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.
Showing posts with label Mr. Natalie Reed. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mr. Natalie Reed. Show all posts
Friday, May 13, 2016
Wednesday, October 31, 2012
It's Really Ironic...
There has been a lot of talk lately about "depathologization" of transsexualism and transgender behavior. Of course, these are two separate topics, which actually have nothing in common, thought, of course, the transgender kooks don't want you to know that.
Now, what is ironic is, depathologization of transsexualism is not really that new of an idea. It has been around for several years, and was previously known as "Harry Benjamin Syndrome." Yes, that horrible thing that makes transgender kooks like Suzan Cooke and "Autumn" Sandeen rent their clothes and cry out was really about moving transsexualism from being a "mental illness" to recognizing it as a medical condition. Well, actually, at first, Cooke kind of embraced the idea until she realized it was competition for her "Women Born Transsexual" silliness.
Oh, and note, I said Harry Benjamin Syndrome, not "Harry Benjamin's Syndrome," the phrasing preferred by a separate, and eventually unrelated movement that originated more in Europe, and which became somewhat extremist in certain views. Some dishonest "historians" attempt to conflate the two movements in order to discredit the Harry Benjamin Syndrome movement.
So, why do the kooks hate it so much? Well, in some cases, it is because it competed with the kooks own little patch of turf, and a lot of the people who endorsed Harry Benjamin Syndrome did not necessarily agree with this, or that, kook's own agenda. For example, we did not embrace the idea that "transgression" was a valid reason to claim to be another sex.
Worse, those who endorsed Harry Benjamin Syndrome made it clear that they wanted nothing to do with transgender activism and that we rejected the transgender paradigm. That, of course, was too much for the gender fascists to accept.
The approach was simple, and straight forward. We asked that medical profession simply acknowledge that a small number of people are born with what is, in effect, a congenital condition where the brain is sexually differentiated at odds with at least part of the body. This condition resulted in an overwhelming desire to correct one's body to the extent that science allows. In another words, what some would call a true, or classic transsexual.
HBS, as it has come to be known, would have provided a basis for insurance coverage, which some are more than willing to sacrifice in their demands that doctors no longer consider people who think that simply claiming to be a different sex effectively changes their sex to be mentally ill. Uh, yes, that sounds crazy to me...but hey, most crazy people will tell you they are really the sane ones.
Another problem people had with the HBS movement was that we would not embrace the insanity of "surgery on demand," and actually endorsed tightening the criteria. While it is fortunate that most who should not have surgery now embrace the non-op paradigm, there is room for mistakes, particularly in cases where surgery is more easily obtained because of insurance or socialized medicine. For example, Natalie Reed, who recently admitted what I had already surmised, that he is a "pre-op" wrote a post in which he discusses his ambivalence towards SRS, but indicates that he will pursue it anyway. Reed is a mistake in the making. If one can live without surgery, then they should. Just because it is, effectively free, and just because one is able to talk a therapist into rubber stamping your request (far too many therapists are afraid to "just say NO!" to be people who are poor candidates, does not mean one should hope on the table thinking that surgery will somehow make it all right.
We have enough screwed up "post-ops" already. We don't need another who will either become a virulently anti-transsexual TG activist, or worse, decide that God does not approve of SRS because they made a mistake.
So, now we have yet another attempt to get transgender people out of the DSM. Of course, most could care less if transsexual are harmed, and for some, harming transsexuals would probably be a desirable side effect.
We have enough screwed up "post-ops" already. We don't need another who will either become a virulently anti-transsexual TG activist, or worse, decide that God does not approve of SRS because they made a mistake.
So, now we have yet another attempt to get transgender people out of the DSM. Of course, most could care less if transsexual are harmed, and for some, harming transsexuals would probably be a desirable side effect.
Thursday, April 12, 2012
Ah, So Mr. Natalie Reed is a Cyber-Stalker to Boot!
I was taking a glance at my blogs statistics after last week's hoopla about Mr. Reed. I had suspected that his blog was the source of the insulting little boys who decided to come my way. And yes, I discovered that he posted a blog where he purports to reveal my name, and he links to a cyberstalking site that was put up when a group of thugs could not run me off from their little sandbox on Usenet.
Oh well... such is life when you stand up to bullies. At least, as far as I know, he has not tried anything as sinister as Mr. Sandeen's bout of cyberstalking.
For what it is worth, the information that he accessed is about 85% total fabrication, with the remaining 15% so badly distorted that it might as well be made up. I actually get a bit of a laugh reading how terrible my life is, while knowing that quite the opposite is true. But like Mr. Williams, Mr. Reed prefers fantasy to truth.
I do find it amusing that those who, oh so often, whine about how horrible their lives are because they are discriminated against as transgender people seem to take delight in fictional accounts of others supposed suffering.
The simple bottom line is, when I created this blog I chose not to use my name. I am, in spite of what people claim, stealth. But, in a perfect example of what the transgender movement is all about, some have presumed to attempt to determine who I am, and to try to cause me harm, simply because I disagree with them.
Funny thing... I could do the same thing, but I choose not to. For example, it took me all of about a minute to determine "Autumn" Sandeen's birth name. Now, I know he is very protective of that information (though given his waving his male flag, I don't know why) and it would hurt him deeply to have that information revealed, but I have chosen not to do so. I prefer to deal with issues, not hurt people. Now, someone like Mr. Reed might not like having his maleness pointed out to him, but it really is central to the issues involved.
Oh well... such is life when you stand up to bullies. At least, as far as I know, he has not tried anything as sinister as Mr. Sandeen's bout of cyberstalking.
For what it is worth, the information that he accessed is about 85% total fabrication, with the remaining 15% so badly distorted that it might as well be made up. I actually get a bit of a laugh reading how terrible my life is, while knowing that quite the opposite is true. But like Mr. Williams, Mr. Reed prefers fantasy to truth.
I do find it amusing that those who, oh so often, whine about how horrible their lives are because they are discriminated against as transgender people seem to take delight in fictional accounts of others supposed suffering.
The simple bottom line is, when I created this blog I chose not to use my name. I am, in spite of what people claim, stealth. But, in a perfect example of what the transgender movement is all about, some have presumed to attempt to determine who I am, and to try to cause me harm, simply because I disagree with them.
Funny thing... I could do the same thing, but I choose not to. For example, it took me all of about a minute to determine "Autumn" Sandeen's birth name. Now, I know he is very protective of that information (though given his waving his male flag, I don't know why) and it would hurt him deeply to have that information revealed, but I have chosen not to do so. I prefer to deal with issues, not hurt people. Now, someone like Mr. Reed might not like having his maleness pointed out to him, but it really is central to the issues involved.
Monday, April 9, 2012
Personally, I Take It As A Compliment....
Well, I see that the extremely confused, and often confusing Suzan Cooke has again noticed that I don't share certain views with her, and has again chosen to attack me. As I said in the title, I take it as a compliment that she is upset at something I said. Cooke is someone who cannot seem to make her mind just how cozy she wants to be with the transgender. I suspect she knows she has burned off a lot of what good will she had with the transsexual community with her rather shrill diatribes touting her leftist politics and her overblown ego that make her a legend in her own mind.
Let me state, categorically, and without question, Suzan Cooke is the last person I would ever want to jump on the "Harry Benjamin Syndrome" bandwagon. Granted, she did early on, but her ego just would not let her own term, "Women Born Transsexual," be replaced by something else. So, she turned on people who might have, at least on certain specific issues, agree with her.
Since her blog, which I consider a never ending source of humor, began, she had swung periodically between "transsexual separatist" and "transgender." In Cooke's case, her lefty side wants to join with the transgender kooks in their rebellion. Her transsexual side pulls her back. It is sort of fun to watch.
I used to be a member of Cooke's mailing list until I made a suggestion that did not meet with her approval. Then her partner, Tina, took a dislike to me, and well, it was not pretty. Something akin to the purging of transsexuals from feminist groups. I moved on, and very quickly realized that I had lost nothing except a few nasty people I did not need in my life.
Personally, I pity Cooke. There are some powerful demons in her life. I know she has a history of substance abuse, and she clearly is deeply insecure. Another blogger once did some research and chose not to publish what she found. She feared it would push Cooke over the edge, and I suspect she was right.
Now, I see that Cooke has teamed up with "Natalie" Reed, who like Cooke, is a rather hateful atheist. I long ago observed that some atheists seem to have reached some intellectual conclusion that there is no God. I disagree, but most of them are capable of being decent and congenial folk who only mention their lack of belief if it comes up naturally in a conversation. They do not feel the need to shout in people's faces, usually as profanely as possible, "I hate God, and refuse to believe in Him!!!" Yes, that is basically their belief. They are angry, usually because some human said or did something that hurt them, and they have come to blame God for that slight. They shake their fist in God's face, and say I hate You, and the worst thing I can do is not believe in You.
All that can really be said for such a person is, God is patient and will welcome them back if they ever feel the need. In the meantime, the only thing is to pity them, perhaps have a guilty laugh at their expense, and to pray for them.
In the meantime, it is nice to know that Cooke still obsesses over me from time to time. But hey, it is the least I can offer given all the laughs I have at her expense. Oh, and I would remind Cooke, she is always welcome to come and argue here. Cooke is a big believer in the vilest forms of censorship. Within limits, primarily mine and others privacy, I allow pretty much anyone to come here and make an ass of themselves.
Let me state, categorically, and without question, Suzan Cooke is the last person I would ever want to jump on the "Harry Benjamin Syndrome" bandwagon. Granted, she did early on, but her ego just would not let her own term, "Women Born Transsexual," be replaced by something else. So, she turned on people who might have, at least on certain specific issues, agree with her.
Since her blog, which I consider a never ending source of humor, began, she had swung periodically between "transsexual separatist" and "transgender." In Cooke's case, her lefty side wants to join with the transgender kooks in their rebellion. Her transsexual side pulls her back. It is sort of fun to watch.
I used to be a member of Cooke's mailing list until I made a suggestion that did not meet with her approval. Then her partner, Tina, took a dislike to me, and well, it was not pretty. Something akin to the purging of transsexuals from feminist groups. I moved on, and very quickly realized that I had lost nothing except a few nasty people I did not need in my life.
Personally, I pity Cooke. There are some powerful demons in her life. I know she has a history of substance abuse, and she clearly is deeply insecure. Another blogger once did some research and chose not to publish what she found. She feared it would push Cooke over the edge, and I suspect she was right.
Now, I see that Cooke has teamed up with "Natalie" Reed, who like Cooke, is a rather hateful atheist. I long ago observed that some atheists seem to have reached some intellectual conclusion that there is no God. I disagree, but most of them are capable of being decent and congenial folk who only mention their lack of belief if it comes up naturally in a conversation. They do not feel the need to shout in people's faces, usually as profanely as possible, "I hate God, and refuse to believe in Him!!!" Yes, that is basically their belief. They are angry, usually because some human said or did something that hurt them, and they have come to blame God for that slight. They shake their fist in God's face, and say I hate You, and the worst thing I can do is not believe in You.
All that can really be said for such a person is, God is patient and will welcome them back if they ever feel the need. In the meantime, the only thing is to pity them, perhaps have a guilty laugh at their expense, and to pray for them.
In the meantime, it is nice to know that Cooke still obsesses over me from time to time. But hey, it is the least I can offer given all the laughs I have at her expense. Oh, and I would remind Cooke, she is always welcome to come and argue here. Cooke is a big believer in the vilest forms of censorship. Within limits, primarily mine and others privacy, I allow pretty much anyone to come here and make an ass of themselves.
Tuesday, April 3, 2012
An Excellent Example of Why I Want NOTHING To Do With "Transgender."
Every once in a while, I come across some random blog that proves to be an excellent example of what is wrong with the "transgender" extremists. I found an excellent example from some kook who calls himself "Natalie" Reed. In what he presents as a sort of "April Fool's Joke" he attacks the concept of "Harry Benjamin Syndrome," which, as is typical, he knows nothing about.
Mr. Reed, it seems, is another gender fascist wannabe.
His article, which starts with a rather nasty portrayal of what he apparently believes those who support the HBS concept to be like, then turns into a rant against people who, gosh darn it, just can't see that they have to be gender rebels like him.
First off, in spite of what he thinks HBS people are like, the first thing he needs to realize is that we are not part of his beloved "trans community." Then he launches into this clueless bit of screed:
In short, I think that Mr. Reed, and all the other transgender kooks are, well kooks. He rejects the idea that transsexualism (or HBS) has any legitimate basis, apparently thinking, as so many do, that it really is, "just a lifestyle choice." Of course, things like crossdressing are just choices, or more specifically, fetishes, though give enough time, they do grow into lifestyle choices.
Oh well, more and more, I try to ignore fools like this, but sometimes you just have to say something. If he wants to be a gender rebel, that is certainly his right. But it is my right to have a good laugh at his expense, to consider him to be a kook, and to certainly oppose his attempts to undermine the very fabric of our society.
Mr. Reed, it seems, is another gender fascist wannabe.
His article, which starts with a rather nasty portrayal of what he apparently believes those who support the HBS concept to be like, then turns into a rant against people who, gosh darn it, just can't see that they have to be gender rebels like him.
First off, in spite of what he thinks HBS people are like, the first thing he needs to realize is that we are not part of his beloved "trans community." Then he launches into this clueless bit of screed:
For all we’ve been through, trans people are not necessarily above falling into the same binary or hierarchical attitudes about gender common to our culture, nor does finding oneself on the receiving end of cissexism necessarily cause someone to immediately divest themselves of all the cisnormative ideas that have been drilled into them over the course of their lives. Deciding to transition doesn’t magically or instantly cause someone to let go of things like gender binarism, genital essentialism, misogyny, transphobia, the confusion of gender expression and role with gender identity, heteronormativity and heterosexism, the idea of sexuality and gender having a deterministic relationship to one another, the idea that gender and sex have a deterministic relationship to one another, or the one million and one ways that any given concept, object, characteristic or behaviour is gendered one way or the other.I sort of, kind, imagine that Mr. Reed would expect, and more likely vehemently demand that his views be respected, and yet, he seems to presume that there is some requirement that anyone who is transsexual must somehow think like he does. Sorry, but I happen to believe in the gender binary, that having a penis does make you a male, and that wishing to keep it does make you a man. On the other hand, I think that men in dresses like Mr. Reed are the misogynistic ones, and they often turn out to be very homophobic since they cannot let go of their heterosexuality. Further they think that gender expression is the equivalent of gender identity, and that gender identity is all that really matters (i.e. say you are a woman, and magically you are...at least until you say you are a man again). While I have gay and lesbian friends, i also have enough sense to recognize that heterosexuality is the norm (that simply means that it happens far more often than not, not that it is "better") and that yes, sex and gender NORMALLY are in sync, and further, that for people where they are not in sync (unlike someone who CHOOSES to rebel against their true gender) that person is healthier and happier when they are brought into sync.
In short, I think that Mr. Reed, and all the other transgender kooks are, well kooks. He rejects the idea that transsexualism (or HBS) has any legitimate basis, apparently thinking, as so many do, that it really is, "just a lifestyle choice." Of course, things like crossdressing are just choices, or more specifically, fetishes, though give enough time, they do grow into lifestyle choices.
Oh well, more and more, I try to ignore fools like this, but sometimes you just have to say something. If he wants to be a gender rebel, that is certainly his right. But it is my right to have a good laugh at his expense, to consider him to be a kook, and to certainly oppose his attempts to undermine the very fabric of our society.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)