Monday, August 23, 2010

The Truth Finally Comes Out

I have written several times about the Mike Penner/Christine Daniels case, usually in response to some drivel from "Autumn Sandeen."  And Sandeen has usually written in response to an article about Penner.  But a new article in the L.A. Weekly has come out that sheds new light on what led Penner to take his life.  And yet, Sandeen is oddly quiet.  Why, all of a sudden, are we not subjected to another round of hand wringing by Sandeen.  Why is he not telling us what wonderful friend Christine Daniel was, and how sad he is over the loss of this dear friend?

Perhaps because the truth is out, and it turns out that we now know some new facts about what drove Penner to suicide.

The primary factor was one that I can understand.  Penner de-transitioned because he missed his wife.  He could not deal with the end of his marriage.  Years ago, I went through a similar time.  There were two differences.  In my case, my ex-spouse and I stayed together and I had time to work through my issues and realize that being true to myself was more important.  In the end, we remain friends.  Penner's marriage was beyond repair, and even after he returned to being "Mike" his marriage could not survive.

But the secondary factors are why I am not surprised that Sandeen has ignored this new insight into what happened.  There are some interesting quotes from Penner, made at the time he was still living as Christine.  For example, there is this one, sent to Susan Stanton who had complained about Christine's comments in a blog:
"I think what I'm doing is correct. If you've got a problem with it, it's your problem. ... I'm a real woman who loves makeup and clothes, shoes. A woman, not a trans-anything who needs to quote-unquote represent some undefined community. For the first time in my life, I'm being true to myself, and my true self loves makeup, clothes, shoes."
That is a very telling comment.  Especially in light of another comment where she said that she was:
"overwhelmed by everything and everyone. I feel as if I am being used as a pawn by the trans community (and maybe theTimes as well). I have been close to tears many times. ... I am flat-out exhausted."
This confirms what I long suspected.  Penner was used, and to a large extent abused, by the transgender crowd.  But Penner was not remotely transgender.  Penner was a late transitioning true transsexual.  He had fought his feelings as long as he could, but when he finally gave in, he had to face the loss of his wife.  That was too much for him to deal with.

In this article, we also learn, for I believe the first time anywhere, that Penner had scheduled surgery with Marcie Bowers.  In fact, the event that triggered his decline was when Bower's office contacted him about delaying his surgery for a week.  

I found Bower's comment that having surgery would have saved Penner's life to be highly questionable.  Penner needed to work things out with his ex-wife.  He needed to reach closure over the loss, or he needed to decide that his marriage was more important.  If he had reached the first, he would have moved on to surgery.  If he had decided the second, then it would indicate he was not a transsexual after all.  But until this was worked out surgery should have been out of the question.  

Thursday, August 5, 2010

You Can't Have it Both Ways

It has been a while since I posted here.  LIfe has been busy.  I have someone new in my life, and that has taken up some of my time.  I also have other things going on, and besides that, there has not been much worth writing about.  Then, yesterday, I saw a post by notorious transgender activist Suzan Cooke and decided I had to say something.

Yes, I know, Cooke is adamant that she is not transgender.  She insists that she is not under the umbrella.  But, the simple fact is, Cooke has, as they say, been guzzling the Kool-Aid for sometime, and is transgender in all but name.

The latest silliness is Cooke's adamant assertion that "gender is a social construct."  That, of course, is straight out of the radical transgender playbook.  The bottom line is that it means that gender is essentially a choice, that transsexuals are not really what they say they are, and that, given enough "social construction," transsexuals can be "cured" (i.e. be beaten into accepting their birth "gender."  Of course, Cooke would probably deny all of this, but hey, facts are facts.

What we call "gender" is actually inherent, and immutable.  It is the sexual differentiation of the brain.  It is well established by science, a fact that is denied vehemently by some in the same way that religious fundamentalists deny proven science about other issues.  Of course, the more radical transgender activists don't want gender to be inherent.  They adamantly claim that gender is a choice, and not inherent.  One's sex is what one says one sex is.  

I did not choose to be a transsexual.  I chose to deal with something that as present from birth.  If one thinks that gender is a choice, they must either be blind, or have a very odd definition of gender.  Anyone who has been around a group of transgender people, observing those who are clearly men in dresses, pretending both poorly and cluelessly, to be women, would have no illusion that "choice" is involved in true transsexualism.

It is not about stereotypes.  It is about something inherent, and not easily defined.  There are obvious differences in males and females that are not affected by socialization.  Some behavior can be modified, but there are things that cannot be.  And those things are what are truly gender.  And since Cooke denies this, she sides with the transgender crowd, as well, ironically with both radical feminists who hate transsexuals and the religious right who wish to deny our reality.