Here We Go Again

Oh well, Mr. "Zierota" Slingen wasted no time in responding to my article on his latest diatribe, and boy, is the new one a mess…

He starts out by taking me to task for violating the imaginary "first rule" of the imaginary "transgender community."  That is, according to him, I misgendered him.  Now, where to begin?  Where to begin…?  

Well, let's see, first off, I am not a member of his imaginary community.  I am not, as I have stated more than once, "transgender."  So, that's his first problem.  The second, and it's a trivial one, is that "misgender" is not a real word.  Oh, he offers up a definition from the Wiktionary, but that is not exactly an authoritative source.  So, some transgender kook put it up there…that does not make it a real word.  And finally, and more to the point, I did not "misgender" him.  I actually, simply, pointed of a fact.

Now he makes the assertion, that, I am "probably going to continue calling me mr. Slingen even if I do get SRS or start being nice to him again with the "correct" gender pronouns."  No, I will call him "Mr. Slingen."  I know how to properly use the English language, including the rules of capitalization.  And I could care less what he calls me, as it changes nothing,  But, more to the point is the little slip he makes here…"even if I do get SRS…"  He is probably not going to, "even if he does," which I honestly would urge him not to, it would be a mistake.  No transsexual would ever use such a phrase, but many crossdressers treat SRS as a fantasy.  If he did have surgery, it would be a mistake, and the results could well be tragic.

He goes on to argue…

I am a transwoman but I am also a woman. I know this because of my medical profile. I also feel that I am female, and people around me treat me like one as well. It feels right as much as it is right.

Well, "transwoman" is an oxymoron.  It is a silly word, coined by crossdressing men as a way of hanging on to their manhood.  They don't really want to be women, so they call themselves "transwomen" to remind themselves, and others, that they are really still men.  No Mr. Slingen, you have a penis, you cannot "feel" that you are female.  You might be able to con, force, bully, seduce, or otherwise persuade people to pander to your fantasies, but that is all they will ever be.  This is shown in your next statement…

I get a lot of responses from cis females who say things like "you're more of a woman than I am".

This is something women say to "men in dresses" sometimes, if they are trying to be nice.  It is a little white lie they say, rather than saying, "Good grief, you are such a pathetic joke…"  I mean, first off, they clearly know you are not a woman.  They are saying, "Hey man, you do a pretty good imitation of a woman…but…"  And the fact that they know you are a woman shows, if nothing else, you have let them know you are not a woman, because deep down, you don't really want to be one.

After this, Mr. Slingen goes off on a rant for a bit, but he is right…if you are a "non-op," that is, if you want to keep your penis, yes, I consider you to be a man.  I simply don't buy into the silliness of "women with penises."  You can believe what you want, but I am not going to be bullied into playing along.

Now, Mr. Slingen accuses me of using a "straw man argument" because I point out that his position is one that does away with any serious meaning for sex.  I never stated that he has said he does not believe in sex, but I have shown that his position is, effectively, that sex is is not real.  If a female can have a penis, or a man can have a baby (and both of these are solid platforms of the transgender paradigm), then sex becomes meaningless.  And clearly, that is Mr. Slingen's position, and clearly, Mr. Slingen is delusional.  No, I did not make a straw man argument…though, Mr. Slingen did just that in his accusation.

From there, he launches off into another incoherent rant, including such gems as accusing me of going to "thousands" of forums to convince people I have had SRS (huh?)  and that I called him illiterate.  Uh, first off, I have posted on hundreds of forums, let alone thousands.  Second, I would never say that he is illiterate (an absurd suggestion) but I did point out that his, and pretty much everyone else at Shame On You Transgender Edition seems to have a very poor grasp of grammar.

Now, to recap…if you have a penis, and you want to keep it, you are, simply put, a man.  You are not a woman, you are not a transsexual, you are a man.  You may be a crossdresser, you can identify as transgender, you can call yourself whatever you want, but you are, and always will be a man.  And if you have a male brain, you will still be a man, even if you have SRS.  How you look, how you talk, how you walk, have nothing to do with being a woman.  I have seen some incredible looking drag queens, I have known men (who identify as men) with voices that would fool anyone, and I have seen some sashay about a room with a walk that would put any exotic dancer to shame.  But they will tell you in a heartbeat, that they are men.  And I have seen some pretty ugly women, who are most assuredly women, born women, who have given birth to children.

BTW, that is another common trait of the classic transgender.  They love to make a big deal out of attractiveness.  I make no claim of being a great beauty.  I'm a fairly plain woman.  Once, just for laughs, I posted my picture on a site called "Hot, Or Not?"  There you could be rated on a 1 to 10 scale.  I scored about 7, with it ranging from 3 to even an 8 or 9.  I got an occasional insult, and more than a few guys showing interest (sadly none near enough to be worth following up with.  But I am perfectly okay being a plain woman.  Most women are.  I would be okay with being an ugly woman, rather than being a drop dead gorgeous crossdresser…not, of course, that anyone on Shame On You Transgender is.  They really have no business throwing stones at anyone…  But, I would expect nothing better.  After all, I imagine Forrest Gump's mamma would have said, "Transgender is, as transgender does…."

Hoist by Her Own Petard

Let me preface this by saying that I personally have no problem with same-sex marriages, though I do believe it is up to individual states to decide the issue, and I believe that unless a state approves of such a marriage, one should be bound by the law in a given state.  That said, this is an interesting turn of events in a story that I have written on before.

"Thomas" Beatie, the infamous "pregnant man" has been told that she cannot divorce her wife of nine years because the judge cannot determine that they were married to begin with.  Now, it should be noted that the judge did not base the ruling on it being a same sex marriage, just that Beatie, who kept his reproductive organs intact, and who has born children will claiming to be a man, failed to establish that she was a transsexual man at the time of the marriage.  Well, DUH!!!!!

Oh, and the worst part...she wants to compete to get pregnant with her new girlfriend, commenting that perhaps both will be pregnant at the same time...

Here is a link to the story.

There is NO Such Thing as a Pregnant Man!!!

Once again, a kook has been given space on Bilerico to make an absurd assertion. This time, it is a rather bizarre character who calls himself "Dyssonance" when commenting on various blogs, but who posts as "Antonia D'orsay" on Bilerico. Mr. D'orsay has become quite a prolific poster there, making his trademark silliness.

This time around, he takes on the issue of another pregnant "man," in this case one who identifies as gay, and who is in a relationship with another "man." In another words, he is talking about two transgender "men," both born female, one of whom has been impregnated, probably by artificial insemination.

He is, of course, not the only gender fascist to deal with this issue. "Autumn" Sandeen, over at Pam's House Blend had a hissy fit because a couple of disk jockeys made some remarks about this case. Ironically, while the female disk jockey was a bit put off by the idea of a man having a baby, neither pointed out the opposite, that the one having the baby is clearly not a man in any sense of the word. This is simply a woman who has taken testosterone, changed her appearance to look more masculine, who is doing the one thing that unquestionably defines her as a woman.

Men, at least with current technology, cannot have babies. And anyone born physically male who wished to have one for any reason other than to be some sort of freak show for monetary gain is probably not a man either. While I am sure there might be some men who would do it if the money was sufficient, I doubt they would have any desire to actually nurture or raise the baby. The child would simply be a prop, to be passed on after the money is collected.

This whole "pregnant man" silliness, is just another attack on biology by those who wish to reduce sex and gender to something meaningless.

A pregnant man?

No, it's not an April Fool's joke. The story is making the rounds about a "pregnant man." But all is not as it seems.

There has been a lot of buzz in the media lately about Thomas Beatie, who is being touted as a pregnant "man." This is just the lastest example of the silliness that is the transgender paradigm. Beatie is a female to male transgender person. What Beatie is not, is a pregnant man. Beatie is a woman who, having undergone hormone therapy, and chest surgery, appears to be a man, but Beatie never had any surgery to remove the female reproductive system.

Because Beatie's partner had undergone a hysterectomy, they decided that in order to have a child, "he" would have to carry the pregnancy. So, Beatie stopped taking testosterone, and after "his" periods returned, "he" became pregnant.

Give me a break!

This is not a pregant man. Now, one of my best friends, now deceased, was an FTM who had a child from before he transitioned. He grew up in a time and place where he saw no hope of ever being able to have a normal life, and like some with HBS, he married, and tried to have a normal life. And for him, that included having a child. It should be noted that during labor, there were complications because my friend's pelvis was too small for the child to pass easily through. It was a very difficult birth. Quite literally, he was built like a man more than like a woman.

But that is different. Beatie is not someone trying to cope with things that are not fully understood. This is a person who has claimed to have dealt with "his" gender issues. But, like many who are properly classed as transgender, as opposed to HBS, Beatie wants to have it all.

Some might praise Beatie for "sacrificing" for his family. But given that Beatie is telling his story for any and all to hear, it does not appear to be that much of a sacrifice.

But all of this raises all sorts of troubling questions about the transgender paradigm.

I know many will applaud this as a great step forward in the battle to put an end to the bi-gender paradigm. They will say it represents a breakthrough in the battle for transgender rights. They will praise how this is a step forward.

Personally, I think it is a nightmare.

This is the sort of thing the Religious Right lives for. The articles are flowing from their websites. Here, they have proof that the "transgender" crowd is a bunch of kooks. This gives them something that can show that "transgender" people are just making stuff up. And, of course, the transgender crowd keeps insisting that we are all the same, so to the Religious Right, and to a lot of other people, this begins to serve as evidence that we aren't truly who, and what we know ourselves to be.

One of the biggest problems with this case is that Beatie has apparently had "his" sex legally changed on "his" birth certificate. This illustrates a major problem with such laws. This sort of thing should only be allowed where someone has actually changed their sex. In Beatie's case, "he" had chest surgery, but no modifications were made to "his" genitalia or reproductive organs. Now, in most states, this would raise some serious questions about how whether or not "he" had met the legal requirements to change "his" birth certificate. I certainly don't believe "he" should have been allowed to do so as long as "he" retains the ability to conceive and carry a child.
Men don't get pregnant. At least not in the real world. But in the fantasy world of the "transgender" such things are not only possible, but they are to be bragged about, and publicized. Beatie will have "his" 15 minutes of fame. But the damage this person is doing will last a lot longer.