Can Someone Buy the Transgender Kooks a Clue?

In a recent article in LGBT Weekly. Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen again advocates for "access to bathrooms."  And in this particular article, he exhibits an appalling lack of having a clue.  He launches into one of his favorite themes...feminists sharing similar views to conservative Christians.  And yet, in complaining about this, he misses a very big clue.

Here we have two groups that are, for the most part, polar opposites.  One would expect little common ground between them.  And yes, both stridently oppose unrestricted access to women's spaces, in particular restrooms, by men who claim to be women.  

Now, it is an interesting fact that, for many years, pre-op transsexuals were able to easily access the women's room.  The problem affects those who are more inclined to identify as "transgender."  Now, I have given quite a bit of thought to term, and I have come to the conclusion that the vast, overwhelming majority of those who prefer to be labeled "transgender" tend to retain a considerable amount of identification as "male."  Unlike the classic transsexual, they seem to want people to be forced to "see" them as women, while be totally aware that the person was born male.  Actually being a woman, in a real, meaningful way, is outside their interests.  They want to be women, but male.  They want to adopt a female identify, persona, and dress, but to remain a male.  Some may go so far as to have surgery, but they still insist on being "out, loud, and proud."  They reject the concept of stealth, and have no desire to enter the women's room and only be seen as a woman.

Now, in some cases, this is connected to the sexual arousal that many feel.  Being in the women's room, or shower, or locker room, or other places that they are not really welcome, is part of the thrill.

But, it never occurs to the kooks like Sandeen that perhaps the reason two groups can find common ground in this issue is that it actually is a serious issue that should not be brushed aside so quickly.  That, perhaps, some common sense is called for.  That honestly considering one's appearance, demeanor, and likelihood of being accepted as female, should be considered instead of just barging in, and expecting to be accepted.

Separating Facts From Total and Complete Fabrication

As I said yesterday, the "trans panic" continues, and to be honest, it is getting pretty deep.  Mr. "Cristan" Williams is in overdrive pumping out the lies, straw man arguments, and such, and the sad thing is, he is just making the whole mess at the worse.

His latest bit of drivel would be hilarious if it were not so serious.  He has posted another straw man argument that seems to raise some serious questions about what really is going on in Florence, CO.  In his latest opinion piece masquerading as "news" he seems to claim that the police are investigating Pacific Justice Institute for "bullying."  What is actually said is very disturbing, if true.  Of course, like pretty much everything in this case, this bit of information comes from a biased source... Apparently Pacific Justice Institute has alleged that Superintendent Rhonda Vendetti has warned that "that the complaining families were now subject to having their social media monitored by police." Okay, there are basically three possibilities here...PJI has fabricated this claim, the superintendent is lying, or the police actually are engaged in outrageous, and illegal acts intended to repress free speech.  The one thing that is very clear is, well, as usual, Mr. Williams is lying again.  The parents are not Pacific Justice Institute, and the Florence Police would have no jurisdiction to investigate them for bullying (PJI Is located in California).  

Now, let's look at several facts, some of which have nothing to do with the Colorado case anyway:

First, in spite of what some want to believe, none of this is really about transsexuals.  Mr. Williams pretty much has shown outright disdain for transsexuals.  He is very focused on "transgender rights" which is an entirely different subject.  He is simply desiring to use a teenage student in Colorado to further a far more extreme political agenda, and apparently will use any sleazy trick he can dream up, including now attempting to buy the support of the parents.  Mr. Williams has started a fund raising drive to provide them with money.  I guess they have to be rewarded for allowing him to use their child.

The real issue is also not a high school student in Colorado.  It is about preserving a rather poorly written law in California.  Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen posted a rather telling comment.  He quotes the AB 1266's author who speaks of how various school districts have instituted "common sense" policies.  That is true.  For example, I did a little research, and found a news article from a local paper, The Canon County Daily Record, in Colorado about the case.  It provided a bit of information about Colorado's law concerning transgender rights:

The Colorado Department of Regulatory Agencies Civil Rights Commission states under Rule 81.11 - Gender-Segregated Facilities (http://bit.ly/18jzRRz) that nothing in the Colorado Antidiscrimination Act prohibits segregation of facilities on the basis of gender; all covered entities shall allow individuals the use of gender-segregated facilities that are consistent with their gender identity, including but not limited to restrooms, locker rooms, dressing rooms and dormitories; and in gender-segregated facilities where undressing in the presence of others occurs, covered entities shall make reasonable accommodations to allow access consistent with an individual's gender identity. (emphasis mine)

BTW, while Mr. Williams has written an increasing number of articles on this case, that was the ONLY story in the local paper.  

Okay, that is not terribly different from the regulations here in San Francisco.  Here they use the term "inevitable nudity" but otherwise the policy is pretty much the same.  They have to make modifications, if reasonable, otherwise they have to provide access to equivalent facilities.  For example, if there are showers, they have to provide separate stalls, and curtains.  That sort of thing.  They do NOT have to allow a "Colleen" Francis situation, like Mr. Williams wants.  

And that brings us to "Colleen" Francis and what that pervert tells us about what is really going on.  Some years ago, when the push for transgender rights really took off...when it was decided that the status quo, which was that transsexuals, perhaps with what were called "carry letters" were pretty much allowed access to restrooms, and other facilities, was not enough, and that crossdressers and such should be allowed access as well, some raised the concern that it would not stop there.  That these men would want to force their way into more private spaces.  We were told that this was absurd, that it would never happen....

Yeah, "Colleen" Francis...  BTW, Mr. Williams's response to that case was laughable.  He actually tried, in an absurd post, to claim that women were a greater threat than men.  Of course, this is a man who has pushed the "cotton ceiling" meme, and who has pretty much show clear disdain for women who, uh, well....don't have penises.  Suddenly, it is not only okay for men (sorry, but if you are willing to wave your penis around in a women's locker room or shower, you are a MAN, BABY!) to invade women's spaces, but to do so nude.

AB 1266 does not contain a provision that addresses "inevitable nudity."  It does not allow for provisions that address "inevitable nudity."  It does not contain clauses that allow schools to set "common sense" policies.  I imagine that the extremists at Transgender Law Center argued against such provisions.  The law, and that is part of the problem, it is a law, not a school policy, is going to be enforced by judges, who will be constrained by what the law actually says.  And by what it does not say.

What the law says on the matter is a bit too simple:

A pupil shall be permitted to participate in sex-segregated school programs and activities, including athletic teams and competitions, and use facilities consistent with his or her gender identity, irrespective of the gender listed on the pupil’s records.

It can, and no doubt will, be argued that the law does not allow a school to make provisions for dealing with inevitable nudity.  That would be a "restriction."  The law does not provide any provision for determining a student's gender identity.  What if a student claims that it "fluctuates."  

I sincerely believe that some "common sense" is needed...

The law should be modified to address "inevitable nudity."

The law should be modified to include a provision requiring some form of medical documentation that the student has been diagnosed as transsexual by a qualified, licensed therapist with experience in the treatment of that condition.  And presentation would have to be consistent, not periodic.

Rules that would address issues of fairness in athletics.  Even if the claims of "gender identity" are true, imagine, for example, girl's basketball teams fielding male students with height and strength advantages that would otherwise be illegal.  It would, in effect, be the equivalent of allowing students to take steroids.  Not to mention, track and field, volleyball, and other sports. 

Those provisions would go a long way towards addressing legitimate concerns.  Yes, groups like PJI would still object...but so, probably, would kooks like Mr. Williams and Mr. Sandeen, who suddenly would be losing their extremist agenda.

Bottom line, it is really sad that a student in Colorado is being used by either side to further political gain.  It is especially sad that this student is reported to be on "suicide watch."  You know, I almost predicted in my article that would be the next development.  I decided that would have been in poor taste, and didn't add it.  I honestly hope it is not true.  But, given that the child might actually believe what Mr. Williams, and Mr. Sandeen have lied about having been said, I don't know if it is true or not.  

Would I put it past Mr. Williams to make such a claim if it were not true?  Not at all.  He has already shown he lies as easily as he breathes.  He has already shown that he is more than willing to pay for the use of this child.  He has already shown little actual regard for the child's  privacy.  

And no, I don't hate Mr. Williams.  I find his behavior to be reprehensible but no, I do not wish him harm.  I wish he would show some decency and stop using a child for his political goals. But, I don't hate him.  And I don't appreciate people making such claims in an attempt to use "club words" to beat me into submission.

Hey! Who's the Naked Dude?

[Updated to correct an error in which I misattributed a position to Cathy Brennan.  For that, I apologize.]

I am sure most are familiar with the "Emperor's New Clothes."  It is the story of a very vain but gullible emperor of an imaginary land who is sold a set of "special" garments.  The thing is, he is told that they are made from a fabric invisible to anyone who is unfit for his position or "hopelessly stupid".    Of course, the garments  are not real, and he is being tricked into paying for nothing.  

So, when his new "clothes" are delivered, he is shocked to discover that he, the emperor, is apparently "unfit," but not willing to admit this, he makes a great fuss over how fine they are and after being assisted in dressing by the con artists who have tricked him, and having his ministers also discover they they too are not "unfit" (and of course no one admits this) he goes out in public where the crowds, again wishing to avoid embarrassment, make a great fuss over how fine the garments are.  Until, finally, a young child says, "Why does the emperor have no clothes?"

Well, many, like the emperor, are being sold an illusion.  And some are beginning to ask questions, and that is causing panic among transgender extremists.  Over the past several days, a number of them, led by Mr. "Cristan'  Williams, have tried to counter an article that first appeared on Christian Broadcasting Networks website about a transgender male in Colorado, who has invaded the girls bathroom, and the fact that this has caused distress for female students.

Mr. Williams has posted at least five (now up to six) stories on Transadvocate, plus one on his personal web page, and has further made efforts to hound any news site that has dared repeat the story.  All of his posts have included outright lies, in an attempt to stem what is clearly the beginning of a coming backlash.

The latest post on Transadvocate is just absurd.  Headlined, "Anti-gay activist group admits trans school “harassment” is fake," it is basically just one big lie. The group in question, Pacific Justice Institute did not make an admission, and the whole thing is Mr. Williams putting words in their mouth in an attempt to create another of his trademark straw man arguments.

Mr. Williams starts off:

Okay. Maybe the Pacific Justice Institute (PJI) doesn’t think that they’re admitted their charge of “harassment” is fake, but I’ll let you be the judge.

Okay, there is so much wrong here, it is laughable.  First off, it is kind of hard to make an admission without intending to actually do so.  Second, well, let's be honest, Mr. Williams is not going let anyone be the judge.  He is going to tell you what to think, and demand that you accept it.

What is really going on becomes a bit more obvious later in the post.  He attacks one of his favorite targets, attorney Cathy Brennan, because, well she simply quoted a statement from Pacific Justice Institute.  This is not even a position taken by her/  That post points out their view that "a trans person in the restroom is 'inherently intimidating and harassing.'"  Now, to be specific, what is referenced, is having someone who is male, who makes it clear that he is male, but who i claiming to be "a girl," insisting on using the women's restroom.  We are not talking about someone who has a medical condition, who is seeking to assimilate as a female.  We are talking about someone who wants to be "out, loud, and proud," as a transgender.

Williams goes on to attack Brennan for "outing" an FTM transgender teenager, while glossing over the fact that what Brennan actually did was notify school authorities about this person posting harassing messages on Tumblr, including some about women and rape.  The student was making the posts from a school account.  Of course, in the fantasy world of the transgender activist, such behavior as that committed by the student is protected and Brennan should have simply accepted it without complaint.  I guess "ordinary women" don't count...only trans women.

All of this serves to further expose what terrifies kooks like Mr. Williams.  If people actually stop and consider what is really going on, the entire transgender house of cards will come crashing down.  They are not interested in helping the rare person who actually is transsexual, who simply wants to get on with their life, avoiding publicity.  In fact, if you do wish this, they are very likely to show what hypocrites they really are, and attempt to out you, especially if you don't wish to follow them in lockstep.

No, the truth must remain hidden.  The focus must be kept off of the fact that they are trying to force people to accept that women have penises, and that simply claiming womanhood magically grants it in total.

And people are finding that increasingly hard to swallow....  And noticing that not only is the emperor quite naked, but that he is trying to be such in women's locker room....

In The Middle....

Well, first off, this post marks the 300th on this blog! It was just over a year ago, I posted the 200th, and now we are up by another hundred. Hmmm, I wonder if Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen will want to make another smart remark about that....for those who don't know, he has been whining about the amount I post...not the first man to claim a woman has too much to say.

Another big announcement....this blog now has a presence on Twitter. I am there as @_JustJennifer_. Feel free to follow me. And I should note, Sandeen has blocked me from following him. Oh well....that is easily gotten around....

Now, on to the topic at hand... I have stated many times that I am a moderate politically. I often joke that I am a member of the Radical Middle, the Far Center....that I am a Extreme Moderate. But it is, in many ways, more than a joke. I do take a very moderate approach to most issues. And I am often amused by the more extremist views that others take.

To start with an easy example...there is Suzan Cooke. Her politics are pretty much off the deep end on the Left. She seems to want to relive her "glory days" as a hanger-on with the Weather Underground. When someone is that far out there, it is hard to take them seriously. On gender issues, Cooke used to be closer to the center, but has recently become almost as extreme as Mr. Sandeen.

Now, Mr. Sandeen may not be the craziest, or the most radical, but he is pretty much a kook among kooks. He is, quite frankly, is the gift that keeps on giving. I am still laughing at the bit about he pounding the table and telling Cathy Brennan that he wanted to carry "his balls around in a jar..." As she told him, that is not female. I guess we should all be thankful that the rules do not allow doctors to return such items to patients. The world is safe from Mr. Sandeen's testicles...though his penis is apparently still at large.

Over on a blog called "Gender Trender," there is a rather amusing exchange between Mr. Sandeen and someone who posts as "Gallus Mag." Basically, he is trying to get this person to reveal her name to him, and she is trying to get him to understand that a woman might not want certain people, including a kook like him, having that sort of information. Sandeen has repeated shown that he is incapable of comprehending how women feel, and this is a perfect example. Towards the end of the exchange, he refers to Gallus Mag as a "girl," and she objects. Instead of acting in a mature manner, Sandeen tries to defend this very male condescension...

I call women “women”. You’re not brave; you’re not a grown-up. You are a girl, “girl”, b/c you’re a hit and run coward. Seriously, not even brave enough to email me? Truly a height of effeminacy—a brave feminist you just ain’t. L and G done with us?

This, as much as anything, shows how male his brain is. What an incredible bit of drivel, from someone who is not only a man, but more than a bit of chauvinistic pig at that. Oh, and a clue for Mr. Sandeen....he should look up the definition of effeminate...

effeminate 
adjective

(of a man) having or showing characteristics regarded as typical of a woman; unmanly.

Hmmm, "of a man." And Sandeen is tossing that insult at a woman. Yeah, talk about completely clueless. I suppose one could call Sandeen, "effeminate," and technically, that is what he is, but only in the sense that he is a very bad caricature of a woman. Sort of in the vein of various comedians who have dressed up and minced around in what many women would consider to be a highly insulting parody. Except he thinks he is actually fooling people.

On the opposite side of the coin, you have this mostly excellent response to Mr. Sandeen from Marie-France Lease

You know what, Sandeen. If I had been born in the middle of an aboriginal forest — without so much as a pot to piss in or a window to throw it out of — everyone who met me in that forest would have NO DOUBT that I am a woman because I am, in fact, a woman.

I don’t need one or three or fifty sheets of gub’mint paper to “prove” I’m a woman. I AM a woman. For me and for half the human race, it really is just that simple.

While you’re bleating and foaming and tilting about demanding that everyone agree with you? Half the human race? We’re just going about our business trying to survive from cradle to grave as actual, authentic females.

If you were an actual, authentic female, you’d be nodding along with me and thinking, “Truth.” For us, it’s not a game. It’s not an achievement. It’s not a contest. It’s not “fake it till you make it.” It’s not a hobby, an avocation, an obsession, something we do to entertain ourselves — or get ourselves off.

We’re living it from the first sex-identifying ultrasound until we draw our last breath.

So to hell with you and the penis you road in on. We don’t care about your stupid little pieces of paper or your falsies or your pink eye-shades. We’re just trying to make it till the next payday, till retirement, till the Goddess draws us back into Mother Earth for our long sleep.

Go take up another hobby. We’re sick to death of being hounded by delusional dudes.

Most of this I can honestly relate to. I don't buy into the "Goddess" stuff, and shoot, when I was in my mother's womb, they didn't have ultrasound...but yes, I understand whshe is saying, and I know, just as well, that it is all lost on kooks like Sandeen.

Another,Becky Green had this to say....

Buffalo Sandeen,

You’re a man with a man’s height, body frame and a man’s rage. You have an imposing figure and no woman could physically beat you. Who’s to say you won’t start stalking Gallus in person or that you won’t show up at her door and pummel her unconscious? With your words alone, we can see you’re pushy, aggressive, fond of intimidation and all MALE. No woman should ever divulge her personal information to a delusion, emotionally unstable man-child such as yourself.

So take your big, lumbering, hulky body with fake tits and size 13 shoes down to your local strip club and get a beer with the bros while you ogle the gyrating women, because that’s what “real” wo-men, like you, enjoy doing.

A bit heavy handed, but in Mr. Sandeen's case, still dead on.  Granted, some women are tall, have a heavier frame, and can exhibit some serious rage.  But, given what has been said about Mr. Sandeen, by himself, and others, this is pretty dead-on.  He himself has bragged about having a fit of rage because he was called a man.  There is a lot of overlap between men in women in terms of size, so this is a bit extremist.

Then, into this argument, a voice of reason appears... Cassandraspeaks has this to say...

If anyone needs a piece of paper to prove their sex they certainly are NOT that sex. The men like Autumn Sandeen are an insult of the worst order. He is everything GM says he is and more. The list of those like him is as long as your arm. I’ve been fighting those like Sandeen in a verbal and philosophical war for over 25 years. They take advantage of the ignorance about what transsexuality really is in order to obtain their own perverted desires. Good luck in dealing with this freak.

Cassandra is a transsexual, and one would hope that this would add some balance to this discussion, but now we see the other side of the extremist coin rear its ugly head...  someone calling herself, Cynical Cynthia tosses this out...

Yes, Cassandra, your definitions of this arbitrary concept are the most correctest ever; menzes like Sandeen will never understand. You, because of the things you say and think about the arbitrary concept of transsexualism, are completely different to him.

Now, if she had only stopped there, we would have reached a good middle ground.  We could come together, shake hands, and join forces to defend women...  Sadly, she continues with this silliness...

*yawn* – Same shit, different day. Females have vaginas and give birth; males have penises and fertilise eggs which causes females to get pregnant and give birth. Your thoughts on arbitrary principles or identification with either sex will not make you a member of that sex no matter how different you supposedly are to Mr Sandeen. At least, I imagine that your supreme ideas have not given you ovaries, fallopian tubes and a uterus with which to give birth, but do correct me if I am wrong.

What a nasty thing to say, not just because of transsexuals, but because a small, but not non-zero group of women are born without uteruses, fallopian tubes, or ovaries.  They are still women, in many cases, of XX phenotype, but with some other condition.  I can understand that, and can certainly relate to them.  Other women lose these things to disease.  And they grieve for their loss.  Men like Sandeen could care less.  Some of use actually do feel a sense of real loss for what we, sadly, never had, and never will.  I have heard similar remarks from some transgender creeps, but hearing such a flippant remark, from a woman, is just nasty.  

But here we get into the realm of the more extreme of the radical feminists.  Here a person recognizes that someone actually gets it, but then, purely on ideological grounds, turns a deaf ear.  Cynical Cynthia effectively says, "Hey, your right, your different, but I am going to stop thinking because I have to stay true to a point of view that say I have to reject anything you say."  How absurd.

This is at the heart of the radical feminist's arguments with transsexuals.  While they are quite accurate in their assessment of the transgender crowd, which for the most part act like men, they have to fall back on ideology when faced with transsexuals.  Someone like Sandeen is easily dismissed as the man he is.  He makes it oh, so easy.  He waves his paperwork and say "I am a woman," and everyone pretty much laughs and says "Nope, you're not..."  He flounces around in a ridiculous outfit that no real women would wear and says, "Hey, don't you just love #girlslikeus," and everyone sort of snickers, and he gets mad and makes threats.  He chains himself to the White House fence, and says, "I am like Martin Luther King, Jr.," and every grimaces and says, "Well, only in the sense you both were men..."

But, they attack transsexuals on very theoretical basis, claiming that gender is a "social construct," and dismissing legitimate brain studies by lying about them...a tactic that has also been used by some transgender types who know that such studies expose them for the frauds they are.  They make claims like biology is destiny, while effectively denying the only basis on which such a claim can be made.

The radical feminist view is based on the notion that gender is all about socialization, which is, often the same idea claimed by feminists.  We are supposed to believe that it is all about how we are raised.  In the radical feminist view, children born with a penis are raised to be men, and told all the things that seem to come to men so naturally.  And yet, they ignore the fact that even when parents try to raise their children more neutrally, they still exhibit gender typical behavior.  Parents who try to raise their boys to be more gentle are shocked when things don't work out as they expect.  Try to raise a girl to be more masculine, and she might shock you.  And do they really think that they can just ignore situations like mine, where my father made very effort to "beat and/or shame the sissy out of me?"  Now, sure, someone like Sandeen, who spent twenty years in the military, proudly, and successfully serving, as a man, in a very male environment, before, as he neared the time he would retire, only then began to show some signs of what was to come.  Sandeen is a typical of the sort of man who hides a fetish for a long time, and then has it come out late in life.  He is able to easily assimilate as a male, before finally deciding he is going to enjoy his little hobby. 

 I, on the other hand, like many, never fit in as a man.  I always stood out.  I was seen, as I have said, as a "defective male."  I was like the classic comedy trope...the woman who dresses up as a man, to infiltrate some group of men, and who is either immediately spotted, and subjected to  playful torment, or for even more laughs, initially succeeds in her disguise, but keeps slipping up, creating more and more humor.  In short, I stuck out like a sore thumb, and often had people people comment on that fact.  I learned to laugh it off, but I knew people wondered what was going on.

On a website called Transgender Tropes, which sets out to refute said "tropes," there is this comment:

“Transgenderism is based on the idea that gender traits, characteristics, emotions and behaviors ARE inherently tied to one’s biological sex (Biology IS destiny), and they seek to reconcile their own diversity from gender norms by altering their biology to match the traits they view as incongruent with their physical sex. This is actually a REVERSAL of the idea that biology isn’t destiny. What they are saying is that gender IS biologically determined. And if they fail to conform to sex based gender norms they must alter their biology as much as possible to at least conform cosmetically to their gender essentialist beliefs. This is opposite to the idea of transgressing biological imperative (nature) with socialization and free will (nurture).”

Actually, this is rather odd, and quite inaccurate statement.  First off, it is not remotely accurate to attribute this to the transgender crowd.  They tend to claim that sex and what they call gender, are so separate as to be completely unrelated.  In fact, they often claim that gender is, effectively not only a choice, but is almost a mood.  That one can be a woman one day, and a man the next, and perhaps even none of the above on yet another day.  And that each whim must be accepted as totally and equally valid.

Ironically, even as the radical feminist reject the idea of "brain sex" (as, ironically do many of the more radical transgender extremists) they actually seem to adhere to exactly such an idea with a tenacity that matches that of some among the religious right.  And, in complete ignorance of scientific studies that show otherwise.

Of course, for the transgender crowd, it is really all about the trappings.  Like most women, I enjoy getting dressed up for certain occasions.  But, day to day, I dress like, well like what I am, a geeky woman.  Most days that means what I guess you would call "mom jeans," a t-shirt (unisex, since I kind of like them loose) with something clever on it (One of my favorites says "There are 10 kind of people in the world, those who understand binary, and those who don't.") , flats or sneakers, no jewelry, and no make up.  I don't need to dress like Barbara Billingsley in Leave it to Beaver in order to "feel like a woman."  Someone, who was quite transgender, once commented that I dressed like a house wife.  He meant it as a bit of a correction.  I took it as a complement.  Then again, one of my best friends, who is a born woman, is never seen in anything but a skirt.  I used to dress that way more, but I was also working in a an office.  BTW, I don't know if she knows my history or not, but she has never brought it up, and even if she does know, she treats me as a woman.  In fact, I had a doctor a few years ago, who would occasionally make some comment, and realize she had actually forgotten my history, catch herself, and then realize that oh, yeah, it really didn't matter.  

I have, or had, a cousin who well, I have often wondered if she was possibly transsexual.  She was very masculine, always preferred things like cars, and ham radio to the things her mother would have preferred.  She generally dressed in what certainly looked like men's clothes, and she never married.  I don't know if she was a closeted lesbian, or simply repressed her feelings.  She lived in a time, and place, where being a lesbian would not have been acceptable.  I have lost touch with her.  I imagine she has heard about me, and it would be interesting to find out her reaction.  Most of that part of my family has effectively disowned me.  At least as far as I know.  The last time I saw her was at the 70th anniversary of one an aunt and uncle of ours.  She was there, in a dress, looking quite odd.  At the 75th, I was told I would not be welcome after informing people of my transition.  Not long after than, both that aunt and uncle had died.  I haven't had contact with any of them since.  But, I digress...

What I honestly wish the radical feminist could accept is that, yes, one is born a woman, but that what makes one a woman really is in the brain, and it really is determined by hormone levels during development, and that yes, something can go wrong.  In a sense, they do accept transsexual women.  Many of us simply do not wish to be "out, loud, and proud."  We don't wear our histories on our sleeve, and we don't tell people our past, and, perhaps this might surprise some of the radical feminists, they would never guess.  The vast, overwhelming majority of my friends in the real world are what they would call "women born women."  I have friends who are straight, and I have friends who are lesbians.  Some know my past, most don't.  I interact with them, and I am accepted by them, as a woman.  I live as stealth as possible.  If I did not love San Francisco so much, and if I did not have such good friends here, I would possibly consider relocating somewhere and starting over...again.  I lived for a year in small town, where literally no one knew.  It was heaven, but it did not last for reasons that had nothing to do with being transsexual, and I wound up moving 2,000 miles to San Francisco.  To most people who know me, I am simply a very smart, very geeky, middle aged woman.  I have nothing to do with the transgender community.  I occasionally will see someone I know from when I did outreach work, a job I stumbled into somewhat by accident, but which paid reasonably well, and had good benefits.  As soon as possible, I moved to a position that had little to do with the transgender community.  It paid even better, but unfortunately, like a lot of government-funded research work, funding dries up, and you end up being cut.  So, shortly afterwards, was my boss.  I have moved on, and I am in a completely different field.  And no, it really isn't anyone's business.

My point in all this is, we need to find a middle ground.  There are people who actually do have a medical condition that is known, for want of a better term, as transsexualism.  They are rare.  Sandeen and that ilk, are not transsexuals.  They are a lot more people who get off on dressing up and pretending.  As long as they don't cause harm, who cares?  But they really need to learn their limits.  Invading women's space is causing harm, and they need to either voluntarily stop it, or they need to be stopped.  They have a choice.  Transsexuals don't.  They should not receive special rights, and yes, things like access to women's spaces, and being allowed to change their birth certificates while keeping their penises are special rights.

It is time to return some sanity to this whole mess.  It is not likely to happen easily, but I do suspect it will eventually happen.  They are pushing for too much, and the backlash is beginning.  And all the while, I will be here, in the middle, watching it all, and doing what I can to help restore a least some reason before it is too late.

A Few Words on Surgery...

This morning, I had a thought that came to me about something that "J. Skyler" said about me.  Referring to me, this person asserted, "...she's a surgical essentialist who thinks anyone who doesn't undergo surgery is pretending/deviant. "  Of course, as is typical with the TG kooks, this is a very simplistic portrayal of a much more complex opinion.  As I pointed out in comments yesterday, I would not automatically use the term "deviant."  As to "pretending," it is also not quite the word I would use either.

So, what do I believe?  First off, I believe that sex reassignment surgery....  Well, let me pause first here, to specifically reject the absurd trend towards calling it "gender reassignment surgery."  This is part of a larger effort by the TG crowd to muddy up, somewhat ironically, the waters they themselves created.  A common meme pushed by the TG crowd is "sex is what is between your legs, gender is what is between your ears."  Of course, they also like to push the idea that gender is, somehow, both fungible, and a choice. But they also want to claim that being TG is not a choice.  In short, they are pretty much making it up as they go.  More precisely, sex is what is between your legs, and what we call "gender" is better defined as the sexual differentiation of the brain.  Simply put, you are either hard wired as a man, or as a woman.  It is, in spite of one of the sillier assertions of some TG kooks, quite related.  But it also occurs at a different time during development.  The body can go male, and the brain female, or vice versa.  Such a condition is rare, but it is what make a person a true transsexual.  So, for something to actually be "gender reassignment surgery," it would have to change the brain, not the genitals.  In short, "gender reassignment surgery" is a fictitious concept, and simply does not exist.

Now, returning to my original thought, sex reassignment surgery, or SRS, does not make a man into a woman (or vice versa) it makes a male into a female (again, or vice versa) to the extent possible with modern techniques.  A better way of putting it would be to say that it allows a true, or classic transsexual the opportunity to live a normal life, and relieves their discomfort with their body.  It corrects, as much as possible, what is, in effect, a birth defect.  It is not magic, and it does not  change who a person is, or make them something they are not.

What this "J. Skyler" person seems to suggest is that I think that the act of having surgery would do just that, and nothing could be further from the truth.  Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen whined, "...It's more than that. She even gets on post-SRS folk who she deems to not be ideologically pure."  Again, a statement that is a bit of a distortion of what I actually think.  Yes, I have encountered post-ops that I seriously believe made a mistake having SRS.  For example, there is "Willow" Arune, the notorious defending of Bailey, Blanchard, and Lawrence, who asserted that he had decided to have SRS because he was raped in a Thai prison (and supposedly had it suggested by a therapist in Thailand).  Another good example would be "Anne" Lawrence...of Bailey, Blanchard, and Lawrence.  I could name a few more, but why bother?  Some are relatively well known, and some are more obscure.  Some have openly declared that they made a mistake, and others, like Arune, just act out in ways that show that their surgery was in error...while often maintaining that they made no mistake.  

So, what is my view?  It is actually simple.  SRS, like an medical procedure, has indication and contraindications.  It is not for everyone.  Surgery is not the dividing line between "real and fake, or between pretending/deviant and...well, whatever that person imagines would be the alternative."  Nor is it about ideology.  Of course, this shows what TG is about, and why it is a flawed, and yes, very dangerous concept.  SRS, again, is a medical procedure.  Those who would undergo it should be carefully screened.  In fact, if a therapist is not rejecting people who seek it, something is very wrong.  And sadly, an increasing number of therapists will pretty much rubber stamp any request.  Mistakes are going to happen.  Some people will always be able to con even the best therapist into granting them approval.  But, therapists should be more cautious.  Surgery should never be "on demand."

For example, if they are faced with someone who is middle-aged, has had a long and successful career as a man, who has shown no prior issues with their gender identity (and no, crossdressing not only doesn't count, but should be a red flag), these things should be investigated.  People who are transsexuals have life-long problems.  When someone claims they have always "known" they were the wrong sex, but clearly had no problems coping, and then suddenly, often after something that would otherwise trigger a mid-life crisis, declare that they are transsexual, and want a sex change, something is probably amiss.  As much as possible, the therapist should interview friends, family, and when appropriate, spouses.  There are a lot of things that should be looked at.  Taking the person's word for it, is not a wise path.

Fortunately, most who should not have SRS don't seek it.  This is the other side of the coin.  I don't think, for example, That Mr. Sandeen is a man because he doesn't want surgery.  I think he doesn't want surgery because, simply put, he is a man.  If he did decide to go the full route, it would not change him into a woman.  He would still be a man, albeit one with a vagina....in effect, finally becoming a transsexual, albeit an FTM.

And that brings us back to a very simple fact.  True transsexuals are rare.  Those who, for want of a better term, can be labeled as "transgender" are far more common.  This has always been true.  Being transgender is a choice, and currently something of a fad.  It is, in many ways, the current rebellious fad.  Such things come and go.  History offers many such examples, but the ones most are familiar with are the more recent ones... In the Fifties, there was the Beat Generation. At least they gave us some interesting literature.  In the Sixties, the Hippies came along.  They gave us some decent music.  They were followed by things like Punks, and Slackers....which didn't seem to give us much of anything.  I imagine, in time, the TG fad will begin to wane as well...and some will be left badly damaged because of it.

The TG Crowd Is Not Going To Like This....

The news media is all abuzz about the case of a transgender male in Idaho who was given a stay-away order by a grocery store after he was caught in the women's room.  Now, this is a perfect example of the sort of thing that I, and a lot of other women have a real problem with.

The way the story is being presented it...a "transgender woman" was told that "she" cannot come into Rosauers grocery store in Lewiston, Idaho after some women complained about "her" presence.

Okay, that is the mainstream media version...


And, here are a few facts that you may not have heard:

• The person involved has not changed his name. Even though it is implied that he is "living as a woman," his legal name is Alberto Robledo, though he apparently uses the name "Abby" to hide this fact.
• He had repeated this behavior for several days.
• And, perhaps most significantly, he was urinating while standing.

It is that last detail that is the real tip-off here. This is not a transsexual, but is a classic example of a transgender male invading the women's room.


The bottom line is clear, the grocery store's security people did the right thing.

It's Really Very Simple...

I occasionally take a look at Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen's Twitter feed.  Some of his best comedic work is there...  For example, today he got into a debate with a woman who posts as Aunty Orthodox.  Here, with my comments, are some of the sillier moments...

Aunty Orthodox 
@AutumnSandeen Alright, go for it. More power to you, to Camp Trans and so forth. But from my POV, you're working to destroy women's space.

Autumn Sandeen
@auntyorthodox No. I'm working to expand women's space to include all women.

I thought that one was particularly silly.  Sandeen, and other transgender extremists really are trying to destroy women's space.  They cannot stand the idea that there are places that "women with penises" are not allowed.  Sandeen needs to understand, women don't have penises, at least not that they want to keep.  I would argue that  transsexual woman is a woman, even before surgery, but that is not the case with Sandeen.  When he first burst onto the seen, he was an avowed non-op.  Then, he became a "surgery-tracked transsexual."  Then, he decided that having his testicles removed was enough.  He is back to being a Arnold Lowman-style, "woman with a penis," or more precisely, a transvestite.  But, he is apparently quite delusional, or terribly dishonest...

Autumn Sandeen


‪@auntyorthodox My birth certificate says I was born female - therefore for attendance purposes I'm going to consider my gender identity.

Sandeen also needs to understand that he is NOT and never will be a woman, no matter what his fraudulent birth certificate says.  And you have to love that male attitude that say, "I don't care, the rules don't apply to me...."  He is going to decide what criteria applies in his case.

Now, particularly enjoyed this next exchange.  First let me set it up by providing a little background about the person mentioned....



Kirk Sneade is an undergraduate at University College, London (UCL), who, along with his  "campaign team" were branded as being"misogynist pricks" by other students after he made a controversial run for a campus office.

First, he uploaded a video of a woman being punched by a man and a photo with the slogan "memes are gay". Then, Sneade, who has the audacity to claim he is the victim of discrimination, compared his situation to the persecution of communists in Nazi Germany.

This is his original manifesto:

• Kirk Sneade has self defined as a woman ever since he realised it gave him legal access to the women's changing rooms at the Bloomsbury gym.
• Kirk wants to make clear his desire to attend all Women's forums to talk about Important Woman Issues such as hair dressing, shopping and walking sassily away from confrontations with your exes.
• Kirk understands the need for equality. He wants to campaign to encourage women of UCL to wear leggings, jeggings and summer-time denim hot-pants.
• Kirk would also like to formally change the name of the Print-Room Cafe to the Pretty-Girl Cafe, and launch an official enquiry into why there are so many pretty girls in the cafe compared to the rest of UCL and what can be done about it.
• More speculatively, Kirk also suggests perhaps herding up the pretty girls you see around campus and keeping them ready for emergency transport to the Roxy later on when things start to get a little dry.
• Kirk is worried that people may see this manifesto as sexist. Kirk wants to make clear that while it is sexier than most, you should probably have a look at the others because some of them are pretty sexy as well.
• Kirk also wants to campaign for reinstatement of the Varsity rugby match, campaign against student politics being full of students who are out of touch with the student body and start the dissolution of the Women's officer position as it an inherently sexist and outmoded position of power within the union.

Now, with that in mind, consider this next bit:

Aunty Orthodox ‏ @AutumnSandeen "self-identified" doesn't seem like an adequate condition for actually gaining access to women's-only space.
 

Autumn Sandeen ‏‪@auntyorthodox Well, who -- in the broad sense of who -- decides how to police women's space, and who polices it?
 

Aunty Orthodox ‏‪ @AutumnSandeen I'd think it should be the organizers of the space, right?


Autumn Sandeen 

‪@auntyorthodox As I said - yes, they get to decide. But, trans community, of which I'm a part, get to engage in free speech & action too.
 

Aunty Orthodox @AutumnSandeen If you were in a women's-only space, would you welcome Kirk Sneade? 

Autumn Sandeen@auntyorthodox Now who's personalizing? Btw, that argument is the example of the KKK fallacy. ‪http://ht.ly/k2p6s 
 



‪Aunty Orthodox
@AutumnSandeen You're evading my question, and now you're bringing up the KKK? Please be serious.
 

Autumn Sandeen @auntyorthodox No no no. There is a logical fallacy called the KKK fallacy. It's in essence one that claims that...
 

Autumn Sandeen ‏‪ 

‪@auntyorthodox ...that are a number of black criminals, then all black people are dangerous and should be discriminated against..a fallacy.
 

Autumn Sandeen @auntyorthodox No no no. There is a logical fallacy called the KKK fallacy. It's in essence one that claims that...
 

Autumn Sandeen ‏‪ 

‪@auntyorthodox ...that are a number of black criminals, then all black people are dangerous and should be discriminated against..a fallacy.
 

Autumn Sandeen ‏‪

‪@auntyorthodox ...that are a number of black criminals, then all black people are dangerous and should be discriminated against..a fallacy.


Okay, there is so much silliness here....  First off, Sandeen tries, again, to avoid the real question, which is basically, by what right does he claim to be a woman?  While the most extreme of radical feminists take an extremist position that basically ignores science....well, so does Sandeen.  The feminists say that it is all about socialization.  They very much adhere to the "blank slate" theory.  That we all start out as blank slates, and our "gender" is written upon us based on socialization.  And that since we are all socialized based on what is between our legs at birth, that determines whether we are truly men or women.  That is, men are men because they are raised to be men, and women are women, because they are raised to be women.  Of course, science has proven this completely false.  The transgender extremists claim that simply because they claim to be women, and in some cases, claim to have "female brains," we have to take their word for it, even if they also state that they want to keep their male genitalia intact.  Science has also proven them to be wrong as well.  Those, like Sandeen, who claim to be "women with penises," expect people to take their word for it, even when they clearly, and unequivocally, act like men.

But that is only half of what is going on here.  Now, no one would ever, seriously, suggest that Snead is a "transgender."  He is clearly a misogynistic man, who has a serious delusion as to how funny he is.  Simply put, he isn't remotely....  But the problem that Sandeen tap dances around is, "If the transgender extremist have their way, who do you keep someone like Snead out of women's spaces?"  He states that he self-identifies as a woman.  Even though he clearly does not, how do you "prove" this?  How can you seriously differentiate between him, and Sandeen?  That is a problem for Sandeen.

And it is not solved by straw arguments like "the Klan Fallacy."  There are serious differences between "skin color" and "sex."  They are not comparable.  That is why we have different laws to deal with the two.  There is NO rational basis for discrimination based on skin color, but there is for discriminating, in certain limited situations, on the basis of sex.  It is irrational to claim that one has a right to be "uncomfortable" sharing a rest room with someone of another race, but it is not irrational to desire to keep someone of the opposite sex out of the restroom, or more importantly, locker rooms and showers.

As to the "Klan Fallacy," that is simply a straw argument tossed about by kooks like Mr. "Cristan" Williams, and Sandeen.  It has no application here.

Here is another interesting exchange...

Aunty Orthodox@AutumnSandeen Alright, go for it. More power to you, to Camp Trans and so forth. But from my POV, you're working to destroy women's space.


Autumn Sandeen ‏‪

‪@auntyorthodox ...is by intention defining women's space as not including of one kind of woman. Just as evil as it would be to exclude..


Aunty Orthodox ‏‪@AutumnSandeen It's not evil. If there is evil, it is forcing women to lose their safe space to people who only "claim" to be women.
 




Autumn Sandeen ‏‪@auntyorthodox ...and I can see now you're one of the bigots. I actually pity you...you're now on the wrong side of history.
 




Aunty Orthodox ‏‪‪@AutumnSandeen And trans activists who refuse to acknowledge womens' rights to create exclusive spaces are actually harming women.


Autumn Sandeen ‏‪‪@auntyorthodox ..your beliefs. To be true to my belief on how to combat antitrans sentiment, I must see your belief system crushed.

A couple of interesting points...  Disagree with Mr. Sandeen, and he instantly calls you a bigot.  Even if what you are doing is simply defining women's space as not including men.  I mean, really, Mr. Sandeen's only claim to being a woman is basically "because I say so."  That is one of those issues he keeps avoiding.  And then there is his classic fallback to violent language.  He has to "crush" Aunty Orthodox's belief system.  Crush...  Kind of scary. And I should point out, nowhere in any of this debate does Aunty Orthodox come across as a radical feminist.  Perhaps she is, but I see no evidence of it.

The bottom line to this whole thing is summed up in this exchange....

Aunty Orthodox @Autumn Sandeen This isn't about equality though. It's about women having the power to establish safe spaces, however they define that.
 

Autumn Sandeen ‏‪@auntyorthodox Ordinary equality means trans women are treated as other women..white, black, Hispanic, disabled, veteran..fill in the blank.


Sandeen could care less about safe spaces for women, as he is not one.  He is a man, and he thinks like a man, including the belief that he what he wants is all that matters.  And, more to the point, "trans women" are not remotely women.  To compare "trans" to things like "white, black, Hispanic, disabled, veteran" is absurd.  By its very nature, "trans" indicates that  they are men, and they want to continue to identify as men.  I am a woman, not a "trans woman."  Yes, I am a white woman, I am a Christian woman, I am a disabled woman...but those do not directly address my being a woman.  To say one is a "trans woman," on the other hand, is to make a statement that expands to "Well, I am really a man, who identifies as being a woman, but I cling to my identity as a man while still claiming to 'really be a woman.'"  Yeah, well, that's nice, now please, stay out of women's spaces....because you don't belong there.

A Moderate Proposal

Over, and over, I see the radical fringe of the transgender kooks demanding more and more outrageous concessions.  And unfortunately, in some cases, they get them.  I think it is time we rein in the silliness.  Therefore, I would like to put forward some moderate proposals that would provide for a balance between real need, and public safety and opinion.

First, I think that changing of birth certificates should be limited to those who have actually changed their sex.  That means, no "women with penises" or "pregnant males.  If you have not made the changes, you will not legally be viewed as having "changed your sex."  No more of this "change of gender" silliness.

Second, I think a simple compromise on issues like "transgender students in school" is to require any student who wishes to be fully recognized as a a different "gender" to be stealth.  In another words, if a student who is born male wants to allowed to use the girls bathroom, but has not had surgery, then they would be required to transfer to a school where they would be required to be stealth.  No more of this "out, loud, and proud" silliness.  If you claim you are "really" a female, or "really" a male, then really be a female or a male.  If you want to have it both ways, then you either use the bathroom appropriate to your genitalia, or you use a bathroom that is "gender neutral."  As to things like locker rooms (usually not a problem before at least middle school) the student would need to be excused from physical education classes.  

Likewise, I believe that access to bathrooms in general should be based on being in transition.  If you are a crossdresser, and this is all just a bit of a game, then it's YOUR problem.  You don't have a right to force yourself on women (or in extremely rare cases, men) just so you can engage in your fantasies.  And again, if you are pre-op, you cannot use areas where nudity is inevitable, period.

Also, I think restrictions should be made for other situations.  For example, if you are going to claim to have changed sex for purposes like engaging in athletic competition at the college level (it is unlikely that anyone in middle school or high school would be allowed to have undergone sex reassignment surgery) then again, stealth should be a requirement.  Privacy would be protected, so people would not be allowed to "research" information and out someone, but anyone publicly outing their own self would become disqualified.  "Gabrielle" Ludwig, for example, is back in the news. This is not someone who simply wanted to be who he really is, but instead is a classic transgender, seeking attention, and getting it at the expense of legitimate female athletes.

Bottom line, people should not be allowed to use situations as a soap box to push their agenda and take advantage of laws intended to protect people with real needs.  It is time to draw the line.  You want to be the real you?  Fine.  You want to attract attention?  Fine.  But using "legal rights" to attract attention?  Nope.

And lest you think I am being unfair, you should check out an article on "Transadvocate" which is not edited by the king of transsexual extremists, Mr. "Cristan" Williams.  Entitled "California Trans Student Domaine Javier Expelled By a Baptist University For 'Fraud' Is Suing" it takes the person in question to task for having lived stealth (even though the student then went public on MTV's True Life. At first, one might get the impression that the objections raised where simply over statements made on the show about having been "deceptive," but the final quote makes it obvious that the author of the article believes that "transgender" people, who I am sure would include in his mind, "transsexuals, must be, loud, and proud, or face condemnation:

So will Domaine begin to live proudly and authentically with us on our bittersweet road less traveled? Or will she continue to deceive? Watch and see.

In another words, will this person give up actually being a woman, which he already did when he went on True Life?  With transgender extremists, actually living authentically as a woman (or a man) is simply not an option.

I Must Have Struck a Nerve...

About two weeks ago, I posted about a silly bit of drivel on "cisgender privilege."  Well, the site that published that article decided to strike back....and, of course, post even more "transgender idiocy," (they don't like that term).  I have to say, I am honored.  

Granted, it is the usual sort of silliness one comes to expect.  I am accused of trying to impose a hierarchy.  Nope, not even close.  For their to be a hierarchy, there would have to be a direct relationship.  There isn't.  Transsexuals are not automatically transgender.

The person also take umbrage at my pointing out that transgender is a choice.  Of course it is.  It is an artificial social political construct with no objective basis in reality.  Period.   Now, a person who is a transsexual might choose to identify as transgender.  Some do, though I cannot for the life of me understand why.  But, transgender is a choice.  It is a chosen identity, though the more extremist of transgender activists, including über kook "Cristan" Williams, try, desperately, to force that label on people against their will. BTW, Mr. Williams was the first to praise the article.  That says a lot, right there.

In any case, this article simply serves as continuing proof of what I asserted in my previous article, and in numerous articles before, and a few since.  Transgender is about being "different."  For a person who identifies as "transgender" normal is anathema, in the sense of something to be denounced.  

I really get a chuckle out of this bit of true idiocy:

I have discovered that members of our community are policing each other and attempting to create a hierarchy of who is truly Trans or not. Many people are playing the same games of ‘normality’ that Gays and Lesbians have often pulled in an attempt to normalize themselves by othering people who are considered less normal. These situations really need to stop if we are going to strive for our goals.

Oh, this is so wrong, in so many ways....  To start, let me repeat, I am not part of the trans community.  Second, as I already pointed out, I don't believe a hierarchy can exist when there is no real relationship.  You now, the old bit about comparing apples and oranges.  Further, there is no real relationship between gays and lesbians and transsexuals, nor is there a relationship between gays and lesbians and people who choose to identify as transgender.  Yes, such a relationship may exist in the mind of some ignorant people, but in reality, there really is no connection.  People who are transsexual may be gay or lesbian, people who are transgender may be gay or lesbian, but people who are into left-handed, underwater basket weaving might also be gay or lesbian.  There is no real connection.  Further, no, this is not about "othering" people, it is about people othering themselves.  People are are transgender deliberately separate themselves from "normal."  They have no desire to be "normal."  That is what transgender is all about.  And finally, let me make clear, again,  I have no desire to further the goals of the transgender community.  I actively oppose the efforts of the transgender community.  I hope to do whatever I can to thwart the goals of the transgender community.

Now, I am taken to task for the alleged mistake of "assuming' that "Nina Ember Nova" is transgender.  Actually, whether this person is transgender or not has no bearing on the fact that what was posted is transgender idiocy.  It's still wrong, it's still bogus, regardless of how the person who wrote it chooses to identify.  And let me add that the term "privilege is, in and of itself, pretty much an example of idiocy in general.  It is used when someone feels that they are denied something they think they should be entitled to, and are envious that they don't have it.  It is what used to be called "covetousness."  In recent years, I have developed osteoarthritis in my left hip. I am not classified, at least for certain purposes, as disabled.  But I don't go around ranting about people having privilege because they are not.  Privilege is just another way of othering oneself, and trying to put down those you envy.

Ah, but the author goes on:

Ignoring that however, JustJennifer’s arguments were inherently wrapped around the notion that if a person truly needed to transition from male to female they would dress and act like a ‘normal’ woman like she apparently does. She also claims that its wrong for someone to look like a ‘man in a dress’ and also claims that some people “invite abuse” because of their gender expression. She also seems to take it upon herself to become a gatekeeper for transitioning by essentially claiming that if others do not match up to her experience, then these other people are just performing “Transgender idiocy” and are essentially fake. Her arguments are also classist and ableist in the belief that people require SRS to have safe spaces while many can not afford or medically receive care for numerous reasons. The point is, her arguments cater to the mainstream audience of society and ask people to cave under the pressure of social expectation instead of understanding that she, despite her self described medical condition, is just as much of a gender rebel to the world around her. Also, Nina and myself will be working to respond to her more in depth soon enough.

Okay, let's be clear about something here, AGAIN!!!  If you really are a transsexual, then you are essentially a normal woman (or man as the case may be).  You will not have the desire to play dress up and prance around in silly costumes like so many do, even though they claim to be "transsexuals).  And yes, if you are not to the point where you can blend in with other women, then you should have the good sense and decency to exercise discretion and show consideration for other women.  If, of course, you are a man, with a typical male personality, well....never mind.  You will act like a man, and we will react accordingly.

And yes those who really need to transition will, it is called "not making excuses."  Again, it is not easy, but one will find a way.  I did.  Others have.  But many won't.  It should also be noted that even when people have surgery handed to them on a platter, they will find excuses.  They, actually, are the ones who believe in this silly hierarchy stuff.  They think, like "Autumn" Sandeen does, that lying and claiming to be a transsexual elevates their status.  It doesn't.  It just makes then look like the liars they are.

And well, it sounds like this jerk, and "Nina" plan to take me on some more.  Good.  I like exposing foolishness.

In closing, let me offer up one last quote that shows the absurdity, and contradiction of this person's arguments:

The minute we, as Trans people, cross the gender/sex boundary, we are not considered normal any longer. We can go stealth and I certainly don’t take that away from any individual, but the mere act of having the courage to say, “Hey, I don’t belong to the group I’m assigned,” automatically introduces gender roles and the thoughts and opinions of society into the mix. It takes a certain level of internal thought and analysis to accept and understand something that much of society isn’t willing to accept as real. It is true that for some people there is a medical fix through hormones and surgery and the problem is more or less solved. Yet for others the acceptance and fight against a broken history and the narratives that are created for us as Trans People are problematic.

Now, I am accused of "othering" people.  Again, no.  I decline to be "othered,"  (BTW, there really are no such words as "othering" and "othered," but since the author uses them....)  First off, I may have crossed the "sex boundary," but no, I did not cross the "gender boundary."  My gender, or more accurately, my brains wiring, was always female.  I simply accepted that, and am living according to my correct gender.  I took steps to bring my body into alignment with my gender.  Interestingly enough, as I began the process, I actually found myself being called "ma'am" even while i was still, technically, "presenting as male."  That is, before I updated my paperwork, and specifically stopped crossdressing.  I chose not to but heads with society.  I saw no pleasure in it.  And that is what separates transsexuals, particularly true transsexual, from the transgender crowd.  We are not rebelling against our gender, or anything else.  We are simply getting on with our lives.  And many of us, like most people, might be amused by the transgender, but beyond that, we really don't understand their need to act out, and we certainly do not approve of it.

Don't blame me if you find it hard being a "trans person."  That's your choice, not mine.  I think you are acting out, and no, I am not going to pander to you, I am not going to play along, and I am not going to welcome you into women's space with open arms.

Extreme Transgender Silliness

Sometimes a transgender kook will publish something that is so incredibly silly it seems beyond belief.  This mornings round of silliness over at Women Born Transsexual brought just such an example.  Now, as you may know, Suzan Cooke mostly republishes stuff from other sites.  There is very little original content, and today is no exception.  One of Cooke's favorite sources of late has been the Huffington Post, which seems to have become a major mouthpiece for the transgender extremists.

This morning there was an article entitledTrans* Invisibility, by "JamieAnn" Meyers that has to be one of the best examples of what makes "transgender" completely distinct from both transsexualism, and well, from sanity as well.  The second paragraph pretty much sets the stage for this:

My wife and I were visiting with a cisgender heterosexual couple, and our conversation began to focus on personal relationships. Because we wanted to be authentic about our life experiences, we came out to them as a couple, and I came out as a trans* woman. Almost immediately, both of them said, "That doesn't matter to us." The intent of their statement was to be affirming, but the statement's impact on me was profoundly different. Though it's important to know that people respect and accept you, it's also important that they honor the lifelong struggle that you have faced as a trans* person.

Now, think about this.  The normal couple, and yes, relative to to the kook writing here, they are normal, basically says "Okay, no problem..."  Sounds reasonable, at least to a sane person,  But this is a transgender kook.  No!  Of course that is not example.  They have to honor the struggle of someone choosing to play dress-up and pretend to be a woman.  This is wrong on some many levels.  It is insulting to women who often face very real struggles.  It is insulting to gay and lesbian couples who have had to deal with discrimination.  Simply put, it is outrageously insulting to anyone who has faced real discrimination for something that was not, quite literally, a lifestyle choice.  

This person shows the true nature of transgender.  It is not, as we are so often told, about being who you really are.  It is about being transgressive.  It is about being at odds with societal norms, and it is about rubbing society's nose in your misbehavior.

Seriously, this person is complaining about people being accepting.  He, and yes, this is another person I refuse to pander to and call by female pronouns, is complaining because they are not making a big fuss over him being transgender.  Give me a break.

I have a few friends who know my history.  I have more who I am not sure know or not, and then quite a few whom as far as I know, have no idea.  Out of the friends who know, there is basically one who I discuss it with much,  And even then, he pretty much understands not to bring it up.  He might rarely ask a question, but I am generally the one who broaches the subject.  For example, on Monday night, we were talking and I suddenly realized something. asked what the date was.  He thought and said, "I'm not sure, why?"  I pulled out my smartphone, and saw it was the 11th.  I realized that the day before had been the 7th anniversary of my SRS.  I hadn't even thought about it.  Not that is not a significant day for me, but as time has passed, surgery has ceased to be a major focus for me.  Before I had it, getting to that point was very significant.  Now, looking back, it simply marks the point where my life got a lot better.  

Somewhat ironically, four days before that was the "anniversary" of "Autumn" Sandeen's showing up for work in drag.  A day he makes a big deal of, especially this year because it marked 10 years of him pretending to be a woman.  He has no idea, of course, what being a woman is like, and he never will.  Ironically, his making a big deal out his "anniversary" is one of the indications of this.

But for me, the past becomes more and more distant.  When I first started dealing with my problem (as opposed to making up an excuse like Sandeen and other transgender kooks have) I wondered if there would come a time when it would be easy to forget.  The answer is yes.  Outside of this blog, and the occasional conversation with my friend, being transsexual is not a major part of my life.

Funny, but I find it highly offensive when someone tries to remind me that they know that I am  transsexual.  It is not something I care to discuss with most people.  The one person I do discuss it with holds a special place in my life, as my spiritual director.  But in most cases, no, I don't like to talk about it.

And I find it rather silly that the original author makes a big deal out of comparing all this to "race."  Now, just think about this for a second.  A lot of humor has been made out of how people react to having the fact that they are a certain race pointed out.  If you are a complete fool, you might feel it necessary to let someone know you are okay with them being black, or Asian, or Native American, etc., but most of us would consider that a bit gauche.  And we would also consider it odd if someone got made because we didn't make an issue out of their race or ethnicity.

If you meet someone who is gay, do you feel it appropriate to make an issue out of it?  Do you go out of your way to "affirm" that you accept their gayness?  Not very likely.  I find it amazing that the Huffington Post would publish such an absurd article, but then again, this is about the idiocy know as "transgender," where making sure everyone knows you are a "man in dress" is part of the fun.