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....

Why Are So Many Transgender Kooks Also Bullies?

As I have recounted, I have again been subjected to a round of attempted cyberbullying by Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen.  But, this i only the tip of the iceberg.  If you don't adhere to the approved "transgender kook party line," watch out.  I have mentioned the attacks that Mr. Sandeen has leveled at Cathy Brennan, who has also been attacked by numerous other transgender kooks.  And now, another of the bully boys, Mr. "Cristan" Williams is having another hissy fit because he, and other boys, are not allowed to visit the infamous Michigan Womyn Who Can't Spell Women Music Festival.  Now, let me disclose, right off, I have no real interest in ever going to such an event.  Like the vast majority of women, it simply does not appeal to me.  But, this has become the Holy Grail for the Men in Dresses crowd.  They have fits at the very thought that they are not welcome in that place.  And speak of Mr. Sandeen, I recall that he claims that they have to let him into the MWMF because his fraudulently obtained birth certificate proves that he is, and I am not making this up, a "woman born woman."

Yes, the latest to take on this issue is Mr. Cristan Williams, who posted a rant on TransAdvocate, which he now runs.  In it, he tries to link the policies at MWMF to transsexuals being denied medical care.  This follows an earlier article (that I planned on commenting on, but couldn't stop laughing at whenever I saw it), where one of the kookiest of the kooks, Zoe Brain (who presumably did not need such medical care since he claims he just sort of magically turned into a woman) claims that Janice Raymond caused the deaths of 50,000 transgender people because they committed suicide after being denied SRS, or something like that.

Personally, if some group has an exclusionary policy that, well, excludes me, that's fine.  I have no desire to invade, for example, the Pacific-Union Club here in San Francisco.  It is a men's only club, and while I will admit to a mild curiosity about what might go on there, I would not remotely consider trying to force my way in.  The same goes for the Bohemian Club, and a few others.  Sure, it would be interesting to have some insight into the mysterious and supposed conspiracies that are hatched out in the woods up near Monte Rio, California, but trying to force them to let me in does not haunt me like invading the MWMF does the transgender kooks.

Sure, a lot of post-op transsexuals, and maybe even a few men with intact penises manage to sneak in every years, but that is not what the boys are after. They want, as always, to be able to "openly" invade the place. That is, to force the women there to "acknowledge" them as full-fledged women with penises, or in some cases, former women with penises...or whatever.

Why, the very fact that there are a few women up there in the woods in Michigan who have not been beaten into submission to the transgender party line gives these poor boys a case of the vapors... Here is what, Nancy Burkholder, the person who apparently started the who thing has to say about it:

My mind was blank, my body absolutely still as I became aware of the emotional devastation that I felt inside. The events that were going down seemed totally unreal. Nevertheless I found a place of calm inside myself. I found acceptance for my situation, and I could feel the emotional devastation without the devastation overwhelming me.

Now, I will grant, Burkholder claims to have not been aware of the policy, and apparently it was not mentioned in the literature until this person showed up.  But seriously, you would think this person had been raped, rather than simply denied admission to a music festival.  No, it is not pleasant having one's identity challenged, especially if one really is transsexual, but even if that is the case here, it seems to represent some pretty massive insecurities.  I can't speak for everyone, but I am secure enough in terms of who I am that I don't let such things throw me for this big of a loop.

My advice to Mr. Williams, and all the others who whine about this every years is simple.  Get over yourselves.  Lisa Vogel and her crew don't want you at their private party, and you need to accept that.  They don't think you are really women (yeah, she thinks the same about me, but I really could care less) and well, in the case of those most obsessed with the whole thing, I suspect she is probably right.  So, go find a bunch of girls who will play with you.  I am sure you can find a few who will swallow the lie that women have, and want to keep, penises.  But Lisa isn't one of them, and I don't think she is going to give in to your bullying.

A Dog in the Manger

There is an ancient Greek fable, sometime attributed to Aesop, about a  dog lying in a manger who could not eat the hay but who nevertheless prevented the other animals from being able to eat it either.   It is used as an idiom for someone who has no use for something, but seeks to prevent another from using it as well.


"Autumn" Sandeen has established himself as a classic example of a Dog in the Manger.  In his most recent diatribe on Pam's House Blend he complains about how his ex-wife, who apparently has nothing to do with him, is seeking an annulment of their marriage from the Roman Catholic Church.


Now, for those who are not familiar with the practices of Catholicism, if one is divorced, and wishes to have their marriage sanctified by the sacrament of marriage in the Church, then the only choice is to have the previous marriage annulled.  There are certain situations where the church will hold that the previous marriage was not properly entered into, and the annulment is granted.


Most often, the grounds for the annulment is that one or both of the parties was too immature to enter into a valid sacrament of marriage.  Other grounds can include mental illness, a lack of intention to stay faithful or have children, deception and some other very technical reasons.


The simple, bottom line is, Mr. Sandeen's wife should have no problem getting such a decree.  But he is not willing for this to happen.  He intends to challenge his wife's effort.  Now, he claims that part of the reason is that he does not want his children from the marriage, who will have nothing to do with him, to be made "illegitimate."  However, a church annulment does not do that, legally, or in the eyes of the Roman Catholic Church.  He would have some claim to that if this were a legal proceeding, but not in this case.


No, the obvious reason his ex-wife would seeks an annulment is that she plans to remarry (or perhaps has already remarried) and wishes to have the church recognize the new marriage as sacramental.


And, just as obviously, Mr. Sandeen's ONLY real reason for opposing the annulment is to spite his wife, and perhaps is also a vain attempt to prevent her from being able to remarry.  Of course, there is no way that the church is going to deny the marriage.  His silly little tantrum is going to do nothing but given ignorant people another bit to use against transsexuals (though ironically, Mr. Sandeen is not remotely actually a transsexual.


Mr. Sandeen is one of those men who, sometime during puberty, developed a fetish for wearing women's clothes, with no real evidence of gender issues prior to that, who then, after a long period of living as a successful male, decides to take his little fetish to the next level, and became full time.  Then, he decided he would be a transsexual to gain higher standing as a "transgender."


Mr. Sandeen shows no desire to simply live as a woman.  He is an "out, loud, and proud" transgender.  He makes sure anyone and everyone knows his history, and in the past made it clear he had no desire to give up his penis.  He now claims to be surgery tracked, though he also tends to indicate that he will have surgery only when he can have it paid for.  In truth, I am sure if he does get it covered, he will find another excuse.


And adding to the silliness of Mr. Sandeen's claims is the comment by "Zoe Brain" the self-acclaimed "rocket scientist" who asserts, rather bizarrely that Mr. Sandeen's marriage was a "same-sex one, despite the fact that children resulted."  Now, that is ridiculous.  Mr. Sandeen had, and still has a penis.  His wife had a vagina, ovaries, and a uterus.  They had children, that were conceived from Mr. Sandeen's sperm, and his wife's eggs.  To remotely suggest such a marriage was a "same sex one" is totally false.  I guess they must have pretty low standards to be a "rocket scientist" down under.


Mr. Sandeen should be ashamed of acting so cruelly towards his ex-wife.  He should just let her seek her annulment, ignore it all, and go on with is little fantasies.  Seeking to deny her the ability to remarry is simply his being a dog in the manger.


And he should stop trying to speak for transsexuals.