Research is NOT the Issue

I wanted to further address some of the silliness that Mr. "Cristan" Williams claims in his post How Not To Do Research.  

First off, I make no claim to be doing "research."  I simply did a bit of fact checking that exposes Mr. William's rather bizarre claims as, well, bogus.  He attempts to claim that the term "transgender" was in widespread use before the rise of the "transgender movement" in the Nineties, and that said rise is actually a myth.  He does this because, well, when examined closely, the "transgender movement" doesn't look all that good.  It basically consists of a bunch of crossdressers trying to co-opt transsexualism.  Something that has given rise to the transsexual movement that Mr. Williams keeps pronouncing to be dead, but never quite is.

But, Mr. Williams doesn't do research either, unless you consider what Blanchard and Bailey do to be research.  Research is a search for facts and the truth.  What Blanchard, Bailey, and Mr. Williams engage in is an attempt to prove a view that has no basis in fact, and an attempt to manufacture evidence to fit their view.

Now, Mr. Williams' approach is something along the lines of, "If I can show that the term "transgender" was used in the past, no matter how rarely, or how isolated, or even if it was used in a completely different context, that will prove that Virginia Prince and other did not create a movement that basically co-opted transsexuals."  Sorry, but no.  Ideas can appear, and then fade, and someone else have the same idea, completely on their own.

For example, I invented the laser printer.  Seriously.  Back in the late-Seventies, at a time when dot-matrix and modified IBM Selectrics ruled the scene, I invented the laser printer.  Someone explained to me how a copy machine worked.  Basically, a series of lenses focus an image on a electrostatic drum, which transfers toner to a page which is then run through heater rollers, fusing the toner into the paper.  It occurred to me that a laser beam could be used to "draw" images from a computer on that drum, with the rest of the process pretty much the same.  I thought it up, on my on, and sadly, did not have the good sense to even consider getting a patent.  It would not have made any difference.  Someone else, completely unknown to me had the same idea, and patented it, a few years before I had my idea.  But hey, that sort of thing happens.  Liebnitz and Newton both "invented" calculus, and fought over who was first.  But they both had the same idea, quite separately (well, to a point, anyway).  Newton gets the credit (at least partly because he used his position to insure that he got it) and we use Liebnitz's notation for the most part.  But two different people had the same idea.  So, it is entirely possible, and based on the evidence, quite probable, that the term transgender was invented, and reinvented several times before the movement that many want no part of arose.

Mr. Williams can double talk all he wants.  He can play with graphs, and then try to link me to Fox News, when he is actually the one doing what Fox is accused of.  But, he can't really prove his claims.

Oh, and in a comment to an article by Suzan Cooke, he makes the false claim that I call anyone I disagree with a man.  No, not true at all.  If that were true, I would certainly be calling Cooke a man.  I call men, men.  "On what basis?" one might legitimately ask.  Well, there are several.  First, I look at whether the person vibes as a woman.  This is the primary one, and no, it has nothing to do with stereotypes.  I have known very masculine women, who were still women.  I have known very feminine men, who were still men.  It is one of those things that is hard to define, but if you think about it, commonly experience.

Mr. WIlliams, simply put, truly comes across as a man, and nothing but a man.

I also look at how the person presents their self to the world.  Do they present primarily as a woman, or is it primarily as a "transgender."  As I have said, you can be a woman, or you can be trans, but not really both.  If you feel the need to strongly qualify what you are, you probably aren't.

And finally, and also very importantly, I look at how they relate to women.  Do they have no regard for women's feelings, needs, privacy, security...?  Do they understand that women see the world differently from men?  Clearly, many don't.