Clearly, Mr. Williams Prefers His Fantasies

"Cristan" WIlliams, king of the wild transgenders, has set his most recent sites on Ashley Love, who is intensely hated by the transgender extremist kooks because she, like myself, refuses to join their cult.  In his typical style, he does exactly what he accuses others of doing, and in doing so, he provides the evidence he claims they lack.


Ashely said:

We simply do not want to be appropriated and treated like a voiceless colony.
We protest the way the truth is being disregarded and censored in this social engineered and problematic "transgender umbrella-ism reservation ideology" mandate that feels more like people with transsxualism being kidnapped and misused than voluntary consent.

No, we will not shut up and be assaulted like this.

We will strike back if we have to

Now, if Mr. Williams was remotely truthful in his claims, his response would simply be, "Fine."  But he intends to do exactly what Ashley objects to.  He is focused on forcing her into the "transgender cult," or at the very least shouting her down.  His view seems to be, "Silly woman, get back in your place!  I know what is best for you!"


In his reply, he uses his usual straw man approach:

Answer the following 4 questions:
1. When did transgender become an umbrella term?
2. When did transsexual stop being an umbrella term?
3. Exactly how many decades has transgender referenced the transsexual experience?
4. Where did the term come from and does it mean today what it meant then?
You know how I know you don’t actually know any of this? Because A.) you wouldn’t have made this post to begin with had you known the answers to these questions; B.) you wouldn’t be thinking about deleting this comment for the crime of challenging your reality; and, C.) you’ve never once back[ed] up anything you assert with any objective fact.
So, while I know you’ll delete this comment, I’m going to at least answer the above questions so that you can no longer claim the excuse of ignorance…

Now, you have to remember that Mr. Williams imagines himself the successor to his hero "Hitch," Christopher Hitchens, who died last year.  Now, while at best, Mr. Williams is a poor imitation, he does have some of the more obnoxious traits down pat.

Now, the above questions are, of course, somewhat dishonest.  They are too vague and lacking in context, which allows Mr. Williams to distort the facts, and create his fantasies, which he then tries to claim as reality.

For example, he claims that "transgender" became an umbrella term in 1974.  This, of course, is based on the fact that a few people among the transvestite crowd might have used it that way, on a few isolated occasions.  A better question would be "When did transgender come to be commonly used as an umbrella term.   The answer there would be during the Nineties, which is when the attempt first began to force people into a common social political construct.  Prior to that, the Internet was not available, and thus such an effort would have been impossible.

His next question, "When did transsexual stop being an umbrella term, again falls back on the fact that it might have been used in isolated incidents in such a manner.  At the crux of his argument is the "Benjamin Scale," which dates to the 1960's.  Of course, the fact that it never really caught on among those in the field is ignored by Mr. Williams.  Transsexual was commonly used to refer to those who were seriously seeking surgery, while the rest were classified as "transvestites."  Actually, the more common "umbrella term" at that time was "sexual pervert."  Now, if we actually apply Mr. Williams' logic, we should continue to use such terminology, though I imagine Mr. Williams would be howling that we have moved past such hateful and judgmental language and that he will never accept being labeled as such (though in a sense, that is exactly what he strives to be.  He does seem to take great delight in being at odds with societal norms.


The third question, again, is lacking in context.  Mr. Williams bases his arguments on isolated usage, that never reached any degree of acceptance at the time, of course ignoring other usages that are inconvenient.  For example, the first medical journal article discussing Christine Jorgensen's case (she was not mentioned by name of course) referred to her as a "transvestite."  So, based on Mr. Williams' logic, "transvestite" should be the universal, umbrella term, since it was applied to both those who know expect to be called "crossdressers" and those who are properly referred to as transsexuals.  Of course, "transvestite" is largely considered an insult these days.  Funny, why do they get to determine what they are called, but transsexuals are denied this right?


And finally, with the fourth question, Mr. Williams just leaves reality behind.  Keep in mind, while he tries to imply that the term "transgender" was widely used for decades, the fact is, the term was, at best, obscure, and more accurate archaic during that time.  Even if his questionable citations are accurate, the usage was not remotely widespread.  One has to remember, that there was a tendency during these times for transvestites like Arnold Lowman, who used the names "Charles Prince," and "Virginia Prince" to regularly try to introduce new terms to replace "transvestite" which they felt was too associated with "perversion."  So, I have no doubt that "transgender" popped up occasionally, along with others like "bi-gendered," "femmephile," and others.


No, the bottom line is this, Mr. Williams is the living embodiment of what Ashley Love is referring to.  


As to his "challenge" to Love, who he hopes to bait into arguing with him, I would remind him, I don't shy away from challenges, even from bullies like him.  When I took him on, he was reduced to throwing ad hominems, which is, of course, the last bastion of a loser.