First off, let me state, for the record, that anything I say here is my personal opinion and does not represent anything other than my personal views. I do not speak for ANYONE else.
Here is the text of the email that Mr. Sandeen has sent to my church. I should add, I am NOT "out, loud, and proud" at my church, so this represents, among other things, Mr. Sandeen outing me to people who do not necessarily know my past.
Now, I find it amusing that Mr. Sandeen decides to join in a cyberstalker's illegal efforts to anonymously cyberstalk me (I know, based on a post by another blogger that he has contacted a wide list of people in an effort to recruit them to his cause) but does not want his efforts revealed.It has come to my attention that Jenifer(sic)
is on the staff and vestry of The as the Editor. I'm also aware that your church identifies itself as a welcoming congregation, being listed in the , and I would believe therefore that your congregation would subscribe to the Tips On Becoming A Welcoming Congregation.One of the statements within Tips On Becoming A Welcoming Congregation is this statement:
If you are going to say you are welcoming, be prepared to prove it.
Outside of the walls of your church building, your staff member Jennifer Usher is not being welcoming of transgender identified people like me.Specifically, Jennifer has self-identified herself as being owner of the blog called JustJenifer. She has frequently misgendered me as by male pronouns, and refers to me frequently as "Mr. Sandeen." The most recent example of this is in her post It's All About The Egos, where she also misgenders Monica Helms.It is one thing for Jennifer to vigorously disagree with transgender people's opinions, and another thing altogether for her to intentionally, with malicious intent, frequently misgender transgender identified people.Jennifer
is listed as a staff and vestry member of your congregation. What she says, and how she says it, reflects on your congregation because she is a staff member of your congregation.Frankly, I would not attend your church or belong to your congregation because you have at least one staff member who very intentionally and maliciously doesn't embrace your message of being a welcoming congregation.If you are going to say you are welcoming, be prepared to prove it.
As a staff member of your congregation, she should be required -- if she wishes to remain on your staff -- to take her blog down. That is, after making a public apology on her blog for her intentional and malicious misgendering of transgender people on her blog (since she has made her vile misgendering of transgender people in public). If she does not agree to take the malicious content down and apologize for it, then she needs to be released from your staff.
Your staff member Jennifer
reflects poorly on your status as a welcoming congregation. I know I will be talking to governing body of if the situation isn't dealt in a manner that I believe is appropriate. This situation is very significant to me.Sincerely,~~Autumn~~Info: JenniferP.S.: Please note the last line of my signature block with regards to this e-letter. I'm not agreeing to the electronic publication of this e-letter.
Now, let me point out some things. I am not a member of my church's staff. I volunteer as editor, nor am I a member of the vestry. I am not an employee of the church, but just a member who gives time to several ministries.
Further, I disagree that I misgender anyone. I do not see Mr. Sandeen as a female, nor do I see Helms as one either. They are very public about their status, and I do not share their view that simply changing clothes changes one's sex and/or gender. I refer to them as male as a political statement in opposition to their positions regard transsexuals and those who identify as transgender. This is a political position, and it is mine alone. Again, nothing I say here reflects anything other than my views. Any attempt to associate these views as remotely being those of my church would be extremely dishonest on the part of Mr. Sandeen. Of course, honesty is not a trait I necessarily associate with him.
BTW, I have been called a male on numerous occasions, including by the very cyberstalker who Mr. Sandeen is assisting (talk about irony, not to mention hypocrisy). Do I go to pieces? Do I throw a hissy fit? No, because I am a woman. I am not playing a game. If someone calls me a male, it changes nothing. It is no different from any other woman being called a male. It might be a mistake, followed by a quick apology when the person takes a better look. It might be an attempt to insult, in which case I consider the source. Or it might be a political statement, in which case I might even have a good laugh. I am not trying to force society to see me as something I am not.
This is nothing more than a blatant attempt by Mr. Sandeen to accomplish what he has previously been unable to do. And that is to censor me. He regularly blocks anyone who disagrees with him. I was banned from his blog, not for any violations of the terms of service there, but supposedly because of what I write here. Now, he attempts to censor that by appealing to my church.
As to his claiming that "The contents of this electronic communication are off the record and not for publication on any blog, web site, news site or other public internet outlet unless otherwise agreed to by the author," that carries no weight in light of the nature of said email. He has shown no regard for ethical behavior by attempting to out me, and to cyberstalk me. So, I am going to ignore his silly attempt to hide his own misbehavior.
Oh, and one final thought. Given Mr. Sandeen's obvious hatred for Christianity, it is kind of funny that he would attempt to appeal to a church to aid him in his censorship.