Monday, August 22, 2011

Mr. WIlliams Throws in the Towel

Over the past few weeks, I have been in a battle of wits with a gender fascist who goes by the name "Cristan" Williams.  Mr. Williams first popped up on Bilerico with some pretty silly claims about how "transgender" had been around a long time.  When he was challenged on this, he began using some rather silly, and dishonest, debating techniques.  Now, most people are not that familiar with forensics, so this sort of behavior can quickly deteriorate into a bit of a brawl.  And when someone is using such techniques dishonestly, this is even worse.  Suffice to say, the battle of wits was quite one sided.  It was me against someone who was essentially witless.

In the latest round, I stated:
"For someone to say, "I am a woman, and I have a penis that I plan to keep," is completely insane. " 
To which another person responded"

Oh please. What's so magical about a penis that makes it define sex? 
 Now, this is just the sort of silliness one often encounters from the more extreme of the transgender extremists.  Mr. Williams immediately rallied to this kook's defense, and I challenged Mr. Williams on the topic.  Now, Mr. Williams response was to accuse me of making a straw argument (not a particularly bright move, since he uses them repeatedly, as I had pointed out).  This is sort of the debating equivalent of saying "Same to you, but more of it."  I made the statement that, if he did not share that view, he was welcome to denounce it, and I would gladly admit my error.  He quickly tried to change the subject a bit by resorting to an ad hominem attack, accusing me of something he labeled "the Jennifer Shuffle."  What this means, is that I would not let him define the limits and terms of the debate.  Put in simpler terms, I would not allow him to try to goad me into saying something he could twist into yet another straw argument.

Now, let me pause here to say that the main reason I have, as some would put it, "misgendered" Mr. Williams is this constant, rather masculine tendency to try to goad people into making statements that he can twist.  His debating style reminds me more of Sen. Joseph McCarthy more than anything else.  I can just picture Mr. Williams, bug-eyed and red faced, screaming "Are you now, or have you ever been, a member of the Communist Party?!?!?!?"  Or in Mr. Williams case, I suppose it would be, "Are you now, or have you ever been, a transsexual separatist?!?!?!?!?"

In any case, I made the statement:
Let me put this in simple terms...a penis does not belong on a woman.
And Mr. Williams came back with: 
Now. this is a classic example of a dishonest question.  It has no context, and there is no simple answer.  It is clearly meant to be answered, "Yes" or "No."  Which is just plain silly.  It is not much better than the classic, "Have you stopped beating your wife?"  If you have never beaten your wife, or if you are not even married, then the "true" answer would "No," implying that you still beat your wife.  And of course, if you answer yes, you are are admitting to having beaten your wife.  Of course, that is kind of silly, but Mr. Williams' question is not much better.

The problem is, he give no indication of what he means by sex.  Does he mean legal sex? Perceived sex?  Chromosomal sex?  Genital sex?  Brain sex? Gonadal sex?  Reproductive sex?  Or perhaps he means sex, as in who you are going to engage in intercourse with, though I doubt it.  Without context, there is no answer to the question.  In some of the above contexts, the answer is yes, in others, no.  And in a couple, the answer is "It depends."

My answer stands.  If you claim to be a woman, and you have a penis, and you plan to keep it, then something is just not right....

Well, apparently he knows he is not going to back me into a corner, and that I am on to his semantical games, so he resorted to silly ad hominem attacks, and finely, when I pointed out that he clearly has no real arguments, he has stated that he is banning me.  And that, of course, is the last refuge of a transgender scoundrel.  When they can't win...when the argument is lost....when they know they are being made to look the fool....they ban you.  

This is why I don't moderate comments before posting.  I don't ban people except under the most extreme of circumstances.  And that, so far, has not really happened.  Bottom line, Mr. Williams is still welcome to comment here.  As are most others.  There are a couple of people I would not allow, simply because I have them blocked in other forums.  But that is because of privacy issues more than anything else.  In fact, that is probably the one thing that would get someone banned.  Violating my, or someone else's, privacy.


Kiera_anne said...

so if a man gets into a car accident and his penis must be amputated, by your logic, he is now a woman... that sure makes sense...

Just Jennifer said...

I have to say, that is one of the dumbest things I have heard from the transgender extremists in some time. Actually, that is not remotely close to what I am saying. In fact, if one follows the illogic of the transgender extremists, if a woman has to have a hysterectomy then she must become a man. After all, we have the silliness of Mr. Sandeen claiming that having his testicles removed makes him a female.

Really, I would strongly suggest you stop, and think, before you post absurd comments like this.

No, if a man is in a car accident, and has to have his penis amputated, he does not become a woman. He becomes a man who has lost his penis, which puts him in the same class as some men who think that having their penis removed was all that it takes to make them women.

But, having said that, a man saying he has a penis, that he wants to keep it, but he is really a woman, is delusional.

If this is incomprehensible to you, then I suggest you seek medical addition for psychosis as you have clearly had a break with reality.

Not your friend said...

Kiera Ann
Dial back the Tee-Gee Kool-Aid
you are getting delusional.

Just Jennifer said...

No kidding....