Monday, May 10, 2010

A Horrible Episode

Last night's Family Guy was a terrible episode that was highly inaccurate, and very insulting to transsexuals. 

In the episode, Glen Quagmire's father,Dan, a decorated Naval officer, appears to be gay.  When Glen confronts his father, he confesses that he is not gay, he is a woman trapped in a man's body.  This is followed by several of the characters expressing opinions that basically came down to "what's the difference?"  There are also the usual references to "she/males" and such. This was not really refuted.

Then, Dan, who has so far appeared as a male, pops off to the hospital where he has a sex change.  Never mind that this is absurd.  One does not just go in, and come out looking like a woman.  No hormones, no RLT, just off to the OR, and he is a woman.  This is followed by playing Glen's confusion of pronouns for laughs, as Glen, now Ida, walks out of the OR, dressed as a female, with quite a nice figure, and a full head of long hair.  The doctor having made it sound like "he" had died during surgery, announces that "she" is doing quite well.  I can assure you, one does not walk out after such surgery.  I was not allowed out of bed for most of a week.

Then Ida visits Peter and family, again with another round of bad jokes.  Then Glen and his father fight and Ida goes to a hotel.  Finally, Brian who has been away at a web contend seminar, returns stopping at a local hotel for a drink. There he meets Ida, who he falls for.  Then, returning home, he talks to Stewie, telling him about having met the perfect woman.  Stewie then tells him about Quagmire's father. More bad jokes ensue, including Stewie talking about how it "must be a train wreck down there."   Brian is making the usual bad jokes until he discovers that Dan is now Ida.  He begins a rather prolonged round of vomiting.  Then Brian makes a comment about how when "they move to a new neighborhood they have to notify everyone, that's how it works." 

Ida comes back to Glen's house, and in about the only decent part of the show, they make up.  There is really not enough here to offset the bad that this show has featured.  Ida, who it had previously been suggested, is extremely selfish, pretty much apologizes and excuses Glen's boorish behavior.  Then Glen, while hugging Ida, apparently has an erection, saying it can't tell the difference.  Then Ida tells Glen about meeting Brian.  Glen does not take the news well.

The show ends with Glen brutally beating Brian, who has been in shower, scrubbing furiously as though he feels the need to wash away something horrible.   He tells Brian that he will blow his head off if he catches him near his house, and after he finishes, tells him to just lie there and die.  The final scene has Quagmire leaving, and Brian at the door saying to him, "I f**ked your father!" The actual word is bleeped out, but it is obvious what was said.

Why such an episode was done, and why this subject was treated so badly, will no doubt be debated online.  Already, Bil Browning at Bilerico has written a rather self-righteous article condemning it. Browning, who is gay, really does not have the standing to speak for the transsexual community.  I strongly suspect, as word gets out, that other transgender sites will express similar outrage.  And all of them will miss the point.

The reason for such ignorance is simple.  This is how transgender people present themselves.  And they insist on linking their confusion to those who are truly transsexual.  How many men, after long successful military careers, suddenly announce they are really women?  How many seek to associate gay and transgender?  How many transgender types imply that we are really still men?  As I say, the truth will be lost on them.  Especially the fact that this episode insulted transsexuals specifically, and that most of them have no business saying anything at all.

It's About Time

An interesting thing happened last week on Suzan Cooke's transgender blog, Women Born Transsexual.  She finally had her fill of "Willow" Arune, who is a well known net kook and apologist for Blanchard, Bailey and company.  What finally triggered the meltdown was the rather bizarre case of George Rekers, a well known advocate of reparative therapy for both those who are gay or lesbian and those who are transsexual.  Rekers was found to be involved with a gay prostitute who had accompanied him on a trip.  I will spare you the nasty bits, which have been posted on numerous gay blogs.

Cooke linked Rekers to Blanchard and Bailey and as would be expected, Mr. Arune rose up in defense.  Cooke, who is a major Godwin's Law violator, seemed a bit surprised, perhaps the only person who was.  The usual accusations of being a collaborator and a Nazi resulted, and Arune apparently decided to beat a hasty retreat before being toss off of another blog.  Arune has a long history of being banned from numerous groups, blogs, and other places.  Arune even managed to get banned from Yahoo after creating a mailing list to attack Andrea James.  That cost Arune not only that group, but also his infamous Autogynephilia mailing list.

Why Cooke would expect anything different from Arune is the real mystery.  Arune has a very bizarre history.  He is on disability in Canada, even though he brags about practicing law pro bono.  He traveled to Thailand, supposedly as part of some sort of business deal, and claims he was imprisoned because he was framed by Citibank.  While he was in a Thai jail, he claims he was sodomized (he uses the term rape, but that is not the appropriate term for male on male sexual assault).  Apparently, prior to this he showed no inclination towards any gender issues and he originally claimed that the idea of a sex change was suggested by a therapist, apparently in Thailand.  When he was confronted on this, he defended that claim.

After being largely rejected as a transsexual by anyone who encountered his bizarre claims, he dropped out of sight for a while, returning with a claim of being an autogynephile and major defender of Blanchard and Bailey.

Arune has a history of attacking those who have successfully transitioned.  He tries, desperately, to drag them down to his level.  He has attacked Andrea James, Calpernia Adams, Lynn Conway (he took her to take for her "Successful Transsexual Women" page, claiming that none truly existed), and anyone else who does not blindly adhere to the Blanchard theory of transsexualism.  Arune also has a history of seeking affirmation for his transsexualism.  He seems more concerned with being seen as a transsexual than anything else.  That is why he was trying to befriend Cooke.  He saw her as a major source of credibility.  As is always the case, this has basically blown up in his face.  Of course, it never occured to Arune that Cooke's imprimatur no longer has the value it was once perceived to have.

Of course, the relationship was symbiotic.  Arune provided major strokes for Cooke's massive ego.  Both seem to have a pathological need to viewed as authoritative.  Outside of their indivdual small groups of followers, neither of them is.

The bottom line?  I seriously considered naming this article, "When Kooks Collide."

Wednesday, May 5, 2010

The Latest TG Insanity in Texas

Let me start off by saying that I have nothing against same-sex marriage and that this is not the issue here.

Since Littleton v. Prange, the Texas case that invalidated a post-op transsexual woman's marriage because the court rule that she was still a male, TGs have occasionally pulled a very silly stunt in Texas.

Post-ops, who identify as lesbian, have applied for marriage licenses on the grounds that they are still, in the eyes of Texas law, still men.  The latest such case has become publicized. Anne Bernal, who is the County Attorney of El Paso County, Anne Bernal, has requested an opinion from Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott as to whether the county can issue a marriage license to a couple where a woman wishes to marry a post-op transsexual who was born a man.  The transsexual's original New York birth certificate still says male, but a new certified birth certificate issued in Washington State, and the driver's license, say female.

Now, I don't know any details about this person that would allow me to evaluate whether they are a classic or true transsexual.  There are claims of intersex, which are often highly questionable.

Now, there are couple of issue complicating this case:
  • First off, in 2009, the Texas legislature passed a law which states that a certified birth certificate suffices to establish sex.
  • Should the Washington State birth certificate be viewed as valid since that is not the state where this person was born?
Personally, I think cases such as this are a classic example of how transgender people do serious harm to transsexuals.  If this person is truly a woman, then I would not think they would want to be identified as a male.  But this person seems to be quite willing to set aside her womanhood to "beat the system."  This sort of behavior was proposed by Phillip "Phyllis" Frye, the infamous transgender kook who has a history of attempting to use outrageous acts to gain publicity,

If the couple is allowed to marry, it furthers the claim in Texas that sex reassignment surgery is invalid.  It can then be used as evidence that post-op transsexual woman are still "really men."  Of course, this is fine with transgender extremists who often push the idea that surgery is unnecessary.

I found out, right after posting this story, that the couple were married in San Antonio, TX.  So, yet another alleged transsexual in Texas has legally claimed to be a male, even though the person is post-op.  This sort of thing betrays all true transsexuals and should certainly not be seen as any sort of victory.  Of course, the transgender kooks will almost certainly disagree.

Tuesday, May 4, 2010

Whoops, Please Try Again...

Well, Suzan Cooke, who has joined the ranks of transgender has weighed in on the Sandeen debacle, and once again has shown a complete cluelessness.

Cooke asserts that:
Perhaps Autumn Sandeen enlisted thinking that doing so might make a man out of her and cure her of transsexualism or transgenderism. Of course TS or TG doesn’t work that way and isn’t cured that way.
No, Mr. Sandeen enlisted, period.  At the time I doubt he ever had a thought about being transsexual, transgender, or anything else.  He was just a man, looking for a career.  How can I be so sure?  Because he served long enough to retire with a full pension.  Sandeen likes to brag about his long, very successful career in the Navy.

True transsexuals don't have long successful careers as men.  They either transition early, or they live very miserable, and troubled lives until they do transition.  Cooke should know this, especially given all that we have heard about how she transitioned early.  Of course, I guess that is a bit difficult for Cooke to deal with since, as I understand it, her partner was a late transitioner.  Perhaps she was one of those who decided to transition after living happily as a man for years.

No, Sandeen remains a classic example of the worst of the transgender movement.  He is a man, who has every desire to keep a strong attachment to his history as a man, but who wants to play at being a woman.  He really should just to stick to what he is good at, and stop trying to be something he clearly is not.