Friday, December 12, 2014

Lask Ups His Game

Well, my long term cyber-stalker, "Diane" Lask has upped his game.  He sent me another anonymous message, this time including a more overt threat.  I guess it will have to have a talk with the San Francisco Police Department sooner, rather than later.  Apparently Lask has taken complete leave of his senses.  His first message was enough to qualify as threatening, and will like result in his being investigated for stalking.  This one, well it will cinch such a case.  He really must be aching to be some hunky prisoner's date.  Remember, Lask is apparently non-op, and thus would end up in with men, not women.  I'm sure he will be very popular.

Wednesday, December 10, 2014

A Somewhat Scary Email

Well, it appears that David Lask, who calls himself Diane Lask, the obsessive stalker who has been harassing me for years, is up to his old tricks.  Now, he has sent me an email in which he makes it clear that he knows my current address, claims he knows my phone number (he mentions my carrier), and then proceeds, in his typical style, to make his usual round of lies.  He has little idea of what he is talking about.  

I am pretty sure it is Lask, because he again makes the claim of having a Corvette (he claimed this before, and it turned out to be a lie).

Sorry, but my relationships with my daughter is just fine...unlike some people who are writing about how they are so depressed this time of the year.  I am considering a trip back to visit my daughter and grandchildren next year, so the claim that "you will never see your grandchildren" is also bogus.  And, as he should be aware, I am clearly not homeless.

Oh, and as to my relation with God, well he is wrong about that as well.

Of course, this could be someone impersonating Lask, but given the nature of the message, I think contacting the police, and filing charges will be appropriate.  A message such as this carries implied threats, and would certainly fall under laws against stalking.  I do believe he has gone a bit too far.  And, well, depending on the anonymous server he used, he may, or may not, be easy to trace.

Oh, and for those who may not remember, or who may be new to this blog, Mr. Lask is the kook who terrorized people on for years.  He harassed anyone he considered unworthy.  The ironic part was, Lask turned out to be a classic transgender, non-op, having had a history of being a member of a group that was pretty much a local variant of the Tri-Ess type cross dresser's club in San Francisco.  His best friend, who died at his keyboard was a guy who called himself "Cheryl Mullins."  That person, who also lied about being a post-op, turned out to be an intact male.

Friday, October 31, 2014

Oh MY! The Men in Dresses Are Having a Hissy Fit!!!!

Since I basically shredded Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen's puff pieces in support of Mr. "Cristan" Williams', and Mr. "Dana" Taylor's claims that they have uncovered the true name of GallusMag, they have been frantic.  I have been subjected to regular cyberstalking on Twitter, by those three, the comments on Mr. Sandeen's column at LGBT Weekly have been removed, and in general they are beside themselves with anger and hate.

The cyberstalking on Twitter has ranged from the hilarious (Mr. Taylor's remark about my blog getting no comments...perhaps he hasn't noticed that the same is true for most of the latest drivel at Transadvocate) to the downright hateful (Mr. Sandeen has again tried to drag my daughter into this).  This is nothing new, and before, Mr. Taylor was heavily involved.  When all this started a bit over a year ago, my daughter was very upset at what these creeps were up to.  Of course, they could care less about how some mere woman feels.  They have shown that, time and time again.

Again, they have taken a comment that my daughter made at a time when we were estranged.  What caused this is really none of their business, and I refuse to violate my daughter's privacy.  Simply put, we have a disagreement, and we did not speak for a while.  Then, she contacted me, and we patched things up.  End of story.  Contrary to some of the crap they have tried to read into this, we are very close.  I speak to her regularly on the phone, and since that time, I have visited her, and my grandchildren a number of times.  I am also, contrary to some rather outrageous claims, on good terms with my ex.

As to the rest of their claims, they have made quite a bit out of stuff they have no capacity to understand.  As I have pointed out many times, none of these three are transsexuals (well, Mr. Williams is a possible exception, having possibly become what would be, effectively an FTM).  All three are basically fetishistic crossdressers who have crossed over to full time.

The stuff my daughter made reference to, again at a time when she was angry with me, was from the time before I made my transition.  I was, quite frankly, non-functional as a "man."  Yes, my ex supported us.  When you are basically living a lie, it can be hard to keep a job.  Like other transsexuals, I had to basically create a false shell to hide inside of.  That was true from childhood.  I remember having to pretend to care about things I was expected to like, and having to hide what I really wanted.  For example, I learned to tell people that my favorite baseball player was Roger Maris.  Now, I could not have told anyone what position he played, any thing about his record, or probably even what team he played for.  But, I could simply give that as an answer to a common question, and people were satisfied.  In truth, I hated sports, and considered them a nuisance because they kept me from getting to watch what I wanted on TV.

I also learned that being honest about other interests would, at best, cause me to be mocked by my peers, and my father, and at worst could result in my suffering abuse.  When I was in elementary school, I regularly hid what I really wanted, or felt, because otherwise, I would have received regular beatings for being a sissy.  Actually, on more than one occasion, I got them anyway.  On rare occasions, when I trusted someone, I usually found it to be a mistake.

These three clowns understand none of this.  They had no problems being men.  Mr. Sandeen, for example, served for TWENTY years in the U.S. Navy, as a man, without any real problems.  Truth be told, I would not have lasted 20 days.  Now, I know, some will argue that many women serve in the Navy, and this is quite true.  But, they are serving as women, and what they go through is radically different.  Of course, I doubt Mr. Sandeen can even comprehend something like that.

Likewise, Mr. Taylor had a relatively successful career as a man, as did Mr. Williams.  In fact, a photo of Mr. Williams in a full beard was recently published on Gender Identity Watch.  I find that rather interesting, since when I hit puberty, I rather obsessively tried to hide the fact that I was sprouting facial hair, and tweezed them out until there was too many, and then secretly shaved to avoid having to go through the time-honored ritual of having my father teach me to shave.  In fact, my parents were rather puzzled that I didn't seem to shave even after I was married.  And I could never, ever, imagine actually growing a beard or even a mustache. 

No, before I transitioned, I was not a very pleasant person to be around.  I was often very angry at the world, and suffered from depression, and self-hatred.  Unlike these three, who seem to have had no problem being men, and still don't.  And they have no idea what actually being a transsexual actually is...though they still keep trying to claim that transsexual, and transgender men like them, are really all the same.

Wednesday, October 29, 2014

How Much Sillier Can Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen Get?

In the latest chapter of the battle between women and the "men in dresses" crowd, Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen has come up with an even sillier post over on Transadvocate.  In previous articles we have discussed his first post, in which he first made the claim that GallusMag has been "outed."  In that article, we showed that, by his own standards, the claim was bogus.  Mr. "Cristan" Williams, and Mr. "Dana" Taylor, yes, the "Milk-Man" himself, have claimed to have found out who GallusMag really is.  And, they cling to this, at best, flimsy claim desperately.  Mr. Sandeen has become point man for their position.

In this article, he attempts to back up that claim with some of the most laughable evidence ever presented.  Now, keep in mind that what GallusMag has done is not, as Mr. Sandeen claims, "doxxing" which is "l33t-speak" for uncovering information on someone.  What GallusMag has done is simply shine a light on some of the sillier things that men in dresses have put up on the Internet.  Her sources are all quite public.  She just exposes them to the ridicule they deserve.  Her subject matter ranges from outright threats of violence, to men in dresses just acting silly.  So, naturally, they hate her with a passion.

On the other hand, they have to claim she has been "doxxing" them to excuse their attempts to invade her privacy.  

Mr. Sandeen's case is ridiculous.  He refers to vague claims, that he declines to provide details of, and then proceeds to back those claims up with some rather hilarious "facts" that add up to nothing.

For example, he claims that GallusMag denied the claim too quickly and therefore it must be true.  Of course, the fact of the matter is, what was actually denied was a claim by Mr. Williams that he had discovered that GallusMag was wealthy, and lives in a "luxurious home."  That is what was denied.  Once again, facts are twisted to make something appear to be different than it really is...

From there, it just gets even sillier.  Someone found a MySpace page for the person who has been mis-identified as GallusMag.  Mr. Sandeen makes a big deal out of the fact that this person, who is an artist, has a piece that depicts GallusMag.  Now, considering that GallusMag is a historical figure, and well known in certain circles, that proves...well, nothing.  But even sillier is an attempt to claim that the image depicts the artist as GallusMag.  A rather silly claim, but presented as though it is conclusive.

The rest of the article, apparently the actual "facts" needed padding, consists of Mr. Sandeen critiquing the rest of this person's art.  Which, of course, has no real bearing on the claims made.  The funniest part is Mr. Sandeen's attempt to accuse a woman of objectifying women, in defense of so-called "transwomen" objectifying women.  Of course, Mr. Sandeen, who is quite male in both body and mind, has no idea what he is blathering about.

The bottom line is, the men in dresses crowd is more obsessed with the idea that they have struck a blow against someone they violently hate, than with any concern for the truth.  They have their "trophy," and they are not going to give it up without a fight.

Tuesday, October 28, 2014

Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen Plays the Censorship Card....AGAIN!!!

Well, Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen, who hates the idea of people having privacy, and who has falsely claimed that GallusMag has been outed, has pulled one of his favorite tricks and gotten the comments on his column at LGBT Weekly totally stripped of comments.  Funny, he seemed to have no problem with it when people are viciously attacking people who disagree with him.  In fact, none of the previous comments have been removed.  Just the ones from the current article, where a number of people had pointed out the problems with Mr. Sandeen's phony claims.

Anyone visiting his current article will be met with this bit of silliness from the "Associate Editor":
Dear San Diego Community:
It is unfortunate that LGBT Weekly is forced to suspend the ability of those who are engaged with our Trans Progressive columnist Autumn Sandeen and the transgender community. LGBT Weekly has provided a forum for the transgender community since our first print edition in 2010. In fact, LGBT Weekly’s commitment to the transgender community is also represented by the inclusion of transgender in the name of our publication.Some members of the San Diego community have forgotten or do not understand the meaning of civil discourse; to engage in a discussion to enhance understanding. While most of the public comments have been civil, some have taken advantage of LGBT Weekly’s desire to balance civil discourse and free speech within a discussion forum.Many in our community are still in the closet and do not want to use their real names in discussion forums. This creates a situation where some hide behind anonymous names and email addresses to spew hateful, derisive comments. If LGBT Weekly were to implement a policy where all comments must have a person’s real name, those who are not out are excluded from the discussion. LGBT Weekly’s global view is more speech is better than less.Let us be clear, LGBT Weekly provides the transgender discussion forum at our sole discretion. We will work with the transgender community to try to arrive at a solution to protect the identities of those in the community who are not out, to provide a forum for civil discourse, as well one that protects free speech. Until that time, all commentary in this discussion forum is suspended.
Of course, in trans-speak, hateful and derisive means "effectively refuting someone who adheres to the transgender party line."  In truth, no one commenting in that forum uses their real name.  But, there are a number who regularly whine about others not doing so, as well as regularly remarks, including this rather outrageous statement by Mr. Sandeen about GallusMag:
GallusMag’s identity is now known – she now has the opportunity before her own speech under her own name, with all the positive and negative consequences that can occur from writing under one’s own name. My thoughts, my prayers, is that violence of any sort isn’t part of the consequences of her being fully doxxed.
Besides being totally false, this comment shows Mr. Sandeen's total disregard for the rights of others.  GallusMag has chosen to write anonymously, and Mr. Sandeen needs to respect her right to do so.  Just because Mr. Sandeen ignores the advice, "Fool's names, and fool's faces are often seen in public places," does not mean that everyone wants their privacy invaded.  Given that more than a few transgender kooks have made violent threats against those who disagree with them, including some by Mr. Sandeen himself, it is not surprising that many women want to maintain distance from them.

Oh, and one more curious fact...LGBT Weekly does not list an associate editor.  So, one has to wonder who actually pulled this stunt.  There is no question that Mr. Sandeen had a role.  He has a long history of censoring critics, having done so in the past at Pam's House Blend (he once banned me from there for something I wrote here) but also at LGBT Weekly.  I imagine he probably pitched a hissy fit and demanded they remove the comments this time, as they were largely against him.  Even his meat puppets were getting drowned out.

Friday, October 24, 2014

The Stalking of GallusMag

One of the blogs I regularly read is Gendertrender.  It is edited by a person who goes by the pseudonym of "GallusMag" which was the nickname of a 6-foot-tall female bouncer at a New York City Water Street bar called The Hole in the Wall in the early 19th century, who figures prominently in New York City folklore.  Her real name is not known

Herbert Asbury, in his book The Gangs of New York wrote:
"It was her custom, after she’d felled an obstreperous customer with her club, to clutch his ear between her teeth and so drag him to the door, amid the frenzied cheers of the onlookers. If her victim protested she bit his ear off, and having cast the fellow into the street she carefully deposited the detached member in a jar of alcohol behind the bar…. She was one of the most feared denizens on the waterfront and the police of the period shudderingly described her as the most savage female they’d ever encountered."
The modern day GallusMag, who's real name is also unknown, is a radical feminist who is giving the transgender kooks fits because she regularly exposes some of their sillier moments.  On her blog, she writes about many of the same issues that I cover here.  And because she has done so well at it, her real name is highly sought after by the nastier of the transgender extremists, especially Mr. "Cristan" Williams, who has a long history of attempting to harass anyone who dares disagree with his extremist views.

Recently, Mr. Williams, among others, thought they had reached their goal.  He even bragged about it on Twitter. 

GallusMag was supposedly identified as a particular woman, who I will not name, but once again, a denial was quickly issued.  Ironically, Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen, Mr. William's faithful lapdog, published the claim that this time they had GallusMag, for sure, including the claim that no denial had been made, thus proving that this was the one, true name of their sworn enemy.  Of course, facts are not really the friend of kooks like Mr. Sandeen and Mr. Williams.

The sad thing is, this sort of behavior is common among the transgender kooks.  GallusMag, contrary to Mr. Sandeen's claims, does not "doxx" transgender men. No, I am not going to use Mr. Sandeen's term, and refer to them as "trans women," because, quite frankly, the people GallusMag tends to expose are most assuredly not women.

I don't agree with everything that GallusMag says, and I am sure we would have much to disagree about, but I do respect her right to both freedom of speech, and privacy.  In his article, Mr. Sandeen, who likes to style himself as the transgender "Martin Luther King, Jr." goes into a spiel about how no one should threaten violence against GallusMag.  Perhaps he is sincere, or perhaps he is hoping to be ignored.  I do know that such threats are a regular tactic by some of the nastier of the men-in-dresses crowd.

Nevertheless, this sort of behavior is nothing short of sick.  Posting the name of someone who wishes to remain private is inexcusable.  Some, like Mr. Sandeen are extremist in their believe that everyone should be "out, loud, and proud," to the point that Mr. Sandeen has zero respect for privacy rights.  Of course, Mr. Sandeen has no real desire to be a woman, and certainly not female.  He just wishes to force people to accept his false claims, and pretend he is both.  And he wants to force his rather bizarre situation on others.

Wednesday, October 8, 2014

Another Example of Outrageous Behavior By Transgender Extremists

A while back, I wrote an article about a case here in San Francisco. Well, here is a follow-up, and well, it's pretty bad. To recap, back in April, I wrote about a 31 year-old male who goes by the by the name of Dana McCallum. He was arrested back on Jan. 26 of this year on suspicion of rape. Specifically, he has been charged with three counts of spousal rape, one count of false imprisonment and one count of domestic violence. Now, Mr. McCallum (oddly enough, his legal name is Dana Contreras) calls himself transgender "woman," and happens to be a programmer with Twitter, and was accused of raping his wife. He was just allowed to plead guilty to a couple of misdemeanor charges and got probation.

It is bad enough that he basically is getting away with rape, but what is even more outrageous is the response from other transgender "women."  They rallied to his support.  Here is someone, who is quite male, and who apparently has no desire to give up his penis, who claims to be a "woman," who raped a female, and a bunch of other men, who claim to identify as "women" tried to censor discussion about the case. 

Yes, the transgender extremists actually got GallusMag locked out of her blog, Gender Trender for over a week, apparently because they were afraid this case would publicize the fact that most transgender males do not have sex reassignment surgery, and would prefer to hang on to their penises.  Well, that and also the fact that transgender males commit sexual assaults at the same rate as other men.

And it should be noted that, again, the media reporting on this story, in an apparent attempt to pander to the transgender extremists, seems to be avoiding the detail that this person is still physically male, and intends to remain physically male.  This has led to more than a bit of confusion among people making comments on the case locally.

Yes, once again, the "men in dresses" club acts like, well, a bunch of men.  They are more concerned with protecting one of their own, than being outraged that a woman, who they claim to identify with, was raped.  Go figure.

Thursday, September 25, 2014

Another Example of Why I Do Not Accept the Label of "Transgender"

In the comments section of Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen's column at LGBT Weekly, another man in a dress tried to dismiss the comments of myself, and another transsexual on the basis that we were "in pain."  I was rather amused by this, and simply replied, "Nope… My pain was ended when I had SRS."

Then I got to thinking about this.  This is a common tactic among transgender extremists, one that is almost as popular as labeling any disagreement as hatred.  The words might vary, with the accusation being that we are ashamed, in denial, or fearful, etc., but the basic idea is the same.  We are to be ignored because we are not being "honest."

Of course, this is the goal.  If they can "dismiss" our point of view, they can ignore it, and not have to actually deal with it.  They don't have to address the actual points raised, which just might prove a bit difficult.  You see this tactic a lot.  It is basically a variation on the classic logical fallacy known as a "straw man argument."  Rather than address the real point that is raised, in this case the issue was open service in the military for transgender people, you create a false argument, which is easily dismissed.

The simple fact of the matter is, I don't identify as transgender.  And that is all that transgender is, an identity.  Most who identify as such are not remotely transsexual.  Yes, there are exceptions, and some have guzzled the transgender "Kool-Aid" in large quantities.  Personally, I cannot understand why anyone who is transsexual would find common ground with the transgender paradigm.

Of course, part of the problem with the term "transgender" is that it is so vague as to actual meaning, it has become, essentially, meaningless.  But, for the most part, those who do identify with transgender seem to be more inclined towards being, as some would say, "out, loud, and proud."  They feel the need to make sure people know that they are transgender.  Their very core identity seems to depend on people being aware that they are transgender.  On the other hand, I, and most other transsexuals simply desire to get on with our lives as the women, or in the case of FTMs, the men, we really are.

To me, the idea of being "openly" transgender, or even "openly" transsexual, is unacceptable.  I am simply a woman.  I have been through transition, and I have left as much of my former life behind as is possible.

In another column on for LGBT Weekly, Mr. Sandeen writes about his experiences trying to obtain a discount based on his service in the Navy.  Now, I find it interesting that he states"One of the documents that can be used to indicate one is a veteran with my phone company is a DD214 (the military’s separation of service, or discharge document)."  Now, this is a document on which the name cannot be changed.  In another words, this document has Sandeen's birth name.  But, apparently, this was not the only document that Sandeen could have used to establish that he served in the military, but it is the one he chose.  Now, I never served in the military, but I have faced situations where I could have revealed my birth name.  And, unless absolutely necessary, I will avoid doing so.  In fact, the last time I recall having to do that was when I got my California ID.  I had to provide a copy of my birth certificate, and since that was before my surgery, I had to use the original version.  But transgender people seem to revel in this.

This is the main thing that divides most who are transsexual from those who prefer to identify as "transgender."  The transgender types want to keep a connection to being their birth sex and gender.  They don't want to be what they claim they "really" are.

Saturday, August 2, 2014

All Together, Forward March, in Lockstep....Or ELSE!!!!

After the silliness of comparing TERFs to Westboro Baptist Church, the kooks at Transadvocate have come up with another idiotic post.  This time, they are again attacking Andrea James for the unforgivable sin of not adhering to the transgender party line.  This is not the first time Transadvocate has gone after her, they also attacked her viciously for daring to disagree with them over Jared Leto playing a "transgender" person in Dallas Buyers Club, which is kind of interesting since the movie was set at a time that 'transgender" was not a commonly used term.  More accurately, Leto played a drag queen who was HIV positive.

So, what did Andrea James do to incur the more recent wrath of the transgender extremists? She had the audacity to suggest that GLAAD is becoming too dominated by transgender extremists. And worse, she has supported the appointment of Megan McCain, who is the daughter of Arizona Senator and former presidential candidate John McCain. Gasp, she is even a Republican. This is about as far from being in lockstep as you can get, and the Transadvocate crowd will have no part of it.

Never mind that Andrea James has done for more for transsexuals than all the transgender kook combined.  Her contributions far outweigh those of men like "Cristan" Williams, "Autumn" Sandeen, and others.

This of course, has become the standard approach of the transgender extremists.  For them, it is all about controlling comments and language.  Even if the person making the comment is someone they would tend to forcibly label as "transgender."  Step of of line, and you will be attacked.  It's that simple.  You want to get along with the transgender kooks, just repeat the party line, never disagree with them, and above all, never, ever, think for yourself.

Wednesday, July 30, 2014

A New Low, Even For the Transadvocate

First off, I want to apologize for being away for a while.  Real life intervened, and I have been very a good way.  Also, to be honest, there has been little worth writing about.  After a while, it gets tiresome writing about the same old silliness from the radical TG crowd.  There just hasn't been much new stuff...until now.

In an article by Fallon Fox, a pseudo-transsexual man who likes to beat up on other women, we are informed that the "TERFs" (i.e. Trans Exclusive Radical Feminists) are "the new Westboro Baptist Church."    Of course, this is the same bunch that has repeatedly tried to get the Southern Poverty Law Center to declare TERFs to be a certified hate group.  I guess since that hasn't worked, they have decided to take on a new approach.

The whole idea is ludicrous.  Worse, Mr. Fox comes up with some rather strained (to say the  very least) reasons for his claim.
Who in the hell would go through years of hormone replacement therapy, electrolysis, doctor’s appointments, psychological therapy, loss of thousands and thousands of dollars, loss of family and friends, possible loss of one’s job, put themselves in harm’s way by being a prime target for physical violence at the hands of men? And most importantly, why would some so called “men” elect to have an operation on their genitals that would remove their ability to use their sexual organ in penetrating fashion in the act of rape? Most rational adults are not ignoramuses to the degree that they would believe such rhetoric especially after hearing the counter argument.
Uh, sorry fellow, but we are constantly told how one does not need SRS to be a woman, how women have penises, how "most transgender people don't have surgery," etc.  So, don't come along and try to use claims about having SRS to argue a transgender position.  It's a bit disingenuous to say the least.

And really, why would someone who claims to be a "woman" spend so much time insuring that everyone, and anyone is fully aware that they were born a man, and expose their self to endless rounds of publicity, seeking out the spotlight?

Sorry, what you try to describe are transsexuals, who are not, automatically, transgender.  

And let's look at what the transgender extremists have pushed.  A lot of the controversy has arose because:

  1. Transgender males generally refuse to respect reasonable boundaries.  They demand to be allowed to invade women's spaces, no matter how personal and private they are.
  2. Transgender males introduced the idea of the "cotton ceiling" in an attempt to shame lesbians into accepting sex with them.
  3. An increasing number of transgender males demand the right to be in place where nudity is inevitable, even though they have no had corrective surgery.  And they adamantly defend men who have been caught in such situations.
  4. These men, Mr. Fox being a particular example, belittle the very real concerns that women have about men committing aggressive acts.
I don't agree with everything the Radical Feminists say, but I also do not believe they remotely deserve the crap spewed by kooks like Mr. Fox.

Friday, April 25, 2014

Transgender Extremists Have Completely Lost It

The latest "feature article" on Mr. "Cristan" Williams' Transadvocate site is so absurd, even I was embarrassed for the poor fool who wrote it.  Talk about not getting…

It is basically a hissy fit about a video that was featured on the Huffington Post's Gay Voices section.  The headline of the article shrilly claims…

Transmisogyny masquerading as parody: HuffPo’s Gay Voices promotes disturbing video from former Drag Race contestant

There is a warning…
Trigger warning: video linked portrays a trans woman being murdered
And then the lead paragraph…
A trans woman activist portrayed with a moustache and a bad wig being murdered by a drag queen is the kind of imagery that would come with a trigger warning on most sensible online information outlet, not hailed as “hilarious” by one it’s editors. But, it would appear that Huffington Post editor James Nichols believes that the death of trans activist at the hands of an angry drag queen is a laugh-out-loud situation.
You can watch the video for yourself here but unfortunately you can't read the article on Huffington Post because they decided to cave to the protests of outraged transgender kooks who took it all too seriously.  Update: I have learned that it was preserved as a PDF here.

Now, let me start by saying that personally, I find a lot of "drag" offensive, not because of the issues raised by the humorless transgender kooks, but for a reason that is totally lost on the men in dresses crowd…it is insulting to women.  Drag is often comparable to the blackface performers that were often a major part of the minstrel shows that were so popular in the 1800s.  In fact, as people grew tired of blackface, it was replaced by female impersonators.  Now, I have seen some drag acts that are quite good, but much of drag involves insulting examples of the worst stereotypes of "bitchy women." 

Yeah, the foolish men who whine constantly about "transmisogyny" (their favorite neologism) could care less about real misogyny.

But, the growing tension between drag queens, like RuPaul, and the transgender nut cases, like Mr. "Cristan" Williams, Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen, Mr. "Dana" Taylor, and most significantly,  Mr. Parker "Marie" Malloy who started this who thing with his article on the Advocate website, and worse, his Twitter post in which he expressed his outright hatred of RuPaul in rather vulgar terms (See Andrea James' excellent response here.  BTW, the transgender kooks have now turned on Andrea James and Calpernia Adams for the unforgivable crime of actually disagreeing with them, and, well, pointing out some of their absurd positions.)

The video is over the top, but the obvious point is completely lost on the humorless men in dresses crowd.  It is not, as one commenter on Williams' site claims, a threat of violence, implied or otherwise.  It really not about "murdering a transwoman."  It is a humorous slap at a self-righteous little man who has started hormones, and suddenly thinks he knows it all, and is going to set everyone else straight.

I mean, seriously, the supposed murderer uses a BLOW DRYER.  It is over the top satire.  After attempting, several times, to modify his language to satisfy the transactivist complaints, he becomes frustrated and opens fires…again, with a BLOW DRYER.  The people offended by this are the same sort of people who actually think Jonathan Swift actually advocated eating poor children when he was really mocking heartless attitudes towards the poor.  It is called hyperbole, and the message is actually that some of these humorless fools should get a life.  Not, of course, that there is any chance of that.

Monday, April 14, 2014

The Real Face of Transgender Extremism

The whole transgender paradigm is built on lies.  It is based on ideas like "Women have penises," and "I someone says they are a woman, then you have to accept, without question, that they are a woman, and grant them all rights and privileges of being a woman."  In short, it is pretty much an absurd pile of absurdities.  And deep down, I believe its leadership knows this.  For example, Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen, who has tried to style himself as the "Martin Luther King, Jr" of the transgender movement, said this on Twitter....
My job is not to make you love me. It's control the extent people can publicly express antitrans sentiments -- A Rustin thought.
Notice that Mr. Sandeen does not say, "influence" but instead says, "control."  He does't say something like "My job is to "refute false antitrans sentiments..."  For Mr. Sandeen, it is about "control."  One might ask, why is this?  The answer is simple, he is a man, and men like to be in total control.

Mr. Sandeen likes to compare the imagined plight of "transgender people" with that of African-Americans.  Of course, this is absurd.  The movement to end racial discrimination was based on people lacking rights based on a criteria that had no basis in reason, and which was rooted simply in appearance.  As hard as it is to believe in retrospect, African-Americans were considered to be "inferior" simply because of the color of the skin.  Nothing more.  Of course, in order to justify that, people made up false claims, which only the truly ignorant would remotely accept today.  

On the other hand, the issues concerning transgender people, particularly the one that is so near and dear to Mr. Sandeen's heart...the right to invade sexually segregated places, are rooted in reality.  Women simply don't want their privacy invaded by men.  Transsexuals have long used the women's room without incident, but it is the increasing invasion of those who are not transsexual, who are increasingly told they have an absolute right to go into women's spaces, provided they simply "identify" as a woman, that are the problem.

One of the most telling aspects of the whole bathroom issue is the arrogant disregard that these so-called "transwomen," have for the feelings and concerns of women.  The basic response is, "get over it."  In their mind, it is their right and privilege to enter women's private spaces, even those involving actual nudity.  

Sandeen, having falsely obtained a California birth certificate by fraudulently claiming to have completed a sex change (he is a eunuch) once made a rather arrogant remark about how he was considering going to the Michigan Womyn's Music Festival, claiming that he was now, "legally" a woman born woman.  

Like many transgender extremists, Mr. Sandeen's arrogance knows no bounds.  Just over a year ago, he tweeted this bit of arrogant silliness to Aunty Orthodox, another one of us horrible transsexual separatists....
I am a woman. I'm among those who define the space. Trans women are women, and are among those who define the space.
Uh, no.  Mr. Sandeen is a male, who has a penis (which he wishes to keep) but not his definition, a eunuch at best, but in no sense a woman.  He fraudulently obtained a California birth certificate by lying to a judge, but that does not make him a female, and certainly not a woman.   And he certainly has no business telling women how to define their space.

No, the arrogance of transgender extremists is astounding.  Sandeen is just one example, but he is a major one.  He is complaining again that I am targeting him, and I admit, I do right about him a lot, because a) he is such a perfect example of transgender stupidity and arrogance, and b) he is a very prolific writer, so he is a rich source of material.

Saturday, April 12, 2014

I Can't Wait To See the Transgender Kooks Try To Spin This One

Ironically, right on the heels of another absurd article by Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen, in which he attacks Roseanne Barr for speaking out against certain behaviors by transgender males (just to be clear, I am talking about males who claim to be women), there comes a story that is going to be a real headache for those who try to claim that transgender males are not potentially a threat to women.  The award for most clueless headline has to go to the San Francisco Chronicle, which had:

S.F. women's rights advocate accused of raping wife

Okay, at first glance, you might assume that some man, who was known for advocating for women's rights, had been accused of raping his wife. But the lead paragraph is very confusing...

While attorneys for a women's rights advocate and prominent Twitter engineer accused of raping her estranged wife say the accuser is "out for revenge," a friend who says she was present after the incident said Friday that the wife just wants to teach her children that criminals must face justice.
Now, this is where things start to get very strange...  You see, under California law, a woman cannot commit rape, which is defined on the basis of "sexual intercourse," and which later sections of the law make clear involves penetration by a penis...  The rapist is a transgender male, who has not had surgery (and presumably does not plan to have said surgery, as there should be little doubt that this dude could easily afford any SRS surgeon since he works in a very well paid position, and I would be surprised if Twitter does not cover SRS).  In California, you pretty much have to be a male (i.e. have a penis) to commit a rape (including spousal rape).  Otherwise, it is covered under a different statute. 

So, to be completely clear here, a 31 year-old male who goes by the by the name of Dana McCallum was arrested back on Jan. 26 on suspicion of rape. According to the San Francisco district attorney's office, he was charged with five felonies. Specifically, he has been charged with three counts of spousal rape, one count of false imprisonment and one count of domestic violence. As a curious aside, his legal name is given as "Dana Contreras"  In fact, two years ago, he was featured, under his legal name in an article, in The Advocate entitledThe Ten Most Innovative Companies and the LGBTs Who Got Them to the Top.  Sadly, you would not quite get that from the San Francisco Chronicle article, which goes out of its way to avoid mentioning that Contreas is transgender, or that he is a male.

Oh, and it should be noted that about a year ago, Contreas, in a speech he gave to at his high school, pulled the classic stunt of misleading people into thinking he had surgery.  Clearly, he has not, as if he had, it would impossible for him to be charged with rape.

Now, I will point out, in all fairness, at this point in time, Contreas has been charged, but not convicted.  On the other hand, it does not really look good for him.  His defense is a classic male tactic, of claiming it is all about "money," that his spouse, who he had served with divorce papers the day before, was hoping to cash in on his stock options.  Now, what that would have to do with "rape" is, of course, ignored by the attorneys.  California law would probably grant her a share in them anyway.  So, this so-called "women's rights activist" falls back on a classic dodge in an attempt to claim he didn't commit rape.  Sad...

It will be interesting to see how the likes of Mr. "Cristan" Williams and Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen deal with this embarrassment.  Of course, for the time being, I would not be surprised if they hammer the "not convicted" meme.  But, if this Contreas is convicted, and I would not be at all surprised if that occurs, it will be much harder for them to explain away.

Stay tuned...this could get very interesting.

Monday, April 7, 2014

It Is Really Getting Out of Hand

You know, up to a point, one can almost laugh at the silliness of the transgender kooks.  They flounce around, claiming to be women, when they clearly are not.  But it ceases to be funny when they start encroaching on the security of others.  It is bad enough that they believe they have an absolute entitlement to invade women's spaces, even those involving nudity, while waving their penises….excuse me, their big old "neoclits" in the women's faces. It gets worse when they think they have the right to expose themselves in front of young girls, as was he case with  "Colleen" Francis.  But more and more, they openly threaten actual violence against anyone who dares even disagree with their insane demands.
For example…there was this tweet…
I can do dialog in real life as long as I have something heavy to kill the with
This sort of things is simply unacceptable. Now, to Cecilia Chung's credit, she did take the person to task…
violence is not helpful
But this person, calling himself "Jessica" is clearly dangerous. He doesn't back down from his violence, but instead tries to excuse it…
these people want my friends not to exist and they don't think I exist.
I am not sure what he means by "they don't think I exist…." Clearly, he does exist…and I guess what he really means is, "They don't think I'm really a woman." And hey, I think they are right…he isn't. He is a violent, and dangerous man, who is threatening women because he is not getting his way.

It actually gets worse…(tweets quoted in the order they were apparently posted, not actually displayed on Twitter)
if they are not dealt with we run the risk of more violence or deaths.

This is not the time to debate with those so predisposed, it is long past time that they were

dealt with, be that via the law, as I am pushing for or by duct tape
Now, obviously what you have here is the classic, "over the top rhetoric of blaming someone for violence, simply because the don't "approve" of you. I am not aware of a single case of any of these women that Mr. Ottowell has such vitriol for ever committing a single act of violence. In fact, they have pointed out that the violence is committed by men.

In another bit display of male arrogance, Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen has apparently offered money (could it really be $10,000?) to anyone who will supply him with the identity of the person who posts as Gallus Mag. Seriously….
She's confusing someone putting a call out to discover Gallus Mag's identity with a "bounty" as in violence.

Well, true enuf. I live under my name, take the heat & past death threats under my name. Gallus doesn't; she should.
Now, Mr. Sandeen can't quite seem to grasp why this might be upsetting. Apparently, after a bit of research, it turns out that not only is Mr. Sandeen involved, but, not surprisingly, so is ├╝ber kook Mr. "Dana Lane" Taylor. While they might only be hoping to embarrass and humiliate said person (uh, yeah…sure) even that is over the top. I have been on the receiving end of Mr. Sandeen's harassment, and I know he is supposed to be the person who blackmailed one blogger into leaving the Internet. This sort of thing is just sick.

I clearly do not agree with the goals of the "transgender" extremists, and I am not shy about stating that. I have been harassed more than once by them.

Wednesday, April 2, 2014

Trapped in a Loop

A "time loop" is common device in science fiction.  The characters find themselves repeating the same experience, over and over, seemingly doomed to forever repeat the same period repeatedly for eternity.  Sometimes, looking at the crap from transgender extremists feels much the same.  I keep having the experience of reading stuff, shaking my head, and thinking "They don't get it, and they can't see that they don't get it."

The latest version of this comes from, of course, the kooks at Shame on You Transgender Edition.  "Michelle" Spicer, who seems to have become he most prolific poster among those spewing ignorance on that blog starts off with this bit of drivel…
Have you ever noticed that when you are talking to a transgender woman that she is always 100% sure beyond doubt that she is making the right decision. She very well may be making the right decision, but it is not possible to be 100% sure about anything. We are humans and we have doubts, it's just part of human nature. Yet in order to toe the line in the transgender community, she is forced to maintain an impossibility to secure her position in the transgender hierarchy.
Now, I cannot speak to the experience of that non-existent entity known as a "transgender woman," but I would assume that, as usual, Mr, Spicer is referring to some random transsexual he has encountered.  Now, by the time a transsexual has reached the point of beginning transition, he or she has struggled through years of self-doubt, misery, and even self-hatred in some cases.  Most of us have suffered at least some form of abuse at the hands of others.  By the time we finally transition, we are generally quite sure we are doing the right thing.  But, something that has been lost along the way is the concept that transition is a trial period.  That is why it is, or at least should be, called the Real Life Test.  If it turns out to  not be the right choice, there is always the possibility to go back.  Of course, now, many kooks attack anyone making that decision.  Simply put, you have doubts, or if you don't need to transition to survive…then don't.

And again with this stupid "hierarchy" stuff.  Bunch of guys finding something to compete over.  There are no degrees of being a woman, and if you are a transsexual, then don't worry about the imaginary "transgender hierarchy," unless, of course, you really do want to link yourself to a bunch of guys in dresses…in which case, well, maybe you should think long and hard before you decide to have surgery after all…because there is no going back.

But then Mr. Spicer takes off on a really stupid tangent that should leave no doubt that he is not remotely transsexual…
I recently posted an article about hormones and I mentioned that hormone replacement therapy does not always cause sexual dysfunction. There was no end of transwomen ready to swear that they lost sexual function not only from the first time they took hormones, they lost sexual function on the way home from the pharmacy! Loss of sexual function happens over time and there are many transwomen who remain functional right up until the surgery. But you won't hear any of them standing up to say so, they are simply not allowed too. Not unless they want to risk losing face in a community that has little cohesion and offers even less help. Why do we have to keep up these pretenses? Why do transwoman have to argue about stealing the pink blanket from another baby hours after they were born in an effort to "out trans" the next transgender woman. The arguments are ridiculous and can make us look like delusional fools.
Okay, this bit of tripe is bad enough…but I checked out the article he refers to, and who led to the above is even worse….
Estrogen will kill your sexual function. More often than not this is certainly not the case. Your sex drive may change over time but your actual sexual function should not be affected until such time as you chose(or not) to have Gender Reassignment Surgery.
Okay, first off, it does not happen instantly.  That much is correct.  In my case, when I started out, I was on .5 mg of Estinyl (Ethinyl estradiol) which would be about the equivalent of 7.5 mg of Premarin, plus an injection of Depo Estradiol once a month.  It took about 6 weeks for my, uh, sexual function as Mr. Spicer puts it, to cease.  Oh, and after two to three months I asked my doctor to move me to more regular injections of Depo Estradiol, so he switched me to every two weeks.  Now, whether or not you lose the ability to have an erection and ejaculate (orgasms never went way) is dose dependent.  I imagine, like most male crossdressers, Mr. Spicer wants to keep having erections.  I was overjoyed that they were gone.  That is one of those significant differences that separates transsexuals and those who are "transgender."  Most men in dresses want to keep their penis, uh, fully functional.

Clearly, Mr. Spicer did not like being confronted with the truth.  He no doubt has a doctor with enough savvy to put him on an appropriate dosage for a crossdresser.  Of course, you probably wouldn't tell the patient that, since many crossdresser, while easy to spot, are not always willing to give up that fantasy that they are "really" a transsexual, even though they want to keep their penis.  Then again, he may even have one of those doctors who follows the ridiculously low dosing regimen of the Clarke Institute, which basically puts patients on low dose birth control pills, and then claims that hormones have little, if any, actual effect on male patients.  Uh…yeah, and I imagine some of them are quite happy with that.  But no the transsexual ones.

If you take a proper dose of estrogen, you will see changes over time.  You will have breast development, which can be as variable as that of women born women.  Some have more than others.  You will see some changes in facial features.  Again, this is variable.  It depends a lot on what you had to start with.  In the case of Mr. Spicer, I don't know how long he has been on hormones, but the pictures I have seen of him are not promising.  You will also see some fat redistribution, and you body will take on a more feminine shape.  Again, variable.  I know one very well known transgender extremist who sports a beer belly any redneck could be quite proud of.  What some would call Dunlap's syndrome.  (My belly, done lapped over my jeans…) I don't know how much of that is how that person dresses, and how much is hormones (or the lack thereof), and how much is simply genetics, but that person does look kind of odd.

The bottom line is, hey, if you want to identify as "transgender" fine…be transgender.  Just stop claiming stuff like how you are just as much a woman as anyone else, and how you are just like a transsexual….  Just stop trying to tell transsexuals they are transgender, because I got news for you…if you buy into the crap Mr. Spicer spews, you almost certainly aren't.

Monday, March 31, 2014

Fred Who?

Well, it has been a less than stellar week for me.  A week ago, my computer suffered a hard drive failure, and well, I just didn't really feel like messing with my back-up PC that much.  Besides, I had the week off, and I figured, might as well rest up a bit...  But, as my vacation draws to a close, and my Mac is back among the living, I am ready to get back to posting.

Of course, by now everyone knows that a certain infamous person died.  Fred Phelps, the leader of Westboro Baptist Church in Topeka, Kansas died on March 19, 2014.  Phelps, and his, uh, "church" (it was more like a compound where his family lived, as most, if not all of the members were his immediate family) were known for traveling about, protesting against various groups they considered sinful, in particular gays and lesbians.  I first heard of Phelps when he started picketing the funerals of AIDS victims back in the 1990's, and quite frankly I was appalled at the idea that someone would do such a thing.  Over time, the protests increased, and eventually included those of military personnel killed in the line of duty, which, it was claimed, was part of God's judgement on the United States for allowing homosexual behavior. 

Phelps and his cult have spent a number of years spewing what can only be called hatred.  They have misrepresented Biblical teachings, and have, behave like those the Apostle Peter described as "the untaught and unstable (who) distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction."  Phelps probably did more, in the long run, to further gay rights than to hinder them, but he still caused a lot of pain for the loved ones of those whose funerals he, and his followers, picketed.

There was briefly some talk of having protests at his funeral, but thankfully enough people were smart enough to point out how counter productive such an act would be.  When it became obvious that his death would not result in people lowering themselves to his level, it was quickly announced that there would be no funeral.  I rather suspect that no one showing up would have been an embarrassment.

In the end, Fred went out with more of a whimper than a bang.  His death resulted in a brief flurry of attention, and then quickly faded.  Many publications didn't even mention his death. And I was somewhat surprised that there was not some sort of celebration in the Castro District.  In short, this rather nasty little man got the attention he deserved.

Friday, March 21, 2014

A Complete Load of Crap

The kooks at Shame on You Transgender Edition posted a hilarious piece by Mr. "Michelle" Spicer, entitled Dating Transwomen Does Not "Make You Gay".  While the title is bad enough, the article is worse.  It is homophobic, and inaccurate.  It starts out with an accurate, but somewhat misleading idea..
Many of you have heard the myth that dating a transgender woman if you are a heterosexual male will somehow turn you gay. This has to be the most ridiculous type of rationale that I have heard of thus far.
Okay, you cannot really turn someone gay.  Granted, under certain circumstances, men who would otherwise not do so, may engage in homosexual behavior (the classic example is men who are incarcerated) but upon release they generally return to heterosexual practices. But…but then Mr. Spicer launches into this bit of absurdity….
Our sexual orientation does not change because of who we date, we date someone because of our sexual orientation. You can make love to a body but you can only date an actual person, it's the person inside you eventually fall in love with(if there is any kind of real love there) and a transwomans spirit is a woman!
Okay, keep that first sentence in mind…it is the petard this idiot will be hoist be, but let's look at that second part.  There is so much wrong here.  But for the moment, let's look at the final assertion…"transwomans (sic) spirit is a woman!"  Nope.  A "transwoman's" spirit is not a woman.  If it was, she would not be a "transwoman," which is an oxymoron, but would just a woman…which is anathema to so-called "transwomen" who cling to their manhood with a tenacity that puts a barnacle clinging to a boat to shame….

But, let's consider the part where Mr. Spicer really goes off the deep end…
Men who are attracted to transgender women are not automatically gay in any way shape or form. That is not to say that gay men cannot be attracted to transgender women, but the attraction itself does not change their orientation. If you are a heterosexual man the chances are that you are attracted to a transwoman because of her femininity, her personality and her spirit. There are fetishists of course, but they are attracted to a fetish and not the actual transwoman that stands before them. Using someone as an object is not considered dating them and does not come from any place of respect. This article is only concerned with men who actually want to date transgender women regardless of their surgical status and not treat her like an object. There is a difference between a "chaser" and having an actual interest in dating transgender women.
Okay, it is pretty much unheard of for a straight man to actually engage in a physical relationship with a "transwoman."  Likewise, if you are a pre-op, once a guy finds out you are physically male, the best you can hope for is that he doesn't totally freak out and become violent.  The relationship will probably end, at least with regards to any hope of romance, and you will end up broken hearted.  If you are seriously surgically tracked, you have two choices…date men who claim to be straight (but clearly aren't) or be celibate.  What they claim here is delusional crap.  It is simply believing the lies of men who are either lying to themselves or to everyone else.  If a guy is attracted to you, and you are physically a male, then that man is homosexual.  He may deny being such, but he is.  End of story.  He doesn't give one whit about your spirit, your femininity, or your personality.  He simply fetishizes "chick with dicks."  I've met my share, and I found the relationships very unsatisfactory.  He may pretend to "not treat you like an object," but if you are physically male, he is almost certainly going to.  And chances are, he will drop you like a rock if you actually do have surgery.  Shoot, I dated one guy who was a very wealth contractor.  He lived in what some would call a "MacMansion," had a pool and a hot tub, and drove a Jag.  I'm not a gold digger, but I am also not stupid…but the relationship ended quickly when he said "Don't have surgery…"  

Yes, for a while, I was a bit naive, and actually believe the sort of fairy tale Mr. Spicer is spewing here.  After learning what guys meant when they asked if I was "functional" (NO!  I have been on hormones for a while, and even if I was, what part of "I'm a woman," do you not understand?) I realized that most of these guys were not straight, and were pretty screwed up to boot.

Mr. Spicer ends with this bit of comedy…
Men who date transgender women are heterosexual men dating women, period. Simply because she is a different "type" of woman makes no difference to this writer. There are men who like French women, does that make them french? Simply because a man is attracted to a "type" of woman will not change his sexual orientation any more than it could change his nationality. The myth that dating a transgender woman "makes you gay" is ridiculous, damaging and causes the men who want to date us a great deal of shame. Transwomen lose out on dating and finding love because of this and that is just a damn shame.
Sorry, but no.  Heterosexual men don't want women with penises, and they certainly don't want to be topped by one.  There is only one kind of "woman" and men who date "transgender" women, as well as men who are attracted to pre-ops and so-called "non-ops" (a misnomer…if you are not going to have surgery, you are not a transsexual, so there is no need for that qualifier) are not heterosexual, they are perverts who fetishize the idea of a woman with a penis.  And if you think otherwise, you are lying to yourself, and very possibly putting yourself in serious danger, looking for a guy who doesn't even exist.

Wednesday, March 19, 2014

Highlighting The Difference, Unintentionally

The whole battle between myself and the cultists at Shame On You Transgender Edition began because I simply pointed out that I do not identify as transgender.  There are good reasons for this, and a couple of their latest posts show this about as clearly as possible.

The first was a fawning tribute to "Kristin" Beck, who apparently now styles himself as "Lady Valor."  Beck was a Navy Seal, a member of what is commonly called Seal Team Six, which was the unit that provided the men who took out Osama bin Laden.  Beck, like Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen, served twenty years, before leaving the Navy.

The second story was a rather telling piece, entitled "All You Need is Love," which states some classic transgender rhetoric (note I said transgender, not transsexual)…
As transgender women we have a tendency to dislike, or outright hate, our male sides. We loath anything that remotely reminds us that we were tragically born in the wrong body. The mirror can be an enemy because it reminds us that we are not perfect and we will always have male characteristics no matter how well we pass. What? You disagree? What is the shape of your pelvic bone?
Okay, dare I say it?  This is clearly a man, in this case, Mr. "Michelle" Spicer, speaking.  Only a transgender male would make such a statement…  This is straight out of Transvestite 101. Sorry, but this is what I make the differentiation that I am a transsexual, that I am a woman, and that yes, the kooks at Shame On You Transgender Edition are a bunch of delusional cultists.  The simple truth is, no one is perfect.  There is not a perfect man or woman, period.  Everyone has some flaws.  I had a friend who was a female to male transsexual who had a more masculine hip structure than I do.  He was short of stature, but his body shape was extremely male, and, contrary to some stereotypes, he had born a son (I remember reading a book on FTMs that basically claimed that no FTM ever would get pregnant) and had gone through some serious complications because his pelvis was too small for the child to easily fit through.  

You have to love how the more extremist transgender kooks, in order to cling to their manhood, even while proclaiming themselves to be women, love to focus on things like this. They want to beat post-ops over the head with their prostates, while ignoring the fact that women have the same gland, although it serves no purpose.  And yes, in extremely rare cases, women (and not transsexual women) can die of prostate cancer.  Of course, most doctors would not call it that…in women it is referred to as a Skene's gland, or paraurethral gland, and is, for the most part, ignored.  However, it is increasingly referred to, quite accurately, as the "female prostate gland."  Boy, are the transgender kooks going to hate that one.

No, the simple fact is, I don't have a "male side."  Then again, to be blunt, crossdressers don't really have a female side.  They have a fetish.  There is a clear difference between someone who grows up with a brain that is differentiated at odds with their body, and someone who simply wishes to play dress-up.

And this brings us back to Beck.  Beck claims to have "always" had a female gender, like Sandeen, and like Sandeen, Beck was able to not only survive in the military through basic training, all the while hiding this supposed "feminine nature" but in Beck's case, to also survive SEAL training, which is extremely intense.  And on top of all this, both Sandeen and Beck thrived in this hyper-masculine, testosterone fueled environment for the full 20 years needed to reach retirement.

No, in both cases, you have someone who was, quite probably, a very closeted cross dresser.  They are not transsexuals, they do not want SRS, and they are not really interested in being anything other than transgender.

You see, this is what underlies transsexualism.  It is not just about a desire to change one's physical sex to match one's brain, it is about wanting to be normal.  And transgender is about wanting to be different.  I have heard transgender people often express this view.  Some, such as Suzan Cooke will go so far as to attack people who are "normborns" as though that is a bad thing.  I have heard them say stuff like, "I would not want SRS, because then I would not be 'special.'"

If someone wants to choose to be "different" or "special," I suppose that is their choice, but they have to accept that society may not respect that choice.  And that brings up another major difference.  Transgender is a choice, transsexualism is not.  Although some try to make the claim that they were "born this way," transgender people choose their behavior.  Most had relatively, if not completely, normal childhoods, showing no signs of having an issue with their gender until later in life, and then beginning with, as stated above, fetishistic crossdressing.

So, the bottom line, again, is that there really is a difference between transgender (which is ultimately a highly subjective term that refers to a social/political construct that has no basis in reality) and transsexualism, which is a medical condition that is, in reality, unrelated to transgender in any meaningful way.