The Transgender Movement's Dirty Little Secret

I've been thinking about this post for quite some time.  It is about something that is quite obvious, but which is kind of easy to overlook in all the rhetoric that spews out of the "transgender movement."  But, an article at LGBT Weekly by Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen, one of the leading voices of that movement finally pushed me to write it.

In the article, titled "Fourteen years ago and now," Mr. Sandeen says

"I remember coming out in early 2003 as a transsexual – that’s what we called ourselves back then. When those of us who called ourselves transsexual also called ourselves transgender, it was actually kind of political – we were also identifying ourselves as falling under a transgender umbrella of gender nonconforming people."

This quote pretty much sums up what the transgender movement is really all about.  First off, it is not about being "transsexual."  Mr. Sandeen may have called himself a "transsexual," but he is not, and never was remotely a transsexual.  He may have even been able to find some doctor who is willing to rubber stamp his fantasies, but he has been a life long member of the "They Will Take My Penis When They Pry it From My Cold Dead Fingers" club.  He occasionally flirts with the idea of SRS, but has made no real move in that direction.  Even during the period when the VA was supposedly going to cover it.  He has had an orchidectomy, rendering him an eunuch, and has tried to pass this off as sex reassignment surgery, but he still retains his penis.

Next he states that he also called himself "transgender" he connects that with being "gender non-conforming."  This is where the truth really begins to come out.  First off, being transsexual is NOT remotely about being "gender non-conforming."  It is quite the opposite. It is about being fully the gender, and sex, that you really are.  Here Mr. Sandeen is letting the secret out.  Transgender is really all a scam.

The transgender movement has tried, for some time, to use transsexualism as, in effect, their "beard."  That is, they have claimed to be "transsexual" to justify their demands.  But they are not transsexual, and in fact, have no desire to be anything other than what they were born as.  They only want to be "gender non-conforming."  In order to be that, they must remain their birth gender.  They may claim to "really" be a gender different from what they were assigned at birth, but this is simply not the case.

Take Mr. Sandeen, for example.  He served about 20 years in the United States Navy.  If his "true" gender had been female, he would have probably not made it through one tour of duty.  He would have not been able to fit in to the male culture that military service requires of men.  He would not have been able to tolerate being forced to dress and shower with other men.  I remember how much I dreaded changing during high school PE.  I went out of my way to avoid showering when others were present during the one semester I lived in a dorm with communal showers.  The rest of the time, I lived in what was either a dorm with "suites" where you had the bathroom to yourself, or in a dorm that was originally a women's dorm, where the showers had individual stalls.

All of this brings us to the big secret.  Transgender people, for the most part, do not really want to be what they claim.  They want to retain their birth gender, and more often than not, their birth sex.  In many cases, when they do change their sex, they seem to regret, and they go out of their way to make sure that others know their birth sex.  For them, it is not about actually being "their true gender and proper sex," but is about forcing people to "accept" them as something they work very hard to not actually be.  

People who identify a transgender seem to have this compulsion to force people to both see them as their birth sex and gender, but treat them as the opposite.  They want to invade spaces where they really don't belong, and increasingly, to expose their bodies while demanding people pretend that their genitals are something that they are not.

Transsexuals are disgusted by the idea of having someone see them naked before their surgery.  I remember having to endure being examined by the surgeons who performed my SRS.  It was excruciating.  But when I went in for a follow-up, and had a rather handsome young doctor removing stitches, his face right up in my privates, I suddenly realized that it did not bother me at all.

SRS does make a world of different for those who actually need it.  For those who don't. it just makes them rather miserable.

Can Someone Buy the Transgender Kooks a Clue?

In a recent article in LGBT Weekly. Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen again advocates for "access to bathrooms."  And in this particular article, he exhibits an appalling lack of having a clue.  He launches into one of his favorite themes...feminists sharing similar views to conservative Christians.  And yet, in complaining about this, he misses a very big clue.

Here we have two groups that are, for the most part, polar opposites.  One would expect little common ground between them.  And yes, both stridently oppose unrestricted access to women's spaces, in particular restrooms, by men who claim to be women.  

Now, it is an interesting fact that, for many years, pre-op transsexuals were able to easily access the women's room.  The problem affects those who are more inclined to identify as "transgender."  Now, I have given quite a bit of thought to term, and I have come to the conclusion that the vast, overwhelming majority of those who prefer to be labeled "transgender" tend to retain a considerable amount of identification as "male."  Unlike the classic transsexual, they seem to want people to be forced to "see" them as women, while be totally aware that the person was born male.  Actually being a woman, in a real, meaningful way, is outside their interests.  They want to be women, but male.  They want to adopt a female identify, persona, and dress, but to remain a male.  Some may go so far as to have surgery, but they still insist on being "out, loud, and proud."  They reject the concept of stealth, and have no desire to enter the women's room and only be seen as a woman.

Now, in some cases, this is connected to the sexual arousal that many feel.  Being in the women's room, or shower, or locker room, or other places that they are not really welcome, is part of the thrill.

But, it never occurs to the kooks like Sandeen that perhaps the reason two groups can find common ground in this issue is that it actually is a serious issue that should not be brushed aside so quickly.  That, perhaps, some common sense is called for.  That honestly considering one's appearance, demeanor, and likelihood of being accepted as female, should be considered instead of just barging in, and expecting to be accepted.

It's Been A While...

My last post was back in August.  To be honest, I just got tired of pointing out the never-ending insanity of the transgender kooks, and decided to spend some time on other, more productive, pursuits.  I have, however, looked in from time to time and have a laugh at how absurd it is all becoming.

And on one of those looks, I found out that, nine months later, Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen is still obsessing over me.  As is Mr. "Natalie" Reed, who, bizarrely, has apparently accused me of stabbing someone in the chest on a bus.  Uh, no...I've never stabbed anyone, anywhere.

As an interesting aside, Mr. Reed is also ranting about how increasing "gender neutral" bathrooms would serve to invalidate "trans people."  As though the obvious obsession with forcing themselves into places they are not wanted hasn't already done that.  Sort of puts the claims of just wanting to "pee in peace" in a whole new light.  Nope, they want to be able to force women to put up with men, who don't even try to actually live or act like females, invading women's spaces, and to demand that these men, who cling very strongly to their male identification (while maintaining that they are "really women") be fully accepted as women.

I have left my past behind.  I only reveal it when absolutely required, and then with an explanation that I am a transsexual, not "transgender."  And an explanation of what the difference is.  Simply put, Mr. Sandeen, Mr. Reed, and all the rest of their ilk, don't want to be women.  They just want to force people to say they are, all the while knowing that this does not jibe with reality.

Oh well, back to doing what these kooks can never do...living my life as a woman.

Who Is REALLY Obsessed With Bathrooms?

One of the most common memes among the transgender kooks is "The Christian Right is obsessed with bathrooms."  Of course, you can also substituted "TERFs," "Republicans," "Social Conservatives,"  or any other term that refers to some group that the transgender kooks want to object to.  The idea is to paint such groups as being out of touch, and desirous of violating some inalienable right that the kooks imagine they have to invade women's spaces.  But, simply put, this is not actually the case.

While some of the more extreme measures to come out of this issue are outrageous (like the suggestion in Florida that access to bathrooms be based on chromosomes) they are just another example of the very real harm that the transgender movement has caused for transsexuals.

No, the ones who are really obsessed with bathrooms are the transgender kooks themselves.  The men in dresses like Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen, Mr. "Cristan" Williams, Mr. "Dana" Taylor, and others too numerous to mention.

When I first transitioned over 20 years ago (24 to be precise) I took a very careful approach to the "bathroom issue."  I did not do what is now seen as the "norm" and charge into the women's room, with total disregard for the feelings of other women.  I started out cautiously, at first seeking out toilets that were less likely to be crowded.  I was very aware of how people reacted to me, and as it became clear that I was not causing a disturbance, I became more confident in my visits.

What I didn't do, was assert an absolute right to be present in women's space, and certainly not in a place where nudity would be an issue.  Now, the transgender kooks expect women to not even object to pre-ops (not really an issue if the person is a true transsexual) and, more to the point, transgender people who belong to the "They'll take my penis when they pry it from my cold, dead fingers" club, walking into showers and locker rooms with their manhood flapping about for all to see.

The transgender community is obsessed with being able to enter any women's space, anytime, anywhere, regardless of their anatomy, appearance, or any problems it might cause.  Anyone who objects is painted as the one with a problem.  In short, they have created the situation that has led to extremists trying to pass laws that would not only affect transgender people (the vast, overwhelming majority of which will remain physically male to the day they die) but also transsexuals (far worse than any effect it might have on the men in dresses crowd) and even worse, those who are intersex or who have the condition known as complete androgen insensitivity syndrome (women who have XY chromosomes, but who are born physically female because their bodies do not react to testosterone).

A classic example of this sort of silliness is unfolding on Twitter, where Mr. Sandeen is attacking a transsexual woman for having the audacity to take the side of a woman who was booted from Planet Fitness because she had the courage to speak up about a man being in the women's locker room.  In typical form, Mr. Sandeen, who mistakenly thinks I cannot read his tweets, goes after her for not adhering to the "party line."

Here is a link to an article my Gallus Mag, on which, Zoey Tur, the transsexual that Mr. Sandeen is attacking commented.  Mr. Sandeen is just having a hissy fit because, well, Zoey spoke the truth:

So, as the nation deals with this confusing issue we’re going to have unfortuante situations like a woman having her membership revoked at Planet Fitness for complaining about a “man” in the women’s dressing room. The transgender person at the center of this controversy is a cross dresser that took advantage of Planet Fitness’ no discrimination policy to push the envelope at the gym. No hormones, no surgeries, no transition, just $12 leggings and a baggy sweatshirt. Not fair for anyone.Apologizes to the trans community, but situations like this invariably lead to well meaning fools taking action. Take for example anti-transgender bathroom laws being proposed, and even passed in progressive states, like Florida and Texas where I could face serious jail time for using the women’s room.

Interestingly enough, I had started working on this post before I discovered what Zoey wrote.  It's nice to see that I am not the only one who sees this.  What Zoey writes about is Mr. Sandeen's vision for America.   He sees no problem with, and actually pushes for, men to have the right to invade women's spaces with their penises wagging about, ala Mr. "Colleen" Francis.  I'm sure he will feel quite righteous when even post-op transsexuals are barred from the women's room in states like Texas and Florida.  Sadly, he doesn't have the sense to see the damage he does.

  Of course, being men, they want to hide behind the women, and push us out there as they fight for their right to invade our space.  This obsession has, quite naturally, triggered a reaction, and now, an over-reaction from people at the opposite extreme.  And neither side is remotely willing to accept a reasonable middle. And unless that happens, it will end very badly for those who are truly transsexual.  Either we will face prosecution because we will be associated with kooks like Sandeen and Williams, or we, along with other women, will have to put up with men invading our private space, exposing their penises, and demanding that we "acknowledge" them as fully female.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 instead.....to 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 testicles...by 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.

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.

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…

Jessica Ottowell ‏@nekomusmue 

@pansgrrl @cecilia_c_chung @TransLawCenter I can do dialog in real life as long as I have something heavy to kill the #terf with

This sort of things is simply unacceptable. Now, to Cecilia Chung's credit, she did take the person to task…

Cecilia Chung ‏@cecilia_c_chung  

@nekomusmue violence is not helpful @pansgrrl @TransLawCenter

But this person, calling himself "Jessica" is clearly dangerous. He doesn't back down from his violence, but instead tries to excuse it…

Jessica Ottowell ‏@nekomusmue  

@cecilia_c_chung @pansgrrl @TransLawCenter 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)

Jessica Ottowell ‏@nekomusmue  17h

@cecilia_c_chung @pansgrrl @TransLawCenter if they are not dealt with we run the risk of more violence or deaths.

Jessica Ottowell ‏@nekomusmue  

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

Jessica Ottowell ‏@nekomusmue  

@cecilia_c_chung @pansgrrl @TransLawCenter 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….

M. A. Melby ‏@MAMelby  Apr 3

@AutumnSandeen @_Plastic_Girl She's confusing someone putting a call out to discover Gallus Mag's identity with a "bounty" as in violence.

Autumn Sandeen ‏@AutumnSandeen  Apr 3

@MAMelby @_Plastic_Girl 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 über 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.

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.

Out, Loud, Proud, and Yet...Making Excuses

I always get a bit of a chuckle when a "non-op" starts making excuses and trying to explain how they are "just as much of a woman" as a post-op, and how having a penis does not make them a man, and how they would have the surgery, but...

I mean, they tell us how "out, loud, and proud" they are, but then they start up with lame excuses.  The simple face is, they are not transsexuals (transsexuals change their sex), they are really not women (women don't want to have a penis attached to their body), and they are apparently not really all that proud (since they have to make an excuse for not being a transsexual or a woman...

The latest example of this comes from one of the kooks at Shame on You Transgender Edition in the guise of a rant about bathrooms.  Yes, another member of the "NPA" (the National Penis Association whose motto is "You will take my penis when you pry my cold dead fingers from it...." who is trying to tell us how he is "not really a man," has every right to invade the ladies room (in spite of being quite obviously male...and unable to pass by his own admission) and that he does not need surgery.  He even tries to shame anyone who would point out this fact...

Yes, a person who calls himself "Jacqueline" Waters has posted a rant about bathrooms.  In it, he drags out the usual lame tropes...and shows the usual lack of understanding so common among transgender extremists...

You see there is a whole faction of people (even within our own community) that think that GENDER and SEX are the same thing, when clearly they are NOT the same thing.

We all know the problem, but what I don't understand is the reasoning. You see there is one camp that thinks that gender is based on parts. Well that gets a bit crazy when you start looking at just the cis gender group now doesn't it? Are you telling me that a woman who has had a hysterectomy is no longer a female?

Uh, no one is remotely claiming such a thing...  This, of course, is a classic straw man argument.  Make up something no one has said, and then "refute" it.  Just wait, he will repeat this again... 

What about someone who has had cancer and has had a double mastectomy? Is she suddenly NOT a woman? You know since the qualification is on parts.

  And again... 

On the other hand what about that soldier who was deployed and ran across an IED (Improvised Explosive Device) who managed to survive but has lost everything below the waist? Yes, such persons exist. Is this person now no longer a man because he lost his male sex organs to shrapnel? Is he now a woman? 

 And again...

What about a victim of Lorena Bobbit? If a man gets his unit cut off is he now a woman suddenly? See, when you start looking at this the whole notion that parts= gender becomes quite silly now doesn't it?

And again...

And each time, he misses several important points.  First off, he is trying to claim that sex and gender are not the same thing.  Most agree on this...  Sex is, as they say, what is between your legs, and gender is what is between your ears.  Except, well, in both cases it is about sexual differentiation, and it is based on hormones.  And, it is related.  You see, if your brain really is female, you will not feel comfortable with male genitalia.  You like your penis...you want to keep your penis...you are not driven by a strong need to be rid of your penis....you are a man, baby!

This, of course, is why women who lose their breasts, and men who lose their penises, don't suddenly "change sex."  Their brain is still what it was before.  And, more importantly, this is why the men in dresses crowd, like Mr. Waters here, and his compadres at Shame on You Transgender Edition will never be women (well, except for Ms. "Mark" Cummings, who will never be a man...  They have male brains, and they show it, over and over, and over...

And then he drags out the next transgender trope...

Then there is this unfounded notion that a bunch of men will slap on dresses just so they can take a peek at ladies in the restroom. Really?

Yes, really...

 A man is under arrest accused of violently attacking a woman inside a Clairemont Big Lots store. 

The attack took place Saturday. The woman says she was in the store's bathroom when the suspect, wearing a pink Barbie costume, attacked her.

That was in Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen's hometown, San Diego...I wonder if it was one of his buddies?

Perhaps he might want to rethink his position...

do you really think sexual predators are stopped because the sign says women? Do you think they would go through the trouble and embarrassment of going out in public in a dress just to take a peek at your vajayjay? Come on now, what fantasy world do you live in and btw what is stopping them from doing exactly that right now and how many cases has this happened in?

And there are other cases, such as the pervert "Colleen" Francis, registered sex offender "Paula" Witherspoon in Dallas, Texas just to name two more. 

Sexual predators aside, there is also the simple question of privacy.  Women don't want men in the bathroom with them.  And if, like Mr. Waters here, you have a penis, and you want to keep it, and especially if you are going to be SEEN as a man, you should just stay the hell out.

The reality is in every single instance that I have been misgendered not a single one of those people know what is or what is not in my undies. Nobody has ever sir's me one time based on what may or may not be between my legs..nobody has ever asked to see it before making up in their mind whether or not I am male or female....go figure.

Of course, in reality, "misgendering" Mr. Waters would mean calling him a "female," but I realize that he is not interested in reality.  Obviously, he is not going to, shall we say, "fit in" while visiting the ladies room...  But, he then goes on to make this absurdly clueless remark...

Another absurd idea is that Trans women who are non operative are suddenly going to be slinging out their dongs in semi private places like dressing rooms and bathrooms? REALLY?

Well, I hate to break it to him, but yes, he has happened, as in the case of the pervert "Colleen" Francis, and another well documented case from Canada, where a "trans woman" with a full on erection was bothering an older woman.  A case that, in spite of Mr. "Cristan" Williams' attempts to cover it up, has proven quite true.

Now, having made all these arguments, lame as they are, he finally gets down to the nitty-gritty of it.  He has a penis, he wants to keep it, and well, there are excuses to be made.

Also it is not always due to the cost as many have mentioned some would not have the surgery even if it were free. This is true..because often times it is not NECESSARY. Often people who have the surgery only do it because of these old laws and pressure from others in the community or society, not because they personally have that big of a problem having the extra appendage.

Okay, let's be clear on some things here...  Anyone who has SRS because "of these old laws and pressure from others in the community or society, not because they personally have that big of a problem having the extra appendage," is a fool.  Actually, while such a thing is possible, I would not remotely say it is often.  I agree, Mr. Waters should not have SRS.  He clearly does not need it or want it, and even if he had it, it would not make him a woman.  It would make him a very miserable man, albeit one with a vagina. 

And then he goes on to make more excuses...

These surgeries are life threatening like any other surgery, it is major and evasive and not to be taken lightly. Over 50% of the people who have the surgery can never ever orgasm again for the rest of their lives and the results typically (sometimes it is ok) rarely are satisfactory as far as appearance as well. There is still a LONG way to go before it is perfected if it ever will be and the risks are still extremely high. 

No, they are not life-threatening.  Yes, death is a risk with ANY surgery, even something simple.  Yes, there is a small risk of losing the ability to orgasm (nowhere NEAR 50%), and the claim that the results are rarely satisfactory as far as appearance is totally a lie.  We get it, Mr. Waters, you don't want surgery, and again, I agree, you SHOULDN'T HAVE SURGERY!!!!  You are a man, and having it would be a disaster for you.  But please, cut the crap...and stop lying.  Clearly, you don't want, don't need it, but deep down, you also know, you are not really a woman, and you can't stand that others, who you see as the same, are.

Get over it...