"Thank you for helping to erase my child"
City hall shows how much it doesn't care, actually, about our queer neighbors
I am irritated with and disappointed in this city. The past week I’ve felt like I am both covering for a coworker who called in sick and the coworker who called in sick. A general malaise that’s hard to put a pin on. A recent post titled “welp” in postcards from the end of the world, a great newsletter from Worcester native and poet at large Leah Lakshmi Piepzna-Samarasinha, just about sums it up though.
I guess I was right when I said a couple months ago, last month, that we could predict some of what would happen after coronation day and we could predict that it would be very bad, but we couldn’t predict the specifics of it, and if we tried we would be fucking ourselves and wasting time.
being right about how bad what we knew was coming is doesn’t make it much easier to bear. this shit is predictably unpredictably batshit. catastrophic and yet, well, let’s see what happens. what else can we do. I believe in us and I believe in the things that are bigger than either us or them, like land, god and time. mostly I respect the power of the chaos factor, the and now for something completely different factor of the unexpected. which comes from land, god, time.
I genuinely did not anticipate how shitty the city council and school committee could be but I guess I should have, as Leah puts it here. Guess I should not be fuckin’ one bit surprised.
The school committee voted on Thursday night against a resolution expressly supporting its trans students. Then they voted for a rewrite introduced at the last minute by Molly McCullough which refocused away from queer kids, toward “all students,” rendering it meaningless. McCullough vehemently denies this but you can’t do that when the objective truth is right there. You saw an LGBTQ resolution and felt so strongly you couldn’t vote for it that you changed the language.
Everyone else involved from the mayor on down pretended to be surprised when Molly introduced this. After they voted through what amounts to a deliberate erasure of trans and non-binary students, the parent of such a student can be heard losing her composure. Screaming at the committee from the “public pen.” It hurts your heart to listen to it.
“Thank you for helping to erase my child. Thank you for standing up for every fascist trying to erase my child from existence. You should be ashamed for helping that.”
These are the stakes for the parents of trans children. They are not the stakes for the parents of all children. This is not hard to understand. The failure to understand is as willful as it is cowardly.
We can’t punish Trump directly but we can punish these feckless and sometimes outright malicious local public officials and in doing so we’ll have used our collective will to make the world better in a small way. Just on its own it’s an increasingly rare and beautiful thing, to make the world better. Not just keep it level, make it better.
Liz Franczak of TrueAnon, in her most recent edition of Crackpots, captured just why a genuine change for the better feels so rare and so beautiful and so far away:
Trading on midcentury nostalgia porn isn't specific to AI marketeers, it's everywhere now, from the retro Reaganite cosplay to the sad parodies of "industrial policy" to the piles of now-discounted books touting the return of 20th century welfarism. What is up with everyone trying to reanimate the past? We don't even have the story straight. America became an industrial power almost despite itself and then immediately de-industrialized to flood the world with complex financial products while setting the rules for global capital flows by nuclear force. Now, faced with the reality of our terminal condition, we are stuck mining our history like an LLM, remixing various parts in the hope it might generate something new. It's not. We are looping, projecting a fantasy of history backwards, using it for the fabric of dreams too empty to produce anything beyond recursion. It just feels like we are out of ideas.
Transphobia is one of those recycled ideas. And the Trump administration has put a lot of stock into it. Play the hits: On Wednesday, a change to Title X barring trans athletes; last week, an investigation into Denver for gender neutral bathrooms, penalizing teachers for helping a student transition; and of course on his first day in office, the executive order declaring only two genders. A concerted effort to erase trans existence, as the pissed-off parent put it. And locally, a failure to respond anywhere near adequately. The past week has been a clear-as-day statement from city hall: We actually don’t have your backs.
This is what makes ending City Councilor Candy Mero-Carlson’s political career, especially, a good deed. She has been the most erm, transparently transphobic, with the “it” slur she threw at her non-binary colleague. When a transphobe in your community gets their public life destroyed by the fact of that coming to the surface, it sends a loud message to the other transphobes. Fuck with our trans neighbors at your own fuckin’ risk. And it sends a message to our trans neighbors, who as Leah described above really fuckin need it right now: we got your back. That shit does not fly here. So long as Candy remains in her seat, though, we must be clear eyed about the fact it is flying here. On Thursday we watched the majority of the school committee, especially Molly McCullough, willfully cater to the transphobia of the moment as well. That body, too, showed us how willing this city is to acquiesce to the fascistic scapegoating of a tiny fraction of the population. This LLM-like mining of our history, as Franczak put it, to come up with a new boogeyman coming for The Respectable Whites and Their America.
So how to change that? We can’t appeal to their consciences that much is clear. So we enter the realm of realpolitik. Where’s the weakness? The obvious one is the ballot box. And the path to making sure Candy Mero-Carlson first and foremost suffers an embarrassing defeat there—or better yet bows out to save herself from one—starts with making her a toxic asset for the others in her small crank coterie. Why hasn’t Mayor Joe Petty condemned her use of a slur? Why is he dodging an investigation, as we talked about in the last post? Why can’t he bring himself to condemn the only Republican on the council when she holds up a resolution proclaiming the city a sanctuary for trans and genderqueer people?
That’s what happened Tuesday night by the way: Donna Colorio “held” the resolution unceremoniously after more than 50 people over the course of two hours pleaded with the council to do something. It just delays the vote by a week, and was done for one reason: to tell the entire audience to go fuck themselves. More on that later.
Petty just accepted it. Let it happen. Why roll over like that in a room full of trans people who desperately want to see someone with even a small modicum of power such as those afforded by a city council seat do fucking something on their behalf?
I’m getting ahead of myself, I know. I got so angry at the city council meeting Tuesday—watching the feckless low-rent crony culture of the council collide disastrously with the real desperate need for certain moral leadership—I stormed out muttering to myself. Once I got away from the crowd I threw my phone tripod against the wall like Kyle had one too many Monsters before logging on to play Call of Duty ranked and the internet gave out mid match, resulting in a slide from plat to gold.
One guy saw me do it I think and he was nice enough to not say nothing about it. He said he came down cuz of this newsletter and will be back next week. His name is Ben. He’s a local attorney and he spoke eloquently during public comment. If you’re reading Ben, thank you. I needed that. We’ll be back next week. That’s all there is to it.
And, thanks to Colorio’s fuckery, we’ll be back with a vengeance. We need 300 people out next Tuesday night by the way. That’s the goal. Tell your friends. Tell your neighbors. It matters a lot that we keep showing up. It’s making these cretins tell on themselves, majorly. And on Tuesday we’re going to do it by having a big gay party at city hall.
Here’s the link to RSVP! Really really important folks show up to this.
There are several really important orders on the agenda that need our support:
Item 10b: An order from Etel Haxhiaj “to hire a third party with LGBTQIA+ and BIPOC expertise and lens to investigate Councilor Nguyen and Councilor Haxhiaj's concerns regarding transphobia, discrimination, and toxic council culture.” This is the same request as the clerk blocked from the last agenda, which I wrote about at length last week: “They pulled the same old dirty trick.”
Item 14b: The resolution, held by Colorio at the last meeting, to declare Worcester a sanctuary city for trans members of our community. There’s a related legal advisory from the city’s lawyer on sanctuary city language we’ll get to later.
We need to talk about school committee and council in further depth—especially the former, as it was way out of left field.
But in keeping with the spirit of partying our way to victory, it’s best to kick things off with a rare and precious W in our column.
Sorry Miss Jackson—the school committee pulls an “all lives matter”—what to expect Tuesday—odds and ends
Carolyn Jackson, Bye Bye!
The union beat the union-buster. Carolyn Jackson, the CEO of St. Vincent hospital brought in for the express purpose of breaking up the nurses union, tendered a rushed resignation on Feb. 3. On Feb. 14, she’s out the door, and there is as of yet no plan for a successor.
The resignation comes as state investigators are digging into multiple patient safety and working conditions complaints filed by nurses at the hospital via their union, the Massachusetts Nurses Association.
In the internal email announcing her resignation, the union appears in the first paragraph. “After serving nearly six years in a difficult union environment, Carolyn is choosing to focus on the next chapter of her career.”
Translation: she went to war with the union and she fa-reakin’ lost!
To celebrate, Chris and I brought MNA nurse Carla LeBlanc onto Outdoor Cats earlier this week. It’s a great conversation (also just FYI the podcast is available in all the players now. Here’s the links to add it on Spotify and to Apple podcasts, for instance. Other links in the post). Here’s a good quote from LeBlanc:
I don't know if other people in the community or in regular population would get how this is going. There's never been a time in healthcare where all of the different departments are on the same page. It's always ER and ICU are enemies, or ER and the med surge units are enemies.
You know, the doctors and the nurses have conflict and management and staff have conflict. And probably in the last month we’ve noticed that so many people are on the same page and across the board, people are needing change in that hospital. And so now we're banding together and people are talking in the hallways that weren't talking before. People are having relationships and conversations that would have never happened prior to this. That email was sent to leadership, which I imagine is managers and doctors. And as soon as that hit the inbox, managers and doctors were letting nurses know like that was their first go-to person.
Tenet Healthcare is an extremely evil and powerful company. The struggle is far from over. But in these nurses we see the power of collective action and camaraderie manifest. Because of the nurses, Tenet has been unable to execute so much of its dangerous agenda. They have put their collective foot down—one big non-slip worksafe croc—and all of us benefit.
The MNA is such an inspiration. A shining light in these nightmare times.
The School Committee pulls an “all lives matter”
By a 7-2 vote the school committee pulled an “all lives matter” on a resolution submitted by Sue Mailman to stick up for queer public school students. A clearly pre-coordinated stunt, Molly McCullough introduced a rewritten version of the resolution that removed LGBTQIA from the title and refocused much of the language on “all students.” The original was voted down and the amendment passed, with only Mailman and Vanessa Alvarez in opposition.
It was the second time in the same week Worcester officials wiggled out of taking a stand in defense of community members targeted by the Trump administration with increasing ferocity. At council Tuesday, they hid behind procedure to delay a vote. At school committee, they more directly stated what they meant, though not by much.
Taken as a whole this week amounts to a clear-as-day statement from city hall to the queer community: we actually don’t have your backs. We actually will roll over when push comes to shove. But rest assured we will feel bad about it. Know that we will be uncomfortable. Take comfort in our acknowledgement that it's a “difficult issue.”
Let’s work through the school committee meeting last night chronologically. There’s a lot to keep straight and it gets confusing. But, remember, the overall message is clear as can be: they didn’t want to vote on a resolution expressly supporting queer students. They took great pains to avoid doing so while trying to say that they weren’t.
—Public comment opened the meeting. Just like on Tuesday, it’s mostly trans people and the parents of trans students desperately pleading for some small form of action on their behalf.
Cayden Davis, a trans resident, pleaded the importance of a show of solidarity with young trans people.
“The federal government is actively stripping away our rights in protecting its students, teachers, and school staff. I'm absolutely terrified as an adult, someone who has access to care and an incredible support system. I'm truly terrified. Most days I can't imagine the fear that trans young people have right now. Being a young person is hard. School is hard and existing in a world that is trying to erase you is really, really, really hard.”
An hour later the committee would mostly erase trans from the resolution they voted to pass. But we’ll get there. Davis continued:
“Let's not make things any more difficult for our young people. The difficult truth is that if this resolution does not pass, more of our trans youth will die. They are already dying. Please, let's give them hope.”
—After public comment, Mailman was first to speak. “There are two groups that have been targeted for the past many months during this national election. And it's the migrant community and it's the LGBTQIA community. And in my mind, we must use our voices. I listen to our Congressman Jim McGovern through the chair, say, we need to speak up. We need to speak up for these families that are most targeted for these students and for our employees.”
Jermaine Johnson was second. At the time, before I knew what McCullough was going to do, I found it odd his address was peppered with All Lives Matter sounding references, like so: “...what I strive for as being a part of this committee is that all students, LGBTQ plus, Black, brown, migrants, they are going to have a place where they could come to every day...”
Alex Guardiola spoke third, doing the same thing as Johnson. “I'm going to hope that we can all ensure the safety of all of our students, ensure that we all as elected officials, support them all and build a place where we can all call home here in the school system.” In retrospect we see a certain laying of the groundwork here.
Fourth was Joe Petty, who opened his address with “I do support this resolution” before voting against it a few minutes later. A slip of the tongue perhaps, which would require he knew about the amended resolution McCullough hadn’t yet introduced. Either that or he was lying in a very obvious way. He then touted the city’s human rights index score, same as he did on Tuesday, and same as he’s expected to do next Tuesday. “We were one of the leading cities when it comes to human rights and the LGBTQ community.”
(That Joe would say this while refusing to condemn a colleague for using a slur or feel comfortable all lives matter-ing a petition in service of queer students calls to question what if any use the human rights index score has in assessing the local climate for queer people. I’m far from the first person to make this point.)
Fifth was Vanessa Alvarez. She thanked those who spoke from the public and addressed them individually, a rare and refreshing sight to see. She actually listened and actually cared. And that would shine through brightly a little later.
Then, sixth, was McCullough. She said their job on the school committee is “listening to and valuing the voices of our community, particularly those who have been historically marginalized.” She then introduced an amended resolution that did the opposite of what the historically marginalized people in the room wanted to happen.
They took a recess to read it. I wasn’t able to get a copy until after the meeting, making what followed extremely frustrating to try to keep up with.
It’s worth pausing here to look at how the two resolutions differ. Let’s start with the headlines, as that really tells the whole story.
Mailman resolution: LGBTQ+ Safe Schools Resolution
McCullough resolution: Safe Schools Resolution
No more “LGBTQ+,” you’ll notice. It becomes a running theme. So let’s look at the full text of Sue’s. Bolded and italicized is language that didn’t make it into McCullough’s.
WHEREAS, it is the right of every child, regardless of gender identity, gender expression, or sexual orientation, to access a free public K-12 education and the District welcomes and supports all students;
WHEREAS, the District has a responsibility to ensure that all students who reside within its boundaries, regardless of gender identity, gender expression, or sexual orientation can safely access a free public K-12 education;
WHEREAS, Massachusetts General Laws ch. 76 §5 prohibits discrimination, including
discrimination based on gender identity, gender expression, and sexual orientation;
WHEREAS, despite recent changes to Title IX, based on the ruling in Tennessee, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Miguel Cardona, In His Official Capacity As Secretary Of Education, et al., Defendants. Civil Action No. 2: 24-072-DCR, in July, 2024, excluding gender identity and expression from Title IX, discrimination based upon sexual orientation and gender identity is already prohibited under MA law (See in part M.G.L. c. 76, § 5 and M.G.L. c. 151B, §§ 3 & 4); Districts are still required to be in compliance with MA law;
WHEREAS, Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer/Questioning students experience high rates of bullying, victimization, and harassment at school on the basis of their actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity, or that of their associates;
WHEREAS, this bullying, victimization, and harassment has let to negative educational outcomes for LBTG students, including higher rates of dropping out, higher rates of absenteeism, and lower postsecondary school aspirations and higher rates of anxiety and depression;
WHEREAS, school-aged years are a critical time for LGBTQ youth as they often disclose their LGBTQ identities to others during that time;
WHEREAS, creating a welcoming and safe school environment for our LGBTQ students, staff, families, and caregivers makes our school community more welcoming and safe to all;
WHEREAS, the District supports education that celebrates our different identities; integrity in how we treat others; and courage to do what’s right by listening to, learning from, and respecting diverse viewpoints;
WHEREAS, educational personnel are often the primary sources of support, resources, and information to assist and support students and learning, which includes their social and emotional health;
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the District prohibits discrimination, bullying and harassment against all persons, whether student, family/caregiver of student, or District employee, on the basis of actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, or the actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression of their associates;
So three main cuts from McCullough:
Any mention of the Trump administration’s assault on trans rights,
any acknowledgment of the undue harm bullying causes the queer community, and
a direct condemnation of bullying, discrimination, and harassment based on sexual orientation or gender identity.
Like the headline, the third change is extremely revealing. In the place of a direct condemnation of bullying based on gender, McCullough inserts (emphasis mine):
WHEREAS, that the District prohibits discrimination, bullying, and harassment against all individuals including students, families, caregivers, and employees;
So yeah. A transparent attempt to water it down, for reasons not even close to explained out loud. McCullough never said what she found disagreeable about the resolution Mailman filed. It remains the only question worth asking her, though I doubt you’d get an honest answer. Knock yourself out but I’m not in the mood to be lied to.
They came back from their recess, and Dianna Biancheria spoke first. She said she found the rewritten version much more amenable than the initial one. Translation: she wasn’t going to support the first resolution. She came closest of any of them to being honest about that.
She seemed to like that it removed any mention of the elephant in the room. “We’re also a bipartisan body,” she said. “So when we look at an approach for what we’re putting on for safe schools we want to ensure we are protecting everyone at all times.” Translation: think about the Trumpers (and let’s be honest, many Democrats) who are making a scapegoat of our trans neighbors. How do they feel? “Some of the comments I’m not too fond of.” The ones critical of Trump, she means.
Mailman insisted that the council vote on her initial resolution—the one the community came out to speak in favor of—but accepted some of the updated policy footnotes at the end of McCullough’s “surprise” amendment. She said she worried the council was losing focus on the fact this resolution was meant as a show of support specifically for the LGBTQIA community, which acutely needs it right now.
I’ll add that if it doesn’t do that, it doesn’t do anything. It spins out under the weightlessness of itself and becomes meaningless. Which is exactly what Joe Petty wanted when he instructed McCullough to file this—whoops did I say that out loud? Sue me. Who fucking cares. It would thrill me to be proven wrong.
While I’m on this aside: I am so fucking sick of these constant backroom games that Joe Petty and his coterie play. The objective: make sure anyone left of center eats shit. The disqualifying rule: admit to it in public. The petulant children of Jim McGovern, scheming behind the congressman’s back to exact their petty local vengeances on their perceived local rivals. But knowing, always knowing, that Papa Would Be Angry if ever their true intentions came to light. Mustn’t Anger Papa. So they walk that line like clever teens. I’m fucking sick of it. Grow up. Just say it out loud already. You only stand to benefit. You will not lose votes, believe me. The people who already vote for you will celebrate you with renewed gusto until they die or move to Florida or die en route to Florida. Just say out loud what you mean and let the chips fall. In this way Dianna Biancheria is better than any of you. She does that. It makes her more morally correct. Evenly monstrous. Only a little less capable of rifling off a complete sentence. Donna calls a floor a floor. The rest of you insist on calling it a ceiling.
Anyway.
A procedural quagmire ensued, the specifics of which are not worth recapping. The result was two separate votes.
The first was to pass Mailman’s original resolution, with the light revision of updated policy links pulled from McCullough’s. Mailman had to fight for this, it should be noted. The rest of the committee was trying to steamroll to a vote on McCullough’s amended resolution first. Again, evidence of clear pre-coordination. And, in case you needed any more, here’s Binienda instructing Biancheria and Roy on how to vote this first time on Mailman’s motion.
This first vote is the real vote on the resolution affirming the WPS is safe for LGBTQIA students.
Here’s who voted against it: Joe Petty, Molly McCullough, Maureen Binienda, Kathy Roy, Dianna Biancheria, Alex Guardiola.
Only three of the nine voted in favor: Mailman, Alvarez, and Jermaine Johnson.
Then they moved to the “all lives matter” version proposed by McCullough. And here Alvarez speaks up and introduces some moral clarity to the situation. Joe Petty told her that a vote against the amendment means the whole thing dies. “I mean that makes me feel a little cornered,” Alvarez said.
Molly read the amended text into the record, finally, then Mailman gets up same as Alvarez. “I don't get the game. I feel cornered as well.” McCullough said there’s no game, to which Mailman replied “What’s the change?”
Instead of explaining, McCullough freaks out. “Excuse me, point of order, I am talking. I am talking. Point of order.” She says it was an effort to make the resolution “more succinct.” She doesn’t say that all of the cuts are the very language that makes the resolution mean anything at all.
Alvarez got up a second time to speak the plain truth, plainly needed:
“The reason why I feel personally how I feel about these changes and how everything is, because it kind of gives me that, when I think of this, I think of with everything going on, all lives matter versus Black Lives Matter. But in this moment it feels like we're saying all the lives matter. They do. We all do. But right now, the LGBTQ plus community is really set on. I mean, I don't have words to describe it, and this to me is just saying, Hey, we hear you. We're putting this here for you. For all of us. It's not. I know. That's pretty much why I feel cornered.”
But that didn’t change anyone’s mind, of course.
The vote on the “all lives matter” version was 7-2. Only Alvarez and Mailman had the temerity to call it what it was—a game—and vote against it. The rest took the cowardly route. The quote from the parent at the top of this post, who shouted at the committee after this vote, bears repeating:
“Thank you for helping to erase my child. Thank you for standing up for every fascist trying to erase my child from existence. You should be ashamed for helping that.”
They should very much be ashamed. After the meeting, I talked to Mailman on the phone. She said she was disappointed. She said the school administration has already done a great job of sticking up for migrant students with the ICE advisory Monárrez put out shortly after Trump’s inauguration. She wanted to do the same thing for the trans community with the petition she filed.
“The trans issue is so hateful and it's so despicable, and it's... we are just running into roadblocks on the city side and now on our side. And I guess it just shows the level of bigotry around the issue. That's the only conclusion I can come to.”
I don’t think there’s any other conclusion available to us. It is bigotry manifest—thinly obscured behind niceties and procedural quagmires. The moves of cowards too afraid to hear themselves say what they mean, admit to what they’re doing.
Venmo a tip / Paypal a Tip / Send a tip on Ko-Fi / Merch Store
What to expect on Tuesday
The councilors unwilling to support trans members of this community with a purely symbolic declaration of this city as a sanctuary are going to focus on the legalese. We know this because that’s what they did last week. Donna Colorio asked for legal guidance. Moe Bergman spoke of the legal risk.
Both of them are full of shit.
In a report submitted to council by Alexandra Kalkounis, the city’s lawyer, she provides a brief overview of Trump’s threats to revoke federal funding for “sanctuary cities,” a legally defined thing a city can be in the specific arena of immigration. And, in short, it didn’t work when Trump tried it in his first term. Massachusetts cities sued when he tried and the idea was abandoned in short order. Kalkounis writes:
History tells us that cities in Massachusetts, amongst several others nationwide, successfully challenged President Trump's Executive Orders in 2017 and federal funding was not held back or frozen.
A bit of bluster for the TV stations. Like so many of Trump’s proposals, it’s that and nothing more. Kalkounis continues:
The current Executive Orders related to gender-affirming care are of first impression, meaning there is no historical precedence for them as there is for immigration, and there have been no decisions or guidance issued from any challenges.
She chooses the gender-affirming care executive order likely because it’s the closest parallel. But it’s not what the resolution even asks! The resolution is “declaring the City of Worcester a sanctuary city for transgender and gender diverse people.” Trump has said nothing about targeting sanctuary cities for trans people not least of all because that is not a legally defined thing.
The argument we’re likely to hear, from Bergman especially, is that we can’t say “sanctuary city” in any context because that puts us at risk. That’s so far removed from being true Kalkounis couldn’t even address it directly.
As she explained, it put us at risk for all of two seconds back in 2017 before Trump’s bluster was laughed out of court. And that was in the one arena in which Sanctuary City has a legal definition.
There is zero zero zero risk because it is a purely symbolic gesture. There is no legal definition of a trans sanctuary city.
If Bergman or Colorio or whoever else argues about the risk, even after this law department report plainly spelling out there isn’t any, there’s no way to see it but that they just don't want Worcester to be a safe place for trans people.
They disagree with the gesture itself, and are clinging to “risk” for the out it provides them. So they don’t have to hear themselves say out loud what they hold in their hearts.
If they do that they are stains on this city. Plain and simple.
Odds and ends
Thanks for reading! This outlet is reader-funded and not any other way funded. So please, if you can swing it, throw us some bones.
Venmo a tip / Paypal a Tip / Send a tip on Ko-Fi / Merch Store
Also any readers out there who like tattoos, my wonderfully talented tattooer girlfriend now has open books. Fill out the form to get yourself on the calendar for your very own Katie Nowicki piece!
There’s an event at a Hudson bank later this month in which two Jan. 6ers are keynote speakers. I’m so excited to go, honestly. The ethnography of local dipshits I’ll be providing you upon my return should prove quite useful given their recent ascendency.
In the opening of my last post I included a riff on Sojourner Truth, quoting from the “Aint I A Woman” speech that rose to historical notoriety as it appeared in the Angela Davis book I’m reading. Then I got this message on Twitter from Worcester State Professor Rita Mookerjee:
Just a pushing glasses up “well actually” moment for you: Sojourner Truth spoke Dutch with her master’s home. she wouldn’t have used AAVE. “ain’t I a woman” was a folksy attempt by white people to dumb down her rhetoric so they wouldn’t find her too scary
And another comment on the article from a reader with a link to the Sojourner Truth project, which has two different transcriptions of that speech available for review. So I checked the footnotes of the Angela Davis book I’m reading and found that her source was Elizabeth Cady Stanton, a white suffragist. Davis opens the next chapter, on racism in the women’s movement of the time, with the full text of an extremely racist op-ed Stanton penned. Racist white lady takes it upon herself to slap a little fictional funk on the words of an intelligent Black woman. Tale as old as time, apparently.
Here’s a glowing feature in the Catholic Free Press about the anti-abortion billboard on I-290 by the I-190 ramp. Surreal read.
Unrelated: Anyone have a paintball gun?
Related: Survivors of sex abuse committed by Catholic priests in Worcester and elsewhere in the state are still trying to get the Attorney General’s Office to release its investigation into the local dioceses. The Boston investigation came out 20 years ago. But not ours, or Springfield’s, or Fall River’s. Check out this classic Massachusetts line: “Attorney General (Andrea) Campbell said she is not allowed to say who is stopping the release of her office’s report.” Okay thank you for that.
Here’s a fun fact: Ed Russo, owner of Lock 50 and the short-lived Russo’s, both permanently closed, made restaurant-ownership level money in the live animal testing business. Per a Masslive story about an equipment fire sale at the shuttered Russo’s (not something I’d write about, personally) a little detail is dropped in the middle:
Russo’s main job is as the president and CEO of LABEX of MA, a company specializing in animal caging and vivarium equipment.
Per its website, the company makes testing cages for a variety of animals up to and including “non-human primates.” That’s... a lot to think about. Time was, Lock 50 represented the promise of a booming Canal District and a restaurant scene on the rise. But it only existed because there was enough demand for monkey cages in corporate R&D offices that such a business could be profitable. What a world. Kudos to my Outdoor Cats cohost Chris Robarge for catching that one.
There’s an 11-story apartment building maybe going in across the street from city hall. At 17 Pearl Street, it would be built on what’s currently a little-used parking lot. So that’s good. Ground floor retail and a number of units set aside for 60 percent AMI. Both good! What’s not so good is it looks as though it was modeled directly on the police station. Here’s a rendering the company provided the Planning Board (left) versus the police station.
Pretty funny.
All right talk soon!
That top hat pic just really ticks me tf off.
Cant find anywhere else to ask this - any plans to move off substack, now that they're openly friendly to Nazis?