A Simple Solution to the Bathroom Issue

The transgender blogosphere has been abuzz over the removal of "public accommodations"  from a Maryland civil rights law that covers "gender identity."  They are screaming because this change does not allow the "men in dresses" crowd to invade the women's bathroom.  


Of course, this seems at times to be the primary goal of the transgender community.  They seem obsessed with bathrooms.  Of course, so do the people opposed to extending rights to them.  One of the latest rounds is a post by "Mercedes" Allen on Bilereco.  This person's idea is to have people take stickers to be left in bathrooms indicating that a transgender person has used the bathroom and that "nothing bad happened."  Of course, the obvious problem with this is, the fact that a transgender person was in bathroom will be seen by many as something bad happening.  The cluelessness of the "men in dresses" crowd is astounding.


This is a classic male attitude.  A form of "counting coup" it allows them to make sure that people know they were there.  I am sure it appeals to their exhibitionistic nature.  Rubbing people's noses in their presence in the bathroom.  It would not make things better.


I have a simpler solution...

• If you are not a properly diagnosed surgery-tracked transsexual (i.e. you were honest with yourself and with your therapist, stay out of the bathroom in public while you are crossdressed.  That includes those who are full time crossdressers.  Yes, it is inconvenient, but you made your lifestyle choice, live with the consequences.

• If you are a properly diagnosed surgery-tracked transsexual, then wait until you have reached the point where you can enter the bathroom without causing a major scandal.  Or, at least until you can't go into the bathroom corresponding to your birth sex without upsetting people.

When I began transition, one of my primary concerns was that I not cause discomfort for other women.  I could understand how offensive a "man" in the ladies room might be.  I didn't want to be the one causing that upset.  As I became confident that I was accepted as a woman, I began to use the ladies room.  Of course, like most, I went through a period where I was living a duel life.  I remember all too well that last trip to the men's room.  Some poor guy almost had a heart attack when he saw me at the sink washing my hands.  I knew it was time to official begin my transition.

A "Telling" Article....

Well, leading gender fascist "Monica" Helms has a new article on Bilerico. This time, Mr. Helms deals with the subject of "When Do You Tell?" Aside from the irony of his writing on the subject (Mr. Helms is not likely to have to worry about "telling.") he takes the predictable position.

Now, as I point out, he is not going to be in a position to worry about revealing anything, unless he does make the mistake of actually having SRS, in which case he would have to explain that he is missing the expected parts.

But, this is a question that does come up, and it does affect both those with HBS or classic transsexualism and those who are transgender.

Mr. Helms, again ironically, seems to be addressing post-op women. Mr. Helms is not remotely post-op, and until recently he was admantly non-op. He has, on many occasions, viciously attacked and mocked post-op women, so he is about the last person who should be discussing this issue, and certainly has no business making pronouncements as he does. Also, it should be kept in mind that Helms is not even interested in dating men himself. In fact, it is rather obvious that he is approaching this issue as a straight man.

Now, Mr. Helms raises a series of objections to not telling. The first is trust. Granted, that can be an issue. If one is in a relationship, it is better to be honest than to keep secrets. But, for a woman who was born with HBS, there are issues that they may not wish to share. Particularly at the beginning of the relationship, when Helms rather dogmatically demands that one must tell.

Beyond that, the issue turns to the "danger" Mr. Helms sees in not telling. Now, granted, people have died when their partner found out about their history. But, that is not always the case, and it is not always the case that someone will inevitably find out.

So, what is really going on here? Is Mr. Helms really just beside himself with concern for the safety of all those post-ops because even one might be harmed or die because they fail to be out to a potential partner? Is he broken up over the chance that some marriage might not be built on perfect trust?

I seriously doubt it. Mr. Helms almost certainly is more concerned that someone might actually be able to do the one thing he will never be able to do....actually be a woman. Not that Mr. Helms actually wants to be a woman. He wants to be transgender. He clings tightly to his maleness. He wears it with pride. He cannot abide for anyone to not know that he was born a man. But worse, he hates it when someone does not share this behavior. He gets beside himself at the idea that someone might wish to, or worse, be able to, leave their past behind.

He talks of shame, and hiding, and all the other transgender silliness.

As to the original question he asks...when should you tell? The answer, quite simply, is when you wish to. I have told none of the men I have dated and had sex with since my surgery. That was my choice. If one wishes to tell early, that is their choice. The only thing that is absolutely certain is this. When you tell is most certainly none of Mr. Helms. business.

Stuck on himself...

As I have said before, when I started this blog, it was not with the intention of spending so much time commenting on the silliness posted on so very many "transgender" blogs. But, because there is so much silliness, and because the gender fascists go to such great pains to censor any dissenting views, I often find myself doing just that.


One of the most outspoken of the gender fascists is Monica Helms. Helms, like some many of those determined to impose their views on people, seems a bit confused. For some time, Helms was an avowed non-op, but has recently started claiming to be surgery tracked. This is odd, given the number of times that Helms has viciously attacked those who have had surgery.

About a month or so ago, Helms started his "Stuck" series, one of which I have already commented on. Apparently, the series was supposed to be three articles, but now Helms has added a fourth that is on a common theme for many who are transgender, "fear." Of course, they are not the ones who are afraid. They project this emotion onto others.

As is typical of Helms, he uses this concept to slam what he sees as improper behavior for those he drags into his "community." For example, he speaks of those who are fearful of being seen with other "trans people." This he attributes to the idea that the chances of being clocked increase with the number of trans people in a group. Now, there is some truth to that concept, but I doubt it is a fear that Helms has to worry about. Helms has little choice in the matter of being clocked.

Then Helms goes on to suggest that some "transsexuals" fear "crossdressers." He attributes this to the fact that many object to the hateful statements made by Arnold Lowman, aka "Virginia Prince." In raising this point, Helms makes the following statement:

They fear the words that came from Virginia in 1959 as if they pertain to the world in 2009. I say this is fear, because there has never been a good explanation why her fifty-year-old words remain relevant in the 21st Century.

Now, this statement leaves me wondering if Helms is really that ignorant of "Prince" and his ongoing diatribes and the fact that they continue to used to attack transsexuals and people with HBS. "Prince" not only never renounced those positions that were first taken in "1959" but continued to express them to anyone who would listen.

Now, I would say that "Prince's" words were never really "relevant" but they did form the basis for much of the harm done to transsexuals and people. For example, Blanchard's pseudo-science can be directly traced to "Prince."

Here are some of the misconceptions that can be directly traced to "Prince:"

• The idea that transsexuals study the biographies of other transsexuals in order to create our stories. This allows researchers to ignore the fact that we share common experiences because. And that allows them to dismiss the legitimacy of our claims. This has led directly to Blanchard's approach of simply labeling as a liar anyone who does not fit his theories.
  
• The concept that sex and gender are so totally separate as to be effectively unrelated. This means that, given the tendency of some to define gender strictly in terms of "social construct," some claim that one can simply choose one's gender.


• The idea that crossdressers are motivated by something other than erotic desire. This view was pushed by "Prince" even as he was telling Robert Stoller how he did find crossdressing erotic.


• The idea that transsexuals can be divided on the basis of sexual orientation, and that they are either men who are just super gay, or that they are men with a fetish.

Helms goes on to discuss how some fear discovery. Now, like many gender fascists, Helms equates not being "out, loud, and proud" with being fearful. It simply does not enter his mind that some might simply wish to live their lives as women, and not "transgender women." If someone knows your past then they are very unlikely to ever fully accept you as a woman, but instead, their views will always be colored by the fact that you were born a male. For some, this is not a good thing. Of course, for a transgender like Helms, it is the whole thing.

Finally, we have this from Helms, which is what lead to the tiltle of this article:

Through all of this, I cannot understand why some trans people fear me, the
things I do, or how I live my life. They try to come across one way, but it
boils down to nothing more than fear. Trapped animals growl, show their teeth
and scream when faced with a supposed threat, all to cover up their fear. Humans
are no different. I try to extend the olive branch to those who fear me because
I have made many friends from those who may not have liked me in the past. I am
never afraid to make a new friend, yet it is another fear that many in the trans
community have.

Now, first off, the people who Helms is attempting to slam here would be insulted by his referring to them as "trans people." I personally do not care to have the adjective "trans" appended to anything referring to me. Now, I suppose Helms idea of a trying to "extend the olive branch" is to attack post-op women, as he has done many times. Granted, Helms was able to find a kindred spirit in Suzan Cooke, but that would be a good subject for another whole article. Simply put, Cooke may identify as a "Woman Born Transsexual," but increasingly Cooke sounds like a transgender in all but name.

No, the bottom line is, no one fears Helms, or how he lives his life. Like many of the gender fascists, he thinks himself more than he really is. No, we simply do not appreciate his attacks, though we do find that he does continually expose himself for what he really is. And, that, simply put, is more, perhaps, to be pitied, not feared.