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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A Really Dumb Question

In yet another attempt to avoid reality, Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen revisits a question he asked in an article in 2009.  The Right Way To Be LGB Or T?  Let's get past the first part quickly.  Being lesbian, gay, or bisexual is an objective state.  You either are, or you are not.  If you believe they are not a choice, then the question is even more ignorant with regards to those three states.

Transgender, of course, is an identity that is a choice.  The right way to be transgender is simply to say, "I am transgender."  And suddenly you are.

Transsexual, which is what Sandeen is not, is also not a choice.  Again, you either are, or you are not.  The real issue is, a lot of people want to lie, and claim to be transsexual, when they clearly are not.  Just as more than a few men, like Sandeen, want to lie, and claim to be women when they clearly are not.

Which brings us to a simple truth...

There is no single right way to be L, G, B, or T...or, transsexual or a woman for that matter.  But there is a very large number of ways to not be transsexual or a woman.  And at the top of that list is "Avoiding reality." And Sandeen and his ilk engage in that one all the time.

Mr. Sandeen Has A Complete Meltdown

Well, I can't say I am totally surprised, but Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen has finally had a complete breakdown online.  In the past, his kook has cyberstalked me, in an attempt to censor what I say about transgender extremists.  This morning, he went off the deep end and posted a rather interesting article on Transadvocate.

Now, Sandeen starts off by claiming to have been cyberbullied, and cyberstalked three times and offers links (note, links as in plural) to document this.  Oddly enough, they are all the same link.  I don't know if he had simply become so angry he was not thinking, or if he thinks his readers are that ignorant.  He then says something that shows just how insane he really is...

I now understand that people I’ve never met in the brick-and-mortar world actually have despised me enough to have seriously planned, and in one case actually accomplishing, real harm to me in the brick-and-mortar world.

Okay...  Well, what actually happened was there was discussion of preventing Sandeen from attempting to, and then actually committing a criminal fraud that he had bragged he was going to do.  He basically lied to a court and claimed he had changed his physical sex.  He has not.  But having said the above, he goes on to tell, in detail, how he tried to cause me real harm.  He wanted, in his mind, to have me fired from a position he imagined I had.  Actually, I was never a "staff member" of my church.  I was, for a while, the editor of the church newsletter.  I did my turn, and now it is someone else.  Sandeen's little harrassment had nothing to do with that.

Hmmm, let's look at that definition of cyberstalking he posted.

Sending multiple e-mails, often on a systematic basis, to annoy, embarrass, intimidate, or threaten a person or to make the person fearful that she or a member of her family or household will be harmed. Also called e-mail harassment.

In another words, exactly what Sandeen brags about doing.  And what Sandeen is clearly hoping others will follow his example and do.  And again, Sandeen admits to this...

I wanted the ministers at her church to know how one of their lay leaders was acting outside of the church towards people the church was supposed to be welcoming towards, so I wrote the church — and as I said before, I cc’d her on that email. I did nothing behind her back.

Sounds like he wanted to make sure I was annoyed, embarrassed, and/or intimidated.

Let's compare here...  I write a blog about issues affecting transsexuals, which includes the silliness pushed by transgender extremists like Sandeen, among others.  Sandeen is very active in pushing an agenda that I rather vehemently oppose.  I express my opinion on these issues.  Further, my blog welcomes anyone who wants to comment, and has only one rule...respect privacy.  The only people I have ever blocked have been those who attempt to engage in the sort of harassment that Sandeen is guilty of.  Granted, the one time that Sandeen attempted to comment here, his post went to spam, which I was not even aware had been added in an update, and I did not see it until long past the day it was sent.  Sandeen tends to prefer posting drivel of the sort we see here, from blogs that are heavily censored.

Now, Sandeen goes on to try to defend another of his attempts to intimidate me.  He threatened to use some photos that were obtained by "Willow" Arune through deceit and provided to a vicious cyberstalker, the one who prompted Sandeen to contact my church.  This person also contacted Suzan Cooke.  To Cooke's credit, she declined to engage in such behavior, having more ethics than Sandeen.  Ironically, Cooke does not brag about how she is so like Martin Luther King, Jr.  

Jennifer claims I don’t own the copyright of my image; she claims it’s owned by the Huffington Post.

Actually, no.  Sandeen wrote me, and demanded I remove the photo.  I declined to be censored by Sandeen (do you think Sandeen, or Mr. "Cristan" Williams, would agree if I demanded that they take down the private information that Sandeen has posted?).  I pointed out that the photo had no copyright, and besides, Sandeen himself had made it public.  Mr. Williams has copied content from my blog, without permission (not just quotes, but graphics as well).  It is called, "fair use."  Sandeen, by the way, has gone far beyond that here.  He pointed out that the web page said "Copyright, Huffington Post" and I responded, "You are not the Huffington Post."  I never said that the items where owned by them.  In fact, I said the opposite.

Now, for example, I have no idea how Sandeen got the photo he used in his post.  It is one taken of me some years ago, by a guy I dated a couple of time, and was used by me in various places.  It is not one of the one's Arune stole (hey, unlike some people I prefer truth). 

Now, as to Sandeen's "meat puppeting" (funny, given I never mentioned that term...) that is kind of obvious.  His columns rarely rate more than a few comments.  Rather suddenly, there seemed to be a chorus of very similar remarks, including a number from a supposed radical feminist who attacked me and another transsexual, including as Sandeen puts it, misgendering us (funny, Sandeen never said a word) but this person defended Sandeen who has also cyberstalked a number of lesbian women.  Perhaps I am mistaken, but I will go with Occam's Razor on this one...

A few final thoughts...

I am supposedly obsessed with Sandeen, but which of us put what was obviously quite a bit of time and effort into searching the Internet for detailed information on someone?  What I write about Sandeen is based on reading his posts on LGBT Weekly, and Pam's House Blend.  And more recently, Twitter.  Hmm, folks be warned...reading Sandeen's public writings is stalking him in his twisted mind.  I actually started my blog, largely in reaction to his, and other transgender extremists efforts to hide dissent.

I would welcome anyone to my church, and in fact, we have had transgender people visit.  Funny thing...I generally don't take political issues to church with me.  And that is, really, what this eventually is.  A political disagreement.  Sandeen wants to rend asunder the fabric of society.  I oppose his efforts to subvert gender.  He just takes it a bit too personally.  And that is just his reaction to my speaking out against his ridiculous demands for society.  As to what else I might do, that is none of his business as it does not directly involve him.  Suffice to say, I won't be donning a uniform I am not entitled to wear (he mocked women, and the US Navy) and chaining myself to the White House fence.  Or otherwise making a public fool of myself.  Unlike him, I do not seek, or appreciate attention.

I will no more pander to Sandeen's delusions than I would those of the gentleman who I had the misfortune to have sit next to me on the bus the other day.  He started ranting, to anyone who would listen, about some person on the bus who he imagined was his enemy.  I'm not sure which passenger it was, but he was quite agitated.  I tried as best as possible to ignore him, but I also made sure the driver was aware (we were both sitting in the front) and I very discretely made sure my pepper spray was in my hand...just in case.  He finally exited the bus without incident.  Both he, and Sandeen, have lost touch with reality.  Fortunately, as someone who knows Sandeen pointed out this morning, Sandeen is 350 miles away.

What I will do is continue to speak out, and draw attention to Sandeen's foolishness.  And that foolishness includes the fantasy that he can control me.

Update:  Well, it seems that Mr. Sandeen chose to update his article, so I guess I should correct his new lies:

I think I need to make a point one more time because Jennifer is still imagining that I’m conspiring with others to cause her harm. Specifically, I’ve never conspired with someone named Willow to take any coordinated action against Jennifer. In general, I’ve never done any conspiring with anyone at all at any time whatsoever in any matter that relates to Jennifer Usher. As much as she may believe I have engaged in some coordinated conspiracy to cause her harm, she’s absolutely wrong in that belief.

This, of course, is a classic straw man argument.  I did not say that Sandeen was "conspiring" with anyone.  To repeat, some time back, a particularly nasty cyberstalker sent messages to several bloggers trying to get people to attack me by contacting my church.  He was hiding behind anonymous servers, and would not do his own dirty work.  I suspect he feared legal action.  Suzan Cooke posted about this,and how she would not go along,  Only Sandeen actually, as far as I know, was the only person stupid enough to actually do what was asked.  The person cyberstalking me was not Willow Arune, though Arune was a supporter of that person's efforts.  It was hardly coordinated, more of a clumsy scheme by a person who had previously been obsessed someone in Canada.  The person has apparently since disappeared.  I don't know if they have died, been imprisoned (there is reason to believe this person had a history of criminal behavior in Nevada, or perhaps finally got on some serious anti-psychotics.  

More Cisphobic Silliness From Mr. "Cristan" Williams

Mr. "Cristan" Williams is continuing his crusade against women with an attack on someone for pointing out a rather significant truth...that women do sometimes lack the privilege that men like Mr. Williams enjoyed before he began his masochistic quest to impersonate a woman.  

In the article, Mr. Williams tries, again, to argue that cis people have great privilege....while ignoring the fact that what he considers a lack of privilege on the part of transgender people is basically of their own making.  Now, keep in mind, we are talking about "transgender" and NOT transsexual. 

Mr. Williams provides a list to make his case.  When looked through the lens of reality, it is a different matter...

Examples of cis-privilege as reported by the trans community: 

You can use public restrooms without fear of verbal abuse, physical intimidation, or arrest.

In another words, people who are not trying to pretend to be members of the opposite sex can go to the bathroom without violating social norms, or the law.  Oh, and I notice that Mr. Williams conveniently removed the one that was next in the original, about going into locker room and store changing rooms.  I guess even he knows that is a losing idea....

Strangers don’t assume they can ask you what your genitals look like and how you have sex.

Funny, but the only people who ever asked me that were transgender kooks.

If you are murdered (or have any crime committed against you), your gender expression will not be used as a justification for your murder (“gay panic”) nor as a reason to coddle the perpetrators.

I agree, no one should be murdered period.  But I do find it disgusting how the transgender community is more interested in praising martyrs than promoting safety.  Gay panic, which is also, surprise, surprise, used against gays, should not be a valid defense.  But pushing the idea that people should take chances is often what gets them killed.

You have the ability to walk through the world and generally blend-in, not being constantly stared or gawked at, whispered about, pointed at, or laughed at because of your gender expression.

Yeah, you tell 'em bro!  You guys have the right to dress up and look hilarious while impersonating a caricature of a woman, and anyone who laughs at you is wrong....  Seriously, do they ever look in the mirror?  Yesh, some of them are NEVER going to blend in, and let's be honest, a lot of them want to be stared at, gawked at, whispered about, pointed at, and laughed at.  If they don't want this, they should stop dressing like they do.

Strangers call you by the name you provide, and don’t ask what your “real name” [birth name] is and then assume that they have a right to call you by that name.

Or, they can realize that they are not now, nor will they ever really be perceived as women.  What they really want is the right to force everyone to ignore reality, and accept them as something they are not, and will never really be.

You have the ability to flirt, engage in courtship, or form a relationship and not fear that your biological status may be cause for rejection or attack, nor will it cause your partner to question their sexual orientation.

Ever wonder just how ridiculous the transgender kooks are?  Here it is!  They are demanding the right to force themselves on people.  Let's see...  If a cis person finds another cis person unattractive, that is, well, normal...  But, if a cis person is not attracted to a trans person, which most are not going to be, if say, a man does not want his girlfriend to be packing a penis, or perhaps even better, a woman is not thrilled to have some male pervert trying to get a date because he considers himself to be a lesbian, then they are somehow wrong?  That they have no right to reject such a person?  I mean, really, this is just how incredibly insane these people are.  I guess they might want affirmative action for male lesbians, or something.

If you end up in the emergency room, you do not have to worry that your gender will keep you from receiving appropriate treatment, or that all of your medical issues will be seen as a result of your gender.

Well, I have never been denied medical care, even while pre-op.  And let's face reality, in some cases, hormones and other drugs used in transition can cause medical issues.  But Mr. Williams wants doctors to ignore reality.

Your identity is not considered a mental pathology (“gender identity disorder” in the DSM IV) by the psychological and medical establishments.

Well, the therapist who referred me for SRS specifically declined to put a diagnosis for GID, stating that she did not think my "gender identity" was disordered at all.  That she saw my gender as female, and since that was my "identity," there was no disorder.  Now, if you have someone like Mr. Williams, who clearly has a male gender (or better a male brain) but wants to pretend he is a woman, then yeah, there is definitely something disordered going on....

You are not required to undergo an extensive psychological evaluation in order to receive basic medical care.

Giving someone hormones that are not appropriate to his or her sex, and which may cause major changes, or performing sex reassignment surgery on someone, is not basic medical care.  If it is not the right treatment, the results can be tragic.  

[You are] able to assume that everyone you encounter will understand your identity, and not think you’re confused, misled, or hell-bound when you reveal it to them.

I doubt anyone is likely to understand someone like Mr. Williams' identity.  Again, he is clearly a man, but he wants to pretend to be a woman.  He is, quite frankly, a walking contradiction.  Confused?  Perhaps.  Misled?  More like he is trying to mislead others.  Hell-bound?  I would leave that to God to decide.  But, understandable?  Hardly.

Again, we see what the transgender kooks want is nothing short of license to behave in an antisocial manner.  They are men who want to force people to ignore basic reality and pretend they are something they never will be.

Reality versus Fantasy...

Well, it appears, at least for the moment, that another Internet flame war is over.  As some may know, I occasionally comment in Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen's posts on LGBT Weekly, the local LGBT magazine in San Diego. Mr. Sandeen seems to be their token transgender kook (most major LGBT publications have one, usually posted online, but not in the actual publication).  This week, he did another whiny post about the Michigan Womyn's Music Festival.  Apparently, the "men in dresses" crowd is determined to force themselves on the lesbians separatists who attend this event.

Usually, Mr. Sandeen tends to ignore comments made to his posts on that site. For a while, they were supporting his usual heavy handed censorship, but something changed. It appears that they decided that pretty much anything goes. A few commenters have actually, and quite accurately, referred to him using male pronouns without being banned. Now it appears that Mr. Sandeen decided to take advantage of this in order to, shall we say, "fight back."

The problem, of course, is that Mr. Sandeen wants to be the "transgender MLK." He regularly, including in this week's article, tries to make that connection, and of course, winds up making a mockery of Dr. King and his philosophy. But in order to maintain his "facade" he has to avoid showing his true nature as much as possible. So, apparently, Mr. Sandeen brings in support. That, or he has more than a few sock puppets.

Oh, and a couple of other points that should be addressed.  Sandeen tries to claim that I am obsessed with him.  Actually, he posts more than most, so he gets written about more than most.  Of course, Suzan Cooke has made the same claim...  And Sandeen has commented about the difference in word counts between me and him, as well as the number of comments I posted.  I simply responded to every bit of silliness thrown at me.  I have no doubt that had I ignored even one of them, the claim would be made that I was "bested."

One of those he called upon, is Mr. "Cristan" Williams, who repeated the outrageous claim made on Transadvocate that Janice Raymond is responsible for at least 50,000 deaths. That article was written by Zoe Brain, who is infamous for claiming that he spontaneously, without medical intervention changed from a male to a female. A rather insane claim, to say the least. Mr. Williams seemed to be trying to argue that the "radfems" have to be beaten into submission to prevent further deaths, or something like that.. Here is part of my response to his comment:

Now, beyond that, we slip the bounds of reality, and well….I love a good conspiracy theory….but this not one. I mean, really….this bit of histrionics, which is a recent invention of Williams, and a certain person from Australia who claims to have “spontaneously” changed from a man to a woman (seriously folks, I am NOT making this up) is quite hysterically funny. Funny, I never once encountered this force reparative therapy, nor have I ever heard of such an effort. Perhaps it was super, duper top secret and known only to the secret lesbian separatist cabal…. Known racists? Funny, but since the 1950′s, transsexuals have been accessing medical care without that much trouble. I know when I started in the early 1990′s, I had no trouble at all, and I was in the Deep South (any deeper, and you would be in way over your head). Yeah, I suppose it is possible that a group of extremists might have advocated legislating “trans folk” out of existence. I remember a lot of radical groups that have advocated a lot of laughable ideas. Let’s see, at one time or the other, I have heard of groups who want to give the country back to Native Americans, of a group that wanted to force all white people out of the states that formed the Confederacy and create an exclusively African-American nation, of people who want to ban the consumption of meat, of people who want to execute anyone who is gay, that men should be allowed to invade women’s shower and locker rooms and that women should accept then as “women with penises”…the list could go on, and on. For the most part, sane, rational people learn about such ideas, recognize them for what they are…the rants of crackpots, hope the person does not become violent (like the guy who got it in his head that there is a black market in human body parts and then possibly sent ricin laced letters to a senator and Obama) and get on with our lives. Oh, we might speak up if the person gets a bit of attention, but we generally seem them as the kooks that they are. 

Anyway, thanks for a good laugh….

I guess Mr. Williams had no answer to reality, as his next response was to fall back on an argumentum ad hominem, the logical fallacy of attacking the person and not their position. That is Mr. Williams' standard practice when he cannot defend a position (which is not at all uncommon).  

I could be wrong, but the whole mess that resulted from one comment had the feel of a very organized effort. I suspect Sandeen invited some people (he has already done that on a smaller scale) hoping to bury me in comments. Didn't quite work very well for him.... As it was, he pulled just about every trick in the book... I imagine he thought I would whither in the face of a massive load of absurd rhetoric. When that did not work, the insults started. As I have pointed out, my identity is quite secure thank you. Repeating lies started by a cyberstalker is not going to scare me off. Anyone I care about, knows better, and anyone who believes that crap...well, I could care less.
Of course, the hilarity continues....  Sandeen was having a hissy fit on Twitter...and she brought in some old faces...

Monica Roberts ‏
@AutumnSandeen @cristanwilliams She was hatin' on me for a while until she discovered I don't play with pseudo cisprivilege chasing fools

Truth be told, I pretty much stopped reading Mr. "Monica" Roberts crap because I realized it was a bad combination of Ebonics, racism, and pretty much the same rants repeated over, and over, and over, and over....occasionally punctuated with his self-aggrandizement about some award he got.  In short.  BORING!

And a new face....who has some incredibly stupid things to say....

J. Skyler @AutumnSandeen @transgriot Im sure she was the one on Wired's interview w/ @GailSimone on Batgirl saying "transgender" is a slur.

Nope, not me.  I hadn't seen the article, and when I took a quick look, and saw the number of comments, I lost interest quickly.  But yeah, Mr. Sandeen is quite correct.  I do agree.  I, personally, would consider it a slur if applied to me.  For those who identify that way, no.  Of course, the subtlety of that is lost on fools like Mr. Sandeen, and company.  Then there was this particular bit of cluelessness...

J. Skyler ‏@
@AutumnSandeen @gailsimone @transgriot also misidentifying as cisgender knowing that's not the intended use of the term, which is hysterical

 Oh dear, I forgot to ask the gender fascists for permission before "identifying."  Actually, it has nothing to do with identity.  My gender matches my physical sex, so, according to the definition, I am cisgender.  Of course, the same, technically, could be said of Mr. Sandeen, and Mr. Roberts, among others.  They are clearly male, and clearly men.  So, by definition, they would be "cisgender" as well.  I do, by the way, I think this J. Skyler person is more than a bit cisphobic.

J. Skyler ‏@jskylerinc
@GailSimone @autumnsandeen @transgriot she's a surgical essentialist who thinks anyone who doesn't undergo surgery is pretending/deviant. 

For those who don't speak "tranny" that means I don't believe women have penises and want to keep them.  Now, I suppose that "pretending" would be pretty accurate, but I would not call most "deviants."  I reserve that term for specific cases, like the guy who was exposing his junk to young girls.  But Mr. Sandeen came back just as cluelessly...

Autumn Sandeen
@jskylerinc @GailSimone @TransGriot It's more than that. She even gets on post-SRS folk who she deems to not be ideologically pure.

Nope, it has nothing to do with "ideology," pure, or otherwise....

Autumn Sandeen ‏@transgriot @cristanwilliams I've feed the troll too many times, I fear.

Actually, except for occasionally cyberstalking me, Sandeen has pretty much avoided responding to my posts. I guess being humiliated as much as he has been will do that to a fellow.

So, let's see....

If they can't refute an argument.....

They will try to bury you in comments....

If that doesn't work.....

They resort to insults....

And when that fails.....

They call you a troll.

Yes, such is the classic transgender approach to reality.

Update:  And then they resort to word count flames...

Yeah, go figure...Sandeen is now comparing the number of words I have posted, versus the number he has posted.  Hmmm, doesn't he know, women tend to be more verbal than men.  Perhaps he might take that into consideration!  Well, in any case, he can update his word count, and whine even more....   ROTFL!

Update:  It appears that Sandeen went a bit too far.  This morning, he had posted two more comments on his post, basically postings of two tweet he had made, which were attacks on me, and which mentioned me by name (which I prefer to keep private).  I responded, and pointed out that he has a habit of attempting to out women against their will.  Both posts, and my responses were removed afterwards.  I kind of wonder if Sandeen did it, to cover his tracks, of if the people at LGBT Weekly didn't like his behavior. Most curious....

Transphobia? Or Just Common Sense?

Way back in the earliest days of this blog, I wrong a post about what I call "club words," the sort of words that people, especially extremist activists, use to beat people into submission.  And of course, the favorite of the transgender kooks is "transphobia."  

The most common definition of "transphobia" is:

An irrational fear of, and/or hostility towards, people who are transgender or who otherwise transgress traditional gender norms.

This rather silly term was made up by the transgender kooks as a sort of parallel for "homophobia."  Now, the term homophobia started out as a bit of a slam against men who had issues with homosexuality, based on the suggestion that such men were actually frightened of their own "latent homosexuality."  Over time, as it became more widely applied, it tended to lose this original meaning, and now stands as a sort of bizarre term that has a root meaning that is largely unrelated to how it is actually used.  Few would now suggest that people actually fear homosexuals as much as they simply dislike their behavior which some see as immoral.

But, as more and more transgender activists decided that they wanted to align themselves with the LGBT community, even though they actually share little in common (especially given the idea that sexual orientation is inherent, while much of what defines transgender is clearly chosen behavior, they decided to plagiarize the term homophobia and modify it into "transphobia."  

Increasingly, the term is used to attack anything that the transgender kooks dislike, even if it is actually quite reasonable, and totally rational.  For example, in the article that inspired this column, Mr. "Cristan" Williams calls the idea that a person who was a male for the majority of his life, but who has in relatively recent time, undergone sex reassignment surgery, should not be allowed to beat up women in mixed martial arts competitions, transphobia.  He cites a claim by "Marci" Bowers, the infamous transgender surgeon who took over Biber's practice in Trinidad, CO before bolting to San Mateo, CA as stating:

Most measures of physical strength minimize, muscle mass decreases, bone density decreases, and they become fairly comparable to women in their musculature. After as much time as has passed in her case, if tested, she would probably end up in the same muscle mass category as her biologically born female counterpart.

 Now, this is the standard set of arguments made whenever the issue of a post-op transsexual who desires to enter women's sports comes up.  Even if one sets aside questions about why they would even want to do such a thing (If they do win, it will be attributed to their having been born a male, and if they don't win, well...one wonders why they even bother?) I find it interesting that Bowers uses a lot of "weasel" words...like "most," "fairly,"and "probably."  Nothing definite, just a bunch of dancing around the facts.  In another words, this person "might" not have an advantage, but Bowers is not going to make a definitive statement.

Another doctor that Mr. Williams cites takes a similar "weaselly" approach:

She’s been doing that [HRT] for so many years, that she probably does not have a significant advantage, if any at all. Especially because she wasn’t a big man when she lived as a male. She’s 5’7 and slight of build, and basically the size of an average female.

She "probably" doesn't have "significant" advantage.  Hmm, based on his statements, I guess a 5'7" man with a "slight build" could fairly fight a woman as well...

The bottom line is, no one really knows.  Personally, I have questions about anyone who has a history as a male engaging in women's sports. and I find it hard to justify such.  Being a transsexual involves trade-offs.  But some, in a classically male manner, want to have their care and eat it too.  Again, if they prevail, they will be seen as having done so because they were born male, and if they don't, well...if one is not in it, to win, why bother?  And in should be noted, in the case of the person being discussed, they have two wins, and no losses, so the question of an unfair advantage remains legitimate.

In the case of a person who was born a man, who is going to actually be engaged in a sport that involves actually trying to beat up a woman, the sane and rational thing would be to err on the side of caution.  But that does not set well with the transgender kooks, who think that a person's right to claim to be a woman trumps all.  Now, even allowing that the person in question might actually be a transsexual woman, which I find a bit difficult to accept when someone decides to out their self (that, at least to me, raises serious questions as to their motivations, should women be subjected to such a situation?  Isn't it funny who women who were born female always seem to come out on the short end of the stick where the TG crowd is concerned?

Likewise, we have a store in Idaho taking the quite reasonable step of telling someone, who is not a woman, and who quite clearly was not really even trying to act like a woman, who was in the women's room, to no longer come into their store.  This person was creating an uncomfortable situation for people who had every right to be there, specifically by standing to pee.  This is not a transsexual woman, who is concerned about fitting in with other women.  This was a man, who just didn't care.  And let's be honest, this person is not even really attempting to look like a woman, but instead is a typical TG parody of a woman.  I was very cautious until I was quite certain that I would not cause a scene in the women's room.  But the TG crowd could care less about women, even though that is what they claim to be.

And the list of such examples could go on, and on...like the response of the TG crowd to the case of "Colleen" Francis, the pervert who was exposing himself to young girls in the women's dressing room at a college.  Or how they think that first grade girls should be forced to share the bathroom with a male child, simply because he says he is a girl, no matter how uncomfortable they are.  Don't like the idea of seeing some man's naked body in the women's shower at your spa Then you are transphobic.  Do you think women have a right to gather together without  men who claim to be women invading?  Well,  you are not only transphobic, but they will call you are TERF as well. Even if you are not a radical feminist, but just think people have a right to decide who to associate with at a private event.  Don't want some guy in the ladies room, just because he put on a dress?  Yes, they would say you are definitely transphobic.  Don't want some boy being assigned to share a dorm room with your daughter...at an women's college?  Transphobic?  Have common sense?  Yeah, you're probably a transphobe.

You know, I think perhaps we should start pointing out instances of "cisphobia," which would be defined as:

An irrational fear of, and/or hostility towards, people who are not transgender or who otherwise fail to transgress traditional gender norms. 

I mean seriously, that seems a reasonable and sane response to some of the silliness engaged in by the TG crowd.