Wednesday, February 13, 2013

Extreme Transgender Silliness

Sometimes a transgender kook will publish something that is so incredibly silly it seems beyond belief.  This mornings round of silliness over at Women Born Transsexual brought just such an example.  Now, as you may know, Suzan Cooke mostly republishes stuff from other sites.  There is very little original content, and today is no exception.  One of Cooke's favorite sources of late has been the Huffington Post, which seems to have become a major mouthpiece for the transgender extremists.

This morning there was an article entitledTrans* Invisibility, by "JamieAnn" Meyers that has to be one of the best examples of what makes "transgender" completely distinct from both transsexualism, and well, from sanity as well.  The second paragraph pretty much sets the stage for this:
My wife and I were visiting with a cisgender heterosexual couple, and our conversation began to focus on personal relationships. Because we wanted to be authentic about our life experiences, we came out to them as a couple, and I came out as a trans* woman. Almost immediately, both of them said, "That doesn't matter to us." The intent of their statement was to be affirming, but the statement's impact on me was profoundly different. Though it's important to know that people respect and accept you, it's also important that they honor the lifelong struggle that you have faced as a trans* person.
Now, think about this.  The normal couple, and yes, relative to to the kook writing here, they are normal, basically says "Okay, no problem..."  Sounds reasonable, at least to a sane person,  But this is a transgender kook.  No!  Of course that is not example.  They have to honor the struggle of someone choosing to play dress-up and pretend to be a woman.  This is wrong on some many levels.  It is insulting to women who often face very real struggles.  It is insulting to gay and lesbian couples who have had to deal with discrimination.  Simply put, it is outrageously insulting to anyone who has faced real discrimination for something that was not, quite literally, a lifestyle choice.  

This person shows the true nature of transgender.  It is not, as we are so often told, about being who you really are.  It is about being transgressive.  It is about being at odds with societal norms, and it is about rubbing society's nose in your misbehavior.

Seriously, this person is complaining about people being accepting.  He, and yes, this is another person I refuse to pander to and call by female pronouns, is complaining because they are not making a big fuss over him being transgender.  Give me a break.

I have a few friends who know my history.  I have more who I am not sure know or not, and then quite a few whom as far as I know, have no idea.  Out of the friends who know, there is basically one who I discuss it with much,  And even then, he pretty much understands not to bring it up.  He might rarely ask a question, but I am generally the one who broaches the subject.  For example, on Monday night, we were talking and I suddenly realized something. asked what the date was.  He thought and said, "I'm not sure, why?"  I pulled out my smartphone, and saw it was the 11th.  I realized that the day before had been the 7th anniversary of my SRS.  I hadn't even thought about it.  Not that is not a significant day for me, but as time has passed, surgery has ceased to be a major focus for me.  Before I had it, getting to that point was very significant.  Now, looking back, it simply marks the point where my life got a lot better.  

Somewhat ironically, four days before that was the "anniversary" of "Autumn" Sandeen's showing up for work in drag.  A day he makes a big deal of, especially this year because it marked 10 years of him pretending to be a woman.  He has no idea, of course, what being a woman is like, and he never will.  Ironically, his making a big deal out his "anniversary" is one of the indications of this.

But for me, the past becomes more and more distant.  When I first started dealing with my problem (as opposed to making up an excuse like Sandeen and other transgender kooks have) I wondered if there would come a time when it would be easy to forget.  The answer is yes.  Outside of this blog, and the occasional conversation with my friend, being transsexual is not a major part of my life.

Funny, but I find it highly offensive when someone tries to remind me that they know that I am  transsexual.  It is not something I care to discuss with most people.  The one person I do discuss it with holds a special place in my life, as my spiritual director.  But in most cases, no, I don't like to talk about it.

And I find it rather silly that the original author makes a big deal out of comparing all this to "race."  Now, just think about this for a second.  A lot of humor has been made out of how people react to having the fact that they are a certain race pointed out.  If you are a complete fool, you might feel it necessary to let someone know you are okay with them being black, or Asian, or Native American, etc., but most of us would consider that a bit gauche.  And we would also consider it odd if someone got made because we didn't make an issue out of their race or ethnicity.

If you meet someone who is gay, do you feel it appropriate to make an issue out of it?  Do you go out of your way to "affirm" that you accept their gayness?  Not very likely.  I find it amazing that the Huffington Post would publish such an absurd article, but then again, this is about the idiocy know as "transgender," where making sure everyone knows you are a "man in dress" is part of the fun.


Rosenkreuz said...

Hey,long time reader of your blog. I read your stuff because you're one of these few people on the interwebs who approaches transsexuality from a standpoint grounded in reality.

I actually found this blog because of a conversation I had with my long-time girlfriend who was born transsexual, about how a lot of stuff the "transgender" community does is just weird.

The paradigm of "transsexuality" versus "transgender" (though I'd rather just call them transvestites) is on a fundamental level, a *medical/neurological* reality co-opted by a *political* ideology. The transgender do get a kick out of taking a crap on the gender binary (even as 99% of humanity is totally cool with it), but the real aim is to totally "debunk" gender as some false social construct. Thus, the idea of a transgender/transvestite being "just a woman" is anathema to them - it's simply not queer enough to undermine anything.

Your blog name, "Just Jennifer" is instructive - you are just a woman, not some queer activist trying to trangress social norms or smash the binary or be genderfluid or genderfuck or boi or whatever other title special snowflakes give themselves. Just a woman living her life.

I do take issue with the idea that the radfems are acceptable or well-intentioned though, even from an "enemy of the enemy is my friend" approach. Because if not for the transvestite desire to breach the "cotton ceiling" (that is, penetrate lesbian females with their penises while pretending to be women), the radfems and transgenders would be indubitably on the same side - both of them are gender deconstructionists. They find humanity's traditional conception of sex and gender (a conception that holds across different times and places, and is more than sufficient to encompass transsexuals and HAS encompassed them) is somehow "oppressive", thus they seek to undermine and destroy it. Thus, we have the idea of men giving birth and women having penises and penetrating and occasionally impregnating other women.

Anyway I'm on a mobile device so I gotta cut the wall of text short. Keep speaking truth to power, Jennifer.

Just Jennifer said...

Thanks for the kind words.

But please, don't misunderstand my position on the "radfems." I have serious disagreements with most, if not almost all of their views. But, they do make good points within their extremism. I guess you could call it the "a broken clock is right twice a day" principal. For example, when I first read Janice Raymond's book I was rather shocked. There was stuff in there that I thought was made up. I have since realized that she was reacting to stuff I now find offensive, but was also painting with a broad brush.

No, I have no illusions that a "radfem" would knowingly accept me as a female. But I also don't care. I suspect the vast majority of females would find the radfems pretty silly on most issues. And I suspect that most radfems would, ironically, consider most females to be horrible traitors to their own sex.

The point I have tried to make, I suppose, is that the radfems provide a sort of "canary in the coal mine" sort of moment. The transgender kooks' reaction to the radfems is so outrageous, that they not only tend to confirm what the radfems say about them (thought the radfems, like the transgender kooks have a tendency to lump us all together) they make it clear that they are truly the worst examples of male behavior. A rational response to the radfems is to, perhaps yawn, stifle a giggle or two, and move on. They really don't deserve the attention they get.

The most ironic thing is, the radfems and the transgender extremists, share basically a common view of gender...that it is all social construct. That is part of what has always amused me.

No, I don't find the radfems to be acceptable, or particularly well intentioned. I find them, mostly, to be pretty much irrelevant.

Rosenkreuz said...

The funnier thing is how both groups go into full damage control mode when you mention, say, BStc data. 4 little letters,so much rage. So much time trying to discredit that brains and bodies are sexually dimorphic and that transsexual persons, in both brain and sometimes body, tend heavily towards the averages for the sex they identify as (as opposed to aggressive shrill linebackers like that Sandeen guy lol)

It's almost something like you'd see in the USSR, literally denying science because it doesn't adhere to a certain political reality. In this case, the science of neurological gender dimorphism undermines both the radfems and the transvestite activists so it must be mercilessly attacked. Tl;dr, transsexual women have, as far as we can tell, female brains and no amount of butthurt can change that.

Just Jennifer said...

Yes, I have seen that as well. The radfems, and such want to claim gender is socially constructed. The TG crowd knows that they have no credibility as women, and that the idea that gender is inherent basically refutes their claims.

I am often amazed at how some of the TGs claim to be oh so much women, and yet they clearly act and sound like men. As I have said, I worked in a research project that was dealing with HIV prevention among transgender people. While some of those we worked with were transsexuals, the vast majority of them were not. A lot of our subjects were, for all practical purposes, gay men from places where being gay is not acceptable unless one takes the role of being a woman. Very strange... They generally reject surgery, and even much in the way of hormones, but rely instead on stuff like silicone injections to feminize. After all, too much estrogen and they are no longer "functional" which was very important to them.

Teslagirl said...

Hello Jennifer.

Slightly off-topic I know, but as you seem more knowledgable than I am about her, could explain to me why Suzan Cooke just yesterday totally went for me when I posted slightly unenthusiastic remarks about the Transgender `umbrella on her 'Women Born Transsexual' blog?

I had thought she'd invented the phrase "Transgender Borg" and was against assimilation and erasure of transsexual people. I'm really confused!

Just Jennifer said...

Simply put, Cooke is a seriously disturbed individual. This person has some personal demons that have not been dealt with, and suffers from extreme paranoia and serious delusions. For too long, Cooke was taken seriously but that has ended, and the loss of status has been devastating.

Cooke's version of history is revisionist at best. Cooke accepted the term HBS at first. Then, like upon joining the Transgender Borg, Cooke embraced the false claims made against it. Cooke is a featured member of Transadvocate, and in spite of protests, has embraced the rigid "no dissent tolerated" ideology of transgender extremism. Like any good transgender kook, Cooke wants it both ways.

Teslagirl said...

Thanks Jennifer, I'm much clearer now. I just thought her blog was safe space and to have Cooke round on me totally rabidly for what were extremely mild comments, I found really disturbing.

I used to have a lodger who was very disturbed and seemed able to hold contradictory opinions at the same time. Black could be white, but it could also be black. Cooke seems to be the same.

It was only when the lodger left that I realised it wasn't me that was crazy after all. The relief was tremendous. Anyhow, I won't be going to WBT again.

Thanks for the information.

Just Jennifer said...

Yes, I had a similar realization about some people online. Once you realize they really are crazy, things make a lot more sense. For example, Taylor has not had a change of heart. Taylor just realized he really idles not want to lose his penis. SRS is not for everyone. Better now, than later.