It's Really Rather Simple

I came across this on Twitter, and I find it rather amusing....

Well, first off, I am not fixated on him at all.  He is one of several "transgender extremists" I regularly look at for source material.  I also look at the rants of Mr. "Cristan" Williams, Mr. "Monica" Roberts, Mr. "Dana" Taylor, Bilerico, Suzy Cooke, Transgender News, and others. And I get ideas from various other sources.  

Now, to be honest, I have never actually looked at how often any one person shows up in this blog.  I know others, including Cooke, Mr. Williams, and Mr. Taylor have all made similar claims.

But the reasons Mr. Sandeen has shown up so much are rather simple....

1. He is an extremely prolific blogger at times.  When he is in one of his manic phases (he is very vocal about being bipolar) he writes a lot.
2. His writings tend towards the sillier extremes of the transgender movement.  He provides some of the best of the worst of transgender silliness.
3. He really is sort of a perfect storm of insanity.  I mean, this is someone who has rather publicly boasted of his defrauding the court system in San Diego (and yes, he knows he pulled off a fraud, because he was frantically afraid that someone would let the court know he was still a male).
4. He has, on more than one occasion attempted to stalk me, and bully me.  I don't take well to such attempts.  Especially when they involve him attempting to use my daughter against me.  I would never dream of trying to track down his estranged son to obtain dirt on him.  And then he had the nerve, when he feared being reported to authorities, to try to claim he was trying to "help."
5. And, it should be noted that it was Mr. Sandeen's over the top censorship  at Pam's House Blend was what let to me deciding to blog.  Who knew it would that would lead to.  Sort of backfired on him in ways he never imagined.

I realize Mr. Sandeen, like a lot of men, does not take well to disagreement, or criticism, but hey, that's tough.

Cooke the Kooke Goes Off the Deep End

Well, Suzan Cooke has really gone loopy this time.  A person didn't even really disagree with Cooke, and Cooke still went ballistic.  Cooke actually disagreed with Mr. "Monica" Roberts, the leading gender fascist bigot, when Mr. Roberts basically demanded that everyone be "out, loud, and proud." And someone, well, actually thought they were agreeing with Cooke, but no, Cooke went off the deep end...

Here is what the person said, in response to Cooke's basically disagreeing with Mr. Robert's demand that all transgender people must be out (and remember as a fully blown gender fascists, Mr. Roberts presumes to include all transsexuals as transgender, even though he really, really hates the post-op ones, especially if they are white....okay, Cooke is an exception, because Cooke is so racked with guilt for being white, and fawns all over Mr. Roberts):

Yes more “out and proud” exultations; I get tired of being told I’m Doing It All Wrong.

And people like Dana Taylor who has seen the one true transgender light* and renounced being just another woman in favour of jumping onto a virtual Pride carnival float with all the flouncy men. How long until her new friends start tearing her apart?

Of course, "Dana" Taylor, who deluded himself into thinking he was not only a transsexual, but a separatist one, has now "seen the light" and decided he really, really loves his penis, and realized that means that lesbians don't want to have sex with him, has decided to join the transgender extremists, since they, presumably, will have sex with him, while claiming that they are really all lesbians in good standing, even if they all still have penises.

Cooke's response?

Being transsexual doesn’t require one to be an ass**** towards transgender people. HBS holes are like KKK/Nazis who think being white requires white people to be racist bigots like them. So far I haven’t met an HBSer who lived up to their bull**** standards. Most are keyboard warriors donning an imaginary avatar uniform to spread bigotry. (sorry, but I am not going to repeat Cooke's profanity)

Hmmm, this is true.  I have even said that a person can be a transsexual, and choose to identify as transgender, if that is what floats their boat, though I cannot imagine why anyone would be so stupid.  But, apparently, in Cooke's brain-damaged delusions, being transgender does require one to be an ass**** towards transsexuals.  Now, apart from the Godwin's Law violation, and the silly delusions (the only standard I have ever seen from the HBS advocates was that one either have had surgery, be living a successful life, or that they be serious seeking it.  But such details such a facts are lost on an insane person, such a Cooke.

Now, it get's worse.  This person had the audacity to disagree with Cooke's portrayal of her.  I mean, the nerve of some people.  Cooke has spoken, and no one should question the absolute truth of the great and powerful Cooke.

Blah, blah, blah. I’ve heard the song too many times. Learn a new one or go play in traffic. I have better things to do than sit here moderating your stupid boring posts. 

Step away from your key board and take off your dress, play time is over. 

The fantasy trannie HBS princess game bores the crap out of me.

I would say that this was the end of any respect I had for Cooke, but that happened a long time ago.  Now, I just see Cooke as basically an insane person, ranting, and trying to live out some bizarre delusion of importance.

I won't bother quoting the next person's comment, or Cooke's rather hilarious diatribe about being a pioneer and all.  If you really are interested, or just need a good laugh, and yes, it is hilarious, follow the link about.

And, one more thing....like a pit bull, Cooke can't let go of this one...  There is another post here, that is even more insane that the one I wrote about here.  Simply put, for the most part, the only person ranting about HBS is Cooke.  The rest of us have pretty much gone back to using the term "transsexual."  Not Cooke's laughable "Women Born Transsexual," just transsexual.  And nope, no one has to make up an lies about Cooke.  The truth is plenty damning enough.  Oh well....

The Sad Case of Dana Lane Taylor

Dana Lane Taylor, who at one time identified as a "transsexual separatist" has now embraced the transgender cause, and is Mr. "Cristan" Williams' latest BFF.  A lot of people are amazed at this turn around.  

Taylor is concerned about now being attacked by former friends.  Nope, though I do feel pity for this sad individual.  Clearly Taylor has a very fragile self-identity.  Taylor apparently embraced both "transsexual separatism" and "radical feminists" in order to feel like a "real woman."  The key word there is "feel like."  

You either are a real woman, or you are not.  Mr. "Cristan" Williams, Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen, Mr. "Monica" Helms, Mr. "Monica" Roberts, and others are not.  They really don't identify as women, but as some odd creature they call a "transwoman."  Oh, they say, "Transwomen are real women," but that is simply laughable at best.  Women are women.  No qualifiers.  They don't want to be women, they want to be "women with penises."  Even if they make the mistake of having SRS, they have an overwhelming need to cling to their maleness.

No, I am not going to attack Taylor, though I will speak out if Taylor starts saying stupid stuff in support of the transgender cause.  It would just be cruel right now.  This person clearly needs serious help, and I fear all creeps like Williams and Sandeen will do is take advantage and make things worse.

I don't need people's acceptance to be a woman.  That is why Taylor fell into a trap.  Taylor cozied up to the radical feminists, who I consider to often be as extremist, in their own right, as the transgender kooks, and then, on discovering that they were not fully accepting, had an emotional crisis.  

Funny how that works.  You tell a bunch of people, who basically hate men, "Hey, I 'was' a guy," and then you get upset because the say, "Sorry, but we don't see you as a woman."  If you are a woman, fine.  But it is not an "identity" you adopt.  I fear Taylor has discovered, the hard way.

Has The Backlash Started?

Yesterday brought some interesting news. Mr. "Allyson" Robinson, the transgender person who became the Executive Director of OutServe/SLDN has been asked to resign. The details remain murky, but apparently the board of the group that was originally formed to push for an end to "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" decided he had to go. Robinson was another of those who served a long career in the military, including graduating from West Point, and then claiming to have "always known they were really a woman." Sorry, but I find that quite a bit too much to swallow.  Robinson has, of course, been at the forefront of the effort to force the military to accept "openly transgender individuals," which has to be one of the more insane ideas pushed by a bunch that is known for pushing some pretty insane ideas.

I have to wonder if this was too much for even those who strongly favored homosexual members of the military openly serving.  While it became increasingly difficult, and finally impossible, for opponents to sustain the argument that gays serving in the military would lead to problems, it is obvious to all but the most radical, that open service by transgender people is just unworkable.

Even as extremist kooks like Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen, Mr. "Monica" Helms, and even everyone's least favorite racist, Mr. "Monica" Roberts screech their shrill demands for open transgender service, anyone with a shred of sense can see numerous problems.  The simplest would be where such service members would be housed.  If they are housed with members of their own sex, that would present problems.  Housing them with those who they claim to identify with would be an even greater problem.  And let's not even go in the direction of having a separate transgender unit.  That would just be insane.

Of course, the transgender bloggers have been somewhat quick to react, claiming that he was fired because of gay anti-transgender bias.  Anything to avoid facing the fact that one of their favorite demands is too much for even those who opposed Don't Ask, Don't Tell to swallow.

As the transgender community makes sillier and sillier demands, they can expect more and more pushback from those who are not, well, as insane as they are.

The Insanity Continues....

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

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

The facts remain:

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

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

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

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

Seriously, Transgender and Reality Seem Incompatible

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

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

Misgender the person at every opportunity? Check

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

Use police mugshot? Check

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

Drag old criminal record into the story? Check

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

'Deception meme' injected into story? Check

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

'Tragic transsexual' meme injected into this story? Check

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

Use salacious and sensationalist headlines? Check

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

Oddly dressed body found in Olmsted Township pond identified

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

The second headline in question...

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

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

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

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

Disrespecting another African-American transwoman? Check.

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

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

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

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

 

Here We Go Again...

You know, some men just can't take a hint...  Others, well they can't take slap to the face, a knee to the groin, and a shove out the door...  Well, granted, in the case of a eunuch, a knee to the groin is kind of irrelevant....

A bit over two years ago, Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen took on Ashley Love and viciously attacked her.  He was pretty widely trashed by many, including even Suzan Cooke who was just beginning to cozy up to the transgender extremists even going so far as to refer to Sandeen's actions as cyberbulling (hmmm, where have we heard that before?).  He responded with a rather arrogant post entitled "Why Transgender Activism?"  I responded with one entitled "Why Not Transgender Activism?"  Well, Mr. Sandeen has again shown his true nature, and is looking kind of foolish.  And, well, he has resurrected that same load of crap...

If you want to see a response to his silliness, click on the link above and you can read what I wrote then.  It still stands, and I am not going to waste bandwidth cutting and pasting the whole thing here.

But I would point out one simple fact....  Mr. Sandeen does admit that transgender is "sociopolitical."  Put another way, it is pretty much imaginary.  It is not rooted in reality.  Males like Sandeen are not, and will never be, women.

As I have pointed out, the entire transgender paradigm is built on a logical fallacy.  And this logical contradiction is born out, again and again by the writings of various extremists.  For example, in another article on Transadvocate, the ever racist Mr. "Monica" Roberts put up an entire post predicated on the very idea refuted by Aunty Orthodox...

Only you should have the power to determine your self identity and you must zealously defend it. When others do it for you either because they did so by force or you ceded that power to do so willingly, you not only aren’t going to like what they come up with, but you don’t have the power to control and define your own humanity.

This sounds very grand, and noble, and such until you really think about it.  If I decide that my self identity is President of the United States, should I be able to take over running the country? No, and while that is an extreme example, it is the logical extension of a fallacy.  You can call yourself whatever you want, but that does not give you the right to impose your delusions on others.  Mr. Roberts can call himself a "black woman," but he remains a man, and he has no right to force others to see him as what he is not.

Mr. Roberts also wants to ignore the inner voice of common sense that keeps telling him to face reality...

But we can’t forget the work we still need to do between our ears to permanently banish the unholy trinity of shame, guilt and fear from our lives. That starts with us never forgetting that we must fight and decisively win the battle for self determination of our own identity and remember as we engage in that just battle, we have the moral high ground when we do so.

While one can become mired in false shame, fear and guilt, it should not simply be banished.  It should be examined, weighed, and if valid, heeded.  There is often a valid reason we feel guilty, and if we fail to learn from our mistakes, we will repeat them.

In another post, while claiming to defend transgender people against "transphobic tropes" Mr. Roberts links to a post that actually shows a logical paradox that renders the transgender paradigm invalid:

I’m going to start with the biggie – that trans people are “really” a [whatever gender you were assigned at birth.]

This is the belief that however we identify, whatever we do to our bodies, we will always really be the gender we were born as. It is irrelevant how trans people feel about ourselves, or how we look, or how we are received by the people in our lives.

You are, supposedly, one gender once and forever. It’s immutable, and whilst you can change the outside shell, you cannot change the inside.

Okay, so the person who wrote this is claiming that transgender people can change their gender.  Okay, let's take this as valid for a moment.  According to this person, gender is a choice.  You can choose to self-identify as a woman.  Well, that takes us back to the logical fallacy which has been refuted.  And while it really does no harm to the transgender kooks (who are fighting for an invalid cause anyway) this would do serious harm to transsexuals, who, again, are the victims of the transgender extremists.

If gender is merely a choice, then there is no basis for a medical diagnosis of transsexualism, we should all respond to being "talked out of it," and if that doesn't work, harsher measures are possibly warranted.  Oh dear....  Mr. Roberts just validated the behavior that Mr. "Cristan" Williams posted about.  If you can choose your gender, then they should be able to beat the sissy out of one.  Whoops...

Just to be clear, this person, while engaging in a contradictory claim, really is claiming that he can simply choose to be a woman:

It’s nevertheless tremendously effective, because it appeals to a cis-sexist biology (one that ignores the tremendous gender variation across nature … see Joan Roughgarden’s Evolution’s Rainbow for more on this) as a way of legitimating denying trans experience.

It denies us the capacity to grow, change, to self-define, to have agency of our bodies and our lives. It denies our identities.

Actually, it is this fool who is ignoring the tremendous gender variation across nature.  Animals do not choose to self-define when they show behavior that is not typical for their sex.  It is because gender is hard-wired and is immutable.  And sometimes it is hard wired at odds with the sex.  A person can choose to vary their gender expression, and that can be at odds with their gender, but that is chosen behavior, and while it can be subject to protection from government interference, it is not a basis for protection against supposed discrimination.

And again, just to drive home what this person is saying...

Well, I am a woman, because I say I am. Because that’s how I feel. Because I live my life as a woman. Because I am seen, by those who aren’t blinded by the “really” a man argument, as a woman. There might be a biological basis to my transness, but it’s ultimately irrelevant to me.

In another words, a delusion is reality.  One is not a woman, because one says one is.  That is the false basis for transgender, and that is what this person has to fall back on.  And if one is only "seen as a woman" by people who buy into your delusion, then, well, it is a delusion.  I am seen as a woman by people who don't agree with transsexualism.  They don't know to not see me as a woman.  Now, if I choose to cease being a woman, and become a "trans" then their view might change.  But then, I am a woman, not a political fiction.

I will repeat again, what I said then...

Will transgender extremists like Mr. Sandeen that the hint? Will they stop trying to speak for transsexuals and insisting that they are working for our rights? I doubt it. They need transsexuals to hide behind. They try to claim to be transsexual in order to advance their extremist agenda, failing to recognize the damage they do. They have done nothing to actually advance our cause, and much to harm it.

Ideally, the whole transgender fad would fade. But that won't happen soon enough. In the meantime, they will continue to cause harm to women, both transsexuals, and those born women.

Maybe one of these days, but clearly, not soon enough...

Hypocrisy and Beyond....

Well, it was an interesting morning....

As I announced in my post yesterday, I decided to create a Twitter account for my blog.  I did this, in part, because Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen had been attacking me on Twitter, and I figured...I would fight fire, with fire.  Or in this case, tweets with tweets.  Actually, this story really starts a bit earlier...  Now, I have been on Twitter a bit longer...but under a different account, and no, I am not giving out that information.  This blog, and transsexual issues is actually a very small part of my life, and I keep things private.  

Now, anyone can look at someone's tweets simply by going to Twitter and putting in that person's user name if known.  You don't have to join Twitter unless you want to post.  In fact, you don't have to be logged in at all.  Sort of like reading a blog....  A person can mark their Tweets as private, but that prevents people who are not following them from reading them, and Sandeen actually took this approach for about a day after I published several of his more embarrassing statements.  But Sandeen is nothing, if not attention seeking, and he went back public

I had started looking at what Sandeen was saying, after seeing various reposts of some of his more obnoxious behavior against various women who have had the audacity to stand up to the jerk.  He can be very abusive, and has a nasty reputation for stalking radical feminist women in Twitter...

When I set my Twitter account up, I followed several people, including Mr. Sandeen.  Later, so I added him again.  Then, I got a message saying he had blocked me.  Okay, I figured...that is his right, and not really surprising.  I mean, he is a bit of a hypocritical jerk.  I am not going to lose sleep over it.  Which I didn't.  This morning, I woke up, and went online to check email and such, and a bit to my surprise, I discovered that I now had two followers... Mr. Sandeen, and more laughably, his cat.  Yes, Sandeen, apparently in a rather clueless attempt to hide, has an account in his cat's name.  So, I figured, okay, I don't censor people, and I followed him again.  I also had picked up another follower.   I then out up my earlier post today, tweeted about it, and added a couple of tweets mentioning that Sandeen...and his cat were no following me.

Well, I guess the world famous eunuch, @autumnsandeen decided to unblock me.I will give him that much.ROTFL!
— Just Jennifer (@_JustJennifer_) April 25, 2013

Talk about hypocrisy....after blocking me, noted eunuch, Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen is following me.ROTFL.
— Just Jennifer (@_JustJennifer_) April 25, 2013

About an hour or so later, I went to check Twitter again...and discovered that my account had been suspended for "abuse."  Now, this is where it gets interesting.  I am not sure how Sandeen managed to pull such a stunt off.  I had made all of four tweets.  My first was a retweet of something from Cathy Brennan, who I am disappointed to say also blocked me.  I am not sure why, as I have not attacked her, and in fact, have defended her. 

#radfem2013 bc if you need other ppl to tell you yr a woman, yr probs a man
— Cathy Brennan (@bugbrennan) April 24, 2013

 But hey, again, it is her right.  If I somehow offended her, I apologize.

Anyway,  had to go through checking off a couple of boxes promising not to do whatever it was I was accused of (which doesn't make any sense, since I looked at the Twitter rules and cannot see what, if anything I violated) and my account is back.  Sandeen has, again, blocked me, and was not "following me" but, as unbelievable as this might seem, his cat was still following me.  I mean really, is he THAT ignorant?  Does he REALLY think he is fooling anyone?  In any case, I filed a complaint against him, pointing out that he has attacked me as well (which does not actually appear to be against the rules) and pointing out that he appears to have somehow abused Twitter's abuse procedures.  Oh well...it is all very strange, but it is also very typical of Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen and the Transgender Kooks in general.  They think nothing of attacking people, insulting them, stalking them, etc...but they react in outrage when they are subjected to mere disagreement.

Yes, I admit, I take great delight in tweaking Mr. Sandeen's rather enormous ego.  But, he deserves it.  I have no sought to harm him in any way.  I do wish someone had filed with the court in San Diego to challenge his fraudulent birth certificate, but that is a bit different.  There, he was committing a crime and should have been stopped.  

If I ever met Mr. Sandeen in person, I would certain be a bit alarmed.  He has admitted to engaging in violence, I would certainly be on guard, and would consider taking steps to protect myself as necessary, just as I would with any man who is known to be violent.  But, I would take no steps to harm him unless absolutely necessary.

But one thing is for certain.  Sandeen is a hypocrite, and a kook.

Update:  Okay, I just got an email from Twitter informing me that "Transadvocate" (I assume that would be Mr. "Cristan" Williams himself, had mentioned me in a tweet.  He was complaining to Sandeen and Mr. "Monica" Roberts, the notorious "Trangriot" bigot, that I was "stalking" him.  So, now, he is trying to claim that following someone on Twitter is stalking them?   So, I guess that would mean that his comrade Mr. Sandeen was stalking me this morning?  As was his cat?  Well, actually, the cat thing was sort of stalking, but that is another matter....   Weird how the mind of these kooks works.  Well, I guess he blocked me...
ROTFL!

Reality versus Fantasy...

Well, it appears, at least for the moment, that another Internet flame war is over.  As some may know, I occasionally comment in Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen's posts on LGBT Weekly, the local LGBT magazine in San Diego. Mr. Sandeen seems to be their token transgender kook (most major LGBT publications have one, usually posted online, but not in the actual publication).  This week, he did another whiny post about the Michigan Womyn's Music Festival.  Apparently, the "men in dresses" crowd is determined to force themselves on the lesbians separatists who attend this event.

Usually, Mr. Sandeen tends to ignore comments made to his posts on that site. For a while, they were supporting his usual heavy handed censorship, but something changed. It appears that they decided that pretty much anything goes. A few commenters have actually, and quite accurately, referred to him using male pronouns without being banned. Now it appears that Mr. Sandeen decided to take advantage of this in order to, shall we say, "fight back."

The problem, of course, is that Mr. Sandeen wants to be the "transgender MLK." He regularly, including in this week's article, tries to make that connection, and of course, winds up making a mockery of Dr. King and his philosophy. But in order to maintain his "facade" he has to avoid showing his true nature as much as possible. So, apparently, Mr. Sandeen brings in support. That, or he has more than a few sock puppets.

Oh, and a couple of other points that should be addressed.  Sandeen tries to claim that I am obsessed with him.  Actually, he posts more than most, so he gets written about more than most.  Of course, Suzan Cooke has made the same claim...  And Sandeen has commented about the difference in word counts between me and him, as well as the number of comments I posted.  I simply responded to every bit of silliness thrown at me.  I have no doubt that had I ignored even one of them, the claim would be made that I was "bested."

One of those he called upon, is Mr. "Cristan" Williams, who repeated the outrageous claim made on Transadvocate that Janice Raymond is responsible for at least 50,000 deaths. That article was written by Zoe Brain, who is infamous for claiming that he spontaneously, without medical intervention changed from a male to a female. A rather insane claim, to say the least. Mr. Williams seemed to be trying to argue that the "radfems" have to be beaten into submission to prevent further deaths, or something like that.. Here is part of my response to his comment:

Now, beyond that, we slip the bounds of reality, and well….I love a good conspiracy theory….but this not one. I mean, really….this bit of histrionics, which is a recent invention of Williams, and a certain person from Australia who claims to have “spontaneously” changed from a man to a woman (seriously folks, I am NOT making this up) is quite hysterically funny. Funny, I never once encountered this force reparative therapy, nor have I ever heard of such an effort. Perhaps it was super, duper top secret and known only to the secret lesbian separatist cabal…. Known racists? Funny, but since the 1950′s, transsexuals have been accessing medical care without that much trouble. I know when I started in the early 1990′s, I had no trouble at all, and I was in the Deep South (any deeper, and you would be in way over your head). Yeah, I suppose it is possible that a group of extremists might have advocated legislating “trans folk” out of existence. I remember a lot of radical groups that have advocated a lot of laughable ideas. Let’s see, at one time or the other, I have heard of groups who want to give the country back to Native Americans, of a group that wanted to force all white people out of the states that formed the Confederacy and create an exclusively African-American nation, of people who want to ban the consumption of meat, of people who want to execute anyone who is gay, that men should be allowed to invade women’s shower and locker rooms and that women should accept then as “women with penises”…the list could go on, and on. For the most part, sane, rational people learn about such ideas, recognize them for what they are…the rants of crackpots, hope the person does not become violent (like the guy who got it in his head that there is a black market in human body parts and then possibly sent ricin laced letters to a senator and Obama) and get on with our lives. Oh, we might speak up if the person gets a bit of attention, but we generally seem them as the kooks that they are. 

Anyway, thanks for a good laugh….

I guess Mr. Williams had no answer to reality, as his next response was to fall back on an argumentum ad hominem, the logical fallacy of attacking the person and not their position. That is Mr. Williams' standard practice when he cannot defend a position (which is not at all uncommon).  

I could be wrong, but the whole mess that resulted from one comment had the feel of a very organized effort. I suspect Sandeen invited some people (he has already done that on a smaller scale) hoping to bury me in comments. Didn't quite work very well for him.... As it was, he pulled just about every trick in the book... I imagine he thought I would whither in the face of a massive load of absurd rhetoric. When that did not work, the insults started. As I have pointed out, my identity is quite secure thank you. Repeating lies started by a cyberstalker is not going to scare me off. Anyone I care about, knows better, and anyone who believes that crap...well, I could care less.
Of course, the hilarity continues....  Sandeen was having a hissy fit on Twitter...and she brought in some old faces...

Monica Roberts ‏
@AutumnSandeen @cristanwilliams She was hatin' on me for a while until she discovered I don't play with pseudo cisprivilege chasing fools

Truth be told, I pretty much stopped reading Mr. "Monica" Roberts crap because I realized it was a bad combination of Ebonics, racism, and pretty much the same rants repeated over, and over, and over, and over....occasionally punctuated with his self-aggrandizement about some award he got.  In short.  BORING!

And a new face....who has some incredibly stupid things to say....

J. Skyler @AutumnSandeen @transgriot Im sure she was the one on Wired's interview w/ @GailSimone on Batgirl saying "transgender" is a slur.

Nope, not me.  I hadn't seen the article, and when I took a quick look, and saw the number of comments, I lost interest quickly.  But yeah, Mr. Sandeen is quite correct.  I do agree.  I, personally, would consider it a slur if applied to me.  For those who identify that way, no.  Of course, the subtlety of that is lost on fools like Mr. Sandeen, and company.  Then there was this particular bit of cluelessness...

J. Skyler ‏@
@AutumnSandeen @gailsimone @transgriot also misidentifying as cisgender knowing that's not the intended use of the term, which is hysterical

 Oh dear, I forgot to ask the gender fascists for permission before "identifying."  Actually, it has nothing to do with identity.  My gender matches my physical sex, so, according to the definition, I am cisgender.  Of course, the same, technically, could be said of Mr. Sandeen, and Mr. Roberts, among others.  They are clearly male, and clearly men.  So, by definition, they would be "cisgender" as well.  I do, by the way, I think this J. Skyler person is more than a bit cisphobic.

J. Skyler ‏@jskylerinc
@GailSimone @autumnsandeen @transgriot she's a surgical essentialist who thinks anyone who doesn't undergo surgery is pretending/deviant. 

For those who don't speak "tranny" that means I don't believe women have penises and want to keep them.  Now, I suppose that "pretending" would be pretty accurate, but I would not call most "deviants."  I reserve that term for specific cases, like the guy who was exposing his junk to young girls.  But Mr. Sandeen came back just as cluelessly...

Autumn Sandeen
@jskylerinc @GailSimone @TransGriot It's more than that. She even gets on post-SRS folk who she deems to not be ideologically pure.

Nope, it has nothing to do with "ideology," pure, or otherwise....

Autumn Sandeen ‏@transgriot @cristanwilliams I've feed the troll too many times, I fear.

Actually, except for occasionally cyberstalking me, Sandeen has pretty much avoided responding to my posts. I guess being humiliated as much as he has been will do that to a fellow.

So, let's see....

If they can't refute an argument.....

They will try to bury you in comments....

If that doesn't work.....

They resort to insults....

And when that fails.....

They call you a troll.

Yes, such is the classic transgender approach to reality.

Update:  And then they resort to word count flames...

Yeah, go figure...Sandeen is now comparing the number of words I have posted, versus the number he has posted.  Hmmm, doesn't he know, women tend to be more verbal than men.  Perhaps he might take that into consideration!  Well, in any case, he can update his word count, and whine even more....   ROTFL!

Update:  It appears that Sandeen went a bit too far.  This morning, he had posted two more comments on his post, basically postings of two tweet he had made, which were attacks on me, and which mentioned me by name (which I prefer to keep private).  I responded, and pointed out that he has a habit of attempting to out women against their will.  Both posts, and my responses were removed afterwards.  I kind of wonder if Sandeen did it, to cover his tracks, of if the people at LGBT Weekly didn't like his behavior. Most curious....

Avoiding the Real Issue

A week or so ago, "Cristan" Williams, self-appointed alpha gender fascist, was crowing about how he had been asked to take over as managing editor of Transadvocate by Marti Abernathey. Well, now Mr. Williams has posted one of his typical bits of drivel...and it is certainly destined to be a classic example of his skill at avoiding the real issue.

Titled Insidious: Extreme Pressures Faced by Trans People, it starts off with this rather ominous sounding lead paragraph:

Studies show that the trans population lives under extreme psychological pressures unseen in even active military personnel. Fifty-five percent of trans people [1,2] were found to live with social anxiety. Within the general American population, similar types of anxiety are experienced by only 6.8% [3] of the population while these levels of anxiety were found to exist at a rate of 8.2% among military personal.

Wow, sounds horrible, doesn't it?  Those poor, oppressed "trans people"...  What Mr. Williams does not mention is the fact that the vast, overwhelming majority of "trans people," who are living with this terrible social anxiety, choose to be "trans people," and are, as a matter of choice, acting in a manner that they know is contrary to social norms.  In another words, it is their own fault.

In fact, I would venture to say that the percentage of so-called "trans people" who actually suffer from social anxiety is actually higher, as it is possible that the statistics cited my well include more than a few transsexuals who might not actually share the same issues as "transgender" people.

Think about it.  The people Mr. Williams is talking about are overwhelmingly men, who choose to engage in behavior that is offensive to a majority of society, and which is actually intended, by choice, to offend others.  These are not innocent victims.  Their identity is rooted in transgressive behavior.  They could easily avoid much of the problems they face, if they chose to, but for various reasons they prefer engaging in the very behavior that results in their social anxiety.  Worse, people like Mr. Williams refuse to compromise to protect the safety and comfort of women.  They prefer a world where the ladies restroom is wide open to men, with no regard for privacy or safety of women, even though the boys in dresses like Mr. Williams demand to be accepted, and treated, as "women," well at least as "trans women."

Now, these are not people who are actually trying to become women.  Their identity is as "trans women" which means that they have to hang on to their identify as men, in addition to their supposed identity as women.  They are, more often than not, demanding that society accept them as "women with penises."  I remember reading about this in Robert Stoller's book Sex and Gender: On the Development of Masculinity and Femininity. At the time, I thought the idea was absurd, but I have come to realize that there is at least some truth there. I mean, there is really no other way to explain the behavior of kooks like "Autumn" Sandeen, "Monica" Roberts, and others. They revel in their penises even as they claim, quite humorously, to be women.

 And yet, we are supposed to believe that these perverts are victims of discrimination. Again, they choose to engage in behavior that most people will find disturbing, but they are the victims. And yes, in spite of denials, like one posted on Transadvocate, for the transgender crowd, it is a choice. The denials are billed as "humor" and perhaps they are, because they are certainly not related to reality. The first talks about trying to achieve passability.  

Seriously, so many transgender types may imagine that they actually pass, but they are often mistaken. And even the ones who look reasonably credible lose any hope of "passing" the moment they start talking. It does not take long to realize that they are not women mentally. Their thoughts and behavior are 100% male.

The next reason given is cost. Of course, this does not remotely apply to transgender people who have no plans to actually transition. And for many, the costs of things like hormones are relatively negligible.

The third reason is "success." That transgender people lose out on jobs and such. Of course, again, this is not true for those not full time. And the number of transgender activists who are on disability, usually for mental health issues, speaks for itself.

The next two have to do with being forced to "explain" and being "gossiped" about. Hello? Look at the behavior we are talking about. This is what they are LOOKING FOR!!! They want the attention being "transgender" attracts.

The sixth reason speaks of having exhausted reasonable options. This of course is typical transgender co-opting of transsexual's experiences. Yes, for those of us who are transsexual, this is true. We reach our limit, after having led very miserable lives. For the men in dresses crowd, after long, successful careers, during which their crossdressing is a part time hobby, they decide to go full bore. They were not desperate. They just decide that the thrills need to be upped.

In the seventh reason, the person whines about how much harder it is to be a woman. This, of course, is also part of the motivation. For a transgender, the "lower status" is part of the game. Ever notice how transgender types seem to be very chauvinistic men? They think being at a lower status make them more "womanly" and they delight in it.

The eighth reason has to do with being alone. Again, a transgender trying to co-opt something that some transsexuals experience. Yes, dating can be hard. Then again, since my surgery, I have never revealed my past to anyone I dated. Now, if you are "out, loud, and proud" you might well attract chasers, of which their are plenty. But most of the men in dresses crowd are into women, and unless they can find someone who is as perverted as they are, or who has such low self-esteem that they will put up with a boyfriend who calls himself a woman, they are generally out of luck. But then again, they are the woman of their own dreams. For them, this is about sex, and well...I really don't want to go there. Disgusting.

The final reason is pain. Again, if you are a transsexual, yes, you may go through some pain. Surgery does hurt. Electrolysis is no fun. But for the men in dresses crowd, surgery is not a serious option, and increasingly, they don't bother with electrolysis. I mean, why give up that option of really freaking people out?

Interestingly, I worked with some of the people involved with one of the studies Mr. Williams cites. I conducted surveys, and I know the sort of people who were questioned. A lot of my opinions on "transgender" silliness came out of that experience. I saw first hand the sort of people Mr. Williams is trying to claim are "really women." Interestingly enough, you don't see the same sort of thing with FTM transsexuals. Most of them simply transition, and get on with their lives. There are a few rare exceptions, but most of them can easily assimilate and move on with their lives. Those who choose otherwise tend to openly identify as "gender queer" and tend to claim a "none of the above" type of gender identity...insisting on silliness like "gender neutral" pronouns.

No, the "social stresses" are not because they are victims, it is largely because they are transgressing societal norms and experiencing the resistance that naturally follows such behavior.

Transition Versus Transgression

I have been working on this post for a while.  During that time I have learned that, as some would say, "Great minds think alike.  There was a post at TS-SI that says almost the exact same thing I do in this post.  Scary in a way...my first reaction was, "How did they know what I was saying?"  Of course, it is just coincidence, but still, it gives one pause.


Then, there was this response to a post by "Autumn" Sandeen at LGBT Weekly:

Living in the real world instead of some sub culture where what is freaky is normal, I have never seen any of the issues transgenders have seen.If only they would ether stay in the closet or have SRS and become real legal women instead of living some life that is a legal fiction all would be good.
There are lots of less than perfect looking women in the world, so Autumn and the rest, why don’t you live your life as legitimate females instead of some other.

And there was this rather frightening response to a question posed by same person making the above comment:

“why force your way into female spaces while still being male bodied?”

for the same reason you choose to attempt to ‘change’ who we are… BECAUSE WE CAN!

I would not want to encounter that person in ladies room.

There have been a lot of words devoted to the battle over "transgender" versus "transsexual."  On one side, you have those I refer to as "gender fascists" who demand that transsexuals accept the label "transgender."  On the other side, you have those that the gender fascists like to label as "transsexual separatists" in their attempts to force transsexuals back into line.  But the real question is, what is it that really divides these two groups?  That can be summed up in two words...."transition" and "transgression."


For me, and other true transsexuals, it is all about simply being who, and what, we really are.    After spending a portion of our lives in the wrong body, dealing with the public perception of how we should be, and struggling with all the problems this leads to, we finally take the steps necessary to correct things, and get on with a normal life.  We see ourselves as simply women, or in the case of FTMs, simply men.  We simply want to live the life we feel we have been cheated out of.


On the other hand, you have people who seem more interested in transgressing gender norms.  They have no desire to simply live their lives as normal men or women, but instead identify as "trans people."  At the far extreme, they go out of their way to insure that they do not even come close t fitting within gender norms.  Others seem to have no concept of how normal men and women act.  They may not go out of their way to completely transgress gender norms, but they often appear more as caricatures than anything else.


Those who are of the transgressive variety are usually very "out" about their past.  They not only have no desire to simply live as members of their "target" gender, they feel a strong need to be extremely open our being transgender.  And, they generally insist that others have an obligation to also be "out, loud, and proud."  They attack those who do not share their desire to be in other's faces as being ashamed, scared, closeted, etc.  They cannot grasp the simple concept that some might simply wish to live normal lives.l


Anyone who disagrees with the "transgender" paradigm, especially those who wish no part of the transgender label are viciously attacked.  We are accused of hatred, bigotry, and trying to tell others how to live their lives.  Actually, none of this is true.  The charge that we try to tell others how to live their lives is particularly absurd.  I would never insist that someone must, or even should, have sex reassignment surgery.  In fact, quite the opposite is true.  I would say that those who are adamantly "non-op" are making absolutely the correct decision for their selves.  I would have serious disagreements with those extremists who try to insist that everyone should forego surgery and simply accept living in their "chosen gender role" without surgery, but no, I would never insist that anyone "must" have surgery.


Now, I do not believe that those who are "non-op" are transsexuals.  I consider the term "non-op transsexual" to be an oxymoron.  If you do not have the absolute desire to change your sex, you are not a transsexual, and under no circumstances should you ever consider having irreversible surgery.  The results would be unsatisfactory, and possibly, even probably tragic.  Unfortunately, there really is a "transgender" hierarchy, and many see "transsexual" as the apex.  This is why some, such as "Autumn" Sandeen, insist on demanding the label "transsexual" even though hey have no desire to change sex.  They believe that calling themselves "transsexuals" increases their credibility, even though just the opposite is actually true.


I cannot relate to the desire of some for transgression.  I have no desire to be seen as anything other than simply a woman.  I take no pleasure in being identified as anything else. I do realize that people are driven by any variety of desires and motives, but that does not mean I accept them as proper.  Some people enjoy variant sexual practices, but I have no interest in them, and I find some highly disturbing.  The drive towards gender transgression often seems linked to this same behavior.  Many males who are drawn to "transgender" seem to have desires that are related to masochism.  They delight in the idea of forced feminization, and they often show belief in the idea of women being lower in status than men.  Some might choose to call me judgmental, but I find such attitudes to be distasteful.  I have actually seen some take delight in being treated poorly by chauvinistic males, claim such as affirmation of their femaleness.  Personally, I think it simply affirms their inherent misogyny., 


Of course, it is this misogyny that has led the radical feminists to attack the transgender movement.  And while I have serious disagreements with much of radical feminism, I can understand some of their views on this issue.  It is also what has brought vicious attacks from conservatives and the religious right.  Claiming that these attacks are rooted in "transphobia," hatred, and bigotry is a bit disingenuous. Much of it is simply an all too natural reaction to what is, quite frankly, often outrageous behavior.  I realize that is, to many who identify as transgender, or even transsexual, outright heresy.  But when you choose to go against societal norms, you have to take responsibility for the reactions, even if you disagree.


Of course, the great irony here is that the transgender extremists actually engage in pretty much the same behavior as those who so vehemently oppose them.  They have a world view, and they expect others to conform to that view.  Part of their problem, however, is that their view is very much a minority view, so they are not going to find the sympathy that they demand.  And when they don't get what they want, they react in anger and often resort to insults and attacks.


I have been taken to task by several transgender extremists, including Suzan Cooke, for refusing to conform to to the demanded "courtesy" of referring to anyone who claims to be a woman with female pronouns.  I hated to break it Cooke, but if I ever had the misfortune to meet "Autumn" Sandeen or "Monica" Roberts in person, I would still refuse to refer to them using female pronouns.  At best, if the situation required it, I would avoid using pronouns, but no, under no circumstances would I refer to either of these fellows as females, as they are not, and I am not going to lie just to make them feel better.  Cooke can toss out as many vulgar insults as she wants, but to be quite honest, I long ago realize that Cooke was basically a bad joke clinging to a conflated past that makes her think she is still way more important than she ever was in reality.


Sadly, while Cooke claims to oppose the use of "transgender" as an umbrella term, Cooke takes an unacceptable middle position, suggesting that "trans" be used instead.  Personally, I don't want to be identified as "transgender," "trans," or any other such term.  I am a woman, period.  Not a trans-woman.


Sadly, some simply cannot comprehend the idea that it is this concept of being "other" that we reject.  We do not identify with transgressive behavior, and we do not view ourselves as "transgressing" anything.  We have simply corrected our bodies, or in the case of pre-op "true transsexuals" in the process of doing so.  We are not seeking to become something we are not.  Quite the opposite in fact.  This is what makes is so absurd when a kook like "Cristan" Williams expends so much bandwidth trying to prove some silliness like his claims that, at some obscure point in time, some obscure person decided that "transsexual" was an umbrella term to be used like "transgender" is now, or that they decided to use "transgender" instead of "transsexual." So what?  At one point in time, someone who was a homosexual male described himself, and other homosexual men, as "women trapped in men's bodies."  Now, I seriously doubt that one could find very many, if any, gay men who would remotely identify that way now.


Sadly, the process of transition often brings us into contact with those who are motivated by desires born of transgression, and even more sadly, some have trouble shaking off that association.  And some, for whatever reason, find themselves drawn to it, embracing it as part of their personality. They don't realize that it actually divides them from the community of women that they worked so hard to be a part of.

My, How Butch!

The Huffington Post is all a twitter over a story out of New York about a "transwoman" beating up a man who call him a woman.  In another words, the dude goes ballistic and acts like a man because, well, some guy called him a man while he was decked out in his feminine finery.  Okay....


This is a perfect example of the bizarre transgender mindset that imagines that they are perfect examples of the finest examples of female behavior, while in reality they act just as they did as men.  It reminds me of the story I read once about some contractor in Texas who announced to his employees that he would be "transitioning" to become a woman.  The next day, he came in dressed as a woman, sat down at his desk, plopped his size 14 pumps up on the desk as he always did, and pulled out his usual cigar.


Of course, this criminal act has found considerable favor in the transgender community.  None other than "Monica" Roberts, of TransGriot is thrilled over this act of male bravado.  Yes, he of the massive "neoclit," his term for his penis, had this to say:

It's not a good idea to get someone pissed off at you who not only has a little more strength than the average cis female, but is an estrogen based lifeform to boot.

Roberts forgets to mention that this person also has the mind of a man.  The reference to estrogen shows Roberts' cluelessness.  In a true transsexual, estrogen has a calming effect.  In a man, it causes other effects, which may lead to problems like depression.

You see a male brain is wired for testosterone.  A female brain is wired for estrogen.  In a true transsexual, the brain reacts well to the estrogen.  In a male brain, the estrogen mostly causes depression.  It does not have as much of calming effect, though it is probably not going to cause aggression.  I am not sure what Roberts is trying to claim, but in any case, he is, as usual, blowing smoke.

And, it should be kept in mind that many transgender people adjust their hormone intake to avoid losing the ability to have an erection.  "Functional" transgender prostitutes are in high demand among men with a desire to be penetrated by a "woman."  Yes, it is all rather bizarre, and does not completely make sense.  But there are men who seek out men who crossdress who are willing to engage in active anal sex.  And a man willing to perform such a sex act would probably also be inclined to react violently to an insult.


Sadly, the LGBT community seems to be embracing this criminal act.  This will probably result in more such incidents.  We already had "Autumn" Sandeen bragging about throwing coffee at at someone who called him a man.  Well, it was supposed to be an apology because Sandeen was not acting like Martin Luther King, Jr.  but it was really more about bragging.  And now this.  One has to wonder, again, do these people think they are above the law?