I Don’t Know What To Say

How can words describe how I feel about what happened early Sunday morning? The tragedy has affect me and I think rest of the U.S. beyond words.

The politicians have made their statements, vigils have been held, cries for gun control have been made, calls for rounding up Muslims or refusing them entry into the U.S., the bigots and the hate mongers have posted their comments, and the calls for peace have been made.

In three or four weeks we will all forget our vows for change, the obstructionist will block bills for saner gun controls with their insane message of more guns for the “good guys” but the problem is how do you tell a “good guy with a gun” from the bad guy with a gun?  The thing is that a “good guy” with a gun after a few drinks can become a bad guy with a gun. Or a good guy with a gun can become a bad guy with a gun when someone cuts him off in traffic. Or a “good guy” with a gun can become a bad guy with a gun when he gets mad at his wife, or the neighbor, or over a gay couple kissing.

In two or three months there will be another tragedy and the cycle will repeat and nothing will be done.

Please remember when you go to the polls in November that there is a lot riding on this elections. The next Supreme Court justices will they be conservative judges that will vote for more Citizens United, more Hobby Lobbies? Will Congress pass anti-LGBT laws banning trans rights or granting broad exemptions for “Religious Freedom?” Will there be new laws banning abortions? Will there be laws for universal carrying of guns and allowing people to take out gun permits in states with lax laws to then go back to their state with tougher laws?

These are all bills that have been introduced by Congress and blocked by the president.

Think before you vote in November.

---

Update 10:00AM
I was reading Helen Boyd's blog en|Gender and she quotes a tweet by  Solomon Georgio "the gay agenda has always been 'enjoy every moment you can before a hateful person takes it away'” sadly we lean this all to well. I have seen trans people who were beaten by a baseball bat just because they are trans. I have been called faggot, freak, he/she, and I have had the Bible quoted to me.

This Is Amazing

We tend to think of religion to be anti-LGBT but there are many churches that are on our side. I never expected this…

Resolution Affirming the Rights of Transgender and Gender Non-Conforming People

Whereas our Torah asserts that all humanity is created b’tzelem Elohim, in God’s Divine Image; and

Whereas rabbinic tradition strongly emphasizes the importance of kvod habriyot (human dignity) and a 2006 teshuvah of the Committee on Jewish Law and Standards cites this principle to supersede the rabbinic prohibitions relating to homosexuality; and

Whereas the Rabbinical Assembly has advocated  to end discrimination against minority communities, including the LGBT community, and

Whereas discrimination against transgender and gender non-conforming people exists, including but not limited to the ability to obtain proper medical benefits, secure employment, and legally change their gender on government-related documents that guarantee the right to vote; and

Whereas many governments have increasingly extended protections to transgender people in the areas of health care, employment, and access to retirement benefits;

Whereas it is increasingly becoming the norm to affirm the dignity of transgender people through the implementation of accommodations in both site facilities and language;

Whereas the literature of halakhah, from the Mishnah to contemporary responsa, affirms the variety of non-binary gender expression throughout history, granting transgender people the obligations and privileges of all Jews;

Whereas transgender people contribute to the vitality of our seminaries, synagogues, schools, camps, communal organizations, and professional associations throughout the Jewish world, and no less within the Conservative Movement;

Therefore, be it resolved that the Rabbinical Assembly affirm its commitment to the full welcome, acceptance, and inclusion of people of all gender identities in Jewish life and general society; and

Be it further resolved that the Rabbinical Assembly encourage all programs affiliated with the Conservative Movement, including seminaries, schools, synagogues, camps, and communal and professional organizations to educate themselves and their employees about the needs of transgender and gender non-conforming people, so as to create fully inclusive settings; and

Be it further resolved that the Rabbinical Assembly encourage all Conservative Movement synagogues, camps, schools, and affiliated organizations to work toward becoming explicitly welcoming, safe spaces for transgender and gender non-conforming people and evaluate their physical site needs, workplace needs, and language that impact gender and gender expression; and

Be it further resolved that the Rabbinical Assembly encourage Conservative organizations to educate their constituencies about the need of transgender and gender non-conforming people to be known by the identity, name, and pronoun of their choice; and

Be it further resolved that the Rabbinical Assembly urge all levels of government to review their policies and practices so as to insure the full equality of transgender people under the law.

I am not religious but I am not anti-religious, I believe in live and let live. That as long as leave me along to life my life from discrimination and harassment I have nothing against and I would love to see more religions speak up as these rabbis did.

United We Stand

There has been a lot of talk that the “T” is not part of the “LGB” but that is only a minority view.

Lesbian activist icon disinvited from Gay Pride parade for supporting restroom privacy
LifeSiteNews
By Ben Johnson
June 9, 2016

MILWAUKEE, June 9, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) – A gay pride parade has rescinded its invitation for a nationally known lesbian activist to be its grand marshal, because she supports privacy in women's restrooms, showers, and intimate facilities – a rift that further highlights the brewing conflict between biological women and the transgender political agenda.

Miriam Ben-Shalom served in the Israeli armed forces before returning to the United States and joining the U.S. Army. However, she was discharged in 1976 after two years of service when she publicly announced that she is a lesbian. She lost a lengthy court battle against the Army in 1990.

She founded Gay, Lesbian and Bisexual Veterans of America (GLBVA) and chained herself to the White House fence on more than one occasion to protest the armed services' ban on open homosexuals serving in the military.

When President Obama signed the repeal of “Don't Ask, Don't Tell," Ben-Shalom - who was widely hailed as a hero of the LBGT cause - was on hand to witness the event.

She was invited to be the pride parade’s grand marshal but then it was rescinded,
“It was brought to our attention that your Facebook page contains a number of posts asserting that transwomen are a danger to young girls in public bathrooms and locker rooms,” the Milwaukee Pride Parade Board of Directors wrote to her in April. “We cannot have a Grand Marshal who has publically and repeatedly denigrated transwomen.”


She responded, addressing her letter "To you bunch of Moral reprobates – so cowardly you can’t even post a name.”


She affirmed that she does, in fact, believe that “women born of women have the right to safe spaces of their own.”
A lot of times I hear from trans people who think all lesbians hate trans people but that is not true. From my experiences it is the exact opposite. I have only run across one or two lesbians who were against us.

Thursday night I was with twenty lesbians and we had a great time at the LGBT senior center night and I go to game night at Real Art Ways and play board games with a group of lesbians.

So please don’t paint all lesbians and gays with a broad brush when it is only a vocal minority that are against us.

Breaking News: Mass Shooting At A Gay Night Club.

What we know:

• There was a shooting at the Pulse night club in Orlando Florida
• There were multiple gun shots; some reports up to 40 shots were fired
• The shooter is dead 

What we don’t know:

• If it was it was ISIS inspired terrorist
• If it was a right wing conservative terrorism
• If it was a hate crime
• If it was a jilted lover
• If it was a fight that escalated to the shootings.

We do not know anything right now other than there was a mass shooting, so don’t speculate.

Police: Florida nightclub mass shooting suspect is dead
CNN
By Faith Karimi and John Couwels,
Updated 7:06 AM ET, Sun June 12, 2016

Orlando, Florida (CNN)Gunfire erupted at a gay nightclub in Orlando around 2 a.m. Sunday, multiple people are injured and the alleged shooter is dead, police said.

It's a "mass casualty situation" at Pulse nightclub. CNN affiliate WKMG video captured club goers carrying injured people from the club.

"It's just shocking," said Christopher Hansen who was inside Pulse. He heard gunshots, "just one after another after another."

"It could have lasted a whole song," he said.

"Everyone get out of Pulse and keep running," the nightclub posted on its Facebook page shortly after the violence began.

Orlando police warned residents to stay away from the area, and urged people not to call their offices. They declined to provide the number of casualties, saying details will be available later. Bomb sniffing dogs are on the scene.

'Just bang, bang, bang!'
Pulse describes itself as "the hottest gay bar" in the heart of Orlando.

Hours before the shooting, the club urged partygoers to attend its "Latin flavor" event Saturday night.
Jovial, well-dressed crowds heeded the call in an event that turned into a nightmare.

Saturday 9: I Dream of Jeannie Theme

Crazy Sam’s Saturday 9: I Dream of Jeannie Theme (1965)

On Saturdays I take a break from the heavy stuff and have some fun...

... Because Harriet requested it. If you're not familiar with today's song, you can hear it here.

1) Jeannie was memorably discovered on the beach in an ornate bottle. Have you ever brought a souvenir home from the beach? (It doesn't have to be a genie. A shell or a stone will do.)
I brought home many shells when I was little.

2) Major Anthony Nelson, the man who released Jeannie from her bottle, was an astronaut. When you were a kid, did you dream of being an astronaut when you grew up?
Yes of course. I a way I did help the space program, where I worked we made fuel level sensors for the Titan IV.

3) Upon discovering Jeannie, Major Nelson's first wish was that she could speak/understand English so they could communicate. If you found a genie, what would your first wish be?
For a thousand wishes.

4) Major Nelson's best friend was fellow astronaut Major Healey. Where did you meet your best friend?
In second grade.

5) This theme song was written by Hugo Montenegro, who is better known for the music he wrote for a pair of Clint Eastwood movies (The Good, the Bad and the Ugly and A Fistful of Dollars). Do you have a favorite Clint Eastwood movie?
Heartbreak Ridge

6) The last episode of the series was titled, "My Master, The Chili King." What ingredients make up your favorite chili recipe? 

Diana’s Chili 
1 LB. Lean ground beef or beef cubes
1/2 LB. Salt Pork
1 Large Green Pepper
1 Large Onion
16 oz Can Red kidney beans
16 oz Can Pinto beans
2 - 16 oz Can Tomato sauce
2 TBS Cumin
2 TBS Chili power
2 TBS Minced garlic
1 Cups Water ( Option - Beer )
Tabasco sauce - To taste

7) Jeannie was played by Barbara Eden, who was born in Tuscon, Arizona. Summer in Tuscon can get very hot, with the mercury often reaching 100º. What's your favorite season?
The fall, in second place is spring.


8) Anthony Nelson was played by Larry Hagman, who went on to play the villainous JR on the popular Dallas. Can you think of anything else Dallas is known for?
The Cowboys, not that I watch football.

9) In the autumn of 1965, just weeks after I Dream of Jeannie premiered, St. Louis' famous Gateway Arch was completed. An estimated 4 million tourists visit the Arch every year. Do you have any summer vacation plans?
I’m heading up to the cottage in New Hampshire whenever I can.

There Was Something Bother Me With This…

And I couldn’t put my finger on it until last night.

At the LGBT Moveable Senior Center last night they had a guest lecturer who talked about the her history for the fight for LGBT rights and that was the clue to what was bothering me with this article.

Why Equality Is Toxic to the Transgender Movement
Huffington Queer Voices
By Eli Erlick
June 9, 2016

In an era of unprecedented visibility, the transgender community is at a crossroads. Do we work transgender people into current systems such as education and the military or do we work to significantly transform these structures and society as a whole? While the majority of media attention has gone towards integrating trans people into the dominant culture, is this the right decision for the community? Many activists, scholars, and community members say no.

I came out as transgender at the age of eight, to a rural community that was not ready to support me. During the next five years, I experienced constant harassment, isolation, and assault. You might think that as someone who has had this experience, I am excited to see hate crime legislation popping up all over the United States. On the contrary, it frightens me. Hate crime laws are framed as initiatives that will end attacks on transgender people, making them “equally” protected under the law. In reality, this legislation is another cisgender issue pushed by neoliberal politicians to further expand prisons and prevent real change.

What hit me last night is that we are not trying to “equally” protect us under the law but rather trying to stop violence against us. When someone commits a hate crime it is not about the physical assault against us that they are being tried for but rather it is to intimidate a community. A hate crime is not targeted against the individual but rather everyone in that community, so it has nothing to do with equality.

The she goes on to say the hate crime laws are supposed to be a deterrent to crime,

Hate crime legislation does nothing to protect trans people. Instead, it only increases sentencing for offenders. Is doubling a 7-year sentence going to deter crime? Statistically, the answer is no. Hate crime laws do not look at the roots of the problem, including systemic racism and transphobia. Individualizing the problem by sending one person to prison does very little for our community as a whole and does not work within a restorative justice framework.

And that is true, but it is true of all criminal laws, they are not designed for reforming the criminal justice system, they are to punish offenders.

We do not just want the same access to a clearly broken education system as our cisgender peers. We are committed to educating our communities and the public on transgender issues, which will significantly decrease victimization for all trans people.

Also very true… but the non-discrimination laws are not meant to reform the education or criminal justice systems, they are to get us access to them. Whether they are broken or not is another story; that is not the purpose of the non-discrimination laws. Laws like Connecticut School Climate laws that are intended to bring about a cultural shift in the ways schools and communities deal with bullying and harassment and how to improve the learning environment.

She is also right in that the way to bring about change is through education. Many of the problems that we face are because most people have no understanding about trans people. Most people have had no interactions with trans people that they know of, and that is the key “that they know of” we have to be more visible.

I think us as a community is also going through a cultural shift. At one time only trans people who could integrate into society could transitions but now healthcare providers are realizing that there are all types of trans people and that is creating a new paradigm with trans people who don’t want to be “male” or “female” but rather their own blend of gender.

It is as the Rev. Martin Luther King said,

Morality cannot be legislated, but behavior can be regulated. Judicial decrees may not change the heart, but they can restrain the heartless.

The non-discrimination laws are not to change the system but rather to restrain those who would discriminate against.

---

Right now I am down at Seven Falls State Park with the town's senior center's photo club on a photo shoot. 

One, Two, Three, Four…

It is hard to count trans people for one thing many of us don’t want to be counted and other consider themselves to be their true gender and not trans. So how do you count the number of trans people?

How Many Transgender Americans Are There?
The census still doesn't collect data on gender identity. Here's why that matters.
Mother Jones
By Samantha Michaels
June 9, 2016

Transgender rights have cropped up in the news a lot over the past year, from Caitlyn Jenner's publicized transition to the fight over sex-segregated bathrooms. Trans rights have even become a campaign issue, with everyone from former presidential hopeful Ted Cruz to presumptive Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton speaking out on recent anti-transgender legislation.

But despite this national conversation, "we can't really say how many transgender people are in the US, and we can't really say what their demographics look like," says Jody Herman, a public-policy researcher at the Williams Institute at UCLA, which has been a leader in efforts to study the transgender population. The federal government has done little to estimate the number of transgender citizens. In part, that's because the Census Bureau's American Community Survey, an annual population count, only asks about sex.

On Thursday, Orange Is the New Black star Laverne Cox, a transgender rights advocate, will speak on Capitol Hill about this lack of data, which can make it difficult for policymakers to address anti-trans discrimination. Cox is urging lawmakers to pass the LGBT Data Inclusion Act, which would require federal agencies like the Census Bureau to include questions about sexual orientation and gender identity in national demographic surveys. "That gap in data potentially denies policy initiatives and funding" to help transgender people, says Arizona Rep. Raúl M. Grijalva, who introduced the bill.

When we were trying to pass the gender inclusive non-discrimination legislation we were constantly asked how many trans people are in Connecticut. The legislators wanted to know and we could not give them a definitive answer and I couldn’t see why they asked whether it is ten or ten thousand what difference did it make, we still needed protection from discrimination.

The article goes on to say,

Why do these numbers matter? Without national demographic statistics, policymakers may be fumbling in the dark when it comes to crafting legislation that helps trans people. And that's troubling, considering all the high-stakes questions that have recently been thrust before them: Should transgender kids be allowed to use school bathrooms that correspond with their gender identity? Should the Department of Veterans Affairs pay for medical procedures like sex reassignment surgery for trans veterans? How can we keep trans inmates safe from sexual assault in prisons and jails?

Laws shouldn’t be made by the size of the population but for the needs of the community. No matter the size of the community we are being discriminated against and I feel the smaller the community the more it needs protection from the majority.

I think one way to gauge the number of trans people is to look at Social Security and see how many people have changed their gender markers. Anyone who has transitioned probably has changed their gender with the Social Security Administration.

Something That We Knew

We know that “bathroom issues” goes way beyond bathrooms, we face discrimination everyday and those who live on the margins have it much worst than the more affluent trans people. But all trans people live the reality that they are targets for injustices and violence.

New Criminal Justice Report Reminds Us That Transgender Discrimination Goes Beyond Bathrooms
Huffington Queer Voices
By Sarah McBride
June 9, 2016

Since North Carolina’s anti-transgender HB 2 law passed in March, arguments about where transgender people can use the bathroom have been at the forefront of national debate. Several other states have followed North Carolina’s lead and are attempting to restrict access to bathrooms for transgender people, and North Carolina’s law is now at the center of a legal battle between the state and federal government.

Access to public facilities like bathrooms is important for transgender people. But the fight for transgender rights does not begin and end at the bathroom door.

Transgender people, especially transgender women of color, face pervasive discrimination throughout life, including by those sworn to protect us. As a new report by the Center for American Progress and the Movement Advancement Project reveals, the criminal justice system disproportionally harms and targets transgender people, tipping the scales against transgender people before, during, and after incarceration. Specifically, legal targeting and social stigma work together to funnel transgender people into the criminal justice system, and create huge obstacles when they try to get out of it.
[…]
Transgender people are under attack in many parts of this country, and the justice system too often fails many of our nation’s most vulnerable. Discriminatory targeting and continued abuse by our criminal justice system remain an everyday reality for transgender people like Destiny, Antonia, and Bianca. As our nation’s elected official discuss and debate reforming our broken criminal justice system, they should take note of the situation in North Carolina and seek to end state-sanctioned discrimination against transgender people, not foster it.

As the article said, the intersection of race and gender identity is not additive but multiplies the discrimination and the abuse that they face in the criminal justice system.

---

This afternoon I am at the Avon Senior Center for the LGBT day at the center. The event is part of the Moveable Senior Center initiative.

The Party Of Lincoln.

The other day Speaker of the House denounced their presidential candidate’s remarks as racist and said the Party of Lincoln does not discriminate.

Later in the week the Speaker had this to say,

Ryan moves to prevent another floor fight on LGBT rights
The Washington Post
By Kelsey Snell
June 9, 2016

House Speaker Paul D. Ryan on Wednesday took the first steps to prevent Democrats from forcing votes on sensitive political issues, such as protections for LGBT individuals.

The Wisconsin Republican asked members at weekly closed-door GOP conference to weigh in on plans to restrict amendments on spending bills after Democrats recently forced a nasty fight over a measure to bar the government from paying federal contractors that discriminate based on gender identity or sexual orientation. The amendment, offered by Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney (D-N.Y.), sparked intense infighting among Republicans but was adopted with the support of Democrats and some GOP members.

Republican leaders are worried that similar floor fights could derail their effort to pass as many spending bills as possible ahead of the end of the fiscal year on Sept. 30.

The proposal would require members to submit amendments ahead of floor consideration of appropriations bills and the House Rules Committee would then determine which would receive a vote. The process would violate Ryan’s pledge to maintain a more open spending process where amendments could be offered freely, but many conservatives said it would be a small price to pay in order to prevent Democrats from forcing political votes.

On Wednesday night the Rules Committee said it would not allow a vote on the Maloney LGBT amendment to a spending bill that would fund the operations of Congress. That bill is one of a small number of annual spending bills that has typically been subject to a limited number amendments under existing House rules.

What brought about the change in House rules was the Democratic rebuttal to this amendment,

Russell amendment to defense bill becomes battlefront in culture war
The Oklahoman
By Chris Casteel
Published: May 29, 2016

WASHINGTON — Late last month, as the House Armed Services Committee worked on the annual defense policy bill, U.S. Rep. Steve Russell offered a very brief amendment.

That amendment, which was approved by the committee, and is part of the defense bill that passed the House earlier this month, may have been short. But it was anything but simple.

It has become a battlefront in the mostly partisan culture war in Washington. Skirmishes over it have left the House floor in chaos.

The amendment said,

Any branch or agency of the Federal Government shall, with respect to any religious corporation, religious association, religious educational institution, or religious society that is a recipient of or offeror for a Federal Government contract, subcontract, grant, purchase order, or cooperative agreement, provide protections and exemptions consistent with sections 702(a) and 703(e)(2) of the
Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000e-1(a) and 42 U.S.C. 2000e-2(e)(2)) and section 103(D) of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 USC 12113(D)).

It would have overturned President Obama’s executive order barring discrimination by federal contractors.

The Democrats then introduced an amendment that would have affirmed President Obama’s executive order and when it looked like the bill would pass with the amendment te Republicans did something amazing. The Bay Area Reporter described the votes as…

Pelosi blasted Republicans for "targeting LGBT Americans" in the National Defense Authorization Act. The language for that nullification came from Congressman Steve Russell (R-Oklahoma), and Republican leadership fought vigorously to preserve it in the overall bill, even to the point of ignoring the clock on a vote for Maloney's amendment to kill the language.

Initially, 35 Republicans voted for Maloney's amendment. Along with the support of 182 Democrats, the amendment had 217 votes for and 202 against.

"After it was clear that the amendment was passing," said House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Maryland) in a news release, "House Republican leaders held the two-minute vote open for nearly eight minutes while they urged their members to change their votes and defeat the amendment."

As the clock reached four seconds remaining, one of the Republican "yea" votes dropped off and the "nays" increased to 205. At zero "time remaining" to vote, another Republican voted "yea," putting the winning tally back to 217. Two minutes after the clock had run out, the Republican presiding over the vote still had not declared the final vote and suddenly two more Republican "yeas" appeared while two dropped from the "nay" column.

At this point, voices on the floor began booing. According to Hoyer's account, these were Democrats booing the Republican chair's failure to call the vote. Within another two minutes, more voices joined in a chant of "Shame, shame, shame" as the number of Republican "yea" votes dropped to 30 and the vote on the amendment stood at 213-212. Moments later, the vote dropped to 212 "yea" and 213 "nay," and the presiding officer banged his gavel and announced the amendment had failed.

Hoyer immediately complained to the presiding officer that the vote count changed even though no Republican went to the front of the House floor to change his or her vote.

The Republicans have only what was once thought science fiction, the ability to stop time. They stopped the clock so that the spending bill would be defeated.

Yes, the Republicans do not believe in discrimination unless it is against LGBT people, or Latinos, or Blacks, or…

What Is Going On Here?

Are we about to lose our Medicare insurance coverage? Reading this article in Modern Healthcare gives that impression that we are about to lose our coverage.

CMS may not pay for sex change operations, but the VA might
By Virgil Dickson
June 3, 2016

The CMS said there's not enough evidence to support Medicare payment for sex change operations. The decision came hours before the Veterans Affairs Department proposed covering sex-reassignment surgeries and other related medical treatment for transgender veterans.

The CMS didn't cover the surgery until 2014, when HHS' Appeals Board struck down a prior national coverage decision forbidding payment. That opened the door for Medicare's regional contractors to allow reimbursement.

In December, the agency announced it was considering a national coverage decision on surgery but now said it has decided the evidence was not there to support the move, according to a proposal released Thursday.

The agency said the clinical evidence was inconclusive for the Medicare population at large. “The low number of clinical studies specifically about Medicare beneficiaries' health outcomes for gender reassignment surgery and small sample sizes inhibited our ability to create clinical appropriateness criteria for cohorts of Medicare beneficiaries,” it said in the notice.

Whoa! “Not enough evidence”? What exactly do they mean? They held hearings and they reviewed the data about trans healthcare and now they are going to second guess themselves and make us go through this again?

The CMS proposal says,

Proposed Decision Memo for Gender Dysphoria and Gender Reassignment Surgery (CAG-00446N)

Decision Summary
Currently, the local Medicare Administrative Contractors (MACs) determine coverage of gender reassignment surgery on an individual claim basis. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) proposes to continue this practice and not issue a National Coverage Determination (NCD) at this time on gender reassignment surgery for Medicare beneficiaries with gender dysphoria.  Our review of the clinical evidence for gender reassignment surgery was inconclusive for the Medicare population at large.  The low number of clinical studies specifically about Medicare beneficiaries’ health outcomes for gender reassignment surgery and small sample sizes inhibited our ability to create clinical appropriateness criteria for cohorts of Medicare beneficiaries.

In the absence of a NCD, initial coverage determinations under section 1862(a)(1)(A) of the Social Security Act (the Act) and any other relevant statutory requirements will be made by the local Medicare Administrative Contractors (MACs) on an individual claim basis.

While we are not issuing a NCD, CMS encourages robust clinical studies that will fill the evidence gaps and help inform the answer to the question posed in this proposed decision memorandum.  Based on the gaps identified in the clinical evidence, these studies should focus on which patients are most likely to achieve improved health outcomes with gender reassignment surgery, which types of surgery are most appropriate, and what types of physician criteria and care setting(s) are needed to ensure that patients achieve improved health outcomes.

We are requesting public comments on this proposed decision memorandum pursuant to section 1862(l)(3)(a) of the Act. We are specifically interested in public comments on the evidence we cited in this decision, comments containing any new evidence that has not been considered, and comments on whether a study could be developed that would support coverage with evidence development (CED), which would only cover gender reassignment surgery for beneficiaries who choose to participate in a clinical study.

But if you read further it seems that they are not really taking away coverage but they want to include Gender Confirming Surgery (GCS) in their ruling from last year. It looks like last year’s statement did not specifically mandate GCS.

I. Proposed Decision
Currently, the local Medicare Administrative Contractors (MACs) determine coverage of gender reassignment surgery on an individual claim basis. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) proposes to continue this practice and not issue a National Coverage Determination (NCD) at this time on gender reassignment surgery for Medicare beneficiaries with gender dysphoria.  Our review of the clinical evidence for gender reassignment surgery was inconclusive for the Medicare population at large.  The low number of clinical studies specifically about Medicare beneficiaries’ health outcomes for gender reassignment surgery and small sample sizes inhibited our ability to create clinical appropriateness criteria for cohorts of Medicare beneficiaries.

In the absence of a NCD, initial coverage determinations under section 1862(a)(1)(A) of the Social Security Act (the Act) and any other relevant statutory requirements will be made by the local Medicare Administrative Contractors (MACs) on an individual claim basis.

While we are not issuing a NCD, CMS encourages robust clinical studies that will fill the evidence gaps and help inform the answer to the question posed in this proposed decision memorandum.  Based on the gaps identified in the clinical evidence, these studies should focus on which patients are most likely to achieve improved health outcomes with gender reassignment surgery, which types of surgery are most appropriate, and what types of physician criteria and care setting(s) are needed to ensure that patients achieve improved health outcomes.

We are requesting public comments on this proposed decision memorandum pursuant to section 1862(l)(3)(a) of the Act. We are specifically interested in public comments on the evidence we cited in this decision, comments containing any new evidence that has not been considered, and comments on whether a study could be developed that would support coverage with evidence development (CED), which would only cover gender reassignment surgery for beneficiaries who choose to participate in a clinical study.

Maybe this will loosen the purse strings on research into the effectiveness of GRS. In another article about this in Modern Healthcare Jennifer Levi form GLAD had this to say,

However, the board's decision didn't guarantee coverage for sex reassignment surgery. It gave individuals the right to submit physician documentation to local coverage contractors stating surgery was recommended in their individual case.

“The last step was about removing obstacles, this step is about creating a path to coverage,” said Jennifer Levi, a lawyer who directs the Transgender Rights Project of Gay & Lesbian Advocates and Defenders.

Some beneficiaries have been able to get surgeries since the ruling. But it's been a cumbersome process and taxing on providers who have had to navigate local coverage bureaucracies, transgender advocates say.

But no matter what it looks like we are going to have to fight for our insurance coverage. 

I Have To Ask Why?

Why did she accept the job at the ACLU? She must have known that ACLU was involved with trans rights, after all they worked to pass trans legislation in a number of states around the country including Connecticut which they strongly backed since at least 2003 with the Hate Crime legislation.

An ACLU Attorney’s Ugly Transformation Into An Anti-Transgender Pundit
ThinkProgress
By Zack Ford
June 6, 2016

Conservatives are clamoring to highlight the story of Maya Dillard Smith, the Interim Director of the ACLU’s Georgia chapter who quit over her position on transgender issues. Under the guise of having “questions” about trans issues, Smith has fully embraced a new public role as an advocate against transgender equality.

The crux of Smith’s objections to the ACLU’s transgender-inclusive positions is an experience she claims she had with her two youngest daughters in a bathroom back in California before making the move:

I have shared my personal experience of having taken my elementary school age daughters into a women’s restroom when shortly after three transgender young adults, over six feet [tall] with deep voices, entered. My children were visibly frightened, concerned about their safety and left asking lots of questions for which I, like many parents, was ill-prepared to answer.

If Smith sincerely just didn’t know enough about transgender people to answer her daughters’ questions, that’s one thing. But she has indicated that she herself was uncomfortable and concerned for her family’s safety, and she has since used the idea of asking such questions to reinforce anti-trans talking points. In fact, she seems to be embracing a new public persona as an anti-trans pundit.

Now come on, here she is a civil rights lawyer and she is worried about how people feel? Would she had said the same thing in the fifties about allowing blacks to share the bathroom with whites? She must have known that these fears are unfounded, after all she was the head of the Georgia’s ACLU.

The article goes on to say in the article that she has created a website to open the discussion on trans rights but they point out that,

If all Smith were doing in her video was asking questions, that might not be a problem. It’s the video’s non-question statements — including deliberate misgendering of transgender girls — that reveal Smith’s biases:

• There’s some boys who feel like they’re girls on the inside, and there are some boys who are just perverts.
• Boys [sic] in the girls bathroom? I don’t know about that.
• I don’t want him [sic] to be uncomfortable in the boys’ bathroom, either. I don’t want them to be uncomfortable anywhere. But what about me too?
• What makes it scary is that sometimes strangers take advantage of kids.

The girl in the ad can’t even say the “perverts” line without laughing.
[…]
Smith accused the ACLU of being “a special interest organization that promotes not all, but certain progressive rights” and catering to a “hierarchy of rights.” The ACLU has not commented, describing Smith’s departure as a personnel matter.

I have to ask the question; why did she join the ACLU? Was there an agenda on her part?

We Are Waiting!

Tick. Tock. Time is running out we only have five more months to this to happen.

Air Force Secretary Declares She’s ‘Certain’ On Transgender Troops
"... the policy is going to change ..."
Western Journalism
By Gerry Urbanek
June 6, 2016

Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James says she is “certain” that transgender members of the U.S. military will be allowed to serve in “a more open way” in the near future.

“I think the review on the transgender policy should be complete within the next few months, would be my best guess. It’s proceeding. These are somewhat complex issues, and by the way, I am certain that the policy is going to change. I’m certain that transgenders will be allowed to serve in a more open way,” James said Friday in an interview on C-SPAN’s Newsmakers.

“What we’re trying to do is we’re trying to get some of the particulars figured out, some of the specific policy matters underneath that umbrella policy matter so that we do it correctly, that we roll it out correctly, that if there’s training required that we have that in place, that we explain to commanders and to the rest of the troops how we’re going to proceed in the future,” James added.

Tick. Tock. The time is running out.

We don’t have a few more months to wait; it needs to be done now! First it was this winter, then it was this spring and now it’s the summer.

Tick. Tock. The time is running out.

You Would Think That This Issue Has Been Settled Already

Insurance coverage for us has been included in the ACA insurance policies; the EEOC has ruled that gender identity is covered on Title VII so why are we still being denied insurance coverage?

Transgender nurse sues over denied insurance claim
Fox News 10
By: Kristy Siefkin
Posted: June 6, 2016

CHANDLER, Ariz. (KSAZ) - Transgender nurse Josef Robinson works at Chandler Regional Medical Center. He's suing Dignity Health for denying coverage of his gender transition treatments.

"They're denying me health care coverage with anything related to transgender care, meaning hormone therapy and surgery," said Josef Robinson.

According to Robinson, Dignity Health refused to cover Josef's $8,000 double mastectomy as well as $100,000 in other transition surgeries. He says they claim that he has a personality disorder which is excluded from coverage.
[…]
"They are lumping being transgender in with all other kinds of mental illness, and that is not the case. Being transgender is not a mental illness," said Steve Kilar with the ACLU.

This is from the Stone Age! A personality disorder really? And this is from a healthcare provider! Don’t they know that the latest DSM classifies it as dysphoria?

It will probably cost them more to defend the discrimination in court than to provide the insurance coverage.

We Don’t Exist

That is what Jeannie Suk believes in an article  in the New Yorker, she writes in “The Transgender Bathroom Debate and the Looming Title IX Crisis” that…

In chastising North Carolina, the Justice Department explained that if non-transgender people may use bathrooms consistent with their gender identity, then denying transgender people access consistent with their gender identity constitutes discrimination on the basis of sex. Similarly, the Dear Colleague letter states that the federal government “treats a student’s gender identity as a student’s sex for the purposes of Title IX.” These interpretations of federal anti-discrimination law are new and surprising. It is not at all obvious that the “sex” in sex-discrimination law means not sex but gender, let alone “an internal sense of gender,” as the Letter says. But it is also reasonable to interpret sex-discrimination law to prohibit discrimination against transgender people. Given that single-sex bathrooms have never been seen as constituting sex discrimination, the tricky question is whether limiting them based on biological sex, rather than gender, does indeed discriminate on the basis of sex.

The author is a professor of law at Harvard and you would at least think she would mention the rationality behind the Justice Department and the Department of Education ruling, that it is based in sex stereotyping in the Price Waterhouse Supreme Court decision.

She goes on to say,

But there is also a growing sense that some females will not feel safe sharing bathrooms, shower rooms, or locker rooms with males. And if a female student claimed that a bathroom or locker room that her school had her share with male students caused her to feel sexually vulnerable and created a hostile environment, the complaint would be difficult to dismiss, particularly since the federal government has interpreted Title IX broadly and said that schools must try to prevent a hostile environment. This is not wholly hypothetical. Brandeis University found a male student responsible for sexual misconduct for looking at his boyfriend’s genitals while both were using a communal school shower. The disciplined student then sued the school for denying him basic fairness in its disciplinary process, and a federal court recently refused to dismiss the suit.

Um… he wasn’t trans.

Why punish us for something we didn’t do? This incident only proves what I have been saying, open showers and locker rooms are obsolete, and everyone should have privacy when they are undressed. When I was in college at Rochester Institute of Technology in the early seventies had private shower stalls in the dorms.

A rebuttal to this article was in Slate.

There Is Only a Title IX Crisis if You Believe the Existence of Trans People Is up for Debate
By Chase Strangio
May 27, 2016

On Tuesday, Harvard Law professor Jeannie Suk published an article on the New Yorker’s website, “The Transgender Bathroom Debate and the Looming Title IX Crisis.” Suk described her misgivings about recent guidance from the Department of Education and the Department of Justice about transgender students with no shortage of hyperbole. But almost everything about her article—from its title to its legal reasoning to its alarmist conclusion—is erroneous. In fact, Suk’s article is so filled with sloppy language and legal inaccuracies, so mired in stereotyped views of trans individuals, that it makes a perfect case study in how not to write about trans discrimination.
[…]
Of the federal guidance on Title IX and transgender students, Suk writes that the government’s “interpretations of federal anti-discrimination law are new and surprising.”

That simply isn’t true. There is nothing new or surprising about the idea that discrimination against transgender people is sex discrimination. As Jillian Weiss, an employment lawyer and law professor, explained recently, “So many federal courts have specifically held that federal laws prohibiting sex discrimination also include sex discrimination against transgender people that such protections should be considered a given.” These federal courts span from Maine to California and include the federal courts of appeals for the 1st, 6th, 9th, and 11th circuits. Additionally, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit also recently held that the Education Department’s interpretation of Title IX—with respect to transgender individuals and restroom use consistent with gender identity—is reasonable and valid.

In addition to this legal precedent from courts across the country going back more than 15 years, the Education Department has also been enforcing Title IX in the precise way outlined in the guidance since at least 2013.

Mr. Strangio goes on to take apart Ms. Suk article,

Forget that Suk completely misuses the term biological sex. Given that the law is clear that discrimination against transgender people is sex discrimination, it is hard to come up with a reason why restrooms should be completely exempt from that legal principle. Even if Suk or others believe that schools, employers, and others should be free to exclude transgender people from restrooms that accord with their gender identity, it’s not surprising that federal agencies might not share that view—especially given that those agencies have found that anti-trans regulations qualify as illegal sex discrimination.

This debate will only end when the Supreme Court hears a case on Titles VII and IX and I wouldn’t be surprised if in October the court decides to hear a case on it.

We Are To Be Counted

If a Congressman has his way we are going to be counted in the next census.

Rep. Grijalva Announces Bill to Add LGBT Data in Federal Surveys
NBC News
By Sandra Lilley
May 27, 2016

Arizona Democratic congressman Raúl Grijalva announced a bipartisan bill to require that federal surveys such as the Census include data collection on sexual orientation and gender identity to strengthen the LGBT community's access to resources and legislation.

The LGBT Data Inclusion Act would ensure that LGBT individuals have a mechanism to confidentially provide data and information on them and their households in surveys put out by the federal government.

"Public officials draft and implement policies impacting the lives of everyone living in the United States," said Rep. Grijalva in a statement. "It is vital that they have robust information about the diverse communities within our populace, including the LGBT community."

It is very hard to get good data on LGBT people, especially us the “T” for an oppressed group there is a strong desire to remain anonymous out of fear of discrimination. Also for many trans people once we transition we consider ourselves to be either male or female and wouldn’t list trans.

There is strong bipartisan backing for the bill.

The bipartisan bill has 68 original cosponsors including Latino Democrats Ruben Gallego (D-TX), Luis Gutiérrez (D-IL), José A. Serrano (D-NY), Tony Cárdenas (D-CA), Lucille Roybal-Allard (D-CA), Rubén Hinojosa (D-TX) and Filemón Vela (D-TX).

New York Republican congressman Richard Hanna is also a co-sponsor.

I hope it passes because it will give us a starting point in being counted.

Yes Sir. No Sir. Whatever You Say Sir

Why is it that the oppressor always thinks it is uppity when the oppressed demand their rights?

It Just Seems a Bit Much
Insider
Posted to Politics May 31, 2016
By Bill Greener III

You would have to be pretty isolated these days to not be aware of the so-called bathroom issue that centers on transgender individuals, their rights and the obligation of others to accommodate them or find themselves in violation of how President Obama and his administration see the law.

To listen to most liberals and the coverage in the mainstream media, you would think only a hateful narrow-minded bigot would have any hesitation in allowing people to use public facilities based solely on how that person has decided to identify in terms of gender. However, this simplistic viewpoint is encountering strong resistance among real people, especially parents.
[…]
For starters, just how many people are in this group? A quick Google search yields a story from the Albany (N.Y.) Times Union (December 5, 2011) that puts the number of transgender people at 700,000. That would be 0.3 percent of Americans. Three-tenths of a single percent. The article goes on to estimate the number of gay, lesbian and bi-sexual Americans to be slightly over 8 million, or 3.5 percent of the population. In other words, combined, the LGBT population totals less than 4 percent.

Ah yes, they are only minorities so it is okay to discriminate against them.

He ends with…

In a broader context this debate should focus on just how much accommodation is reasonable to expect, much less to demand as a matter of a legal right. When is it that more than nine in 10 Americans will be allowed to say: “We don’t hate you. We even understand and agree you deserve not to be discriminated against. However, this has become an argument that centers on personal comfort levels. You need to deal with being uncomfortable. It is more fair, more logical, and more reasonable than asking all the rest of us to adjust to you. Where possible, we will attempt to reduce this discomfort by providing separate facilities. However, a good deal of the time, you are just going to have to suck it up and deal with things.”

Yes, feeling uncomfortable is grounds to discriminate just like you justified segregation because blacks made you feel uncomfortable in the bathroom with you. Now you are saying that trans people make you feel uncomfortable and you want us to use separate bathrooms and locker rooms – or in other words you want to bring back separate but equal again. It was wrong then and it is wrong now.

Yes Sir… just let me kiss your feet and the ground that you walk on.

When Europeans Conquered…

…Indigenous cultures one of the first things that they did was to destroy their culture. Here in the United States we continued genocide and the abolishing of their culture, we sent their children to missionary schools to teach them the white man’s culture and religions.

BACKLASH ON NATIVE AMERICAN RESERVATION OVER TRANSGENDER BATHROOM POLICY
Newsweek
By Max Kutner
May 2, 2016

As several U.S. states consider public bathroom policies similar to the one that passed in North Carolina this spring, a Native American reservation in Montana is facing criticism for passing its own version of the law. The Fort Peck Reservation in northeastern Montana has likely become the first Native American group to say that tribal members must use the public bathroom corresponding to their gender at birth.

On May 23, the executive board on the 2 million–acre reservation, which is home to roughly 10,000 members of the Assiniboine and Sioux tribes, passed a motion “regarding transgender use of public bathrooms to mirror the position the state of North Carolina has taken,” according to the minutes from the meeting, obtained by a local media outlet.

“What people do in their bedrooms is their business. How public bathrooms are used is [my] business,” Tribal Councilman Edward Bauer said during the meeting.

The bathroom frenzy didn’t exempt the indigenous communities but not everyone feels the way that their leaders feel.

Anthony Shields Sr., an executive board member on the Fort Peck Reservation, says tribal leaders have been inundated with calls about the bathroom policy. “They basically don’t know how to handle it,” he says. “A lot of them have been catching hell from tribal members for doing this.”
[…]
“It’s very offensive to our people,” he adds. “These guys who brought it up are in the dark about our gays and lesbians and our transgender [people]. They don’t understand it, they don’t want to understand it.”

Pathos has an article about Two-Spirit peoples…

Two-Spirit: Gender Identity in America, Before America
May 31, 2016 by Mason Lync

I’ve heard many people claim that sexual orientation and gender identity are new and radical ideas invented by god-hating progressives, but that’s simply not true. From ancient China to the pre-colonial Americas, and just about everywhere in between, recognition of non-binary gender and sexuality is a common but often ignored part of history. The details vary between cultures, and our current movement has its own unique traits, but the basic ideas are far from new.

Long before Europeans introduced smallpox and Christianity to the American continents, many of the native tribes recognized non-binary gender identities, which are now described by the term two-spirit. Formerly, Europeans had used berdache, which essentially means “male prostitute”…one small example of how badly they failed at respecting native culture.

“The phrase ‘two spirit’ began to gain traction across Native America after 1990, when 13 men, women and transgender people from various tribes met in Winnipeg, Canada, with the task of finding a term that could unite the LGBTQ Native community. Numerous terms in tribal languages identified third genders in their cultures that encompassed both masculine and feminine, and the struggle for those gathered in Winnipeg was finding a contemporary term that would be embraced across all tribal cultures.”
-Zachary Pullin, Two Spirit: The Story of a Movement Unfolds

The details of the social standing of two-spirit individuals before European colonization varied from tribe to tribe. Many considered them to have both male and female spirits in one body, hence the modern term, and in most tribes they were accepted and respected. Some thought being two-spirit was a blessing from the gods. They filled roles such as maintaining oral traditions and storytelling, healing, weaving, performing spiritual ceremonies, caring for children, arbitrating conflicts, and more. Their existence was one of the most widely shared social features of native tribes throughout the Americas.

The article goes on to point out how we destroyed their culture,

European colonization brought Christian values to America and the result was devastating for two-spirit natives, who were considered perverted and forced into more traditional gender roles. The U.S. government acted directly to suppress the acceptance of non-binary genders among native tribes. Unfortunately, their efforts were successful and native communities became corrupted with the homophobia of Europeans.

And now we see the tribal council criminalizing Two Spirit people.

The Film Festival

Last night was the opening of the Connecticut LGBT film festival or as it is officially known as OutFilmCT, is about my fifteenth year attending the festival and opening night is always fun with the reception after the movies.

Spoiler Alert! You may not want to read this is you are going to be seeing these movies.

They start the night with a short of President Obama’s speech when the Supreme Court voted in favor of marriage equality. Which was then followed by three other shorts “The Little Deputy” which really funny, a little boy and his father go to a mall when there is a photographer who takes photos the look like old time photos. Well the photographer mistaken the boy for a girl and offers him an eighteen hundreds style dress and the boy after some initial desire to wear passes it up for a deputy outfit. Flash forward to when he is an adult and he tells his mother he is going back to have the photo redone but wearing the dress this time and the mother says she will bring his father with her. Ought Oh, is this trouble? So the next scene is him sitting there with the dress on and his mother hands him a urn with his father ashes.

The second one was kind of corny two women meet at a therapist’s office and seek therapy together, the short was called “The First Session.”

The last short was Instant Karma. A man saves a woman from walking into the path of a bus and she befriends him and when she finds out that he is gay she tries to “save him.” He waves her off in disgust and walk to his car and she runs after him right into the path of a truck… splat!

The main feature was,

Me, Myself and Her (Io E Lei)
Something isn’t quite right in Marina and Federica’s relationship and it might take more than a new mattress to make it work. Such is the test of their relationship, too comfy and cozy, or firm enough to withstand trial and error? In this lighthearted love story, Marina and Federica rekindle love in a bit of a drought. After five years together, they share the same apartment, elevator, and face cream. They laugh, they fight, they put up with each other’s families, but even so, they’re are [sic] not sure if they’re still a couple or not. In this charming romantic comedy they try to figure it out.

I gave it a three because I don’t like sad movies; I would have giving a lower score if they hadn’t gotten back together again.

One of the reasons why I go to the festival is to meet people and at the reception I met many old friends that I see around the LGBT community. There looked like there was another trans woman there who was out for the first time, I tried to get to her to talk but she vanished.

All in all it was a good night out.

Saturday 9 Ode to Billie Joe

Crazy Sam’s Saturday 9 Ode to Billie Joe (1967) 

We opened the cottage up last week and it was spring cleaning time there so I didn’t have time to write Saturday 9.

On Saturdays I take a break from the heavy stuff and have some fun...
If you're not familiar with today's song, you can hear it here.

1) This song takes places on "the third of June," which is described as "another sleepy, dusty" day. Describe the weather where you were on Friday, June 3, 2016.
Overcast and cool. The temperature was in the sixties compared to the eighties on Thursday.

2) In this song, the family sits down to eat and discuss the doings of their friends and neighbors. Mama, Papa, Brother and Sister were at the table. Who did you have dinner with on Friday?
Me, myself, and I

3) Young Billie Joe MacAllister playfully put a frog down another kid's back. Do you see many frogs where you live?
Yes, I have a swamp… um… wetlands in my back year.

4) This song made Mississippi's Tallahatchie Bridge famous. What's the name of a bridge in your neighborhood?
Well we don’t have a stream large enough to name the bridge over, the nears named bridge is in Middletown the Arrigoni Bridge.

5) Bobbie Gentry often performed with Glen Campbell. Mr. Campbell's family is very open about Glen's battle with Alzheimer's. Is anyone in your life facing this terrible disease? 
My aunt had dementia.

6) "Ode to Billie Joe" was made into a movie directed by Max Baer, Jr. Mr. Baer is better known for playing Jethro Bodine in a famous 1960s era sitcom. Can you name it?
Yes, the Beverly Hillbillies


7) Bobbie Gentry made one of her last public appearances in 1981 on The Tonight Show with Johnny Carson. Johnny is now seen in reruns on the Antenna TV channel. Think of the last TV show you watched. Was it new or was it a rerun?
It was a very old show of Murder She Wrote.

8) In 1967, when this song was popular, Sweden changed its traffic laws and Swedes began driving on the right. Have you ever driven in a foreign country? If so, did you have a hard time adapting to their laws?
No, but my father drove in Canada when I was little and it is seems like the rules are pretty much the same as here in the U.S.

9) Random question: Which would you rather have more of -- compliments or hugs?
Hugs.

Do You Have A Partner?

If you’re trans that is a hard thing to have. Unless you fall in love with another trans person, finding a cisgender spouse is almost impossible.

Queer singles survey reveals divisions on dating, marriage, and kids
LGBTQNation
By Dawn Ennis
June 2, 2016

Actually, we’re not OK, Cupid. Not when it comes to three big issues that divide single lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer-identifying Americans.

These hot topics aren’t all that different from those faced by cisgender heterosexual singles: do you want to get married, do you want to have kids, and would you date someone who’s transgender? The surprising result was that those taking part were split almost 50/50 on each of those questions.

But when it comes to us the pickings are slim.

And when the question of dating someone trans came up, again the survey found a deep divide: more than half of those participating said they would not date someone who identifies as transgender

That finding surprised Garcia, according to the newspaper. “I thought more people would be open to dating someone who’s transgender,” he said. “It was a good reminder that gender operates in very complicated ways; people are attracted to very specific things.” However, looking at the result another way, 47 percent of LGBTQ singles said they would be willing to date someone who is trans, and 44 percent said they would at least consider it, which is likely higher than the number of people that a single transgender American might expect.

And I imagine that those who cannot blend into society the numbers are even higher.

I was dating for one summer and I do not know why we broke up but my guess is that when we went out to dinner with my friends she had a hard time dealing time dealing with that. The way I look at it, we have the same odds as getting hit by lighting, but people get hit by lighting every day so there is always a chance of finding the right person either a trans woman or a cis woman.

So I go out to social events like the LGBT senior centers programs, and other events because you never know when you find that spark. There is a day trip for LGBT seniors this August to West Point that I'll probably go on, it will get me out of the house and out among friends and you never know I just might meet someone new.