Separating Facts From Total and Complete Fabrication

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Mr. "Cristan" Williams, the Cotton Ceiling, and a Big Pile of Straw

It would be tempting, having read Mr. "Cristan" Williams latest round of misdirection and straw arguments entitled "Cotton Ceiling: Uncovering the trans conspiracy to rape lesbians" to just roll one's eyes, and say "Well, he is an idiot..."  But no, this article actually took quite a bit of thought to come up with.  You don't build up that kind of deception without putting at least some effort into it.  No, I think he really knows better.

Or not...  Maybe he is really is that blind to what women actually experience and think that he really does believe his own lies.  Either way, the bottom line is, he is putting up his usual arrogant straw arguments.

In this latest travesty of a post, he actually tries to defend the "cotton ceiling" silliness pushed by men pretending to be lesbians.  What he ignores is the simple fact that rape not only involves force, but can also involve coercion.  And quite frankly, coercion is what the cotton ceiling is really about.

Mr. Williams, in his typical fashion, presents several straw arguments, and attempts a rather clumsy bit of misdirection.  He first bases his argument, quite laughably, on the fact that the matter began with only seven participants in the original workshop where, apparently, the term was coined.

The problem is classic.  How many times have we heard it?  All together now, let's repeat it for the benefit of men like Mr. Williams....  

NO MEANS NO!

As in, end of discussion...the matter is closed....go away and leave the women alone.  But, as is so typical, they won't take no for an answer.  They have to "identify barriers" (i.e. THEY DON'T WANT TO HAVE SEX WITH YOU AND HAVE SAID NO!" and then "strategize ways to overcome them" (i.e. "We find a way to get them to have sex with us, or die trying..." and then these idiots think this will "build community?"  I think the message is pretty clear....they are not wanted in the community they are trying to, quite frankly, force their way into, and this effort is pretty much just going to make that worse.  In fact, it clearly has, but these are men, and men don't believe in retreat.

Now, in the interest of full disclosure, I am a straight woman, so my only interest here is a general one in the bigger picture of how other women are treated.  I am not interested in having sex with lesbians, and I am certainly not interested in a "man in a dress."  I like my men a bit more, well, masculine.  Sure, it would be easy to just ignore the whole mess, and let them duke it out.  But I am not one to ignore someone trying to bully another.  

Mr. Williams then goes on and pulls the old trick of putting words in other's mouthes...a classic variant of the straw argument:

TERF: Teh cotton ceiling is all about teaching trans people how to rape lesbians!1!!

Dupe: LOLWUT

TERF: Yeah, Planned Parenthood gave a workshop to teach trans people how to rape lesbians! No means no!

Dupe: That sounds a little strange to me…

TERF: Don’t believe me? Google any of the many, many, many TERF blogs that freaked over the Planned Parenthood workshop! #rapeculture

Dupe: Well, I did hear about how transwomen want to hang out in the women’s restroom…

TERF: Yup, it’s all about rapey rape culture!

Dupe: Yeah, I guess tranwomen are kinda rapey…

TERF: I KNOW, RIGHT?!?! Spread the word!

Dupe: I’m totally blogging about this!

This is typical of Mr. Williams.  He isn't quoting anyone in particular, and the one example he offers simply proves he is misquoting it. 

Even when faced with facts, he tries to "spin" it to sound like women are being unreasonable...

Original workshop description:  Participants will work together to identify barriers, strategize ways to overcome them, and build community. 

TERF Petition to stop the workshop:Planned Parenthood Toronto is helping to sponsor a March 31 conference in Toronto that includes a workshop inviting participants to discuss and strategize ways they might be able to“overcome” women’s objections to these participants’ sexual advances.

I mean, it is more than a bit obvious that the only barrier to overcome is women's objections to these participants sexual advances.  Whether you are male, female, transgender, transsexual, or a woman born woman....NO MEANS NO!  End of discussion.  Back off.  Go away.  Stop trying to have sex with that person.  But, some, particularly men, don't seem to get this.

He goes on in this vein, attempting, quite lamely, to make transgender men the victim of a "TERF" conspiracy.  Funny, but he just can't seem to accept that simple fact...

NO MEANS NO!

 End of discussion.

I Wonder...

Okay, the blog Feministing has yet another whiny, and more than a little creepy, post about how those mean old lesbians will have sex with women born women, and even "trans men," but not with "trans women."

The basic gist of the whole posting, besides the obvious "those mean old lesbians won't have sex with me, and they should be forced to" thing is about how this "disrespects" the gender identity of "trans men:"

It’s incredibly undermining to frame sexuality in a way that lumps these men in with all female assigned folks instead of with cis men. It’s a failure, in the realm of sexuality, to recognize thattrans men’s male identities are just as legitimate as cis men’s. If you’re going to base sexuality on gender, better base it on people’s actual genders.

Okay... Well, first off, I find it rather odd that a "trans woman" is presuming to speak out on the idea that "trans men" are being disrespected...especially when, as far as I am aware, few, if any "trans men" are actually raising this issue.  

Second, and more to the point, where is the outrage about all those men, often referred to as "chasers" or "fans" who claim to be "straight" but who not only will only date a "trans women" who have not had surgical correction, but who insist on those "women" performing sex acts that no woman born woman could perform...at least without wearing a prosthetic phallus.

These, uh, "straight men" have been known to dump their, uh, "girl friends" if they have SRS, even after long term relationships.  Funny, but I have to wonder, where is the outrage?  Where are the cries of how this disrespects the "gender identity" of the "trans woman?"

Huh?

Well, Mr. "Dana" Taylor just gets weirder and weirder.

First he posts...

Not bad for a crossdresser, eh Mr. Jennifer Usher? Had to throw that dig in. I am done paying attention to the bigot and hate monger.

Then he proceeds to make the next five out of six posts about me, with the most recent being  a link to a juvenile (in more than one way) video, where he makes the claim that I have asserted that his man boobs are hurting women all over the world.  

HUH?

Now, where he gets that I remotely said that in a post which was actually about how his behavior exposes him as just another  autogynephile (Bailey and Blanchard would have a field day with some this crazy) is, well, it just doesn't make ANY sense.  

Not to mention his regular comments here...and his persistence in mentioning me in comments every chance he gets.  

In any case, Mr. Taylor's obsession with me continues...  

Update:  Make that six out of seven...

He has posted two in one day.

Does he support rape?  Well, that is a matter of opinion, but he did decide to turn against the radfems, simply because they don't want to have sex with him.  I mean, that is what the whole cotton ceiling silliness is about...trying to force lesbians to accept transgender men, pre-or post op, to have sex with them.  No, I don't trivialize rape.  Mr. Taylor does when he tries, on the one hand, to force women into having sex with him against their will, and then tries to put on a show of false piety about the subject of rape to prove he is just one of the boys in dresses, whoops I mean, one of the "girls."

I take rape very seriously.  People who are very close to me have been raped.  And that is all  I will say on the subject, because I don't violate confidences and privacy.

Mr. Taylor...I think he is doing more harm to the transgender cause no, than he did when he was lying to himself (he was never a transsexual separatist, because, quite frankly, he was never a transsexual to begin with).

Fact Twisting 101

Well, Mr. "Cristan" Williams wasted no time firing up his attempt at trying to make something out of a post that was basically none of his business, after a cyberstalker went to great lengths to invade my, and my daughter's privacy.  And of course, the nasty boys all rushed.  Now, Mr. "Dana" Taylor has joined the fray.

Of course, Mr. Taylor can't quite seem to figure out how to spin it.  In one post, he goes for blood, trying to make me out to be a violent person.  Again, unless one has full knowledge of the context of what my daughter wrote, and let me repeat this, it is not anyone's business but her's and mine, what that context is, they can find all sorts of meaning there that is, well, completely wrong.  But that's how Fact Twisting works.  You just make it up as you go.

Of course, that is all the nasty boys have.  I don't need to twist facts.  Mr. Taylor posts about how he is "lactating" and has been going at his, uh, "breasts" with an electric breast pump.  And he wonders that women would find that sort of behavior creepy?  Does he have a moment of retrospection and think, "Could this somehow be a warning sign of an issue I should deal with?"  Of course not.  He's a man, and men don't have moments of retrospection.  Instead, he goes on the attack, and tries to deflect attention from his perversion by taking advantage of someone's cyberstalking, and with no regard for the pain he is causing my daughter.  She is just collateral damage in the transgender crusade.

He focuses, in one post, on something he has no real knowledge of, but does not hesitate to make into something it was not.  This is classic of the transgender extremists.  The one thing they cannot abide is truth, especially if they can use a lie to further their cause.  Again, there are things that are really no one's business.  But, suffice to say, when one is hurting, one can cause others to hurt.  My daughter understands that now.  But that was in the past, though in the spirit of fact twisting, Mr. Taylor makes it out to be current.

And let me make it clear.  If anyone continues to mess with my daughter, they will be very unhappy.  I am not a violent person, but I will not hesitate to rely on law enforcement to deal with the situation.  And well, my son-in-law is not happy about what his wife is being put through.  

Oh, and as to "Satin Lacy," I have no idea who that pervert is, or was, or whatever.  Some years ago, I wrote a rather putrid bit of satire parodying the worst of several genres of transgender fiction.  My intention was to write something so bad, it might get people to think about some very real problems.  It was inspired by a member of the Alabama State Supreme Court, the chief justice, who would have jumped at the chance to execute people for being gay, and I would assume transsexual.  Unfortunately, people took it, not as a parody, but as what it was a parody of.  I got some very creepy emails, and I took it down.  Unfortunately, someone calling himself "Satin Lacy" had reposted it, and well, the obsessive creep who has cyberstalked me for years found it.  

Facts are not the transgender extremists friend, so, given a bit of truth, they can create a number of lies.  

Of course, the most common example of transgender fact checking is that any disagreement or challenge to the transgender idiocy is, of course, hate.  If you don't think that a man becomes a full fledged woman when he puts on a dress...you are a hater.  If you don't think men should be able to invade women's spaces, you're a hater.  If you are a lesbian, and you don't want to have sex with someone who is transgender, you are a hater. If you don't think men should be able to force lesbians to have sex with them, against their will, you are a hater.  If you disagree with even the smallest point, you are a hater.  Sort of makes any reasoning with them impossible.

Another major part of transgender fact twisting is the word "identify," which is sorely abused. Identity is given magical powers to change reality.  Simply claim you identify as a woman, whatever that is supposed to me, and you are mystically changed into one.  I guess if you identify as a dog, you should be rounded up and hauled to the pound, unless you are on a leash, and wearing a proper tag.  Give me a break.

Yes, at one time, I "identified" as a crossdresser.  That was back when, in spite of Mr. "Cristan" Williams' lies, there was no "transgender."  You were either a crossdresser, or a transsexual.  No much else, except perhaps "drag queen."  In truth, I simply knew how I felt, and I worked with the terminology available to me.  The important point is, identify isn't reality.  I remember many times reading stuff, and finding myself thinking, "No, that is not me."  But, I was the victim of bad information.  The same sort of information that some will now cite if it suits them.  

And an even more important point was, I was not a crossdresser.  No matter what label I mistakenly adopted, I learned the truth, something Mr. Taylor, and some others, are fighting hard to avoid.  

There was a time when therapists took things more seriously.  A good therapist still does.  But there is also good money in pandering to fantasies.  And while not universally true, as is claimed by some, like Blanchard and Bailey, a lot of transgender people do lie.  Mr. Taylor is quick to claim he has been "diagnosed" with gender identity disorder.  One wonders, has Mr. Taylor updated his therapist on his breast milk perversion?  I would imagine not.  A competent therapist would find that very telling.

Mr. Taylor claims he is on "planning" for surgery in December of 2014.  I hope he reconsiders.  We don't need another person who had the surgery, and then regrets it.  I regularly did reality checks pretty much right up to the day I left for the hospital.  I wanted to be sure, and I did the right thing.

And that brings us to the worst, most tragic example of transgender fact checking.  As I have said, I was a miserable person before I transitioned.  I was in a lot of pain, and that caused people around me a lot of pain.  I transitioned, and things changed.  In spite of the lies pushed by the nasty boys in dresses, my life improved.  I was able to deal with things that would have been devastating before.  My daughter and I are very close.  But, for so many, the exact opposite is true.  Men who had successful lives as men, suddenly become, for all practical purposes, mental health basket cases when they decide to pursue life as women.  And, being the kooks that they truly are, they think this is a good thing, because, after all, that is how they think women are.  

And they wonder why radical feminists despise them...

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....

Mr. Williams' War on Women

Well, the man who wants to be the world's leading gender fascist continues his war on women.  I do not, repeat, do not agree with a lot of the extremism that comes from the Radical Feminists, but when I see the sort of crap that Mr. "Cristan" Williams is trying to pull, it actually makes me feel sorry for them.  Williams apparently has no clue as to how he comes across, or more likely, just doesn't care.

It started when, born of his anger that Victoria Brownworth does not support the right of men who claim to be women to force themselves on the Michigan Womyn's Music Festival.  Williams is also heavily involved in the "Cotton Ceiling" silliness, where "male lesbians" attempt to demand that real lesbians must have sex with them.  They cannot seem to accept the pretty much absolute right of someone to decline another as a sexual partner.  This really does begin to come very close to rape.

Well, Williams dug up a five year old article Brownworth did about pumping parties, which mentioned a young FTM, including the appearance of his genitals. Williams tried to accuse Brownworth of pedophilia and went so far as to contact authorities in an attempt to have charges filed.  Since then, Brownworth has alleged that she has been subjected to threats of violence and rape.  

Now, there is no way of easily ascertaining if Brownworth's allegations are true, but Mr. Williams' claims have been pretty much laughed away by everyone he has contacted.  If Brownworth's allegations are true, and it is very probably that they are, it would not be unreasonable to suspect that Williams might be responsible.  That does not mean that he is, just that he would be a reasonable suspect.

Williams now claims to have contacted the police and is alleging that statements by Brownworth, that she has contacted the police, are not true.  It should be noted that what he has specifically claimed is that a police report has not been filed against him.  While Brownworth did allude to Williams when mentioning filing a report, in reality, under such circumstances, unless Brownworth can show, objectively, that Williams is the culprit, the police would not have a report that "names" Williams.  Further, while the police might tell someone that they do not have a specific report on them (as in, no we are not looking to request you be arrested at this time) that does not mean that a report has not been filed.  Williams considers himself a master of spin, and this would not be the first time he has, in effect, lied like a cheap rug.  

I do know Mr. Williams can be quite obsessive about those he sees as an enemy.  He has very little respect for boundaries, unless he is the one setting them.  His behavior in this matter is outrageous, and his contempt for real women is highly disturbing.  And he actually wonders why transsexuals want no part of his little "movement."

This Would Be Funny If It Were Not So Infuriating

Okay, I just saw a post on Transadvocate where Dana Taylor has decided to join the transgender side.  Now, it is, of course, one's right to choose how one views the world, and who one wishes to align oneself with.  For me to say otherwise would be hypocrisy.

But when I read the reason, "The Cotton Ceiling" I had to do a bit of checking.  I knew it had something to do with the whole rad fem versus trans kerfuffle.  But I was not sure of the details.

Here is what I found...

“…the Cotton Ceiling – with reference to knickers – is the term parts of the trans community have inventively adopted for the way that, however theoretically accepting of trans people a lot of progressives may be, when it comes to actually having sex with us, they vote with their …um…feet.”

In other words, it is about complaining because someone is exercising their basic human right to choose who, and who not, to have sex with.  Now, let me be clear on several things here.  Since I completed my transition, I have had sex with several men, none of whom knew my history.  It was none of their business.  Unlike the transgender crowd, I have no need to reveal my medical history in order to get my jollies.  Had someone known, and decided to decline, I might have had my feelings hurt, but I would have seen it as their right to make that decision.  Just as it is my right to decide, for example, if I want to date someone who is an FTM.  I have done so, but I don't know that I would always make that choice.  I had one post op friend who was almost stalked by a rather obnoxious FTM.  She did not want to date him, but for a while, he was almost comical in his pursuit of her... almost, but more creepy than funny.

But according to the "cotton ceiling" crowd, lesbians should be ashamed of making a choice that it is their right to make.  Taken to its logical extreme, and I have actually seen this done, straight men should have no right to turn down a "trans woman," in other words, quite possibly, a dude in a dress, who wants to go to be with him.  Now, I had a few dates before surgery and on occasion the guy did not know when we first met. I alway was careful how I revealed my, uh, situation in order to avoid any violence.  I don't believe such violence is warranted, nor do I believe the trans panic defense should be allowed.  I also think pre-op transsexuals as well as transgender men, should exercise caution to avoid being injured or worse, murdered.  But this cotton ceiling crap is just creepy.  If you feel the need to broadcast your history, people have a right to take it into consideration when deciding if they want you as a sexual partner.  There is a word for trying to deny someone the right to make a decision based on that knowledge.  It is called rape.  If a woman does not want to have sex with you because she does not believe you are an appropriate partner, whether that woman is of trans history or not (and I have known of trans women, who identified as lesbian, who also did not want to have sex with transgender men, but you insist they do not have that right, then hey Bro' you are proving, you da man!

If anyone wants a good example of the sort of behavior that lies behind my statement that I don't "misgender" transgender men, this is one of the best....