A Historic Moment....

Well, as of noon Eastern Standard Time on January 20, 2009, our country has a new President. And this was a moment of major historical significance as it represents the first time that an African-American has become President. It is an exciting time for the country. There has been a lot of speculation about what this means for various factions, including the "transgender" community.

Personally, I wonder what Obama's taking office means for those who have Harry Benjamin Syndrome. It has become obvious that more often than not, that which is sought by the "transgender" activists may not be acceptable to those who have HBS, and may even be detrimental. Obama has already stated that there will be no discrimination in his administration's hiring on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. It will be interesting to see how that works out in actual practice. Of course, for most with HBS, this would not be that much of an issue, as they would not want that fact made public.

And I know, during the transition, one local "transgender expert" was called to meet with the transition team to provide advice for the Department of Health and Human Services. I don't know exactly what actual advice was offered, but I have concerns since this person has strong links to some who represent the more extreme elements of the "transgender community."

There are, of course, more practical issues of concern to those with HBS. For example, how will the new administration implement the Real ID act? This law caused a lot of concern because it appeared that it might lead to problems for those who had left their previous lives behind. It has somewhat faded as an issue, since full implementation has been put off until 2011.

Another area of concern regards passports. There was some talk, early in the Bush administration, that the policy of issuing temporary passports with the sex marker changed for those traveling overseas to have sex reassignment surgery would be ended. Apparently this did not happen. Again, it seems likely that this will not be a problem under Obama's administration. But there is a possible danger that the laws might be loosened too much.

The bottom line is, what those with HBS most need is simply the right to be recognized as being members of their reassigned sex, and to have their privacy protected. Unfortunately, that is a not at all a priority for the transgender crowd, who are more interested in forcing society to accept men as women, and vice versa.

One thing is clear, this is a time of renewed hope. Many are more than willing to give Obama the benefit of the doubt, and to look ahead with optimism. Only time will tell whether he will be a great President, or a major disappointment.

But I have to say, I am very disappointed in the behavior of many who did support him. There has been a lot of nasty comments about George Bush. Bush was certainly not a great President, and there were certainly a lot of mistakes made. But he was hardly the monster he has been made out to be. And he was hardly the worst president ever. At least two others come to mind that I would consider worse, one Republican and one Democrat. Those attacking Bush would no doubt be among the first to be offended at the least slight against Obama. Once again, it appears that irony is dead. No one likes a sore loser, and a sore winner is even more offensive. It remains to be seen if Obama represents a major change in American politics, or if we will return to the conservatism that has dominated before. Only time will tell.

The Bathroom Issue....Again

The dreaded "bathroom issue" has reared its ugly head again, this time in Gainsville, Florida. About a year ago, the city council there passed an ordinance that, among other things, granted "transgender people" the right to use whatever bathroom they choose. Now, a conservative group has started an effort to repeal the law. As part of this effort, they have put out a very controversial commercial. The thing is, the conservative group raises a vaild point.

Now, I know that is remark is going to be taken as heresy by the transgender crowd, but that is just another example of how short sighted they can be. This ad exposes a very real problem with this law, but it is one that the transgender activists want to ignore, or perhaps pretend is not really there, but it is there, and it needs to be addressed.

The law simply states that access to facilities cannot be prohibited on the basis of, among other things, gender identity. It does include an exception where nudity is unavoidable, such as dressing rooms and showers.

The problem is, the conservative groups have targeted the very obvious flaw in this law. It is simply too vague. Now, it is very possible, even probable, that this is not their actual purpose, but it is still true. The transgender activists have, of course, been raising a howl. They are complaining that they are being portrayed as "sexual predators." But the strange thing is, that is not what is happening at all. I really don't see where they are remotely suggesting that "transgender people" are going to be doing something wrong. What they are pointing out, and quite rightly so, is that as the law is written, it allows anyone to enter any bathroom, and simply claim that at the moment they did so, they have a certain gender identity. And that is obviously a problem.

The commercial that has everyone up in arms does not even remotely portray a transgender person, at least not obviously. It shows a man, clearly presenting as a man, entering a women's room. I certainly don't think that is what the law was intended to protect. But, it is exactly what this poorly written law would allow.

So, what is the answer to this sort of problem? Some would simply say that anyone born male should be forced to use the men's room. That would do serious, and grevious harm to those born with HBS. So, as is often the case, we are caught between two extremes. Obviously a compromise is needed.

The proper answer is quite simple. The law should simply put reasonable restrictions on who is, and is not, allowed to use a bathroom that does not match their anatomic sex. It should be restricted to those who are undergoing treatment for HBS or transsexualism, who have started the real life test and are thus living full time as a female. Tranvestites, so-called non-ops, and those who identify as gender queer would either use the restroom appropriate to their birth sex, or else need to find a unisex restroom (which are increasingly provided in public places for situations where assistance is needed, and the care provider my not be the same sex).

This would solve the problem for everyone. The religious right would have less to complain about, those who really need to have this right would receive it, and it should reallty do no harm to those who wish to identify as women while retaining their penises. In fact, it would give those who are gender rebels a chance to be very "out, loud, and proud." And most importantly, it would remove a defense that could be used by those who might abuse it.

Would this make everyone happy? No, of course not. But it would do what is right, and accomplish what was probably originally intended,

And the Clue Meter Continues to Read Zero....

I never fail to be amazed at how incredibly clueless the gender facists can be. They spend an incredible amount of time whining about the how people should be free to be who, and what, they wish to be, while at the same time they attack those who are pushing the Harry Benjamin Syndrome model...because they seem to object to people having the right to be a part of the gender binary. In there view, it only seems to be acceptable for someone to have surgery as long as they are willing to be "out, loud, and proud" as a member of the "transgender communuity." Anyone who dares to simply wish to be normal, and live their life as who they really are is branded as a traitor to the cause.


Recently, one of the leading gender facists, Mercedes Allen, posted on "The Future of Transsexual Medical Care." Now, when I first saw this, I thought it rather funny Mr. Allen would be trying to speak about was the future of medical care for those who are transsexuals, not transgender. After all, for many years Allen was an avowed "non-op." But it seems that Allen has recently decided that he wants to be a "woman" after all. In an earlier post, "Mercedes Joins the Gender Binary," he announces that he has decided that he wants "GRS," by which he means "Gender Reassignment Surgery." Now, unless doctors have figured out how to make major reconfigurations to the human brain, I have no idea who such a surgery could be accomplshed. Of course, Mr. Allen is really just a classic transgender on whom such fine points are lost.


Now, as disturbing as it is that Allen has "suddenly" decided that he wants "surgery," that is not the primary topic of this article. But I would like to take a moment to discuss this sort of thing. Now, first off, it is entirely possible that this is just a ploy to gain some status and credibility. In the "Imaginary Transgender Hiearchy of Status" a "pre-op" trumps a "non-op." Of course, a "post-op" trumps them all, but that is beside the point. By moving from "non-op" to "pre-op" Allen can possibly hope to silence those who dismiss him as just a "wannabe." In fact, given that he remarks " It also doesn’t mean that I’m allowing ideological bullies push me into making a life-changing decision based on their indignant and bigoted puritanism," it is very possible that is all that this is. Now, I don't know of a single HBS person who would ever actually do such a thing. Almost everyone would say that this is not something to seek unless it is absolutely necessary, and in fact, my advice to Allen would be to seriously reconsider if he is seriously considering surgery. Everything I have read that he has written indicates that he is not a person who needs to choose that path. In fact, no one should ever "choose" it at all. If it is truly a choice, then no, it is the wrong path.


But that aside, I was struck by the complete cluelessness of Allen's attempt to "pontificate" on medical issues. What specifically brought this on was the assertion that, "What is needed right now is to assess what our community itself can do in order to (best case scenario) drive the change toward a better model of transsexual health, or at least to (worst case scenario) avoid a future in which transition and surgery are further restricted or made unattainable to the people who need them."

Now, first off, Allen is one of those who rejects the Harry Benjamin Model, even though it is specifically a "better model of transsexual health." The problem is that it is not a "model of transsexual health" that fits the transgender party line. And, of course, I would imagine that what Allen really means is that he would like to avoid a future in which surgery is specifically restricted to those who need it. Allen, as has been observed, does not "need" surgery, but instead has developed, for whatever reason, a desire to have the surgery...or at least to claim that he does.

Again, I strongly suspect Allen simply wishes to claim some degree of standing to speak for those seeking surgery. His previous writings show no inclination towards any real desire for normality. And that is really what separates those who are truly transsexual, or preferably HBS, from those who transgender.

A person with HBS generally wishes to simply be who they really are. They derive no pleasure from being "different" and that plays no part in their motivations to transition. In fact, much of their life has probably been spent in misery because they have been punished for something they cannot help and which they often do not completely understand.


Early on, all I knew was that there was something wrong. I knew I was not "normal," but I did not really understand exactly why. I seemed to be at odds with what the world expected of me. In my childhood innocence, I was simply myself. As I grew older, my behavior caused more and more distress for my parents. Of course, they did not deal with this well, and when I did not "outgrow" those things, they tried to correct me. I learned to hide parts of me from people.

Now, for most people who are "transgender" the opposite was largely true. They were perfectly normal in childhood. They showed no signs of having gender issues until after puberty. In fact, many of them lead successful lives in their birth sex. For me, the opposite was largely true. I had numerous indications of what lie ahead. But, I wanted to get away from it. I did not know what was wrong, but I knew I had to hide it from my parents, my teachers, and my peers. The worst thing I could be was a "sissy." I was, I wanted to deny it, but I could not escape it.

When I read someone who says that he had a successful career, or was happily in the military for an extended period, but now is a "woman," I am just amazed. I would not have lasted through basic training in the military. Not as a man, for sure. I know there are women in the armed forces, but for all of the claims of "equality," they are still treated differently. They are not expected to be men, as that would never work. But these men were often able to successfuly fit in, and had no problems serving.

Of course those like Allen who "suddenly" decide to have surgery after an extended period of denial are classic autogyenphiles. The flaw in Blanchard's theories is not that autogynephiles do not exist, this beyond quesion, but that he is excessively rigid in his criteria. A lot of younger women with HBS identify as lesbian. That does not mean they are autogynephils, and they certainly do not fit within Blanchard's stereotypes. But those like Allen do show the classic indications. They may try to deny it, but that is what they are.

No, the transgender crowd continues to be completely clueless. They want everyone to be part of one big, happy family of gender variant people. They cannot understand that there are significant differences, and that there really is no such thing as "transgender" as they try to define it. At best, it is a group that people should be free to opt into. They want it to be a group that no one can opt out of.

Another great example of the difference between transgender and HBS

I just found out about this absurd bit of drivel on YouTube. Now, this video, named "The Politics of P" features someone who claims to be a woman, or more specifically a "transwoman." In fact, in the video they ask the question..."Does the preference to pee standing up make me less of a woman..." The answer, simply put, is an unequivocal YES!!!!

This person is as "transgender" as they come. He is not a woman, and he certainly is not someone who has HBS. He has a very bizarre idea of what being a woman is about. No question, this person certainly "passes" visually, though the voice is clearly male. As is the brain, and really, that is what matters.

View the video here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRDvnPSmT2I

What the Pope said...and didn't say, and why I agree with him.

The transgender types are up in arms because, as they wish to put it, "The Pope has attacked transsexuals." Now, two things quickly become obvious....first, the transgender types did not actually pay any attention to what the Pope actually said (or perhaps, don't want to) and second, they have suddenly decided that by calling themselves "transsexual" they can further muddy the waters, since many of them have absolutely zero desire to give up their penises. They remind me of the old gun nut bumper stickers...."They will take my penis when they pry my cold dead fingers from it."

Actually, the Pope did not specifically mention transsexuals. He spoke out against so-called "gender theory," which is at the heart of much of what defines "transgender," not true transsexualism which is now increasingly referred to as Harry Benjamin Syndrome. Of course, I realize that the Pope probably does not truly understand the difference, since he is advised by people like Paul McHugh who is deliberately ignorant of the facts.

No, what the Pope was speaking out against is the theory that came out of radical feminism which holds that "gender" is all a social construct, and that people should be free to decide such matters for themselves. Except, of course, that the most radical practitioners are very unhappy unless they actually decision is to either stick with the gender considered appropriate for one's birth sex or to be some sort of gender queer. Being HBS is usually not consider an acceptable "choice." And of course, in "gender theory" it is all a choice. Biology is not considered an acceptable explanation.

What is odd about this is the fact that LGBT dogma holds that homosexuality is always congenital. But being transgender is usually held to be a choice. And what is even odder is that the evidence that gender is inherent is pretty much insurmountable, while the evidence that homosexuality is never a choice is still lacking. Now, it is pretty certain that some people are born homosexual, and that others make a choice. Simply observing behavior in prisons should make it obvious that some choose homosexual behavior when they have no other option for sex. When their situation changes, they return to being straight. And it is certainly true that transgender people clearly choose to rebel against their inherent gender.

I agree with the Pope that "gender theory" is invalid, and that it poses threats to societal order. While I have no desire to force people's behavior, that does not mean that I am going to approve of it either.

Pope Paul VI had not problem with the surgical treatment of transsexuals since it improved people's lives. The current Pope is influenced by people who claim the opposite, but who do so by ignoring the clear evidence. The Pope is right about "gender theory" but is mislead about those who have HBS. I believe if he had more accurate facts, his views would be different.

No, in spite of what you read, the Pope did not attack transsexuals. He did attack "gender theory" which is favored by many, if not most, who style themselves as "transgender activists." And that is why they are so dead set on attacking him for simply speaking the truth.

A couple of examples of what is wrong with "transgender."

As I have pointed out in the past, I, like most HBS survivors, object strongly to being referred to as "transgender." A couple of recent items that are floating around the web show why we have such strong objections to the label.

The first is the now well-known story of Stu Rasmussen, the recently elected mayor of Silverton, Oregon. Now, for those who have not heard of Stu, well he is quite the character. He is quite open about being a crossdresser. That is, perhaps, shocking enough. But he does not stop there. Even though he rather admantly identifies as a straight male, he has taken at least one step to alter his body, having had breast augmentation. He wrote an article about the experience for Transgender Tapestry under the name Carla Fong.

Now, admittedly, Stu is a rather extreme example, but how anyone could possibly think that an HBS woman (or man for that matter) has anything in common with someone like this is beyond me. Stu makes no attempt to actually be a woman. He just likes, as he puts, being "...a heterosexual male who appears to be a female." A favorite t-shirt of his anwers the obvious question, "Why?" It reads simply, “Because girls have more fun.”

Now, some "transgender" activists are thrilled over Stu's victory. I mean, you can't get much more "transgender" than him. And that pretty much says it all.

Now, don't get me wrong. I think Stu has every right to live his life however he wishes. It is kind of a puzzle to me, but it is his life. But, I'll be honest. I doubt I would vote for such a person for mayor. I would have serious questions about any such person.

Another good example comes from that bastion of weirdness, Bilerico, and was posted by none other than Monica Roberts, who we have written about previously. It is a little ditty Roberts wrote to be sung to the tune of "Santa Baby."

Santa Baby (Transgender Version)
Sung to the tune of Santa Baby by Eartha Kitt

Santa Baby, just slip some hormones under the tree,
For me.

Been an awful good girl, Santa Baby,

So hurry down the chimney tonight.


Santa Baby, I need some electrolysis, too
I do.

I'll wait up for you dear, Santa Baby,
So hurry down the chimney tonight.


Santa I am being dissed.'
Cause I was born a mister and Not born a miss

Next year, I'll be really good
If you'll check off my surgery wish list

Santa Baby, I want lipo to make me look hot
Why not? Been an angel all year, Santa Baby,


So hurry down the chimney tonight


Santa, Honey, one little thing
I really need, indeed

Round trip tickets on an airline,

Santa Baby.So hurry down the chimney tonight.


Santa Cutie, an early date for my SRS
Please check.

Kunaporn will be fine, Santa Cutie,

And hurry down the chimney tonight.

After my recovery,
I'll need to change my name from Ted to Tiffany.

I really do believe in you.
Let's see if you believe in me.


Santa Baby, please remove the ding-a-ling,
By spring.

I don't want it no more, Santa Baby,

So hurry down the chimney tonight.

Hurry down the chimney tonight.


Hurry . . . Tonight

Now, this bit of silliness, courtesy of Monica Roberts, exhibits quite a bit of the "transgender" mindset, which often treats SRS as a sort of fantasy...not something one necessarily actually has, but as a sort of a fun thing to dream about. The original song is bad enough...but this is really awful. The lyrics seem to show a lack of real understanding of the realities of correction for HBS women. And the terminology seems to be right out of the autogynephile playbook. I imagine it would be a real hit at Asia SF, a San Francisco nightclub the features the finest in "gender illusionists."

Hey, the transgender can have their fantasies and their weird behavior, just as long as they leave me out of it. But that is really the heart of the problem. They keep insisting on dragging people with HBS under their little umbrella, and worse, they expect us to step to the front and be more visible.

What are the Gender Fascists so afraid of?

Well, after making some polite comments in support of an article on the Bilerico Project website, and enduring more than a few insults, I have just discovered that I was banned. Worse, the message in which they stated this is untrue. A while back, I was given a suspension, and was told I could return as a registered user after a week or two. I forget the exact time period. When a topic I was interested in was posted, I decided to comment, and joined. Of course, anyone who actually refutes he pary line of certain there is going to be booted. In fact, I am surprised they even allowed the post I responded to, as it was contrary to what is acceptable.

This is typical of certain people who can be though of, collectively, as the Gender Fascists. Their view is that gender is a social construct, that transsexualism has no legitimate basis, generally that SRS is not only unneeded but is actualy "evil" and that anyone should be able to change their "sex" simply by saying they have changed their sex. Contradict them, and you are going to pay the price of being insulted. Actually refute their arguments and you will be shown the door.

It used to be said that reality is for those who can't handle drugs. I guess Bilerico is perfect for those who can't handle reality.

What are they so afraid of? That is simple. They are afraid of the truth.