Well, it seems that "Autumn" Sandeen has decided to abuse the changes to the rules concerning passports, while playing dumb (or is he really that stupid) about why his new passport will be limited to two years.
Simply put, the government has had a long standing policy that allows those who are traveling overseas for SRS to obtain a temporary two year passport for the purpose of obtaining that surgery. Apparently, the rules have been loosened a bit to remove the specific requirement that one be traveling for surgery, but still there remains a two year limit for those who have not yet had SRS, clearly to allow them to easily travel for that purpose.
Well, of course the radical transgender crowd, like Sandeen, think this gives them license to obtain an ID that is often allowed in place of a birth certificate. So, now Mr. Sandeen can pretend to be a natal woman, while remaining an intact man.
In response to a question, he claims to not know why his deceptive passport will be limited to two years. The answer is simple...it is to allow him to travel to a place like Thailand to have SRS. But, of course, that is not what Mr. Sandeen plans to do. He just wants to have something that falsely claims he is a woman...another chance to revel in his transgender status, imagining himself to be a real woman....with a penis.
Mr. Sandeen needs to realize that a passport that claims he is a female will not make him a woman. It will just make him a man who is lying. And when his two years are up, his passport will end, and he will very possibly find that is it. That he will have had his little fun, but there will be no more.
I fully support the idea of allowing a temporary change to allow for travel for surgery, but all Mr. Sandeen's abuse of this will do is give conservatives more ammunition to oppose even that small favor.
Then again, Mr. Sandeen refuses to see that his antics hurt the chances for repeal of "don't ask. don't tell." Some of the extremists are even starting to push for the repeal of the ban on transgender people being allowed to openly serve. That is an absurd suggestion. While I can where people who have completed transition, and have had full surgery, might be able to serve, the idea of someone like Sandeen demanding to be allowed to serve as a female, while retaining his penis, is absurd. There really are limits, though extremists like Sandeen and his ilk refuse to acknowledge them.
UPDATE
It appears that Mr. Sandeen has decided that he misread the new law. He now plans to fraudulently claim that he has completed his transition, and that he is fully female. Apparently the kooks at NCTE talked to Obama administration into wording things vaguely enough that people can claim that they are fully transitioned when they are not. Never mind that such a change will almost certainly result in a nasty backlash that will wind up hurting true transsexuals when a more conservative president is elected. They will have had their short season of fun pretending to be women, and real women will, again, suffer.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
.jpg)
11 comments:
Actually, if you read the NCTE's explanation of the new passport policy, it actually allows preoperative folk like me to get full 10-year passports -- not based on surgery, but based on receiving clinical treatment.
I had misread the policy because it's confusing for lay people. Thankfully, myn attorney afriend Abby, nd Mara Keisling (executive director of the NCTE) explained the new passport policy to me, and fixed my misconceptions of what the policy changes are.
Basically, I wasn't going to be abusing the rules, I was going to be underutilizing the new rules. So I'll be getting a 10-year passport, not a 2-year passport, due to the assistance I received by my attorney friend Abby and my activist friend Mara.
Which is just excellent! =)
(Editing corrections for repost of comment.)
Actually, if you read the NCTE's explanation of the new passport policy, it actually allows preoperative folk like me to get full 10-year passports -- not based on surgery, but based on receiving clinical treatment.
I had misread the policy because it's a confusing document for lay people like me to easily understand. Thankfully, my attorney afriend Abby, as well as my activist friend Mara Keisling (executive director of the NCTE), explained the new passport policy to me -- both online and on the phone. The two fixed my misconceptions of what the policy changes are; apparently, you have misconceptions of the new passport policy as well.
Basically, I wasn't going to be abusing the rules when I applied for a 2-year passport, I was going to be underutilizing the new rules. So, I'll be getting a 10-year passport due to the assistance I received by my two knowledgeable friends.
Which is just excellent! =)
We shall see a well placed letter can unravel this easily enough.
And Mr Sandeen you deserve it.
You never have and never will be a real life transsexual.
I guess this new passport rule is the dream act for trannys.
Actually, Mr. Sandeen, abusing the law is exactly what you are doing. Even if the NCTE got the government to use vague language, it is clear that the full term passport is intended for people who have had genital surgery.
So what you plan to do, in the grand tradition of transgender fraud, is get a doctor to lie, and then knowingly submit a false statement to the government, If you claim you have completed transition, then you should be able to petition the California courts for an order to change your birth certificate. Oh, but wait, you still have a penis. So, you really haven't completed anything other than being another fraud. And I take it this is your admission that you really don;t have any plans for surgery. Since, if you do, you are further compounding your perjury.
And please note, while you enforce heavy handed censorship on your blog, you are free to come here and be humiliated to your hearts content.
Not even close. Your side lost because you now have to go into the closet with your non op status as far as the government is concerned. I hope you never get outed by being arrested again, it could go very badly if you present female documentation like a passport. And in turn it will cause them to reword the regulation so that surgery is mentioned.
That's the thing with all the TG "victories". They are presenting a false argument to authorities, and turning around and proclaiming a TG victory to their followers. It's smoke and mirrors, bait and switch.
They rely on the unstated assumption most people have that the pre-op TS is going to get surgery. Then when the truth comes out, that the authorities have been tricked...they will get really, really angry.
Every single "victory" claimed by the TG has been done under the auspices of the pre-op TS assumption, and the result is a complete falsehood from the perspective of regular society. The "TG" don't know, and don't acknowledge that if they do know.
Forward progress for TS halted when TG came into the picture, and these grudging few concessions are nothing like the work done before that allowed all the BC and License changes. When the public discovers the man-in-a-dress ruse they will move quickly to correct it.
I received several copies of this, indicating that it had been posted here by "Autumn" Sandeen. I don't know what happened to it, as I do not remove messages unless they are abusive to others, involve an invasion of privacy, or are spam or porn. So, I am posting this version so I can respond here.
Again, you don't appear to understand the new policy, Jennifer. I'm won't be claiming that my transition is complete, my doctor will instead be stating that I have received "appropriate clinical treatment for gender transition." That is not saying my clinical treatment for transgender transition is complete, it's saying I have met the current requirements for treatment to this point that State Department passport found in 7 FAM 1300 APPENDIX M GENDER CHANGE. Please don't add a requirement that isn't there in the current State Department passport policy, saying that "appropriate clinical treatment for gender transition" really means that "appropriate clinical treatment, which is genital reconstruction surgery, for gender transition is complete" as this isn't what the new policy is stating needs to be accomplished. In fact, the new policy specifically states:
"Sexual reassignment surgery is not a prerequisite for passport issuance and such documentation must not be requested.
Well, I have an email in at the State Department, and I will be posting their response here. I don't believe I am mistaken at all. And if you are so convinced, then have your doctor specifically state in the letter you are seeking, that you have not completed sex reassignment surgery. Have your doctor state that you are still, physically, a male, and see if you get that 10 year passport. Of course you won't, because you know as well as I do that you are committing a fraud. Obviously, genital surgery is not required to get a passport...a two year passport.
"Medical certification of gender transition from an attending medical physician as described in 7 FAM 1320 Appendix M is the only documentation of gender change required. Other medical records are not to be requested. If a passport adjudicating officer or consular officer has questions about this guidance or a particular case, see 7 FAM 1380 Appendix M."
Yes, I know, they are trying to pull a fast one. They are hoping no one notices. But people will notice, and this is only going to result in a backlash that will hurt true transsexuals, after you and your ilk has had its little thrill.
I'm using the new policy on transgender passports exactly as it was intended to be used, Jennifer. If you see it as abuse -- Well, Mara Keisling, and I -- as well as many of hers and my peers -- live under our real names, and as such are free to lobby politicians and regulatory agencies. Or, we can donate to organizations that do lobbying on our behalf -- as I donate monthly to the National Center For Transgender Equality (NCTE). Lobbying by publicly identified members of the transgender community -- which include preoperative, nonoperative, and postoperative people who publicly identify as transgender men and as transgender women -- resulted in this change of State Department regulatory policy change on passports for transsexual people of all stripes. This policy doesn't just apply to postoperative transsexuals for permanent passports, but transsexuals of all stripes. It's not abuse of a policy if one is using a policy exactly as the policy was intended to be used, despite your personal view in this case that it is.
What you are doing is using the policy as it was intended to be used by the extremists at NCTE. If genital surgery was not expected, why bother with two different types of passport. This is really just restoring the policy that was suspended by the Bush administration. The one that allowed for a temporary passport to travel to get surgery. You can play semantics all you want, but the simple truth is, you and NCTE are committing fraud.
(continued)
And here is the rest of Mr. Sandeen's comment and my reply:
Let me point out here that you currently post on the internet under the alias of Just Jennifer, and don't work with a community of your peers and allies to lobby for any legislative and administrative policy goals. You have no national or local organizations arguing your position to lawmakers or bureaucrats. So if you see my use of the State Department's new passport policy as "abuse" of the system, you did nothing to make sure that the government treats me as an inferior kind of transsexual to a postoperative woman who identifies with Harry Benjamin Syndrome.
Let me point out here that I a woman, not a disturbed man like you, who gets his jollies playing at being a woman but relishing the fact that he still is packing a penis in his panties. No, I am not "out, loud, and proud," because I did not go through all the pain, and misery, to be a "transgender," or a "trans woman." And sir, you have no idea what my involvement is. No, I do not make a public spectacle of myself, chaining myself to fences while bringing shame to the Navy. You violate the law regarding the use of a military uniform (wearing it during political activities is a clear violation) and you wearing a woman's uniform is a sham. You were not a woman, are not a woman, and will never be a woman. You do it for jollies, That is just sad.
Because those who identify similarly to me (and me as well!) are publicly out of the closet with our transgender identities and our legal names, and your peers and you aren't out with your identities and your legal names; and because we often work as a community to achieve pro-transgender legislation and policies, and you and others who identify similarly to you do not -- well, we can (and do on occasion) achieve our legislative and policy goals, and your peers and you don't achieve any legislative or policy goals your peers and you might believe are best for you and others who identify similarly to you.
First off, you are "out, loud, and proud," because otherwise you would not be able to engage your fantasies and rub the public's nose in your trans status. You know you are not a woman, and don't really want to be one. You are an exhibitionist transvestite who enjoys being the center of attention. You are considered a joke. And you do far more harm than good.
Frankly, if you want to put this in terms of winning and losing, my side of the issue won, and your side of the issue lost. Call that a personal humiliation of me if you want to, but I call it a win; I call it progress I've been personally willing to sacrifice for to achieve.
What will happen is that Obama will be replaced by a conservative, possibly one who is far right, and there will be a backlash that will hurt true transsexual women.
As to the rights that benefit me, and those like me, we have them. They are called "women's rights." You see, we don't parade around as freaks. We don't rub our medical history in everyone's face. We assimilate and live quiet, productive lives. And we are sick and tired of people like you trying to screw with our lives.
I think it's time to fight fire with fire. Who says they're the only ones with access to Congress and the Senate? I happen to live in a fairly conservative state (GA) and I know my congressional district reps would be *very* interested to know that men in dresses were trying to upset the apple cart, again...
Autumn, You help no one but yourself and you're hurting many more. You lack a larger view of things.
You live as a tranny - well good for you. The rest of us live as WOMEN - big difference. We don't want to be identified or live as trannys - we want to live as women.
Your parading around does not help those of us - including the many you never hear about - who want to live as WOMEN. You are making things more challenging.
Your arrogance is unbelievable to ASSSUME we as citizens of this country do not have access to our legislative members of local and national government.
As Ms. Lisa said - perhaps some of said congressmen would love to know what you're up to.
Autumn, you do not represent me and it would do the world a load of good if you would shut the fuck up.
Jennifer, in the past it was not a 2 year passport - it was a 1 year passport.
Post a Comment