. What's more -- and this is probably what is chafing everyone's buttocks -- I am an effective attention whore. When I came out last year, I did so specifically to raise money for a member of our community who needed life-changing surgery.

This attention whore raised over six thousand dollars, bitches. 

When is the last time you helped anyone so significantly? I'm guessing never, and with your attitude of "Let's make fun of the people effecting positive change within our community rather than do anything about it ourselves,"  I doubt you ever will. Did any of you so much as post a link to Squeaky's fundraiser?  No? Then your opinions are quite frankly irrelevant.

So that's the attention whore part settled -- now we get to the fun part of identity politics.  Last year, as the deadline for revealing my face (and therefore my genderqueer nature) loomed, I had quite the freak-out. I was terrified that people would react with disgust and horror, and they would mock me and make me feel like a freak. I was frightened that I would be rejected by the community that meant so much to me.

To their credit, 90% of the gunblogger world replied with a shrug and a "So what?  You're one of us. As long as you aren't trying to drag me into your bedroom, what your gender and sexuality is and how you display it is none of our business."  And when you think about it, this makes sense; when a community is founded on the principle that the individual is important enough to defend with lethal force, it also follows that the other rights of that individual are similarly sacred. For this, and for the acceptance I was shown, I thank everyone who offered support.

But as I've discovered over the past week, apparently there are some people who did not accept me, and have been nurturing resentment towards me for the past nine months or so, just waiting for an opportunity to bash me. I am particularly fond of one commentor's suggestions that "If he wanted attention so damn badly, he should have worn a damn tutu."

Well, you know, I suppose I could have. It really did occur to me to bring along some of my feminine clothes, but I decided not to because I didn't want to make things weird for those people who are uncomfortable with that kind of in-your-face expression of alternate sexuality.  In other words, this attention whore decided to dress in a manner that would make OTHER PEOPLE comfortable. What a terrible person I must be.

So here we are, a week later, and people are taking cheap shots at me for, essentially, being someone they don't like in too close a proximity to them.

Well, guess what, folks?  By mocking me for being me, by not accepting me for who I am and reacting with contempt when I don't fit into your rigidly designed mold, you've fulfilled my worst fears. This means I have nothing left to lose at this point. You took your best shot, and not only am I still here, I know who my friends are. What's more, I'm pretty damn sure my supporters outnumber my detractors.

So since the worst has already happened, I might as well be fully out and proud and post things like this:

You thought you'd seen whoring before?  You haven't seen anything yet. Perhaps I will become the poster girl for all the queer, transvestite and transgender gunnies out there (oh, they do exist, and probably in greater numbers than any of you imagine).  And once again, I will be doing it to promote our cause, showing that gun owners, as a whole, are accepting of alternative sexualities and genders and lifestyles. What's deliciously ironic is that YOU are the ones who empowered me thus:  by fulfilling my worst fear, I have gone from running away from it to running straight towards it, with the express goal of knocking that fear directly on its ass and then trampling it as I run over it.

So now, my dear detractors, you are faced with a decision:

1. You can continue to mock me as I continue to promote our cause, in which case you end up fulfilling every negative stereotype about gun owners (being insecure, bigoted, intolerant, etc) that the Brady Campaign, CGSV, Moms Demand Action, et al. perpetuate;
2. Or you can quit the high school drama and get out of my way.

Do whatever you like, darlings. Just keep in mind that doing the former gives aid to our political opponents, and doing the latter paints us as an inclusive, non-kneejerk community. It's your call.  Just remember what happened to Dick Metcalf and Jim Zumbo, and what gunnies do to folks who hurt our cause...

But above all, you need to realize that no matter what you choose, I WIN.   I am no longer afraid of what you may do or say.  In fact, I'm going to anticipate the vile hate I'll get for this and beat everyone to the punch:

Look at that. Give it a good, long look, and realize that I did this to myself.  I've already thought of all the horrible things that can be said, because I think them every time I look in a mirror.  Look at that picture and understand that you have no power over me, because you cannot possibly hate me any more than I hate myself.

And yet, here I am, unafraid, because I realize that I can be a force for positive change. And it was all thanks to you!

So in conclusion:

• You cannot stop me
• You cannot hurt me
• You caused all of this by not being able to keep a civil tongue. 

So go on, talk more trash about me.  I'm dying to see what else I can do to make you uncomfortable in the name of tolerance and gun rights advocacy.