Finally, a Bit of Common Sense!

I just saw a news report that the murderer Robert "Michelle" Kosilek's appeal to have sex reassignment surgery paid for by the Massachusetts' Department of Corrections has been denied by the Supreme Court.  Basically, the High Court simply declined to hear the appeal, allowing the lower court's ruling denying the surgery to stand.

Kosilek had brutally murdered his wife, and then claimed he had started transition, though there was no evidence that he had.  He had previously had a court order that he immediately receive the surgery, but thankfully sanity has resulted in it being finally, and for the foreseeable future, denied.

This case, among others, has been a major cause for a number of transgender extremists, who will no doubt be heartbroken that Mr. Kosilek will not be rewarded for having murdered his wife.

 

A Complete Load of Crap

The kooks at Shame on You Transgender Edition posted a hilarious piece by Mr. "Michelle" Spicer, entitled Dating Transwomen Does Not "Make You Gay".  While the title is bad enough, the article is worse.  It is homophobic, and inaccurate.  It starts out with an accurate, but somewhat misleading idea..

Many of you have heard the myth that dating a transgender woman if you are a heterosexual male will somehow turn you gay. This has to be the most ridiculous type of rationale that I have heard of thus far.

Okay, you cannot really turn someone gay.  Granted, under certain circumstances, men who would otherwise not do so, may engage in homosexual behavior (the classic example is men who are incarcerated) but upon release they generally return to heterosexual practices. But…but then Mr. Spicer launches into this bit of absurdity….

Our sexual orientation does not change because of who we date, we date someone because of our sexual orientation. You can make love to a body but you can only date an actual person, it's the person inside you eventually fall in love with(if there is any kind of real love there) and a transwomans spirit is a woman!

Okay, keep that first sentence in mind…it is the petard this idiot will be hoist be, but let's look at that second part.  There is so much wrong here.  But for the moment, let's look at the final assertion…"transwomans (sic) spirit is a woman!"  Nope.  A "transwoman's" spirit is not a woman.  If it was, she would not be a "transwoman," which is an oxymoron, but would just a woman…which is anathema to so-called "transwomen" who cling to their manhood with a tenacity that puts a barnacle clinging to a boat to shame….

But, let's consider the part where Mr. Spicer really goes off the deep end…

Men who are attracted to transgender women are not automatically gay in any way shape or form. That is not to say that gay men cannot be attracted to transgender women, but the attraction itself does not change their orientation. If you are a heterosexual man the chances are that you are attracted to a transwoman because of her femininity, her personality and her spirit. There are fetishists of course, but they are attracted to a fetish and not the actual transwoman that stands before them. Using someone as an object is not considered dating them and does not come from any place of respect. This article is only concerned with men who actually want to date transgender women regardless of their surgical status and not treat her like an object. There is a difference between a "chaser" and having an actual interest in dating transgender women.

Okay, it is pretty much unheard of for a straight man to actually engage in a physical relationship with a "transwoman."  Likewise, if you are a pre-op, once a guy finds out you are physically male, the best you can hope for is that he doesn't totally freak out and become violent.  The relationship will probably end, at least with regards to any hope of romance, and you will end up broken hearted.  If you are seriously surgically tracked, you have two choices…date men who claim to be straight (but clearly aren't) or be celibate.  What they claim here is delusional crap.  It is simply believing the lies of men who are either lying to themselves or to everyone else.  If a guy is attracted to you, and you are physically a male, then that man is homosexual.  He may deny being such, but he is.  End of story.  He doesn't give one whit about your spirit, your femininity, or your personality.  He simply fetishizes "chick with dicks."  I've met my share, and I found the relationships very unsatisfactory.  He may pretend to "not treat you like an object," but if you are physically male, he is almost certainly going to.  And chances are, he will drop you like a rock if you actually do have surgery.  Shoot, I dated one guy who was a very wealth contractor.  He lived in what some would call a "MacMansion," had a pool and a hot tub, and drove a Jag.  I'm not a gold digger, but I am also not stupid…but the relationship ended quickly when he said "Don't have surgery…"  

Yes, for a while, I was a bit naive, and actually believe the sort of fairy tale Mr. Spicer is spewing here.  After learning what guys meant when they asked if I was "functional" (NO!  I have been on hormones for a while, and even if I was, what part of "I'm a woman," do you not understand?) I realized that most of these guys were not straight, and were pretty screwed up to boot.

Mr. Spicer ends with this bit of comedy…

Men who date transgender women are heterosexual men dating women, period. Simply because she is a different "type" of woman makes no difference to this writer. There are men who like French women, does that make them french? Simply because a man is attracted to a "type" of woman will not change his sexual orientation any more than it could change his nationality. The myth that dating a transgender woman "makes you gay" is ridiculous, damaging and causes the men who want to date us a great deal of shame. Transwomen lose out on dating and finding love because of this and that is just a damn shame.

Sorry, but no.  Heterosexual men don't want women with penises, and they certainly don't want to be topped by one.  There is only one kind of "woman" and men who date "transgender" women, as well as men who are attracted to pre-ops and so-called "non-ops" (a misnomer…if you are not going to have surgery, you are not a transsexual, so there is no need for that qualifier) are not heterosexual, they are perverts who fetishize the idea of a woman with a penis.  And if you think otherwise, you are lying to yourself, and very possibly putting yourself in serious danger, looking for a guy who doesn't even exist.

Mr. "Cristan" Williams Hits a New Low, Even For Him

Well, in his never ending battle to make the world safe for men in dresses, Mr. "Cristan" Williams has hit a new low.  He has drug up a story from six years ago, written by a journalist named Victoria Brownworth, who Mr. Williams has labeled a TERF (i.e. a Trans Exclusive Radical Feminist), apparently because she doesn't want Mr. Williams and the other men in dresses to invade the Michigan Womyn's (who can't spell Women) Music Festival.  I mean, we all know how Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen is just dying to go there and wave his "Woman Born Woman" penis in their faces.

The story is about transgender youth who are being exploited as sex workers, and boy is Mr. Williams upset...not that these children are being exploited as sex workers, but that Ms. Brownworth looked at the genitals of a young FTM.  It not only doesn't bother him that these kids are being exploited, in another article on Transadvocate, where Mr. Williams is the editor, it is described as "Trans Survival Sex Work," a phrase often used to justify such behavior.

So, let's see, Mr. Williams is outraged at a female journalist looking at, and describing a young FTM sex worker's genitals, but doesn't seem to have a problem with someone using him as a prostitute.  That, I suppose is okay, since the creep actually have sex with this child is not, a dreaded "TERF."  Such is the wonder world of Mr. Williams' bizarre ethics. Here, is how Mr. Williams describes his moral outrage:

Lets be clear about this:
1. It doesn’t appear that 15 year olds can consent to give random adults access to their genetalia(sic) under the law.
2. Brownworth clearly states that she believed that she was dealing with a 15 or 16 year old kid.
3. Given the opportunity, she – an adult – states that she asked to gawk at this transkid’s genitalia.4. The transkid complied and Brownworth took a good look.5. Brownworth then described – in detail – to the Philadelphia Gay News’ audience what this transkid’s genitalia looked like.6. Nobody – until now – thought that perhaps this was inappropriate.

Isn't it interesting that the ONLY thing Mr. Williams is concerned with is the opportunity to imply that Mr. Brownworth has somehow violated the law. Not a word of concern for the fact that what she did is nothing compared to the real abuse this child suffered.  Oh, but those were just good old boys, not dreaded TERFs.  And the child was just engaging in harmless "Trans Survival Sex Work."  Uh, the sort of "Trans Survival Sex Work" that results in quite a few murders that feed the orgy of outrage known as the "Transgender Day of Remembrance" each year.  I guess Mr. Williams would be heartbroken if he didn't have his yearly supply of martyrs.

Ms. Brownworth was actually trying to shed some light on a very real problem.  Mr. Williams just wants to walk around naked, waving his penis in front of a bunch of lesbians, who he wants to make pretend he is just "one of the girls."

Oh, and it should be noted, Mr. Williams takes advantage of the fact that the original story by Ms. Brownworth is noy available, so we cannot read her words in context.

Sad, when you actually thing about it.  Of course, that is the one thing Mr. Williams doesn't want you to do.

Another Rather Blatant Lie From Transadvocate

Well, I guess it should not come as a surprise, but Mr. "Cristan" Williams has posted another blatant lie on Transadvocate.  And not also not surprising is that it is targeted at "TERFs," his favorite term for Trans Exclusive Radical Feminists.  This time around, it is the form of a cartoon that claims that they are blaming "transgender people" for any violence inflicted on them.

The cartoon shows a highly insulting caricature of a rather butch looking female pointing at the grave of Angie Zapata.  Ironically, that is the murder case that resulted in the former editor of Transadvocate exposing Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen's rather atrocious behavior during the coverage of the trial.  I should add, it appears that one of the articles linked to in Abernathy's article has been removed from Pam's House Blend, but that is why we can be thankful for the Internet Archive, also known as the Way Back Machine.

Anyway, the cartoon completely distorts what has been said, which is simply the truth.  When someone who is transgender is murdered, it is usually because of homophobia, not "transphobia."  In fact, with the possible example of Brandon Teena, I cannot think of a single case where such a claim would be valid.  And, as Mr. Williams, and the rather silly cartoonist, try to avoid, homophobia is pretty much male violence, and it is most certainly not something that can be validly referred to as "transphobia,"  

Not that Mr. Williams ever shows much regard for the truth.

A Whopper of a Lie

In a typically bizarre and disjointed post, Mr. "Cristan" Williams has again created a "big lie." And this time, it is a whopper.  Apparently the "next big thing" from the transgender extremist is to claim that "trans excluding radical feminists," or TERFs, are responsible for the "transphobia that causes "trans women" to be killed.  POPPYCOCK!!!!

In the article, Mr. Williams makes this assertion:

The real Trans Day of Remembrance gives trans people a chance to honor the memory of those whose lives were cut short through anti-trans violence. Remembrance affords members of the trans community an opportunity to publicly acknowledge our humanity, our loss and our strength as a community. The TERF DOR site attempts to use the death of trans people to promote the TERF belief that it is not the confluence of cis-privilege and transphobia which leads to the slaughter of trans people, but rather something they call “male violence” – that is, the belief that men are inherently violent by virtue of their maleness. 

Paradoxically, TERFs believe, assert and promote that transwomen are men.

First off, it is NOT transphobia, or "anti-trans violence" that leads to the murder in most cases.  It is HOMOPHOBIA.  Of course, "transphobia" is a neologism that was cooked up by the transgender extremist in what was originally a rather silly bit of plagiarism of the term "homophobia," and which now is apparently being used to cover-up the fact that it really is homophobia that gets so--called "trans women" murdered.

The simple fact of the matter, which the transgender extremists seem to have decided to cover up, is that so-called "trans women" are not murdered because they are "trans," and certainly not because they are "women," and without question not because of the "transphobia" of the TERFs, but for the simple, undeniable fact that they are....MEN!  MALES!  HUMAN BEINGS WITH PENISES!!!  Wow, what a shocker that must be for some.

Seriously.  Transgender people most often get killed because some guys suddenly realizes that what he thought was a woman, turns out to be a man, and he is suddenly confronted with a horrible, though often somewhat irrational, thought.  He was attracted, sexually, to a man.  And that would mean he is, gay.  So, he freaks out.  Now, if he stopped and thought for a moment, he might realize that he was attracted to a woman, but that it turns out that what he thought was a woman...what he was attracted to, is actually a male, and well, he is no longer attracted, and thus is not remotely gay, and so he has nothing to worry about in that regard, and it was all a simple misunderstanding, and he should just move on.

But, he we are talking about men here.  They are not always going to stop and think things through.  They are going to react, irrationally, and violently, not because of some imaginary "transphobia," but because of good, old-fashioned, homophobia. Which is actually a pretty accurate use of the term in this case.

Now, the transgender community is being confronted with this fact by the radical feminists.  They are pointing out that men can be, and often are, quite violent.  The transgender extremists, who are of course, men, are upset by this.  It is quite telling that a bunch of men, who claim to "really" be women, can't seem to grasp something most women learn early on.  Men can be, and often are, violent.  Yes, women can be violent.  But not nearly as much as men.  It would be interesting to know, out of all the so-called "trans women" killed in a given year, and honored as the fallen martyrs at each year's Transgender Day of Remembrance, were actually killed by a woman.

The claim is made in a post that Mr. Williams links to, that "1 in 12" transgender persons is murdered.  The claim is never backed up, but the author goes out of his way to avoid admitting that someone simply made this number up.  Quite simply, it is absurd on the face of it.  But this is the sort of bad "evidence" that is used by the transgender extremists to cover their lies.

Sorry, but the idea that "trans women" are killed because of "cis-privilege" is a new low, even for Mr. Williams, who can come up with some pretty stupid claims.

The Insanity Continues....

Transgender racist "Monica" Roberts is at it again, still carrying on about the fact that a paper in Ohio actually published the legal name of a transgender murder victim.  He really, really needs to buy a clue.  

The deceased, Carl Acoff, had not legally changed his name.  There are indications that he was not actually transitioned, and it seems likely that he was only a woman part of the time.  But, in classic transgender extremist style, his tragic death has been latched onto as a means of promoting the transgender agenda.

The facts remain:

• This person was murdered.  Now, thankfully, the case has been solved.  But, it is clear that the transgender community was more interested in promoting an agenda, than in seeing justice.  Things that the kooks objected to the mention of, might have helped crack the case.  Things like the person's actual name, how the victim was dressed, etc.
• This person had serious mental health issues.  The transgender community wants to hide this fact, because, well, I guess they find it a bit embarrassing that a rather large number of people who might well be identified as transgender are, to put it quite frankly, seriously mentally ill.
• This person engaged in anti-social behavior.  Again, the transgender community wants to make this fact disappear, again, no doubt, because it is an embarrassment.  But the fact remains, a lot of transgender people engage in some seriously anti-social behavior.

As I have stated, I worked doing outreach as part of an AIDS prevention research project that targeted transgender people in San Francisco.  I saw lots of people like Carl Acoff.  And yes, at least one of our clients was murdered.   

Unfortunately, all too often, the transgender community wants to present an imaginary illusion that they are all perfectly normal, completely sane, and pure as the driven snow.  In truth, they are more often mentally ill, engage in seriously anti-social behavior, and well, let's just say "purity" is not a word that would be very applicable.

The transgender community needs to fact reality.  No amount of lies will change the fact that a person who has, and wishes to keep, a penis is not a woman.  And a person who wants to get pregnant is not a man, no matter how she looks otherwise.  They might take all this mucking about with sex and gender quite seriously, but they do not change reality.

There Has Been a Break In the Case

Not a lot of details are available, but the FBI and Olmsted Township Police report have made an arrest has been made in connection with the murder of Carl Acoff,  the transgender the kooks were more concerned about being referred to by the what they claim are the wrong pronouns, and by his legal name than they were about the fact that he was murdered.   They, apparently, would rather facts that might help solve the case be hidden, than that a killer be arrested.

In what sounds like an episode of the hit CBS show, Criminal Minds, and FBI Task Force assisted in the arrest of Andre L. Bridges, 36  Saturday morning, May 4, 2013.

Bridges was arrested at his residence in Parma.

And, interestingly enough, the transgender kooks are more interesting in whining about pronouns, then in the fact that the case has, hopefully, been solved, and that no one else will likely be murdered by this creep.

The Silliness Continues

Well, now GLADD has become involved in the effort to force the news media to suspend reality and pander to transgender extremists.  They have several complaints...

Describing Acoff as "oddly dressed" is incredibly insulting.

The body was dressing in three bras.  Now, unless this is some very common transgender thing I am unaware of, I would say that can accurately be called "oddly dressed" and would be if the victim were a female.

Her murder did not "end her fight for acceptance," it ended her life. Period

 Well, I can sort of agree that the murder ended the victim's life, but talk about straining out gnats...

There is no need to describe what she was wearing at the time of her murder; she had already been identified at the start of both stories, describing her wardrobe only trivializes her murder.

 It is called "reporting." It also provides information that might help jog someone's memory, and which might help lead police to the killer.  You never know. 

Acoff's criminal record is almost certainly irrelevant to the story, especially when provided without any context concerning the trans community and law enforcement.

 Well, let's provide a little context then, shall we?  Transgender people are often very ant-social and are very likely to engage in criminal behavior.  The police tend to take a dim view of such behavior.  Is that better?  Or are they supposed to lie about that as well?  And yes, I know what I am talking about.  I observed such behavior first hand for several years.  I heard them talk about engaging in criminal behavior, and not just the stuff you would expect, like drugs and sex work.  Shoplifting is a very common activity.  If you look at the "ball culture" scene, it is rife with tales of stealing very expensive garments for shows.  So, yes, let's talk about transgender and the police in context.  It says quite a lot about the real nature of transgender.

And removing pronouns doesn't fix much. Yes, the stories are no longer factually incorrect, but this tact still shows an unwillingness to respect the victim's gender identity and accept her as female.

He wasn't a female.  It is not even clear that he was full time as transgender.  But, you have to love how they blithely demand that reality be ignored, and that the newspaper should report false information.  In fact, in the article, GLADD even makes excuses for why this person might not have presented as female all of the time.  But still, they demand that part of the person's life be the basis for lies.

All, apparently, to spare the feelings of a dead person.

Seriously, Transgender and Reality Seem Incompatible

I just saw another piece on Transadvocate where there is a serious demand to simply suspend reality by the transgender kooks.

A person was murdered in Ohio, and well, a local paper reported the facts.  But, for the transgender kooks, facts are EVIL!!!  The story by, you guessed it, Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen is a rehash of Mr. "Monica" Roberts' demand that reality be suspended in reporting.  Here is Roberts' list of complaints, and why they are silly:

Misgender the person at every opportunity? Check

Sorry, but the person was a male.  It appears that he was not full time.

Use police mugshot? Check

Well, that is what police do.  Mugshots are generally what the police have available.  Would Roberts have preferred that the police provide a photo of the bloated corpse instead?

Drag old criminal record into the story? Check

The person had a fairly active, and recent criminal record.  Again, Roberts says "The facts must  be ignored."

'Deception meme' injected into story? Check

Uh, why?  Because they reported, quite accurately, that he lied to the police about his identity and true sex.

'Tragic transsexual' meme injected into this story? Check

Huh?  I think Roberts just made this one up to complete a checklist he has used before... the reporters gave no indication that he was remotely a transsexual.

Use salacious and sensationalist headlines? Check

Now, this is downright funny... There were two headlines.  The first was:

Oddly dressed body found in Olmsted Township pond identified

The article said, "The body was clad in a red Betty Boop tank top, three black bras on top of one another, and a light black hooded jacket. The body was naked from the waist down, police said at the time."  Sound to me like, and oddly dressed body was found, and the police identified it.  How is that salacious, or sensationalist?  It is simply the truth.

The second headline in question...

Brutal slaying marks the end of Clevelander's fight for acceptance

Again, not really very salacious or sensationalist.  The story talks about the person's repeated run-ins with transit police.  Apparently this person had a bad habit of not paying fares on transit as well as assault and drug possession.

Not give a rats anus about the victim's dignity and their femme presentation? Check

What dignity?  This person sounds pretty messed up to me.  Assault, drugs, and such.  I think the reporter told the truth without embellishment.  Which, of course, is what Roberts objects to.  Can't have the truth coming out...

Disrespecting another African-American transwoman? Check.

This person did not seem to have much self-respect.  Putting on a bad wig, and dressing up does not make one a woman, or entitle one to have the truth withheld. 

Of course, they also complain that they refer to the victim by his legal name.  In another words, this person had not bothered to change his name, and according to the article did not fully identify as a "transgender woman."

And finally, in a classic example of silliness, Sandeen complains that the article accurately describes the police using "it" to describe an unidentified body.  While the story does not give details, one can assume that this person could not be easily identified from appearance, as they relied on DNA.  Simply put, there was a 20 day gap between the person being declared missing and the body being found.  It is likely they may not have immediately been able to determine the sex.

But hey, this is transgender silliness, and everything has to be blown all out of proportion and complained about.  Reality has no place among transgender kooks.

 

Surgery for Kosilek? No WAY!!!!

Up until now, I have pretty much ignored that case of "Michelle" Kosilek, who is the infamous prisoner in Massachusetts who a Federal judge has rule is entitled to sex reassignment surgery (and yes, it is SEX reassignment surgery, not "gender reassignment surgery as there is no way to change gender) even though he is serving life without parole for the murder of his wife. And yes, I said "he" because there is no way this person is a woman (trans or otherwise), no way he is a transsexual, and really simply because, "It's a MAN, baby!"

Kosilek murdered his wife, and the claim is made that he started his transition though at the time he of the murder though he had not changed is name, nor did he start hormones until he was in prison. Most likely, at the time, he was a crossdresser. He coldly strangled her, and left her body in a parking lot. Hardly an act consistent with his claim of being a woman. Yes, women murder, but his act was not typical of a woman, but is a very male style of murder. He tried to claim that he killed her in self-defense following an argument, no doubt over his crossdressing.

There is also evidence that Kosilek functions quite well, and does not actually need the operation, which would, of course, no doubt result in his transfer to a women's prison.

Kosilek killed his wife, and as such he gave up quite a bit of his rights, including, I believe, the right to force the state to pay for SRS. Even though he is serving a life sentence, there is no valid reason for him to have the surgery. It would be different if there was more evidence that he was a true transsexual. But this is just another case of a man, with a history of crossdressing, deciding, suddenly, to pursue SRS.

I have seen nothing that indicates that Mr. Kosilek had any history of childhood gender identity issues. Everything in this case indicates that he is a crossdresser who, having aged, wants to "ake it to the next level." The taxpayers of his state should not be burdened with the cost, and any competent therapist would deny his request for surgery. Unfortunately, competence is increasingly being replaced by political correctness.

Personally, I agree with the policy that says that a person who is transsexual who enters prison should be frozen at the state of transition they were at the time of incarceration. If one is pre-transition, you stay there. On hormones, they are continued. And such. In the case of someone like Kosilek, where the sentence is life, well. tough. Killing someone has consequences. He should have thought about his future before he deprived his wife of hers.

Remembering Their Dead

Well, here we are...another November 20th, and another round of posts on all the transgender blogs about how this is the "Transgender Day of Remembrance."  Yes, it is time to celebrate all the honored dead, who sadly, in most cases, did something really stupid.


Now, don't get me wrong.  I am not engaging in blaming the victim.  No one deserves to die, but in most of the cases of those who are honored and even near worshipped each year the victim could have, and yes, should have, taken steps to avoid being murdered.  It is just common sense.


And every year, the transgender extremists seem to go out of their way to discourage people from showing said common sense.  After all, they believe it is their absolute right to act as they wish, and expect people to, well, suck it up.  Unfortunately, no matter how much they believe in such a right, and no matter how much such a right might exist, reality says if you are not careful, you may end up dead.


If you are a pre-op, or you are a crossdressing male who belongs to the "They Will Take My Penis When They Pry My Cold Dead Fingers From It" club, and you become involved with a man who does not know your situation, and you let him "discover" your little secret without warning, then you run a significant rise of violence.  It may be wrong, and hey, you may even live in a jurisdiction where the "trans panic" defense is not allowed, but what does that matter if you wind up seriously injured or dead?  But hey, you will be honored on the next Nov. 20th.  


I do wonder if some of those who die are not subconsciously looking for release.  I do wonder if they are suicidal.  I understand the temptation that one might feel to seek out companionship.  But one has to be careful.  Taking chances is stupid.  Letting a man discover your penis without warning is very likely to end badly.  He is probably not going to be delighted to discover you are a male, no matter how often you call it a "neo-clit."  He is likely, at best, to reject you, and at worst, to engage in violence.  


If you have to reveal, do it in a public place, but one where there is enough privacy that he is not going to be shamed.  Remember, no matter how "out, loud, and proud," you are, he may not share you beliefs.  


And also ask yourself, is it worth your life to engage in sex work?  There are other options.  It is NEVER your only option.  It may seem an appealing choice, but is it worth your life?  Most who engage in sex work wind up using drugs to dull the pain, and then they find that they have to do more sex work to afford the drugs, which leads to more pain, that requires more drugs....well, it just gets worse and worse.  Is it really what you want?


If you are truly transsexual, it is a matter of transition or die.  If you are transgender, if you want to hang on to your maleness while pretending to be a woman, you really need professional health, and you really need to consider if your little hobby is worth dying for.


But seriously, those who do die are not martyrs, and while they should be mourned, they don't deserve the near worship they receive.  They should be seen as tragic examples of what not to do.

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.

The Tragedy of Angie Zapata

Well, it is pretty much official...Angie Zapata has become the latest martyr for the transgender activist crowd. Her murder was horrible. It is good that the man who killed her has been brought to justice. But some of what is being written about her is becoming downright silly.

Marti Abernathy, who I would normally disagree with did a surprisingly good piece on how some bloggers, well one in particular, have tried to use this sad event to puff themselves up. Angie's death was an outrage. It was clearly not, as claimed by the defendant, a crime of passion. And, contrary to what some want to claim, this was not really a test of the "trans panic" defense. The facts showed that the murderer had plenty of time to think about what he was doing.

But as I say, some of what has been said in this case has reached the point of being absurd. In a recent post, Autumn Sandeen has gone to a ridiculous extreme in an effort to portray Angie as some sort of bastion of purity.

Sandeen objects to a statement on the Huffington Post that explains that "Angie and Allen Ray Andrade first met on the Internet, and that they had arranged a sexual encounter." Now, Sandeen is just outraged at the very suggestion that Angie had actually made a date to have sex. I mean, give me a break! What does Sandeen think...that she was planning on going to church with him?

The sad fact is, Angie did what a lot of pre-ops have done, and made arrangements to meet someone for sex. Unfortunately, like a lot of pre-ops, it is also possible that she did not consider what might happen.

Now, it is never, never, NEVER okay for someone to be harmed or murdered because someone suddenly discovers that they are not what they appear to be. The only correct thing in such a case is to leave. But, it is also extremely foolish to put oneself in such a situation to begin with. I was once a pre-op, and I dated a few men, and yes, I took some chances. In almost every case, I made sure we were in a relatively public place before I told them my situation. I can remember a couple of exceptions, and in both of those cases, I was probably more lucky than anything else.

No, the murder was no Angie's fault, but it is criminal for some of the more idiotic of transgender activists to not only fail to point out that taking chances is stupid, but to also even go so far as to actually attack those who do point this out.

I can understand why someone would want to date a man who is not an "admirer." The ones I have met tend to see us as sex objects rather than people. I suppose there may be exceptions, but they are rare. Oh, they may say the right things, and even fool one for a short period, but in the end, the object of their desire is interchangable. Simply put, the relationship is not going to go anywhere, no matter how badly one wants to believe it will.

The bottom line is, Angie did nothing other than meet the wrong man. Making her into some sort of virginal saint is silly. Her death should serve as a warning to those who would take chances. And her murderer's conviction should serve as a warning to those who would treat human life as worth so little. Unfortunately, I doubt either is really paying any attention.