Thursday, September 12, 2013

From Cyberstalker to Just a Stalker

Well, it appears that Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen decided to up his game from simply cyberstalking to actual threats.  In a round of tweets, he asked what I would say during a face to face meeting.  I made it clear that this is not desired, and that if it happened, I would be calling the police and report him.  He then began pushing for such a meeting.  This crossed the line.  

I have blocked Mr. Sandeen, who has a record of cyberstalking me, and have reported him to Twitter for harassment.  I had no problem with online sparring, but I have NO desire for physical contact with him, whether another is present or not.

Of course, in typical fashion, Mr. "Cristan" Williams and Mr. Sandeen are trying to spin this and "blame the victim."  The bottom line remains...Mr. Sandeen tried to push for contact, I decline, he persisted.  That feels very threatening, especially in light of various threats made against women by a number of "transgender extremists."  Again, a man refuses to take "No!" for an answer.

I will continue to document his lies and distortions.  I will not allow him to bully me into silence.  

29 comments:

Autumn Sandeen said...

I don't understand. You began the engagement tonight here...you obviously want my attention.

You can't tag me in over 130 of your blog posts, you can't comment in the comment threads of just about every article I write at LGBT Weekly, and then claim victimhood and that I'm "stalking" you when I respond.

Please. You've initiated the conversations we have -- you initiated contact first tonight. You've been trying to pick a fight for a long time. I guess, as a bully, you don't like it when someone stands up to you -- Especially when the response isn't in kind; especially when it's done in a way that doesn't sink to your level of name-calling, putting first names in scare quotes, and misgendering.

You want me to not engage you anymore? Then to quote a phrase you like to use, "It's really very simple": follow the teaching of Christ found in Luke 6:31 and Matthew 7:12:

Treat others the same way you want them to treat you.

Leave me alone and I leave you alone. Engage me though -- as you did tonight on Twitter and then again here in this blog post -- and I'll often engage you.

"It's really very simple."

Just Jennifer said...

It should be obvious to anyone reading this, that Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen has escalated his efforts to bully me into silence. This male atheist is making cynical attempts to use my faith, as well as threats of making contact, in an effort to intimidate me.

I have made it clear, in the past, that I have no problem engaging him online, but have no desire, and actually would be quite upset by any attempt at physical contact.

He is trying to play the classic stalker game. But, I will not be bullied. As long as he keeps his distance, fine, But if he attempts, again, to initiate a physical meeting, I will take appropriate action.

Autumn Sandeen said...

Yes. You want the safety of never being held to account to your peers in the brick-and-mortar world what you do online. What I wrote you in a private email last night:

Hey Jennifer,

If you don't want my attention -- if you want me to stop engaging you -- why do you keep tagging me on twitter?

http://twitter.com/_JustJennifer_/status/378418525334806528

Why do you keep trying to engage me by writing about me publicly on twitter -- and now in your blog just tonight?

We both know why, don't we?

Play victim again; claim to be stalked. But we both know people who are stalked don't keep trying to engage their alleged stalkers while the alleged stalking is allegedly still ongoing -- engaging their "stalker" like you're still trying still to engage me.

No, Jennifer, this seems to me to be a game to you. You're not a victim -- you just play one on the internet.


Your response:

Sir, let me be clear…I do not wish personal contact with you. I found your attempt at this highly threatening. I have also made it repeatedly clear that I will not be bullied into silence.

To be clear, if you ever attempt to physically contact me, approach me, speak to me, etc., I will consider it to be a threat.

No, this is not a game. I am simply a woman who will not be bullied by a creepy man like you.


(part 1 of 2)

Autumn Sandeen said...

(Part 2 of 3)

My response to your response:

I'm going to keep personally contacting you, Jenifer. You don't get the set the parameters of our relationship -- especially since you keep poking me with a stick online, so to speak.

If you don't like this, you know what to do. Stop misgendering as male; stop putting my first name in square quotes; stop using my handle on twitter -- hell, just stop writing about me and trying to get my attention online. You are no victim -- you act in a creepy, stalking way that says you want my attention.

If you can't leave me alone, I WILL NOT LEAVE YOU ALONE ANYMORE. If I'm asking for a third party of your faith to be in a room and talk about your behavior, and that's not stalking. I want you to explain why, to one of your pastors in front of me, why you believe your online behavior towards me is appropriate for a lay leader in an affirming church.

And, if that meeting ever happens, expect me to print out the reams of what you wrote about on your blog about me and plop it on your pastor's desk. How many volumes would that be, Jennifer, how many volumes would that be?

You can't poke me with a stick -- stalking me online since 2007 -- and now call yourself a victim of stalking.

If you want me to stop paying attention to you, then follow the golden rule. If not -- if you keep stalking me online with your comments on your blog and on the LGBT Weekly site -- then don't expect me to lay off. You've been stalking me online since 2007 -- I'm not ignoring you until you stop. I've turned my cheek so many times with you -- no longer. I'm standing up to you, an online bully.

There is no physical violence from me coming your way -- in fact I wouldn't meet you alone because it's been shown by your fruit that in your anger you've behaved towards others with physical violence. [Note: link intentionally omitted because of the source of the information is Jennifer's relative.]

But that said, your clergy at your church needs to know how one of their lay leaders treat others that your affirming church welcomes. Your faith, from the outside looking in, sure looks like a lie to me.

You lie so much about what you suppose I think that has no bearing on what I actually think -- you straw man me repeatedly in calling me a man and calling me an atheist. -- I'd consider that kind of behavior coming from a lay leader at an affirming church to be unbelievable. Well, except for the literal fact that you're literally engaging in that kind of behavior for years towards me and others.

Autumn Sandeen said...

(Part 3 of 3)

...Own your online behavior to those you know in the brick-and-mortar world -- especially to those you know at your affirming church. Explain your online behavior to your clergy at that affirming church before I do. Be prepared to justify your behavior should I drop hard copy volumes of print-outs of your misgendering, name calling, and lying about me. Accept that your behavior towards me now has real world consequences -- and not hacktivist consequences of attacking your server or sending you unwanted pizzas to your home, as well as not any threats of physical violence, or actual physical violence, towards you. But instead, the consequence of having your fruits of faith called out where as a lay leader at an affirming church your fruits of faith should be put to question. To quote Jesus Christ from Matthew 7: 15-20:

Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they? So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. So then, you will know them by their fruits.

Regarding just your behavior towards me, I know 6-years of your fruit. If I talk to one of your pastors in your home town, it would be a conversation of showing them in volumes of hard copy the fruit of your "Christian" faith.

You cannot with honesty to your pastors and church peers say as Paul said in 1 Corinthians 11:1: "Be imitators of me, just as I also am of Christ."

Own it. Your practice of your faith is inconsistent with the teachings of your church. Pointing that out isn't stalking you -- writing about me over 130 times in your blog is creepy online stalking of me. You are no victim, and you delude yourself if you actually believe you are.

Sincerely,
~~Autumn~~

P.S. -- You have my permission to post the entirety of this email online on your blog.

Just Jennifer said...

"Yes. You want the safety of never being held to account to your peers in the brick-and-mortar world what you do online. What I wrote you in a private email last night:"

No sir, I want the safety of not having personal contact with you. Let me spell this out for you. If you ever come near me, I will take action to defend myself. This action will include notifying authorities that contact with you is no desired, and will all include taking legal measures to prevent you persisting in such contact. Put another way, if I ask you to leave me alone, and you do not, I will use non-lethal means to prevent you from harassing me. Is that clear?

"Hey Jennifer,

If you don't want my attention -- if you want me to stop engaging you -- why do you keep tagging me on twitter?"

When I make reference to you, as a person who has made himself a public figure, I am going to tag you. That is the way things work on Twitter. Otherwise, we both know you would accuse me of going behind your back.

http://twitter.com/_JustJennifer_/status/378418525334806528

"Why do you keep trying to engage me by writing about me publicly on twitter -- and now in your blog just tonight?"

I am going to continue exposing you to public scrutiny. You have positioned yourself as a public commentator on certain issues. But, you don't want people to criticize, or publicly disagree with your extremist views. Sorry sir, but I really don't believe in censorship. That is not the issue you here. I won't. however, have personal contact with you.

"We both know why, don't we?"

Well, I know it is because I find your views repugnant. I believe they are wrong, that what you write does harm to transsexuals (no, you are not remotely transsexual) and should be held to public scrutiny,

"Play victim again; claim to be stalked. But we both know people who are stalked don't keep trying to engage their alleged stalkers while the alleged stalking is allegedly still ongoing -- engaging their "stalker" like you're still trying still to engage me."

The reason you are trying to "stalk" me is the same as any stalker's...control. In your case, it is control of the free expression of ideas. You don't want anyone to counter what you say. Sorry sir, but that is NOT going to happen.

"No, Jennifer, this seems to me to be a game to you. You're not a victim -- you just play one on the internet."

A game? Nope... But when you try to force unwanted contact, that crosses a line. The sad part is, like a lot of men, you really don't seem to have a clue.

"Your response:

Sir, let me be clear…I do not wish personal contact with you. I found your attempt at this highly threatening. I have also made it repeatedly clear that I will not be bullied into silence.

To be clear, if you ever attempt to physically contact me, approach me, speak to me, etc., I will consider it to be a threat.

No, this is not a game. I am simply a woman who will not be bullied by a creepy man like you."

Now, what part of that is too complex for you to understand?

Just Jennifer said...

"My response to your response:

I'm going to keep personally contacting you, Jenifer. You don't get the set the parameters of our relationship -- especially since you keep poking me with a stick online, so to speak."

Actually sir, I do get to set those parameters. I have informed you that I do not wish to meet you in person. That is my right but, you seem to be unwilling to respect that boundary. That, and that alone, is the only issue here. Your harassing me online in written form just exposes your true nature to public scrutiny, though you are too dense to even realize that. You are so wound up in your own egotistical fantasy that you think yourself some nobel hero, fighting the good fight, without realizing that you are just another creepy man (one of far too many these days) trying to terrorize a woman into giving you your way. Sorry, sir, but you picked the wrong woman.

"If you don't like this, you know what to do. Stop misgendering as male; stop putting my first name in square quotes; stop using my handle on twitter -- hell, just stop writing about me and trying to get my attention online. You are no victim -- you act in a creepy, stalking way that says you want my attention."

I have not misgendered you. I have just not pandered to your delusional demands. So, you, in classic male fashion, attempt to bully. I, on the other hand, laugh in your face, with the exception of drawing the line at physical contact. That will not be allowed. Keep your distance, and there is no problem. You can comment all you want. But if you try to initiate contact, I will not accept that.

"If you can't leave me alone, I WILL NOT LEAVE YOU ALONE ANYMORE. If I'm asking for a third party of your faith to be in a room and talk about your behavior, and that's not stalking. I want you to explain why, to one of your pastors in front of me, why you believe your online behavior towards me is appropriate for a lay leader in an affirming church. "

Again, you will not bully me into silence. If you cannot stand the idea of your views being subjected to scrutiny, you picked the wrong path. But, no, I will not be in the same room with you. I find it extremely creepy that you cannot accept this. Not really surprising. Such behavior is common among men, but it is still extremely creepy.

"And, if that meeting ever happens, expect me to print out the reams of what you wrote about on your blog about me and plop it on your pastor's desk. How many volumes would that be, Jennifer, how many volumes would that be?"

I don't know, and I really don't care. I make no secret of my opinions. And I have no problem defending them. You seem to have the mistaken delusion that you are above criticism. Sorry, but no, you are not.

"You can't poke me with a stick -- stalking me online since 2007 -- and now call yourself a victim of stalking. "

Poke you with a stick? Seriously, are you really that delusional? Be honest...how is what has been done to you, any different from what you buddy Mr. "Cristan" Williams has done to Victoria Brownworth? Oh, other than the fact that everything I have written about you is based in fact, and documented by your own words? I don't make you lies about you, accusing you of acts bordering, for example, on pedophilia. I simply point out the errors in your reasoning. Which apparently is more than you can handle.

Just Jennifer said...

"If you want me to stop paying attention to you, then follow the golden rule. If not -- if you keep stalking me online with your comments on your blog and on the LGBT Weekly site -- then don't expect me to lay off. You've been stalking me online since 2007 -- I'm not ignoring you until you stop. I've turned my cheek so many times with you -- no longer. I'm standing up to you, an online bully."

I am more than willing to continue this 'war of words,' which it seems you think I am winning. You certainly are frantic about stopping me, so I can only assume that you fear what I say.

"There is no physical violence from me coming your way -- in fact I wouldn't meet you alone because it's been shown by your fruit that in your anger you've behaved towards others with physical violence. [Note: link intentionally omitted because of the source of the information is Jennifer's relative.]"

A link that has been taken out of context, and which is over ten years old at that. Further, you know nothing of the context of those remarks, or any of a number of details that, quite frankly sir, are really none of your business (another boundary your refuse to accept). I would never presume to try to contact your estranged son, though I suspect there might be some dirty laundry there you would not want revealed. I have standards of decency that you clearly lack. And yet, given that lack of respect for boundaries, you seriously expect me to believe you when you say you do not pose a threat? No way.

"But that said, your clergy at your church needs to know how one of their lay leaders treat others that your affirming church welcomes. Your faith, from the outside looking in, sure looks like a lie to me. "

Let me make it clear, I do not answer to you concerning my faith. You persist in trying to cross lines you have no business crossing. That you are an atheist, and a hypocrite, are obvious.

"You lie so much about what you suppose I think that has no bearing on what I actually think -- you straw man me repeatedly in calling me a man and calling me an atheist. -- I'd consider that kind of behavior coming from a lay leader at an affirming church to be unbelievable. Well, except for the literal fact that you're literally engaging in that kind of behavior for years towards me and others."

That you are a man is beyond question. And you have made it clear, in the past, that you abandoned your faith because, well, it was inconvenient and interfered in your fetishistic behavior. I simply look at what you yourself have made public. Don't like the truth? Tough.

Autumn Sandeen said...

No. You don't get to control this, Jennifer.

You feel safe at your keyboard spewing hate. You can feel safe I will not contact with you when you are alone; I will not be violent towards you. I also wont seek you out at your home or any workplace you may be at.

But you shouldn't feel completely comfortable. You can rest assured you're physically safe and that I'll never be alone in the same space as you, but I don't promise you won't have feelings of discomfort. Two very, very different things. altogether.

Just Jennifer said...

"...Own your online behavior to those you know in the brick-and-mortar world -- especially to those you know at your affirming church. Explain your online behavior to your clergy at that affirming church before I do. Be prepared to justify your behavior should I drop hard copy volumes of print-outs of your misgendering, name calling, and lying about me. Accept that your behavior towards me now has real world consequences -- and not hacktivist consequences of attacking your server or sending you unwanted pizzas to your home, as well as not any threats of physical violence, or actual physical violence, towards you. But instead, the consequence of having your fruits of faith called out where as a lay leader at an affirming church your fruits of faith should be put to question. To quote Jesus Christ from Matthew 7: 15-20:

Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they? So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. So then, you will know them by their fruits."

Why don't you worry about your own behavior? You are not my conscience, and you do not get to dictate to me how I can, or cannot behave.

Oh, and Satan himself can quote Scripture.

"Regarding just your behavior towards me, I know 6-years of your fruit. If I talk to one of your pastors in your home town, it would be a conversation of showing them in volumes of hard copy the fruit of your "Christian" faith. "

I have nothing to be ashamed of. But, I will not accept physical contact with you. Nor will I give in to your bullying.

"You cannot with honesty to your pastors and church peers say as Paul said in 1 Corinthians 11:1: "Be imitators of me, just as I also am of Christ."

Own it. Your practice of your faith is inconsistent with the teachings of your church. Pointing that out isn't stalking you -- writing about me over 130 times in your blog is creepy online stalking of me. You are no victim, and you delude yourself if you actually believe you are."

Do you really hold yourself to be entitled to write about the issues you write about, but immune from others disagreeing? I have simply exposed your views to contrary opinion. You, on the other hand, have engaged in deliberate attempts to bully me. Just as Mr. Williams has against Victoria Brownworth, Cathy Brennan, and others.

Sometimes I really have to take a step back and remember, I am dealing with some truly insane kooks.

Autumn Sandeen said...

My friend, if I'm "unquestionably a man," how do you answer the fact that you fathered a child? Wouldn't being a father make you a man? One could certainly make that argument that whatever standard you use could be measured against you again.

You're apparently smarter and more qualified in your own eyes than the psychiatrists and therapists who've diagnosed with gender identity disorder and gender dysphoria over multiple tears. You apparently more qualified in yor own eyes than the State of California, the State Department, the Veterans Administration, and the Department of defense.

So, with Matthew 7:1-5 in mind, what would your pastors have to say about you judgement of my gender? About how you express in you choice of language your judgments about me? We should ask them, don't you think?

Just Jennifer said...

As I have said, you have a penis, and clearly want to keep it. And again, that is a good thing, as surgery would, for you, be a tragic mistake.

Just Jennifer said...

"But you shouldn't feel completely comfortable. You can rest assured you're physically safe and that I'll never be alone in the same space as you, but I don't promise you won't have feelings of discomfort. Two very, very different things. altogether."

No, you will never be in the same place as me, if I have anything to say about. Got that? Because if you don't, you WILL regret it. I do not want to meet you. So, stay away from me. Comment online all you want, but no, I will not have contact with you...not voluntarily, ever.

Autumn Sandeen said...

You just refuse to listen to what I want over surgery, don't you? Is there some medical or psychiatric reason that explains why you're not listening to me and embracing a straw man fallacy about what I want? Are you God that you know what's in my heart?

And you didn't answer the fatherhood question about your sex. Are you afraid to admit that you aren't quite a woman, period?

You can stop dodging any time, Jennifer.

And hey, I still have you engaging me -- after you said engaging you equals harassment. But, we both know you just can't let go, can you? You have to admit you love my attention.

I think I'm going to leave you alone for awhile -- but hey! Don't get too comfortable, y'hear? ;-)

Just Jennifer said...

As I have said, you have a penis, and clearly want to keep it. And again, that is a good thing, as surgery would, for you, be a tragic mistake.

Autumn Sandeen said...

You, Jennifer, can threaten me all you want. Does your threat mean that if I attended a service at your church you'd hit me? Is violence what you're threatening?

You've lost control of this situation -- you do not, and will not -- control me. And, you have lots and lots of my attention now, sub-deacon.

Just Jennifer said...

No, i have not threatened you. I have simply made have made it more than clear that I do not wish physical contact with you. You seem obsessed with pushing this. If you showed up at my church, I would make my discomfort known to the appropriate people, and you would likely be asked to leave. If you approached me, I would ask again, that you stay away, and take appropriate action if you did not. Would I hit you? No. You really are a fool. I would have you arrested most likely. If necessary, I would take other, quite legal steps, to protect myself, but I never engage in violence, and would consider attempting to hit any man quite foolish. Especially one with military.

Just Jennifer said...

"You just refuse to listen to what I want over surgery, don't you? Is there some medical or psychiatric reason that explains why you're not listening to me and embracing a straw man fallacy about what I want? Are you God that you know what's in my heart?"

I know what you have made clear.

"And you didn't answer the fatherhood question about your sex. Are you afraid to admit that you aren't quite a woman, period?"

I haven't dodged anything. My daughter is, sir, none of your business.

"You can stop dodging any time, Jennifer."

Stop imitating Mr. Williams. That foolishness is lame enough when he tries it.

"And hey, I still have you engaging me -- after you said engaging you equals harassment. But, we both know you just can't let go, can you? You have to admit you love my attention."

No, foolish boy, I said threatening to APPROACH me is harassment. I don't "love" your attention. I am simply giving you the means of your destruction. In the past, I helped establish your enduring reputation for censorship. Now, I simply build on that foundation.

"I think I'm going to leave you alone for awhile -- but hey! Don't get too comfortable, y'hear? ;-)"

Smart move, right up to the bullying threat. But then, you turned around and came back to harass. You are the one who can't walk away. You can't handle not being in control. It is driving you nuts that you cannot force me to submit. Well, at least not during a manic phase...in a short while, you will be back in depression, as reality sets in....and peace will reign until you go off again.

I really do pity you. Why not get real help, accept your are a man, albeit one with a fetish, and become the next Arnold Lowman.

Deena said...

I have not yet seen anything positive gained when penis packing narcissists make youtube videos or author columns in web media.

Nicky said...

Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen is just like Mr. "Cristain Williams and Mr."Dana" Lane Taylor. Their nothing but narcissistic MEN with a penis and a sick fetish. In the old days, these Men would have been locked up in some mental institution and never ever let out. Now, society has to deal with these delusional and often dangerous Men in dresses.

Autumn Sandeen said...

Again, how arrogant you are, sub-deacon, by deeming what is and isn't "real help," and decide I have a "fetish" when I had been diagnosed by multiple psychiatrists and with gender dysphoria...

But you are equal to Christ and God the Father, aren't you? You know what's in my heart, right? 1 Samuel 16:7 be damned.

And how you've gone from apparent internalized transphobia and definite externalized transphobia to engaging in ableism regarding my bipolar condition. I guess I should expect no less, sub-deacon, for a person whose practice of Christian faith is so anti-Christ-like.

Can you imagine Christ acting as you do online? I can't.

My belief certainly is moving towards challenging your faith in the brick-and-mortar world. You feel comfortable in your sins online, and you shouldn't. You feel comfortable in wanting to define the parameters of where you can behave so sinfully without consequence -- your being a lay leader in your affirming church seems to me to be an abomination.

Your practice of your faith is a problem. You need to be challenged on it -- and you need to be challenged on it where you piously pretend you live your faith.

You shouldn't stay comfortable in your sin, Sub-deacon, you shouldn't feel comfortable in the brick-and-mortar world about your sin. Be sure your sin will find you out.

Just Jennifer said...

I offer a sincere suggestion, based on experience, and you attack me for it...and I'm arrogant?

It is far too easy for someone to find a doctor to rubber stamp their delusions.

Let's just say what you are is more than obvious to anyone who bothers to look.

I honestly imagine Christ would say the same thing, though sadly, I don't have the ability to heal you as He does. Not that you even believe in Him

Again, you come anywhere near me, or persist in threatening to do so after I have made it clear that such is not desired, and I will take legal action.

And then you will find out just how worthless your fraudulent birth certificate is. You'll go to the "queen tank" just like the rest.

Autumn Sandeen said...

Oh. Using "queen" as a derogatory term. Wow.

Tell me, how is that language in line with your lay-leadership at an affirming church?

If you believe your online behavior is acceptable, shouldn't you want to share your use of the word "queen" with your clergy? And then show your clergy the volumes of your posts that tag me?

Shouldn't you want to show them your frequent referral to me as "Mr. 'Autumn' Sandeen" if it's truly Christ-like behavior? If it's Christ-like behavior, shouldn't you be proud of it?

As for not being in the same space as you --you stating "I do not wish personal contact with you" -- how much do you think I wish your attention? Again, I ask you...why aren't you treating me in accordance with Luke 6:31?

In all seriousness, if you want me to leave you alone in a manner that you wish, why aren't you leaving me alone in the way I wish? Don't you think over 130 posts is enough at this point?

Listen, Jennifer. If you want this over, then leave my peers and me alone. If you want the possibility that this all will escalate, then keep on your current path.

Hey, I was part of a group that made the President uncomfortable -- even angry -- over repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell. And, I went to jail twice in the process of making the President uncomfortable.

So tell me, Jennifer, how afraid do you think I am of you or what you threaten? How far do you believe I'm capable of going to address your un-Christian activities online towards me? ...Addressing it with those clergy who might be interested in just how a lay leader in their affirming church is behaving towards a transgender identified woman?

You should consider that I adhere to the principles of non-violence, but you should also consider that there's a lot of room in the principles of non-violence to address this situation between us.

To quote MLK Jr. on non-violence and discomfort:

If anyone has ever lived with a non-violent movement in the South, from Montgomery on through the Freedom Rides and through the sit-in movement and the recent Birmingham movement, and seen the reactions of many of the extremists and reactionaries in the white community, he wouldn't say that this movement makes, this philosophy makes them comfortable. I think it arouses a sense of shame within them often, in many instances, I think it does something to touch the conscience and establish a sense of guilt. Now so often people respond to guilt by engaging more in the guilt-evoking act in an attempt to drown the sense of guilt. But this approach certainly doesn't make the white man feel comfortable. I think it does the other thing. It disturbs this conscience and it disturbs this sense of contentment he's had.

You express different kinds of bigotry than against African-Americans. You instead express transphobia -- and in this thread you've also expressed ableism.

I'm certainly on the receiving end of your hate and misgendering, and basically you need to feel shame over your words. Your comfort with your online behavior is exactly what needs to challenged -- you need to feel uncomfortable.

So with these thoughts in mind, you should consider all of what I've written in your calculations of what I may or may not do in the future.

Just Jennifer said...

ROTFL! A bit thinned skinned, aren't you Mr. Sandeen.

That's what the locals call the area where they put "transgender" male prisoners...like you. The "Queen Tank." Along with gay males. To keep them safe.

Bottom line, you are not going to bully me. You are a classic male control freak. And it drives you crazy that I won't kowtow to you.

Now, you make threats, and you will leave me alone, or go to jail. It is that simple. You are not to come anywhere near me. That, I can control. Commenting on what you post online? It's called free speech. But, making threats, that's called harassment and cyberstalking. It is against the law.

Bottom line, you are free to comment about what I say, but not to bother me in person. Try it, and you will face charges.

No sir, I don't hate you. I do hate the lies you, and your peers tell. I hate the way you try to control transsexuals. I hate the abuse you hurl at women. I hate the fact that you think you have some personal right to invade women's space, and wave your penis around because you claim to be a woman even though you clearly don't actually want to be one, just to control people by forcing them to call you one when you are clearly a man.

You are not a transsexual. You are simply a man who has a fetish, and a desire to control people. You make no effort to actually live a a woman. Clearly, the idea of actually being a woman repulses you. You live as a "transgender male." Not as a woman, and certainly not as a female. Your delight is not in being a woman, but in controlling people and forcing them to ignore reality, and call you a woman, and then you have the audacity and the arrogance to try to claim to be just like real transsexuals.

No, I don't hate you, but I do hate your behavior. And yes, there really is a difference, though you will try to claim there isn't. I honestly hope the day will come when you will see that what you do is wrong, that it harms people, and that you will realize that you are a very disturbed man who delights in those facts...but I am not remotely holding out much hope it will ever happen.

As long as you keep pushing your sick, destructive, harmful agenda, I will keep writing about you, exposing you to the reality, and telling the truth. Got that, mister? You picked the wrong lady to bully.

Keep it up. All you are doing is making it easier, and easier to have a case to present to the police if needed.

Autumn Sandeen said...

I've been putting up with your hate speech directed at me for six years. Kinda goes against that "thin skin" false belief of yours, don'cha think? I'm pretty slow to anger.

You call me "he" and "him"; you call my "Mr. 'Autumn' Sandeen." Jennifer, that's not hating what I do, that's expressing a hate of me. Judging my gender identity is expressing hate of me, not of what I do.

And not only me, but to all the others you misgender on your blog.

And, you've never met me in the brick-and-mortar world, but you feel comfortable in saying:

"You are not a transsexual. You are simply a man who has a fetish, and a desire to control people. You make no effort to actually live a a woman. Clearly, the idea of actually being a woman repulses you. You live as a "transgender male." Not as a woman, and certainly not as a female. Your delight is not in being a woman, but in controlling people and forcing them to ignore reality, and call you a woman, and then you have the audacity and the arrogance to try to claim to be just like real transsexuals."

Yet again you functionally claim omniscience for yourself; yet again you judge me in contradiction to the tenants of your faith.

As I said, if keep up your behavior you should be prepared for escalation. The status quo is not acceptable to me now. I'm done with you being comfortable in your bigotry and hate.

Just Jennifer said...

I refer to you with male pronouns because I honestly see you as a man. Again, I have no hate for you. I do not wish you harm. Judging your gender identity, as you put it, is not hate. It is simply observing your behavior and reaching a logical conclusion. You see, like any sane, rational person I do not buy into your political silliness. I see it for the absurdity that it is.

Yes sir, I feel completely comfortable saying "You are NOT a transsexual, as you make NO effort to actually live as a woman, assimilate as a woman, or remotely be a woman. You try to force people to submit to your will. It is NOT really about gender identity, but it is completely about control. You think you have a right to dictate to people, and quite frankly, I am calling your bluff.

Talking about escalation certainly sounds like a very thinly veiled threat. You just keep making that hole you are in get deeper and deeper.

Autumn Sandeen said...

Take it however you want to. I've laid out parameters -- there's nothing veiled at all.

It's all really very simple, isn't it?

Just Jennifer said...

And, I have called your bluff, sir. You don't get your way.

Deena said...

Autumn you do realize that you are viewed as a laughing stock and worse by women don't you?