Disagreement is NOT Hatred

One of the classic tactics of the transgender extremist kooks is to scream "hate" if someone so much as even slightly disagrees with them.  It happens all, the time, and yesterday, it popped up in a comment that got blocked for a violation of the one rule I have about commenting on this blog.  But I did want to address the foolishness expressed by Mr. "Jacqueline" Waters.

He starts off with an incredibly stupid bit of drivel…

If you look like a woman and you go in the mens room you are going to get harrassed and possibly abused and raped. I realize you hate transgender people just like many Jews hate jews.

Let's see…  Stupidity, mixed with lies, tossed with a nice Godwin's Law violation.  Yes, we have a classic bit of transgender silliness here.  Actually, you are going to get some shocked looks, and possibly someone trying to be helpful and tell you "Ma'am, you are in the wrong rest room."  Maybe in a bit of panic on the part of some poor guy who wonders just which of you made the mistake.  I know, from personal experience.  The last time I visited a men's room before I began living as myself full time, some poor gentleman looked absolutely aghast that a woman was in the men's room.  Not too long before that incident, I had a helpful employee on another occasion stop me and say, "Ma'am, your going into the wrong restroom…"  Fun times…

Now, quite frankly, Mr. Waters might be harassed because he looks a bit effeminate, but that is another matter.  No one is going to mistake him for a woman in either the men's room, or the women's room.  Of course, I realize he does face a dilemma and is going to cause problems in either.  Of course, causing problems is one of the thrills that transgender kooks seek.

Now, I don't appreciate garbage like what Mr. Waters spewed.  I had a dear friend who was a Holocaust survivor, and I don't like it when people toss around comments like that.  Besides, I honestly don't hate anyone.  I don't wish anyone to suffer harm, including rape.  But if one is engaged in deviant behavior, and pretending to be a member of the wrong gender, which is at the heart of the transgender lifestyle (i.e. men pretending to be women, or women pretending to be men) one does risk upsetting the wrong people.

He then goes on to make the false claim that I am "an advocate for rape of transgender people," and that I am one who "applauds for every name read on TDOR you now since you find we are not 'real women'…"  Uh, all I can say is, "Wow, talk about delusional…"  Actually, again, I don't delight in anyone's death.  And I have never advocated anyone getting raped.  People who are close to me have been victims of rape, and I find such comments highly offensive.  Mr. Waters is simply one sick fool to even suggest such a thing, but this does show the silliness of the transgender mindset.

And finally, he shows his complete ignorance, and blind believe in the rants of Mr. "Diane" Lask when he makes a comment about "the so called surgery you claim you have had with no break in posting for long enough to ever have a surgery like that and recover."  I would suggest he pop over to Google Groups, take a look at the newsgroup postings for February of 2006, and he might notice that I talked about my surgery coming up, and that I didn't post for some time.  I was in the hospital for a week, without Internet access (I asked before I went in…) and then because I had moved to a new unit in the building where I lived at the time on the day before I went in for surgery, it was another couple of weeks before my Internet was back up.  I got some support, and more than a bit of crap from the usual trolls at that time.  Oh well…it was something I did for myself, and no one else.  It is kind of amusing to go back and read some of the crap posted back then.  According to the trolls, I died (several times apparently), was on suicide watch, and "jumped the gurney."  It is kind of ironic that it is now claimed that I was posting the whole time people were asking where I was…

Actually, having SRS is a very profound experience.  I took a while before I felt up to dealing with both hooking up my Internet connection, and reading the crap I knew some would post.  When I was ready, I found it all quite laughable, then, and even more so now.

My advice to Mr. Waters, and the rest of the kooks at Shame On You Transgender Edition is to simply face the fact that you are not transsexuals, you are not "women," you will never be transsexual, you will always be transvestites (at best), and be proud of what you are, and stop trying to force your silliness on others.

And a footnote:  This is the 400th article on my blog…  A minor milestone, I suppose, but one worth a brief mention...

Trannymaniacs

I miss the Animaniacs.  I used to love watching that series of cartoons, as well as Tiny Toons.  Well, I encountered a group of bloggers who have recently appeared who might well be called the "Trannymaniacs."  Yeah, I hate that word, but they seem to embrace it, among other bizarre things, so, why not?  The other name I thought of using was "Bat Sh*t Crazy Trannies," but I really don't care for profanity.

I encountered them after I read an article they had posted through the "Transgender News" mailing list.  I read it as a possible source for article ideas.  Entitled "The Transgender Hierarchy of Evil," it was a diatribe about the "imaginary" transgender hierarchy.  You know. the one that supposedly ranks people and goes something like:

Post-Op Transsexuals

Pre-Op Transsexusls

Non-op Transsexuals

Pre-Transition Transsexuals

Crossdressers

Fetishistic Transvestites

Drag Queens

Of course, never mind that most transsexuals do not even identify as being member of the transgender community, nor do many drag queens.  And some have started excluding crossdressers, fetishistic transvestites, and drag queens because, well they are just too darned embarrassing.

Well, I read the post, and left a simple comment…

Sorry, but no…I am a post-op transsexual. I am not transgender. I reject that term and the political silliness it represents. I changed my sex, not my gender. One is "transgender," if, and only if, one identifies as such. Otherwise, it is a meaningless term. The hierarchy is meaningless, because transgender is meaningless.

And, well, I set off a fire storm of controversy… A little over an hour later, I got a reply from some kook who calls himself "Jessica Lynn Cummings."  Mr. Cummings' post was followed about 3 minutes later by a post from his wife, "Mark Angelo Cummings."  Yes, you read that correctly…you see, Mr. Cummings claims to be a "post-op transsexual," as does his wife…  Now, this sort of thing happens, but they are not remotely transsexuals.  Not judging by the insanity that followed….

Right off the bat, Mr. Cummings went full-blown gender fascist, telling me that I am not allowed to not identify as transgender.  Worse, as things went on, they basically let it be known that transsexualism (remember, they claim to be transsexuals themselves) is not legitimate.  Their rhetoric sounded more like the sort of crap spewed by Blanchard, Bailey, and Lawrence (and yes, Lawrence also claims to be transsexual) than anything else.

Things went down hill from there…I'm not exaggerating when I say this bunch is seriously insane.  All told, there are six members of this bizarre little cult.  The more I went back and forth with this bunch, the stranger it got.  Apparently Mr. Cummings and his wife (not remember, Mr. Cummings is "Jessica" and the wife is "Mark") fancy themselves some sort of transgender messiahs, who are going to "take their show on the road."  Or, to put it a bit more accurately, they have bought a motorhome, and are going to become traveling grifters.  It appears that neither is employed, though Mrs. Cummings claims to be an "Occupational Therapist, Nutritional Consultant and Master Personal Trainer."

I'm really not completely sure what is going on with this bunch.  On the one hand, a lot of their stuff, including the attacks on transsexuals, is straight out of the classic transgender playbook.  It sounds a lot like old school Arnold Lowman (you may know him better as "Virginia" Prince), or classic Phil Frye (aka, "Phyllis," Mr. "Cristan" Williams' role model), but there is also almost a hardline, right wing tone to it.  It makes me wonder if Mrs. Cummings, who on at least one of her numerous websites, speaks of her "faith" might be trying to balance involvement with fundamentalism with his lifestyle?  She would not be the first person to have issues with this.

Her attitude almost comes across as, "You can be a transgender, but don't think there is any real legitimacy to your identity.  You're not "really" a woman, (or a man in her case) but as long as you accept that, and identify as a transgender, it's okay.  But if you get uppity, and think you're really a "woman," or really a "man," then you are delusional.  It would also be consistent with her being married to a man in a dress.  That way, she can be the "husband" but not have to deal with being in what would be, in the eyes of some religious people, a "same sex" marriage.  On the other hand, they can let lose with profanity that rivals that of most sailors, so I don't know.

Whatever the source of their beliefs…fundamentalism, or just extreme transgender, they are clearly some of the most insane transgender kooks I have run across in some time.  They spend a lot of time accusing anyone who disagrees with them of "self-hatred," "shame." "arrogance," "transphobia," etc.  But that seems to be exactly what they are suffering from.  They are clearly dealing with some serious mental issues, and are taking them out on anyone, and everyone who dares question their views.  But, they also spend a lot of time parroting the same tired crap you get from the usual mindless transgender types.

In any case, the whole thing deteriorated into them posting a series of articles attacking me, and violating the copyright on this blog site.  I have contacted Google to complain (they also use blogger) with them threatening me with the "Streisand Effect."  I am sure this isn't over, especially when they see this article…but, I admit, I don't suffer fools, and especially bigoted fools well.  Sometimes it is fun to see just how badly they will get when they fall apart.

More Panic

Well, it's always nice to have something affirmed, even if it is inadvertent.  Dana Beyer has a new article on Huffington Post that is a perfect example of what I wrote about in Panic in the Ranks!  The simple fact is, a few examples of "transgender" men deciding that becoming, or being, a woman was not the right path for them has them up in arms.

The problem is, in their effort to defend their house of cards, they are posting outright lies.  For example, Beyer has this to say:

Trans persons, like gay persons, are "born that way." While the younger generation is now claiming space between genders or negating gender entirely, I will focus only on what most Americans see as the trans experience: persons raised as boys who become women, and those raised as girls who become men.

Nope, not even remotely true...  Trans people, i.e. those who identify as transgender have adopted a label that is highly subjective, and pretty much meaningless.  Transsexual people, who are relatively rare, and who may, or more likely may not, identify as transsexual, are born that way.  But the vast majority of people who identify as transgender are not remotely transsexual.  And they are also not remotely born that way.  Not even everyone who engages in homosexual behavior is born that way.  For example, it is well documented that men in prison will have sex with other men, even though they have not done so prior to incarceration, and do not do so after being released.  

Then Beyer goes on to make this ridiculous claim:

The most important fact needed to understand this process of physical and gender transition is that the sense of oneself is innate. It does not suddenly transform as we grow, or change with puberty. It is not determined by clinging mothers or distant fathers. It matters not that Mom wanted a girl and got a boy, or that Dad punished his son for dancing. Our sense of self is inborn, and that is to be expected with a sexually reproducing species. Variations in sexual orientation, choices about procreation and the like are irrelevant for this discussion.

Let's consider reality, instead.  We are expected to believe that someone who has lived to the age of 40 0r 50, showing no indication of actually believing that they are a "really" a female, is married with several children, has had a successful career as a man, and then rather suddenly announces that he has a life-long history of "gender dysphoria" and has always known he was a woman, is not, perhaps, making most of it up?  Usually the only indication of gender issues in such cases is, possibly, fetishistic crossdressing.  And in rare cases, the progression from the onset of fetishistic crossdressing to "full transition" can be quite sudden.

The two example Beyer chooses to focus are poor ones:

So while we may be raised as boys, our brains have told us we're girls, and vice versa. The process of gender transition aligns the body and social life with the mind. It is, in a very profound respect, coming home. The process has been beautifully described by women such as Jenny Boylan and Joy Ladin.

Both were late transitioners who are not living as women, but as transgender people.  In the case of Joy Ladin in particularly, the ex-wife presents a very different version of the story from the one told by Ladin.

Beyer, much like Sandeen, tries to argue that the "real reason" someone might detransition is not that they realize they are not "really a woman," but is only because of external pressures:

If at any time during or after this period one chooses to stop the process, that is called detransitioning. External pressures can be intense, and it may simply be imprudent for some people to continue. For others it becomes medically or financially impossible, or the tradeoffs simply may not add up. It's unfair to consider those situations failures, though after having lived closeted for decades, mired in shame, it's extremely hard to not feel like a failure. That's why detransitioning is not a panacea and often ends up creating an emotional state worse than the one present during the difficult transition process. You cannot undo the coming-out process, just as you cannot un-ring a bell.

Or, more likely, the person simply realizes that they are not really a woman after all...  In some cases, it can come after years of living a lie.

It is amazing the lengths that Beyer will go to in an effort to avoid the truth:

This often unavoidable sense of failure may drive a person to fabricate a fantasy to explain away the transition altogether. This isn't surprising, as we are often looking to understand our actions, particularly those that cause a great deal of stress to ourselves and our loved ones. Some simply can't accept that they were "born that way," so they create narratives about having been stung by a bee or forcibly cross-dressed by Mom until puberty, or having suffered transient global amnesia. While we don't understand all the causes of gender dysphoria -- we know some cases are caused by genetic and chromosomal variations; metabolic differences in utero; environmental pollutants called endocrine disruptors, such as DES (diethylstilbestrol) and dioxin; or association with more generalized intersex conditions -- we do know that bee stings, amnesia, and parental behavior do not play a role. Claiming them to wall off shame and embarrassment only serves to minimize the truly difficult challenges faced by so many others and trivializes the success of those who make it through the gauntlet of societal resistance.

I mean, really....how silly can you get?  It is not a matter of not admitting that one is "born that way," it is a matter of it being obvious that one was not, and that one decided, for whatever reason, that being a woman would be better.  We are not talking about transsexuals here.  We are talking about delusional men.  Which are the most common form of "transgender person."  Delusional men who, in spite of privilege sufficient to insulate them from reality, still realize that being a woman is not for them.  And admitting any error is near impossible for some men.

And the Clue-Meter is Pegged on Dead Zero

Another day, another update on the continue saga of Mr. "Dana" Taylor's death spiral into absurdity...

Yesterday, Mr. Taylor posted a comment concerning a person who comments here, and number of other places, on Gender Trender.  Not only was this comment completely off-topic (the article it was posted to was about an excruciatingly bad vocal performance by some kook singing about how the New York Senate should pass GENDA.  I suspect it is more likely to cause them to pass a ban on torturing people with truly awful videos.  It is tempting to say it falls into the "so bad, it's good" category, as it is laughable, but no....this video is just excruciatingly horrid.  But I digress...

Mr. Taylor did not, unsurprisingly, get the response he expected.  Instead, he pretty much was made to look like a fool.  Not that he is likely to realize that.

Gallus Mag responded:

Dana, your hobby is ingesting massive quantities of synthetic female hormones so that you can expel a form of male breast milk from your moobs which you then post pictures of on your blog. I don’t think you are in a good position to call out another man for “perversion”.

And that was followed by a picture of Mr. Taylor's blog page, complete with the infamous photo of his trophy milk.  Now, anyone with sense would have slinked off in shame, but not Mr. Taylor....  He came back with...

So you excuse actual sexism? Okay…good on you. Thanks for sharing my photo.

I almost feel sorry for Mr. Taylor...is he really that arrogant?  And again, he said...

Gallus is okay with Nicky’s sexism.  Thanks.

No, that is not what was said at all.  What was said was, "I don’t think you are in a good position to call out another man for “perversion”.  Big difference, but totally lost on Mr. Taylor.  

If that wasn't enough to get across to Mr. Taylor that maybe he had made, shall we say, a major strategic blunder, you would think this would:

Okay this dick can afford a dual electric breast pump. I never thought I could get more angry at one of these bastards but this just triggered it. F**K NO women who have infants can’t afford one of those. To rent one is crazy expensive–sick. People a dual electric breast pump is top of line like $300. You disgusting prick. He bought a breast pump for his fetish and women who actually need them to express for sick infants in hospital can’t afford them. You know what? When the vote to keep keeping this dicks out of womens spaces comes up my state I am on the state house steps handing these pics out. Come on by Dana I will be with the La leche women. Trans Rights live the sick fetish to the fullest. Dana your gonna be famous baby. I honestly did not think these guys could come up with anything else–I was wrong.

I have to say, Mr. Taylor is doing far more damage now, than he ever did when he was delusional enough to think he as actually a transsexual.

No, someone with a shred of intelligence would realize they were licked at this point.  But, not Mr. Taylor.  He was back this morning with yet another clueless post on his website:

For those who seem obsessed with my breasts and lactation. When I first lactated it was totally unexpected. I did some research and found more information about Prolacton. Prolactin is important in development of the breasts. I am currently trying to naturally increase the size of my breasts and increased prolactin will hopefully help. No matter how many of you haters try to same me for having control over my own body, it won’t work. So keep crying. I live of the tears of haters.

There are several points this pervert needs to grasp...

1. No one is obsessed with his moobs...
2. We are simply using him has the poster boy for transgender idiocy and perversion.
3. Trying to cover your...uh, posterior, is only making your look every sillier.  
4. Those are tears, except, perhaps, from laughing so hard.

BTW, look closely at how he worded that.  After having made an effort to produce milk, and having spend a ridiculous amount of money for a toy (men...boys....toys, you know the old line), he goes back and tries to find something to try to hide his perversion behind.  He didn't know this before, and makes that clear, but tries to now act like this is why he did this.  I mean, really, this is hilarious.

And, in the final bit of cluelessness, the crowning touch, if you will...I have to say, he picked the perfect website.  They have a section on Male Breast Enlargement.  And that is their words, not mine.  No "Trans Woman Breast Development, or something else like that, but what it really is, breast development for men who want to indulge in fetishistic fantasies.  They certainly know their audience:

It (sic) you’re a biological male who dreams of having beautiful, voluptuous female breasts, there are several routes available to take you there. Many of them require some research, some planning, and a lot of gumption. None of the methods listed below are going to transform a male body into a female body overnight. But regularity and time can produce the breasts you’ve always dreamed of.

It's like...well, Mr. Taylor's dream come true.  The perfect place to indulge his fantasies.

Ah, Mr. Taylor, the gift that keeps on giving.

Huh?

Well, Mr. "Dana" Taylor just gets weirder and weirder.

First he posts...

Not bad for a crossdresser, eh Mr. Jennifer Usher? Had to throw that dig in. I am done paying attention to the bigot and hate monger.

Then he proceeds to make the next five out of six posts about me, with the most recent being  a link to a juvenile (in more than one way) video, where he makes the claim that I have asserted that his man boobs are hurting women all over the world.  

HUH?

Now, where he gets that I remotely said that in a post which was actually about how his behavior exposes him as just another  autogynephile (Bailey and Blanchard would have a field day with some this crazy) is, well, it just doesn't make ANY sense.  

Not to mention his regular comments here...and his persistence in mentioning me in comments every chance he gets.  

In any case, Mr. Taylor's obsession with me continues...  

Update:  Make that six out of seven...

He has posted two in one day.

Does he support rape?  Well, that is a matter of opinion, but he did decide to turn against the radfems, simply because they don't want to have sex with him.  I mean, that is what the whole cotton ceiling silliness is about...trying to force lesbians to accept transgender men, pre-or post op, to have sex with them.  No, I don't trivialize rape.  Mr. Taylor does when he tries, on the one hand, to force women into having sex with him against their will, and then tries to put on a show of false piety about the subject of rape to prove he is just one of the boys in dresses, whoops I mean, one of the "girls."

I take rape very seriously.  People who are very close to me have been raped.  And that is all  I will say on the subject, because I don't violate confidences and privacy.

Mr. Taylor...I think he is doing more harm to the transgender cause no, than he did when he was lying to himself (he was never a transsexual separatist, because, quite frankly, he was never a transsexual to begin with).

Why Do Transgender Kooks Do Such A Lame Job of Lying?

I was about to turn in for the night, and on a hunch, I decided to take a quick look at Mr. "Dana" Taylor's blog, since he spent quite some time trying to harass me in the comment section.  Let's just say, it is quite absurd...

In a post entitled,  Dear Mr. Just Jennifer he says:

You have made me regret posting photos of my breasts and their functions on my site. I get this weird creepy feeling knowing you are paying so much attention to them. Kind of like a pervy man would. I posted the medical aspects of my breast development, not something for you to pant over. Please stop looking at my photos, creep. Thanks.

*puke*

And learn how to read, idiot.
http://danalanetaylor.com/2013/05/04/natural-breast-enhancement/

BTW, a few days ago, after starting high doses of Saw Palmetto, I actually began to lactate. It has since stopped because the herb made my head feel a bit funny. 

So, slowly introducing it now.

Not intentional induction of lactation.

This is what is know as "misdirection."  He assumes that people are too stupid to actually read what he posted in another entry.  Oh, and this references something I didn't do more than glance at.  Sorry Mr. Taylor, but I'm a straight woman.  I'm really not the least bit interested in your breasts, even if they are man boobs.

So, what is he directing attention away from?  What is that makes the above into a complete lie?  What shows who the real "idiot" is here?

This post entitled Quick Update On My Breast Development:

I have increased in size a bit but more noteworthy is that I have begun lactating! This did happen once before but it felt like a fluke. This time I used an electronic dual breast pump designed for expecting milk. The only changes I have made to my program is an increase in Puerana Minfica as well as a couple of days of Doperdomine.

I have removed the rather bizarre picture of his "trophy" milk...

If really just have to see it, follow the link above. 

But why you would, I have no idea. 

Not bad for a crossdresser, eh Mr. Jennifer Usher? Had to throw that dig in. I am done paying attention to the bigot and hate monger.

Now, I was curious.  I had never heard of Doperdomine, so I did a Google search.  Turns out he misspelled it (not that I had heard of the correct version either) and the correct name is 
Domperidone.  This is a drug that is not even approved in the United States.  It would have to be obtained through from another country.

A link on its use to increase lactation.

A link to its entry on Wikipedia.

Notice, both places make it clear, it is taken to increase lactation.  And thehe whole gist of the second blog post is that he "begun lactating!"  And that he got himself an "electronic double breast pump."   And that he thought the first time was just a fluke.  Yeah, sure, he didn't do it "deliberately."  Uh, huh...sure.  I mean, seriously, does he really think he is fooling anyone?  

No, I am not "paying so much attention to them."  I'm not "panting" over them (seriously, this sounds like even more of his autogynephilic fantasies).  No, I am simply pointing out what a complete and creepy pervert he is, and he is trying to scramble and save face.  The smart thing would have been to pull the posts.  Then, if he could have made a desperate attempt to claim they never existed, and hope they are not on the Internet Archive.  But, I guess he is too proud of his little trophy to do that.  So, he pulls this stunt instead.

Oh, and Mr. Taylor, there's your problem right here....it seems I can read quite well.

If There Was Any Doubt That "Dana" Taylor Is Nuts....

His new blog removes them completely...

I mean, between this example of having an adolescent male mindset...

And his over the top, autogynephilic obsession with his breasts...including lactation... (warning, NSFW or if you have a weak stomach)

I find myself wondering....how did this kook manage to fool us as long as he did?

I guess the first is supposed to just devastate me.  It doesn't.  

The second, however, I find pretty revolting.  Some men are really disturbed, and disturbing.

Truly sad...

"Brynn" Tannehill, Please Try To Keep Up

As part of maintaining this blog, I occasionally check the statistics, one of which is a list that shows how people get here.  This morning, I noticed several readers had arrived from a link on an article on the Huffington Post.  At first, I thought perhaps it was a link to a comment I made.  I was a bit surprised to find it was actually a remark in an article by "Brynn" Tannehill, about a post I made yesterday, entitled, appropriately enough, The TG Crowd Is Not Going To Like This....  Clearly, I was correct on that one.  Unfortunately, Mr. Tannehill doesn't quite get it....

Okay, let's being with Mr. Tannehill's comment...

The trans community has its own deep internal divisions, with some individuals working hard to marginalize anyone who doesn't express their "transness" in a way they approve of.

This is the quote that he links to my article.  There is so much wrong here...

• First off, Mr. Tannehill, I am not a part of the trans community.  Not even remotely.  If you took a few minutes to bother to read my posts you would have seen this.  I am not a member of your community, and in fact, I am very much opposed to it.
• Since I am not a part of your community, my statement does not represent a division, deep or internal.  It represents outside opposition.  I am not transgender, and I would thank you to recognize that in the future.
• I am not working hard to marginalize anyone.  Mr. Robledo has done an excellent job of marginalizing himself.
• Personally, I could not care less how someone expresses their "transness."  What is at issue in this case, as it is in yours, is a man, falsely claiming to be a woman.  Women, for example, do not stand to pee.  That is classic transvestite.  And let's look at your case.  You claim you are a "woman" but you had a long and successful career as a man.  You clearly had no issues that affected your ability to enter and successfully complete the program at the U.S. Naval Academy, one of the toughest schools in the country. It was only after you had had a successful life as a male (albeit, I am sure with a bit of crossdressing on the side) that you rather suddenly decided that you preferred you little hobby to your male life.  This is typical of what is commonly referred to as autogynephilia.  In another words, you are a man with a very strong fetish, not a woman.  I'll even bet you have promised your wife that you will not have surgery...
• If Mr. Robedo was a woman, it would not matter whether I, or anyone else approves, but the isn't...and nothing will change that.

So, please, don't go making statements like you made here in the future.  You should have better reading comprehension than that.  And the classic "gender fascist" game of ignoring people's desire to be left out of the "trans community" is getting kind of lame,

Oh Good Grief, ANOTHER One....

I swear, there seems to be a never ending stream of examples of the sort of silliness that the transgender extremists are trying to foist on the world....  I just found another one who is blogging on the site of a newspaper in New York State.  In this case, an elderly male has taken to calling himself "Renate" and is out to tell the world how he is really a female.  In another article, he tells about the "birth of his female self."

Too funny....

I mean, all the classic TG stuff is there....

Successful career as a male....check.

Defines being a woman in terms of stereotypical "female" behavior....check.

Waited until he was retired, and then some to start living as a woman, well a caricature of a "woman"...check.

Speaks of his "male self" as having died even though he claims he was always female gendered....check.

Calls himself a lesbian....check.

Thinks his wife should accept it....check.

Says he loves his wife, but clearly not as much as he loves crossdressing....check

Doesn't want to give up his penis.....check.

Almost certainly a lifelong crossdresser, but too old for the sexual part....check.

Thinks that women have penises....check.

Has his own name for his condition....check.

Couldn't want to start telling the world about how he is a "woman with a penis"....check.

As I said, another one....

Ethics and Late Transition

The New York Times Magazine has a column called The Ethicist and he was asked the question "Should I Become a Woman and Risk Causing Pain to My Wife and Children?"  His response was very reasonable.  He said:

So the question you really need to ask yourself is this: Is your psychological damage from gender dysphoria greater than the psychological damage that its restoration will inflict upon the lives of any (or all) of your children? If the answer is yes, proceed. If the answer is no, don’t do it. Your sadness is tragic, but at least it’s confined to yourself. This advice might seem reactionary, but it’s not a position on whether transitioning is ethical in and of itself. There’s no inherent ethical problem with that decision. It’s about the possibility of improving one life at a greater cost to three others who might lack the intellectual and emotional maturity to comprehend what’s really happening.

Of course, this will not sit well with the transgender extremists who will insist that he should transition without regrets or apologies.  At least a couple have already objected to the advice given., here and here.

But, the columnist raises some good points.  This person has a happy married life, and a satisfying career.  This is not a person who has been tormented all of his life by gender issues.  It is almost certainly yet another aging crossdresser who wants to increase the thrills.  

I made my second, and final major transition a bit later in life.  My first ended because of stress over issues that were not directly related to transition.  My life improved greatly, and I maintain a good relationship with my ex and my child.  But they understood my need.  It was not easy for them, and there were periods of strain, and there are still occasional issues, but they do understand that it helped me.

Sadly, this is not always the case, but the kooks keep pushing people to move forward.

From One Extreme to Another

For years, Suzan Cooke was a terror on the Internet.  Cooke took a pretty absolutist position that, quite frankly, was more akin to Charlotte Goiar than anyone else. Cooke would mock anyone who admitted to being delayed in their transition. In Cooke's extremist view, the information was all there...we just weren't motivated. That, of course, was a complete load of crap.

Cooke claims to have known from the age of four or five. Not quite the "I was three years old, sitting under my mother's piano..." narrative, but close. I've often joked, my mother didn't have a piano, to I was a bit delayed.

 Cooke would make a big deal out of having transitioned early. Some of us simply did not have that luxury. Cooke seemed to be immune to understanding that not everyone fell into that time-line sweet spot where April Ashley and Christine Jorgensen were common knowledge.

 But to hear Cooke tell it, if you didn't transition as a near teenager, you were at the very least, suspect. Basically, the bottom line was, if you weren't Suzan Cooke, you were suspect, but that was not quite said, just implied.

 Now, Cooke has gone to the complete opposite extreme. Now Cooke will buy almost any load of crap spewed by anyone remotely claiming to be trans-anything.

 Yes, there are a range of stories. But there is still a big difference between legitimate, and the silliness we get from kooks like "Autumn" Sandeen and as mentioned in another post, "Colleen Francis." No, such people are not transsexual, and they are not women, trans or otherwise.


When someone comes along and tells about how they had a successful career in the military, retiring after twenty years, and then "suddenly" realized they are really a woman (if they are honest they will include the fact that they were strongly identified as a crossdresser) I am sorry, but I have to cry foul.

 Yes, some of us were delayed in our transitions. In my case, I knew something was wrong as a child. But I simply did not have a frame of reference that allowed for any realistic possibility of correcting my situation. Boys who felt like girls were called a "sissy," and well, being a sissy got you a world of hurt, both from one's father, as well as from your peers. I learned to hide my feelings and desires. Not always very well, and I still suffered a lot.


I discovered the term "transvestite" from a Dear Abby column, and I researched the topic as much as I could at that point in time, but it never quite seemed to fit. But it was the only term I knew. The first I ever heard about the concept of transsexualism was on a show called The Joe Pyne Show. He did a show about Christine Jorgensen, but it was extremely vague on details. I learned that there was a way of "changing sex," but I could not imagine how it would work, and the show made it seem very sordid. The first I discovered in terms of details was in the book Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Sex by Dr. David Rubin. There it was described in such horrid language that I thought it all horrifying. I forget the exact words, but it was something like "an open wound where their genitals used to be." Not remotely the actual results of surgery but I did not know better at the time.


When I was in college, I discovered Canary Conn, and for the first time I realized that SRS was possible. I immediately hit the library and what I discovered convinced me I could not possibly pursue that path. Having grown up with an abusive father, and such, I was literally afraid of men. Like many women in such situations, I thought I was attracted to other women, and I would be a lesbian after surgery. But everything I read said this was not possible. You had to be attracted to men. Now, Cooke has tried to claim that bisexuality, and even lesbianism was acceptable to therapists, but I didn't have any idea where to find one, and what I read, that was written by supposed experts, told me there was no need to bother.

 So, thinking I had no choice, I got married, to get away from my father as much as anything else, and the marriage produced one child.

 It was ironic, when I learned that transition was possible, and actually began, I discovered that I was attracted to men after all. I had some setbacks along the way (being married has a way of doing that) but I made it, and I am happy.

 But, and this is important, my life was a mess as a man. I never had a successful career, and most of my jobs ended after a relatively short period. I spent years keeping house. It was, quite simply, the role I was more suited to. Now, I am happy, successful, and getting on with my life. Unlike so many who transition and wind up on mental disability as they seem suddenly to be non-functional. Funny, but that alone should tell them something.

Cooke, for years, made people miserable by attacking their histories. Now Cooke is trying to tell us all that anything goes, and we should accept even the most ridiculous claims. The real truth is, transsexuals remain rare. Perhaps our stories don't always fit the "classic narrative" made famous by Christine Jorgensen, Jan Morris, and ironically, Renee Richards (who probably lied about a lot of it). But they do have a certain resonance, and some just don't fit at all. I wonder if there is anyone Cooke wouldn't accept now.

Cooke is like some people I have met who, after joining Alcoholics Anonymous, and becoming sober are convinced that anyone who has a single drink is an alcoholic in denial.  Even if you drink with friends one evening a week, you, in their mind, should join AA and get sober.  Cooke has, for reasons that probably have more to do with being romantically involved with someone who transitioned later than would have been acceptable, has "seen the light" and now will accept almost any silliness.  Sad really, as Cooke is contributing to people who basically are doing more harm to themselves, and others, than good.

 As I say, from one extreme to another...

A Curious Discovery

While dealing with the unfortunate incident with the autogynephile who calls himself Dev (and no I am not using male pronouns because he disagree with me, but because he showed himself to be classically male) I discovered that I had "spam" comments in my spam filter.  I had never even bothered checking, since I did not expect anything to be there.

Much to my further surprise, I discovered that a number of them were repeats of a single comment from none other than "Autumn" Sandeen, the noted gender fascist and eunuch.  The comments were in response to my challenge to his attempt to obtain a passport as a "female" by taking advantage of an outrageous loophole provided by the Obama administration that allows men who can get a doctor to write a note to fraudulently claim to be females.

Mr. Sandeen proceeded to whine about how he was just following the new rules, and was not claiming to have actually completed changing his sex.

Now, I admit, he has a point...as well as a "pointer" but that comment now seems awfully ironic in light of his actual fraudulent act of obtaining a California birth certificate as a female.  Unlike Federal regulations (which can, and probably will be changed by a future administation, California law does not really allow a man, with a penis, to claim to be a woman.  In fact, here in San Francisco, where you would expect the rules to be the loosest, the paperwork specifically states that you must have completed sex reassignment surgery,  None of this "completed transition" silliness that Sandeen's fraud involved.

So, he not only did what he denied he was doing with the passport application, he bragged about it online.  I wonder...if Sandeen is ever arrested and prosecuted for his perjury, will he claim that his birth certificate entitles him to serve his time in a women's prison?

Another Perfect Example...

Ah, "Cristan" William's website is the gift that keeps on giving.  Even when Williams is not posting questionable claims, and suspicious evidence to back them up, his eager followers can post some pretty hilarious silliness.  Here is one from a person going by the name Tess McGowan that just shows the absurdity of the transgender mindset:

I was just going to post something like this. We never get to see the faces of separatists because they live in seclusion until they get their surgeries in the hopes that they can live a “normal life”. However, once they get their vaginal surgeries, many of them will walk the earth still having masculine traits (physical and mental) because they have NO IDEA how to live as a woman. It’s quite funny and sad if you think about it, the fact that these people have such high hopes that vaginoplasty will somehow magically change their lives when it’s just one milestone.
I giggle at separatists.

Now, this shows the sort of invincible ignorance that permeates the transgender extremists.  I don't know anyone who lived in seclusion before getting their surgeries.   I suspect what this person means is that some live in stealth, not participating in silliness like gatherings such as "Southern Comfort" or "Fantasia Fair," and not having one's photo published on some of the sillier web sites.  In another words, they simply transitioned and completed a proper Real LIfe Test.  My life was pretty normal before and after surgery.


Now, the really hilarious part is some transgender person making a comment like "have NO IDEA how to live as a woman."  Good grief!  People like Williams have no idea how masculine they come across.  He has a "win at all costs" attitude that is totally male.  Others, such as the example at hand, present as silly parodies of women, "giggling" their way through life.  Actually, it is the true transsexuals who see vaginoplasty as a very important milestone, but I not met one who thought it would do anything other than making them more comfortable in her own body.  And while that may not be magical, it does make a big change in one's life.


I remember cringing at my last examination by my surgeons before my SRS.  Having them sit their and examine that part of my body was pure torture.  I never felt comfortable having it looked at. Not long after that, I was on an exam table with a rather gorgeous doctor taking out some stitches.  It suddenly occurred to me that even as he had his face literally right up in my crotch, I felt no discomfort, no shame, no desire to flee.  That might seem odd to some who is rather attached to his male genitals, but for me, it is was a pretty big change.


Funny though, I didn't have to learn to be a woman.  I didn't have to go to support groups or silly transgender gatherings for the thrill of being taught how to walk, sit, and gesture.  It came naturally to me.  Which had a lot to do with being miserable for the period before transition.


The bottom line is, this foolishness sounds like the classic "more woman than you" silliness that is so popular with transgender people.  They don't get it....you either or a woman, or you are not.  Their is not quantification of being a woman.  One is not a certain percentage of being a woman.  It is not something you learn, or build up points towards.  You simply are, or you are not.

It's About Time

An interesting thing happened last week on Suzan Cooke's transgender blog, Women Born Transsexual.  She finally had her fill of "Willow" Arune, who is a well known net kook and apologist for Blanchard, Bailey and company.  What finally triggered the meltdown was the rather bizarre case of George Rekers, a well known advocate of reparative therapy for both those who are gay or lesbian and those who are transsexual.  Rekers was found to be involved with a gay prostitute who had accompanied him on a trip.  I will spare you the nasty bits, which have been posted on numerous gay blogs.

Cooke linked Rekers to Blanchard and Bailey and as would be expected, Mr. Arune rose up in defense.  Cooke, who is a major Godwin's Law violator, seemed a bit surprised, perhaps the only person who was.  The usual accusations of being a collaborator and a Nazi resulted, and Arune apparently decided to beat a hasty retreat before being toss off of another blog.  Arune has a long history of being banned from numerous groups, blogs, and other places.  Arune even managed to get banned from Yahoo after creating a mailing list to attack Andrea James.  That cost Arune not only that group, but also his infamous Autogynephilia mailing list.

Why Cooke would expect anything different from Arune is the real mystery.  Arune has a very bizarre history.  He is on disability in Canada, even though he brags about practicing law pro bono.  He traveled to Thailand, supposedly as part of some sort of business deal, and claims he was imprisoned because he was framed by Citibank.  While he was in a Thai jail, he claims he was sodomized (he uses the term rape, but that is not the appropriate term for male on male sexual assault).  Apparently, prior to this he showed no inclination towards any gender issues and he originally claimed that the idea of a sex change was suggested by a therapist, apparently in Thailand.  When he was confronted on this, he defended that claim.

After being largely rejected as a transsexual by anyone who encountered his bizarre claims, he dropped out of sight for a while, returning with a claim of being an autogynephile and major defender of Blanchard and Bailey.

Arune has a history of attacking those who have successfully transitioned.  He tries, desperately, to drag them down to his level.  He has attacked Andrea James, Calpernia Adams, Lynn Conway (he took her to take for her "Successful Transsexual Women" page, claiming that none truly existed), and anyone else who does not blindly adhere to the Blanchard theory of transsexualism.  Arune also has a history of seeking affirmation for his transsexualism.  He seems more concerned with being seen as a transsexual than anything else.  That is why he was trying to befriend Cooke.  He saw her as a major source of credibility.  As is always the case, this has basically blown up in his face.  Of course, it never occured to Arune that Cooke's imprimatur no longer has the value it was once perceived to have.

Of course, the relationship was symbiotic.  Arune provided major strokes for Cooke's massive ego.  Both seem to have a pathological need to viewed as authoritative.  Outside of their indivdual small groups of followers, neither of them is.

The bottom line?  I seriously considered naming this article, "When Kooks Collide."

Gender Confused?

A term that is commonly trotted out by the religious right in arguing against transsexuals is "gender confusion." It is used in the context of arguing that transsexuals should not receive sex reassignment surgery as treatment, but should receive psychiatric treatment to help them overcome their "gender confusion."

Now, for those who are true, or classic transsexuals, i.e. those who have what is better referred to as Harry Benjamin Syndrome, there is clearly no confusion about their gender. They know, quite fully, that they are mentally female, and no amount of psychiatric browbeating is going to change this. For example, I identify as a woman, period. I do not identify as a "trans woman," or any other variation on the numerous man who had a sex change and became a woman concepts that so many cling to. From the beginning of my transition, I knew I wanted to be accepted as a woman, not seen as a transsexual, or worse, as transgender.

But, unfortunately, there are also those who are transgender. In their case, the answer is not as simple. First off, I should point out, again, that "transgender" is actually an artificial political construct. A more proper term for those who are not transsexual or HBS would be "crossdressers". I mean, they are clearly not transsexuals if they are not seeking SRS, or even if they are seeking SRS but do not have a brain that is sexually differentiated differently from their body. Most of those who would fit this description seem to have a very strong need to maintain an identification with their birth sex. For them, it is not about being, but about appearances.

Robert Stoller, a researcher at UCLA, wrote about crossdressers (he used the term transvestites) having an identification as being a "woman with a penis." Now, I don't agree with much of Stoller's ideas, mainly because they were rooted in the silliness known as psychoanalysis, but I have come to see that he did have a point about crossdressers. There does seem to be a strong identification of the sort he described.

Now, in the process of writing this article, an interesting thing has happened. You see, I don't always write a post in one setting. I work on it some, take a break, do some more research, etc. Well, this morning the suggested DSM revisions came out, and one of the suggestions is to classify autogynephiles as "transvestites."

That would mean that a lot of the "transgender" crowd, the vast majority, would now be classified as having "transvestic fetishism" instead of "gender identity disorder."

But to return to the original subject, the term "gender confusion" does seem more appropriate for someone who wishes to be seen as a "woman" while clinging to his status as a "male," though I am not sure that is is rooted in "confusion" so much as it is just a conscious rejection of reality.

Is there anyone who is truly "confused" about their gender? I don't know, but I cannot honestly say I have seen any real cases. I have encountered people who are clearly suffering from mental illness that seems to manifest itself in cross gender behavior. In some cases, the person goes back and forth, but I am not sure that it is actually confusion.

In any case, the bottom line is that "gender confusion" is a myth created by the religious right in an attempt to appear compassionate while actually doing real harm to people simply because they do not fit a world view that has no foundation in reality, and that includes the Bible.

I've Got to Ask....

What is the deal with "Autumn" Sandeen and "weiners?" I mean, several times a week, Mr. Sandeen does an article he calls "This and That," and everyone of them has his "Wiener story of the day." Some of them seem to be pretty boring stuff that he digs up to fit the theme, while others seem to play off of the sexual innuendo that one can derive from the subject.

Now, Mr. Sandeen claims to be a "lesbian," so I would not think that he has any intererest in male genitalia as, shall we say, a "consumer." So, again, what is the deal?

I suspect this is just some immature humor on the part of an autogynephile who is getting all giggly, and perhaps a bit nervous at the idea of actually giving up a certain body part. In any case, it is a rather bizarre thing, but not really that surprising. I remember one author taking delight in his fellow "transgender" hosting a weiner roast right before his surgery. A truly sick joke that only a man who is making something of a mistake might find joy in.

Absolute Insanity!

I can always count on Bilerico to regularly produce some post concerning "transgender people" that will lead to some bit of absolute insanity. A new post, entitled "Open thread: Who are the "real women"?" is no exception. Of course, as has become the pattern on Bilerico, the author is a gay man. I find it interesting how Bilerico seems to think it proper for men, gay or supposedly straight, to be telling women how to think and live. And yes, in this case, his remarks are, at least in part, aimed at women since he seems to be speaking of post-op women versus men who wish to claim to be women.

He starts out comparing a transgender person named "Rachel" Crandall (a so-called non-op) with someone named "Dallas," who from the description I strongly suspect is the infamous Dallas Denney.

Neither is a good choice for whatever point he is trying to make, unless that point is the now classic transgender claim that one has only to assert that one is a woman to become a woman. Crandall is, as I said, a non-op, and Denney had surgery, but makes no real attempt to actually be taken as a woman, choosing instead to insist that people accept him as a woman. In fact, I have been told that Denney never bothered to change his name, and that he still has an obviously male middle name..not that I know that many women named Dallas either.

But the really insane statement is in the comments. One of those commenting is a person using the user name "Paradox." This person claims to be surgery tracked, but is bragging about how the women in her gym's locker room accept her. Anonymous T-Girl has challenged her on this, leading to this bit of drivel from "Paradox:"

'Women' with penises that they have no desire to lose + intruding on women's locker and shower rooms = insanity.

An interesting question:
Suppose you discovered that there was a woman in your locker room that had a penis. How do you determine if she's
A) A woman with a penis that wants to remove it but can't afford it yet.
B) A woman with a penis that wants to remove it but can't due to medical issues.
C) A woman with a penis that wants to remove it but doesn't think its worth the surgical risks.
D) A woman with a penis that actually LIKES her penis and would never remove it.

And incidentally, which of these characters are "actually" women, and which ones are not? How do you determine this beyond just taking their word for it?

Now, the comment about women with penises invading locker rooms is from Anonymous T-Girl, and I agree 100%. When I was pre-op, I went to Curves, which is a well-known women-only gym. But, the one I went to had private, single person dressing rooms. I did not have to go into a room with other women, where there might have been any risk of anyone noticing anything. And I would never have been in any situation where someone might have had a chance to raise concerns about my presence. Nor can I imagine any pre-op who is truly a woman doing so. It is only men, masquerading as women, who care so little that they will place their own needs above those of women.

So, that is the answer to the above "interesting question." No woman would engage in such behavior. And no woman would ever identify as "a woman with a penis."

The commenter Radical Bitch puts it well:

Oh, surgery doesn't make one a woman, I've met a number of post op crossdressers. It's neurology that makes you a woman or not and a female neurology will eventually reject a male anatomy......that you can take to the bank.

A pre-operative classic transsexual is a woman. A post op autogynophile is not. 'taint rocket science.

I identified as a woman before my surgery, but I was also aware that I was undergoing a diagnostic procedure known as the "real life test." I was well aware that, as unlikely as it was, I had the choice to stop the process. I was a woman, but I was not truly female. And that is the difference that the transgender types cannot seem to grasp. It is my neurology that makes me a woman...it is my surgery that makes me a female.

Unclear on the Concept....

Let me begin by saying again that this blog is not targeted at any individual, regardless of what some may wish to believe. This blog began as a means to comment on issues related to HBS, also known as true or classic transsexualism. On my occasions, the biggest issues related to these are raised by the transgender communities. So, people who are part of the transgender community are going to be mentioned. Of course, one of the common traits of the transgender communit is to view an disagreement as an attack. Personally, if they would simply leave transsexuals out of their model, I would gladly ignore them.

That said, discovered this morning that Suzan Cooke, who has effectively abandoned transsexualism in favor of a more transgender viewpoint, now objects to the term "classic transsexual." This is not, of course, surprising for someone who has embraced the transgender view, but as is all too common, Cooke doesn't seem to understand the concept...or perhaps doesn't wish to, preferring instead to simply make straw arguments.

For example, Cooke makes this statement:

Embracing “Classic Transsexual” is sort like embracing autogynephilia. Indeed Bailey uses it as a synonym for androphilic or homosexual transsexual. I was sort of amused to discover this one because the other couple of people I banned were self identified autogynephilics. Neither set particularly strike me as folks I would want to hang out with.

Now, this statement is a bit puzzling. I know of no one who uses the term "classic transsexual" who remotely embraces Bailey's ideas. Blanchard, who created the idea of their being only two kinds of transsexuals, homosexual transsexuals and autogynephiles, did so as an attempt to discredit the concept of classic or true transsexuals. Blanchard's model was designed to show that all transsexuals are actually men, either those who are "too gay to be men," or who are men with a fetishtic desire to be feminized.

Now, there is really no question that autogynephiles exist. But, the concept as created by Blanchard is flawed. But this is not the subject we are dealing with today.

Cooke seems to wish to claim ignorance, even as she attacks the concept of classic transsexualism:

They also displayed a propensity for obfuscation when asked for a definition.

That is an odd statement, given that Cooke has link to several blogs that support the concept on her own blog site. But, just so there is no mistake, the definition of "classic transsexual" is simple. It refers to someone who has had a lifelong knowledge that they were different. Someone who has show indications of having a brain that is sexually differentiated at odds with their body from a very early age. It precludes those who suddenly, at some point after puperty, discover that they enjoy crossdressing and who then "progress" to claiming to be a transsexual. Classic transsexuals will have serious problems coping with their situation prior to transition, but will show significant improvement afterwards.
Being a classic transsexual has nothing to do with sexual orientation, the age at which one transitions, or the age at which one has surgery. It only has to do with having a lifelong history of showing a brain that is sexually differentiated at odds with the body.

Further, those who are classically transsexual will, in the vast majority of cases, have a strong desire to simply get on with their life as who they really are. This is probably because their life prior to transition is nothing they wish to hold on to.

I have met young transitioners who were clearly not classic transsexuals, and those transitioning later in life who clearly were. Granted, both are relatively rare. I have met classic transsexuals who are gay, lesbian, or bisexual. I have even seen a few tragic cases where they wind up "drinking the transgender Kool-Aid." Transgender is an identity, not an objective state of being. Most who identify that way are not classic transsexuals. A few do. And when they do, they effectively give up what they have worked so hard to achieve, and often do a great deal of harm to other classic transsexuals.

The Latest Fad in TG Land

I suspect it started with Chloe Prince. Part of that story is the claim that Prince has Klinefelter syndrome. Now, Klinefelter syndrome occurs when a male is born with a XXY chromosomes instead of the normal XY. Now having XXY occurs about once in every male 500 births, but only half of those actually develop Klinefelter syndrome.

Klinefelter syndrome may have any of the following symptoms:

• Developmental delay
  
• Undescended testicles (cryptorchidism)
  
• Pea-sized testicles
  
• Hypospadias
  
• Tall stature
  
• Knock-knees (genu valgum)
  
• High arches (pes cavus)
  
• Protruding lips
  
• Projecting jaw (prognathism)
  
• Very widely-spaced eyes (hypertelorism)
  
• If he is Caucasian or Black, epicanthal skin folds on his upper eyelids at the inner corner, giving him an oriental look
  
• Poor coordination
  
• Fused bones inhis forearms that make it difficult for him to rotate his arms (radioulnar synostosis)
  
• Quiet, tractable personality with occasional tantrums and aggression
  
• Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD)
  
• Learning disability (especially dyslexia, reading difficulty, and data retrieval problems)
  
• Mental retardation (IQ drops 15 points for each additional X chromosome)
  
• Poor expressive and receptive language skills
  
• Poor short term memory
  
• Osteoporosis (bone thinning)
  
• Lack of sporting ability
  
• High-pitched voice
  
• Sparse beard and body hair
  
• Gynecomastia (enlarged breasts)
  
• Feminine fat distribution
  
• Taurodontism (enlarged molar teeth)
  
• Breast cancer or germ cell tumors from elevated estradiol
  
• Inability to deal with stress
  
• Psychological problems, like anxiety, neurosis, depression, or psychosis

Now, Klinefelter syndrome is sometimes classified as an "intersex" condition, but unlike most, it is not caused by hormonal imbalances in utero. Now, there is a lot of controversy about referring to intersex conditions as "Disorders of Sexual Development," but in a sense that would be a more accurate term. Klinefelter syndrome does not, for example, actually result in one having any significant intersex characteristics with regards to the genitalia. In fact, the only actual symptom that would be considered intersex would be the hypospadia, which does not always occur, and which is considered the mildest of intersex conditions.

I mention all of this because in a recent post at Pam's House Blend, lead gender fascist "Autumn" Sandeen claims to have decided that he might have Klinefelter syndrome. Worse, he wants to use this to gain some boost in his credibility:

To say it doesn't weigh on me though would be an understatement. Let's face it: Even though there is mounting evidence that transsexual people's brains are literally cross-gendered or bi-gendered, there is a perception among many that transsexual people have a "bad" mental health disorder, whereas the apparently cross-gender identities of intersexuals are allowed for.

The problem for Mr. Sandeen is that Klinefelter syndrome is not that kind of intersex condition. Notice that in the list above, taken from a web site that provides information for the parents of children who might have the condition, that there is NO mention of cross-gender identity. That is because, with a few rare exceptions, those with Klinefelter Syndrome are not transsexual. Of course, now that Chloe Prince has claimed Klinefelter as an excuse to transition, it may become a popular condition to try to claim.

Mr. Sandeen then goes on to claim, quite erroneously, the following,

Well. Then I go from someone many will see as a parody of a woman to someone who has a verifiable medical condition that "explains" what at first blush appeared to be my transsexuality. Nothing will have actually changed, except for how others perceive me.

No, Mr. Sandeen will continue to be a parody of a woman. Having Klinefelter syndrome will not change that, but it might give him seom special cachet in the imaginary hierarchy of the trangender world. Being sort of, kind of intersex will, presumably, making him even higher than a transsexual in their imaginations.

He continues on:

For me, the consequences of found to be intersexual instead of being found to be transsexual would mean there are many more who would accept me as female than accept me as female now. And, being painfully honest with myself, I would want that; it would change everything -- and nothing -- both at the same time.

Again, this is simply not the case. At best, Mr. Sandeen would still be an autogynephile. More likely, he will still be simply a transgender who has become carried away. His comments make it ever more clear that surgery is not a good choice for him.

I experience having my gender questioned all the time. For those of us trans women who have throughout our lives have never been fully allowed to doubt that we were male, the criteria that folk like Germaine Greer apply to us seems equally bizarre. We know we think like women, and we have psychologists and psychiatrists out there daring to distinguish our thought processes as female.

What Mr. Sandeen does not grasp is that the question is not whether or not he imagines himself to think like a woman, but whether or not women agree that he thinks like a woman. What some refer to as "vibing as a woman." He clearly does not. For example, as pointed out in a previous post, he admits to preferring to stand to pee. Mr. Sandeen imagines he can just claim womanhood, and it becomes his by some inherent right.

So, is it any wonder that when I examine the feelings in the deepest recesses of my soul, I find I deeply hope that my recent genetic test comes back "Klinefelter's Syndrome"; I have a certain amount of internalized transphobia. Everything and nothing, it appears, rides on how my genetic test comes back; whether or not I'm perceived as a ghastly parody by Ms. Greer and her ilk appears to ride on how my genetic test comes back.

No, Mr. Sandeen's latest fantasy is just that, a fantasy, nothing more. Even if he is able to claim that he is XXY, he will still be a man. It will change nothing, period. He will still be transgender. He will still have a male brain. He will still be making a mistake if he actually pursues surgery. He has not advanced to "transsexual," and he cannot really climb up his imaginary ladder to "intersex."

No, when Mr. Sandeen realizes that he is never going to accepted by those who are HBS, classic transsexuals, or women, and when he accepts this fact, he will be a lot happier.

The Sad Story of Chloe and Rene

On Tuesday, I decided to check out the latest story on ABC’s Prime Time: Family Secrets. The episode, "‘He’ Becomes ‘She’: Husband’s Transformation Into a Woman" is about Chloe Prince, a transgender person who has had what she refers to as "gender reassignment surgery." Now, I generally avoid most such "documentaries." They usually just make me regret the time wasted watching.

I have to admit, I found this one a surprisingly interesting story. Granted, parts of it sounded a bit contrived....the intersex stuff especially. But overall, it was, interesting.

In may ways, it was a typical transgender biography. For many years, Chloe was a run of the mill crossdresser. Lots of clothes, but transition was more fantasy than serious desire. Chloe had been in a relationship that ended. Chloe met Rene, fell in love, and they got married. Before they married, Chole revealed her, uh, hobby to Rene, who married her anyway. They have two sons. Now, this is where the story gets kind of weird. Chloe claims that, after having blood work related to an allergy to be stings, she was informed that she has "47 XXY 'Mosaic' Klinefelter's syndrome." (Actually, the proper term is Klinefelter syndrome, as Dr. Harry Klinefelter neither had the condition, nor did he own it. He just discovered it. But such mistakes are common.) Kilinefelter Syndrome occurs when a male is born with a karotype of XXY instead of the normal XY. It is considered a form of intersex, though it should be noted that most with Klinefelter have no gender identity issues. Chloe, however, uses the claim of having Klinefelter Syndrome as the excuse for the decision to transition.

Now, the vast majority, though not 100%, of those with Klinefelter Syndrome are sterile. Chloe claims that because of being "mosaic" this is not the case. Mosaic would mean that not all cells are XXY, but that some are XY. This however, makes the story even more bizarre, as this variant of Klinefelter Syndrom is extremely rare. There are only 10 cases recorded in medical literature.

It is not unusual for those who are transgender to claim some form of intersex in order to gain some added degree of credibility. That is not to say that all such claims are false. In fact, a lot of HBS women have some history of documented intersex issues. This should not surprise anyone, as the same sort of hormonal issues that are believed to cause HBS also cause intersex conditions. But, as I said, Klinefelter Syndrome is not normally linked to gender identity issues.

As to Renée, I honestly felt sorry for her. I'll be blunt. I would like to see her kick Chloe to the curb, and take her for all she is worth in divorce court. I mean really, it is obvious that the poor woman was not involved in her husband's choices. Chloe cleaned out the 501(K) and took off for Thailand, leaving her behind to worry about what to expect. I seriously doubt she is at all happy with Chloe being "Mommy."

It is obvious, Renée is at Chloe's mercy. She is scared to be on her on, and Chloe takes advantage of that. Simply put, she is "codependent." I try to avoid using that term, as it has become trivialized by its abuse as a form of psychobabble, but in this case it is entirely appropriate.

Yes, Chloe got her money's worth out of her FFS, but really, I honestly did not feel she vibed as a woman. I mean, the line about not being able to decide if she wanted to be a girl, or be with a girl...I bet that one made Michael Bailey's heart go pitter-patter. The whole thing was a farce. I find it funny that the only reason some transgender types hated it is because it emphasized surgery. Well, I'm sorry, but that is how the real world works. No, surgery doesn't make you a woman. I think Chloe illustrates that very well. But not wanting surgery indicates that you don't really want to be a woman in my opinion. I don't buy into the deconstructionist view. Chloe is another exception that proves the rule.

Beyond that, I felt that Chloe is a poster child for the transgender view. And a good example of why I don't accept that identity. Really, if someone has problems with the fact that Chloe had surgery, they are missing the point. Granted, the day may come when this person's world crashes in on them. But right now, the real problem is the damage Chloe has left in her wake. She has likely ruined the lives of three people, and worse, she continues to victimize them.