Oh MY! The Men in Dresses Are Having a Hissy Fit!!!!

Since I basically shredded Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen's puff pieces in support of Mr. "Cristan" Williams', and Mr. "Dana" Taylor's claims that they have uncovered the true name of GallusMag, they have been frantic.  I have been subjected to regular cyberstalking on Twitter, by those three, the comments on Mr. Sandeen's column at LGBT Weekly have been removed, and in general they are beside themselves with anger and hate.

The cyberstalking on Twitter has ranged from the hilarious (Mr. Taylor's remark about my blog getting no comments...perhaps he hasn't noticed that the same is true for most of the latest drivel at Transadvocate) to the downright hateful (Mr. Sandeen has again tried to drag my daughter into this).  This is nothing new, and before, Mr. Taylor was heavily involved.  When all this started a bit over a year ago, my daughter was very upset at what these creeps were up to.  Of course, they could care less about how some mere woman feels.  They have shown that, time and time again.

Again, they have taken a comment that my daughter made at a time when we were estranged.  What caused this is really none of their business, and I refuse to violate my daughter's privacy.  Simply put, we have a disagreement, and we did not speak for a while.  Then, she contacted me, and we patched things up.  End of story.  Contrary to some of the crap they have tried to read into this, we are very close.  I speak to her regularly on the phone, and since that time, I have visited her, and my grandchildren a number of times.  I am also, contrary to some rather outrageous claims, on good terms with my ex.

As to the rest of their claims, they have made quite a bit out of stuff they have no capacity to understand.  As I have pointed out many times, none of these three are transsexuals (well, Mr. Williams is a possible exception, having possibly become what would be, effectively an FTM).  All three are basically fetishistic crossdressers who have crossed over to full time.

The stuff my daughter made reference to, again at a time when she was angry with me, was from the time before I made my transition.  I was, quite frankly, non-functional as a "man."  Yes, my ex supported us.  When you are basically living a lie, it can be hard to keep a job.  Like other transsexuals, I had to basically create a false shell to hide inside of.  That was true from childhood.  I remember having to pretend to care about things I was expected to like, and having to hide what I really wanted.  For example, I learned to tell people that my favorite baseball player was Roger Maris.  Now, I could not have told anyone what position he played, any thing about his record, or probably even what team he played for.  But, I could simply give that as an answer to a common question, and people were satisfied.  In truth, I hated sports, and considered them a nuisance because they kept me from getting to watch what I wanted on TV.

I also learned that being honest about other interests would, at best, cause me to be mocked by my peers, and my father, and at worst could result in my suffering abuse.  When I was in elementary school, I regularly hid what I really wanted, or felt, because otherwise, I would have received regular beatings for being a sissy.  Actually, on more than one occasion, I got them anyway.  On rare occasions, when I trusted someone, I usually found it to be a mistake.

These three clowns understand none of this.  They had no problems being men.  Mr. Sandeen, for example, served for TWENTY years in the U.S. Navy, as a man, without any real problems.  Truth be told, I would not have lasted 20 days.  Now, I know, some will argue that many women serve in the Navy, and this is quite true.  But, they are serving as women, and what they go through is radically different.  Of course, I doubt Mr. Sandeen can even comprehend something like that.

Likewise, Mr. Taylor had a relatively successful career as a man, as did Mr. Williams.  In fact, a photo of Mr. Williams in a full beard was recently published on Gender Identity Watch.  I find that rather interesting, since when I hit puberty, I rather obsessively tried to hide the fact that I was sprouting facial hair, and tweezed them out until there was too many, and then secretly shaved to avoid having to go through the time-honored ritual of having my father teach me to shave.  In fact, my parents were rather puzzled that I didn't seem to shave even after I was married.  And I could never, ever, imagine actually growing a beard or even a mustache. 

No, before I transitioned, I was not a very pleasant person to be around.  I was often very angry at the world, and suffered from depression, and self-hatred.  Unlike these three, who seem to have had no problem being men, and still don't.  And they have no idea what actually being a transsexual actually is...though they still keep trying to claim that transsexual, and transgender men like them, are really all the same.

Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen Plays the Censorship Card....AGAIN!!!

Well, Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen, who hates the idea of people having privacy, and who has falsely claimed that GallusMag has been outed, has pulled one of his favorite tricks and gotten the comments on his column at LGBT Weekly totally stripped of comments.  Funny, he seemed to have no problem with it when people are viciously attacking people who disagree with him.  In fact, none of the previous comments have been removed.  Just the ones from the current article, where a number of people had pointed out the problems with Mr. Sandeen's phony claims.

Anyone visiting his current article will be met with this bit of silliness from the "Associate Editor":

Dear San Diego Community:
It is unfortunate that LGBT Weekly is forced to suspend the ability of those who are engaged with our Trans Progressive columnist Autumn Sandeen and the transgender community. LGBT Weekly has provided a forum for the transgender community since our first print edition in 2010. In fact, LGBT Weekly’s commitment to the transgender community is also represented by the inclusion of transgender in the name of our publication.Some members of the San Diego community have forgotten or do not understand the meaning of civil discourse; to engage in a discussion to enhance understanding. While most of the public comments have been civil, some have taken advantage of LGBT Weekly’s desire to balance civil discourse and free speech within a discussion forum.Many in our community are still in the closet and do not want to use their real names in discussion forums. This creates a situation where some hide behind anonymous names and email addresses to spew hateful, derisive comments. If LGBT Weekly were to implement a policy where all comments must have a person’s real name, those who are not out are excluded from the discussion. LGBT Weekly’s global view is more speech is better than less.Let us be clear, LGBT Weekly provides the transgender discussion forum at our sole discretion. We will work with the transgender community to try to arrive at a solution to protect the identities of those in the community who are not out, to provide a forum for civil discourse, as well one that protects free speech. Until that time, all commentary in this discussion forum is suspended.

Of course, in trans-speak, hateful and derisive means "effectively refuting someone who adheres to the transgender party line."  In truth, no one commenting in that forum uses their real name.  But, there are a number who regularly whine about others not doing so, as well as regularly remarks, including this rather outrageous statement by Mr. Sandeen about GallusMag:

GallusMag’s identity is now known – she now has the opportunity before her own speech under her own name, with all the positive and negative consequences that can occur from writing under one’s own name. My thoughts, my prayers, is that violence of any sort isn’t part of the consequences of her being fully doxxed.

Besides being totally false, this comment shows Mr. Sandeen's total disregard for the rights of others.  GallusMag has chosen to write anonymously, and Mr. Sandeen needs to respect her right to do so.  Just because Mr. Sandeen ignores the advice, "Fool's names, and fool's faces are often seen in public places," does not mean that everyone wants their privacy invaded.  Given that more than a few transgender kooks have made violent threats against those who disagree with them, including some by Mr. Sandeen himself, it is not surprising that many women want to maintain distance from them.

Oh, and one more curious fact...LGBT Weekly does not list an associate editor.  So, one has to wonder who actually pulled this stunt.  There is no question that Mr. Sandeen had a role.  He has a long history of censoring critics, having done so in the past at Pam's House Blend (he once banned me from there for something I wrote here) but also at LGBT Weekly.  I imagine he probably pitched a hissy fit and demanded they remove the comments this time, as they were largely against him.  Even his meat puppets were getting drowned out.

Another Example of Why I Do Not Accept the Label of "Transgender"

In the comments section of Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen's column at LGBT Weekly, another man in a dress tried to dismiss the comments of myself, and another transsexual on the basis that we were "in pain."  I was rather amused by this, and simply replied, "Nope… My pain was ended when I had SRS."

Then I got to thinking about this.  This is a common tactic among transgender extremists, one that is almost as popular as labeling any disagreement as hatred.  The words might vary, with the accusation being that we are ashamed, in denial, or fearful, etc., but the basic idea is the same.  We are to be ignored because we are not being "honest."

Of course, this is the goal.  If they can "dismiss" our point of view, they can ignore it, and not have to actually deal with it.  They don't have to address the actual points raised, which just might prove a bit difficult.  You see this tactic a lot.  It is basically a variation on the classic logical fallacy known as a "straw man argument."  Rather than address the real point that is raised, in this case the issue was open service in the military for transgender people, you create a false argument, which is easily dismissed.

The simple fact of the matter is, I don't identify as transgender.  And that is all that transgender is, an identity.  Most who identify as such are not remotely transsexual.  Yes, there are exceptions, and some have guzzled the transgender "Kool-Aid" in large quantities.  Personally, I cannot understand why anyone who is transsexual would find common ground with the transgender paradigm.

Of course, part of the problem with the term "transgender" is that it is so vague as to actual meaning, it has become, essentially, meaningless.  But, for the most part, those who do identify with transgender seem to be more inclined towards being, as some would say, "out, loud, and proud."  They feel the need to make sure people know that they are transgender.  Their very core identity seems to depend on people being aware that they are transgender.  On the other hand, I, and most other transsexuals simply desire to get on with our lives as the women, or in the case of FTMs, the men, we really are.

To me, the idea of being "openly" transgender, or even "openly" transsexual, is unacceptable.  I am simply a woman.  I have been through transition, and I have left as much of my former life behind as is possible.

In another column on for LGBT Weekly, Mr. Sandeen writes about his experiences trying to obtain a discount based on his service in the Navy.  Now, I find it interesting that he states"One of the documents that can be used to indicate one is a veteran with my phone company is a DD214 (the military’s separation of service, or discharge document)."  Now, this is a document on which the name cannot be changed.  In another words, this document has Sandeen's birth name.  But, apparently, this was not the only document that Sandeen could have used to establish that he served in the military, but it is the one he chose.  Now, I never served in the military, but I have faced situations where I could have revealed my birth name.  And, unless absolutely necessary, I will avoid doing so.  In fact, the last time I recall having to do that was when I got my California ID.  I had to provide a copy of my birth certificate, and since that was before my surgery, I had to use the original version.  But transgender people seem to revel in this.

This is the main thing that divides most who are transsexual from those who prefer to identify as "transgender."  The transgender types want to keep a connection to being their birth sex and gender.  They don't want to be what they claim they "really" are.

All Together, Forward March, in Lockstep....Or ELSE!!!!

After the silliness of comparing TERFs to Westboro Baptist Church, the kooks at Transadvocate have come up with another idiotic post.  This time, they are again attacking Andrea James for the unforgivable sin of not adhering to the transgender party line.  This is not the first time Transadvocate has gone after her, they also attacked her viciously for daring to disagree with them over Jared Leto playing a "transgender" person in Dallas Buyers Club, which is kind of interesting since the movie was set at a time that 'transgender" was not a commonly used term.  More accurately, Leto played a drag queen who was HIV positive.

So, what did Andrea James do to incur the more recent wrath of the transgender extremists? She had the audacity to suggest that GLAAD is becoming too dominated by transgender extremists. And worse, she has supported the appointment of Megan McCain, who is the daughter of Arizona Senator and former presidential candidate John McCain. Gasp, she is even a Republican. This is about as far from being in lockstep as you can get, and the Transadvocate crowd will have no part of it.

Never mind that Andrea James has done for more for transsexuals than all the transgender kook combined.  Her contributions far outweigh those of men like "Cristan" Williams, "Autumn" Sandeen, and others.

This of course, has become the standard approach of the transgender extremists.  For them, it is all about controlling comments and language.  Even if the person making the comment is someone they would tend to forcibly label as "transgender."  Step of of line, and you will be attacked.  It's that simple.  You want to get along with the transgender kooks, just repeat the party line, never disagree with them, and above all, never, ever, think for yourself.

The Real Face of Transgender Extremism

The whole transgender paradigm is built on lies.  It is based on ideas like "Women have penises," and "I someone says they are a woman, then you have to accept, without question, that they are a woman, and grant them all rights and privileges of being a woman."  In short, it is pretty much an absurd pile of absurdities.  And deep down, I believe its leadership knows this.  For example, Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen, who has tried to style himself as the "Martin Luther King, Jr" of the transgender movement, said this on Twitter....

My job is not to make you love me. It's instead.....to control the extent people can publicly express antitrans sentiments -- A Rustin thought.

Notice that Mr. Sandeen does not say, "influence" but instead says, "control."  He does't say something like "My job is to "refute false antitrans sentiments..."  For Mr. Sandeen, it is about "control."  One might ask, why is this?  The answer is simple, he is a man, and men like to be in total control.

Mr. Sandeen likes to compare the imagined plight of "transgender people" with that of African-Americans.  Of course, this is absurd.  The movement to end racial discrimination was based on people lacking rights based on a criteria that had no basis in reason, and which was rooted simply in appearance.  As hard as it is to believe in retrospect, African-Americans were considered to be "inferior" simply because of the color of the skin.  Nothing more.  Of course, in order to justify that, people made up false claims, which only the truly ignorant would remotely accept today.  

On the other hand, the issues concerning transgender people, particularly the one that is so near and dear to Mr. Sandeen's heart...the right to invade sexually segregated places, are rooted in reality.  Women simply don't want their privacy invaded by men.  Transsexuals have long used the women's room without incident, but it is the increasing invasion of those who are not transsexual, who are increasingly told they have an absolute right to go into women's spaces, provided they simply "identify" as a woman, that are the problem.

One of the most telling aspects of the whole bathroom issue is the arrogant disregard that these so-called "transwomen," have for the feelings and concerns of women.  The basic response is, "get over it."  In their mind, it is their right and privilege to enter women's private spaces, even those involving actual nudity.  

Sandeen, having falsely obtained a California birth certificate by fraudulently claiming to have completed a sex change (he is a eunuch) once made a rather arrogant remark about how he was considering going to the Michigan Womyn's Music Festival, claiming that he was now, "legally" a woman born woman.  

Like many transgender extremists, Mr. Sandeen's arrogance knows no bounds.  Just over a year ago, he tweeted this bit of arrogant silliness to Aunty Orthodox, another one of us horrible transsexual separatists....

I am a woman. I'm among those who define the space. Trans women are women, and are among those who define the space.

Uh, no.  Mr. Sandeen is a male, who has a penis (which he wishes to keep) but not his testicles...by definition, a eunuch at best, but in no sense a woman.  He fraudulently obtained a California birth certificate by lying to a judge, but that does not make him a female, and certainly not a woman.   And he certainly has no business telling women how to define their space.

No, the arrogance of transgender extremists is astounding.  Sandeen is just one example, but he is a major one.  He is complaining again that I am targeting him, and I admit, I do right about him a lot, because a) he is such a perfect example of transgender stupidity and arrogance, and b) he is a very prolific writer, so he is a rich source of material.

Well, At Least He Tried

Well, I have challenged Ms. "Mark" Cummings, the leader of the Shame On You Transgender Edition cult of loser bloggers to post something beside his usual insults, and well, so far she hasn't post much except the same repetitive crap, usually along with a statement that she is tired of dealing with me, and is going to stop…  Oh well,..

But, I will give "investigative reporter Mr. "Zierota" Slingen credit…at least he has tried to post a coherent argument.  Sort of…kind of….

He asks, "How Objective is Transgender?"  He is clearly attempting to answer my assertion that "transgender" is a meaningless, subjective term that is an artificial social/political construct dreamed up by some crossdressers in the 1990s.  Sadly, for him at least, he falls quite a bit short.  

The primary basis for his argument is, "if the definition is accurate then there is ground for meaning."  Now, besides being vague, and pretty much circular reasoning, (sort of like saying, "The sky is blue because it is, well, blue in color….") it has no real bearing on the discussion, if only because there is no accurate definition of "transgender."  He then goes on, curiously enough, to use the terms "good and evil" which are certainly "subjective" as an example…of what, I am not sure…but okay.

He then offers this gem…

Transgender is a very objective word that can go into many directions for each person while the basis remains the same. Every direction of its meaning holds the same two words. Trans and gender. So what's the best way to explain the objectivity of this? Let's try an image!

Well, aside from effectively admitting that term is subjective (a "word that can go into many directions for each person while the basis remains the same") he offers as an illustration, this:

Here we have a mish-mash of terms, and a definition that is, by its very nature, totally subjective.  

Even worse, different people, and different groups, and even members of some of the groups listed in the illustration, would argue that they are not transgender.  For example, a lot of people who identify strongly as transgender would exclude crossdressers, transvestites, drag queens, and drag kings because, well, they are sort of embarrassing and they don't want people "getting the wrong idea."  On the other hand, a lot of interest people would violent object to being labeled transgender, and would argue that including them under the imaginary umbrella is simply an effort to co-opt their condition for cynical purposes.

And quite frankly, I and a lot of other transsexuals would argue that we do not fit that silly definition (not the lamest, but close…) in that we do not cross over from our true gender, and we do not challenge traditional gender roles or expressions.  Simply put, unlike Mr. Slingen, I am a woman, and that is the gender I express.

What is even sillier is what he posted about that diagram above….

Goodness gracious! That's a lot of labels!

Uh, yes, and that is part of what makes the whole thing HIGHLY SUBJECTIVE.

He then goes on to assert…

So, how objective is Transgender when you know the entire meaning? Simple. It's objective enough to know what gender means as opposed to sex. We also know that in a traditional society, the majority of people are cis gendered and they only recognize two extreme ends of the gender spectrum which is male and female as absolutes in a binary system.

He is just digging a deeper and deeper hole, since it has become common practice among transgender extremists to conflate "gender" and "sex."  They insist on using terms like "Gender Reassignment Surgery" while also asserting that "gender is what is between your ears, and sex is what is between your legs."  So, are they talking brain surgery?  Seriously…they do this a lot, referring to changing the "gender" on a birth certificate.  Or the "gender marker" on a driver's license.  So, talking about transgender being "objective" because we know what "gender" is, well that's another nail in the coffin for Mr. Slingen's argument.

Oh, and another example he attempts to use is that of the term "atheist."  Now, atheist is a clearly defined term.  He tries to compare my assertion that I am not transgender to someone who asserts that they do not believe in "god or gods"  saying they do not "identify" as an atheist.  Well, that is sort of like Mr. Slingen saying he is not a man…it doesn't quite work that way.  As I said, the term is clearly defined…unlike "transgender."  It is not about "identity," is is about fact.  Mr. Slingen could say, "I do not identify as a human being," but that would not make him a dog."  But, transgender is, quite frankly, meaningless as anything other than as an identity.  Trying to make it an objective label fails miserably.

But, of course, the transgender extremists need to make it appear to be an objective label for political reasons.  Which is, again, part of what makes it so subjective, and, quite frankly, meaningless.  In many ways, it comes down to numbers.  More "transgender people" means more political clout.  Now, given that I rather strongly oppose their political agenda, that is another reason I flatly refuse to accept the label.

So, Mr. Slingen can pout, through a fit, sputter, and spew, but he can't force me to be transgender, no matter how badly he wants to.

The Transgender Kook Triple Play

There is a pattern that seems to play out repeatedly when one deals with transgender extremists.  The more they are kooks, the more precisely it plays out….  And in my recent adventures with the Trannymaniacs I wrote about last time, it has played out very precisely.

So, what is the Transgender Kook Triple Play?  Well, it works like this…

First, they try to show you the error of your ways.  They inform you that you are wrong, and that they want to show you the "right path…"  (BTW, all of the weird grammar and spelling mistakes are in the original…just consider everything to include (sic) where appropriate.) They will be firm, but that "only want to help you out."  Here is part of what this bunch's self-appointed "messiah", Ms. "Mark" Cummings had to say at the beginning...

Transgender is not meaningless it is who you are and will always be. You can run but you cannot hide. Say all you want, scream from the top of your lungs. But you don't full anyone. Now if you feel the need to think you are a woman and that gives you peace, then by all means wish away. But you are only hurting yourself in the long run. You were not a mistake from the word go, we are here to show the world the true meaning of duality, and to think you can kill who you were, is only an act of delusion.

As I said, a bit firm, but after all, she has to set me straight…  But, he tries a somewhat softer approach after I pointed out to him that, no, I really didn't buy into his crap, and was not going to accept his advice…

You can repeat it all you want and believe it. It is your choice, your life, but the world knows otherwise. My life is amazing and I am so at peace, before I use to think like you, and I woke up. You are no more of a woman than a transgender woman who still has her penis. Your penis has been inverted but it still has male written all over it. It is fake, it does not lubricate, it does not self dilate. It is a wound at best, having that does not make you a woman. You were born a guy. You and all of us have a hormonal imbalance that makes us feel, in your case feminine and in my case masculine, but that does not make us the gender we claim we are. No matter what surgery, no matter what procedure. You are not a mistake, you don't need to prove to the world one thing. You were fine the way you were. Now I have nothing against transitioning but knowing why we are doing this and why we have been placed here on earth.

Now, she drags out some classic transgender tropes, but she also tries to be a bit condescending, but also tries to gently set me on the proper path…  And I decline to accept her correction…

At this point, Ms. Cummings' "husband," Mr. "Jessica" Cummings joins the discussion…

Actually Jennifer I am post op and had my surgery in April of 2013 just FYI. I identify as a woman but I am proud to be Transgender so your fetish theory holds no water with me. We are all equal unfourtunately some of us that are proud of who we are post real pictures of ourselves and those of us that are ashamed hide behind fake photos such as a cartoon character.

Now, I had pretty much told Ms. Cummings that I was not buying into their crap in no uncertain terms.  I was already seeing a bit of what was going on, but I hadn't read enough to know the depths of insanity this group holds..  For example, while I would come to suspect something was amiss, I did not yet know for certain that Mr. Cummings was lying through his teeth when he claimed to be "post-op."  Yes, he, like Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen is a post-op eunuch, not a transsexual.  And I had not made the connection that he was the "husband" of Ms. Cummings.

Now, he drags out some classic transgender tropes, but he also tries to be a bit condescending, but also tries to gently set me on the proper path…  More classic transgender silliness…"shame," "hiding," etc.  In their mind, someone who is leading a normal, quiet, and happy life as a woman is somehow actually miserable, ashamed, hiding, and in need of correction.

Of course, when this approach fails to work, the second stage of the Transgender Kook Triple Play is to start insulting the person they are arguing with.  As sure as the sun rises, the insults will come out.  The break is not always clearly defined, and there is usually some mixing of the two…

I don't care if you agree or disagree with me, I don't need your validity or anyone elses. I am speaking my mind and that I am entitled to do. And yes I have walked my life in both genders as have you and as all other trans people. Glad we provided you with amusement since your lonely ass has nothing else better to do. I am sure dilating gets boring after awhile and since you have not been able to use that expensive man made vagina, I wonder how much regret you actually have and need to boost yourself by saying you are better than us trannies who won't put ourselves through that unnecessary procedure that at best won't be able to satisfy anyone, not even yourself. You did come and throw the first stone, by saying transgender is meaningless therefore, you must understand that we don't take very lightly to snobby transsexual women who are uptight due to lack of sexual pleasure and filled with regrets.

Actually, she clearly does care, and she clearly needs my validity.  Now, keep in mind the irony of the statement that she is "speaking my mind and that I am entitled to do," given that she repeatedly informed me that I have no right to not identify as transgender.  Now, it should be noted, I never said I was better, and actually said there was no basis for comparison.  My position throughout this discussion, including what started the whole mess, was simply to point out that the idea of a "transgender hierarchy" was bogus, in part, because the ones supposedly at the top are not necessarily transgender.  

And yes, I said "transgender is meaningless" because, well, it is.  It is an artificial, social/political construct that is highly subjective and which has no objective basis.  In reality, the only criteria for being "transgender" is if one chooses, of one's own volition, to identify as transgender.  Of course, this offends the extremists, who, as much as anything, need numbers.  And they wish to use transsexuals as their "beards" to hide behind. 

Now, when things really get rough, they bring out their favorite insult, and violate Godwin's Law…

I can't believe these HBS nazis have to be just like the TERF is today. Because that's why their scientific theories are not being taken serious and the proposal of having the term transsexual changed to HBS is thus rejected.
There is a page dedicated to debunking the entire series of claims made by HBS nazis who tried to get a page up on Wikipedia.

Now, at this point, they have effectively lost the argument…but, hey, the funs only starting.  I will spare you the endless back and forth of nasty insults.  I admit, I was not exactly kind in my responses, but as I have said many times, I don't suffer fools, or bigots, well.  And when you are dealing with she extremely foolish bigots…it is not going to be pretty.  But the main thing I did was meet their stupidity with facts, and that, of course, just made them madder, and madder, which brings us to the final stage of the transgender triple play…the inevitable end of battle.  But first, we should look at a bit of irony…

This band of kooks chose to use the image I have on this blog in their attacks on me.  Now, the content of this blog is copyright, by me, and as they say, all rights are reserved.  I don't object to "fair use," but copying my artwork and using it as they did is not fair use.  Quoting is fair use, but taking an image is not (ironically, because of this, I did find out that some bizarre plastic surgery blog, which is not in English, has actually stolen my image as well.  Not much I can do, as I assume it is hosted in China, which does not recognize copyright as a rule…but sort of weird…and a little creepy…).  When I notified them of this, they went totally loopy, claiming I was trying to censor them.  No, I simply said, "Remove the image you stole."  I did not say, "Take down the silly insults you have thrown at me…" or "Remove the outrageous claims you make on your blog…" or even "Stop lying about having had surgery you haven't had…"  No, I did not try to censor them…BUT….

Yes, in the classic endgame for a transgender kook, they played the censorship card.  Mr. Cummings has this to say...

@ Jennifer we have Sat back and entertained your childish actions on every article. It is getting old. We have yet to censor you and shut you up but if it keeps up much longer I will personally start deleting everyone of your comnents from this point forward. So you can waste your time babbling your hypocritical, disrespectful, and manly comments and I will simply make then disappear. Poof =)

And, after I pointed out the irony of this, in light of them doing an entire blog post on their false claim of being censored (Really, this people have NO sense of irony, no sense of humor, and well, no sense, period….) one of them replied:

Well you getting blocked won't be determined by the amount of farm animals you've f****d, but by the amount of stupidity and hate you put into pixels in these commentsections. I take it you've blocked people on your blog too since you're so privacy sensitive about things you've put into the public domain! Ouch! That had to hurt. (And yes, I did censor the profanity in this one…)

My reply to this one was, quite simply, factual…

ROTFL! Well, I guess you should block me then, since I would never match you on the first (since, as I said, I don't engage in your sexual practices, sir…and if you actually thought, about it, you would realize just how incredibly ignorant AND impossible such a suggestion is) and I am also not going to make stupid remarks, since I clearly disagree with your idiocy. But, as you point out, Blogger (alas) does not have a blocking function. And again, your understanding of "public domain" versus copyright is laughable. Hurt, only in the sense that it always hurts to see someone so completely, and woefully lacking in knowledge.

And I still love the irony of you all whining about censorship, and then threatening it because you realize you are actually losing the argument. Classic transgender mentality.

And, of course, they removed my post…along with another, earlier one, where I pointed out, in response to a similar childish remark suggesting that I live in Texas, and well, engage in what I can only assume is a sexual practice this person is quite obsessed with…he keeps mentioning it) along with the suggest that I should therefore "copyright animals"…

Well, first off, I don't live in Texas, nor do I engage in your sexual practices. I do however understand the difference between copyright law, and patent law. You see, copyright applies to creative works, like writing, art, photographs, and movies. It would not apply to an animal. Patent law would, but only if you invent something sufficiently new. Now, genetic modifications are covered, so it would be possible to patent an animal, but one has to keep in mind that patents are in effect a much shorter time than a copyright. Now, sir, it is obvious that your statement was, as usual, mind numbingly ignorant, but that is to be expected.

Anyway, this has all been fun…I admit a certain guilty pleasure in giving kooks fits…and I could sort of see how it would end…it almost always does, unless someone higher up the food chain prevents it (as has happened at LGBT Weekly where Mr. Sandeen is not allowed to censor like he would like to).  I will probably occasionally monitor these kooks, and bring you response to anything truly insane, as I do with other kooks.

Trannymaniacs

I miss the Animaniacs.  I used to love watching that series of cartoons, as well as Tiny Toons.  Well, I encountered a group of bloggers who have recently appeared who might well be called the "Trannymaniacs."  Yeah, I hate that word, but they seem to embrace it, among other bizarre things, so, why not?  The other name I thought of using was "Bat Sh*t Crazy Trannies," but I really don't care for profanity.

I encountered them after I read an article they had posted through the "Transgender News" mailing list.  I read it as a possible source for article ideas.  Entitled "The Transgender Hierarchy of Evil," it was a diatribe about the "imaginary" transgender hierarchy.  You know. the one that supposedly ranks people and goes something like:

Post-Op Transsexuals

Pre-Op Transsexusls

Non-op Transsexuals

Pre-Transition Transsexuals

Crossdressers

Fetishistic Transvestites

Drag Queens

Of course, never mind that most transsexuals do not even identify as being member of the transgender community, nor do many drag queens.  And some have started excluding crossdressers, fetishistic transvestites, and drag queens because, well they are just too darned embarrassing.

Well, I read the post, and left a simple comment…

Sorry, but no…I am a post-op transsexual. I am not transgender. I reject that term and the political silliness it represents. I changed my sex, not my gender. One is "transgender," if, and only if, one identifies as such. Otherwise, it is a meaningless term. The hierarchy is meaningless, because transgender is meaningless.

And, well, I set off a fire storm of controversy… A little over an hour later, I got a reply from some kook who calls himself "Jessica Lynn Cummings."  Mr. Cummings' post was followed about 3 minutes later by a post from his wife, "Mark Angelo Cummings."  Yes, you read that correctly…you see, Mr. Cummings claims to be a "post-op transsexual," as does his wife…  Now, this sort of thing happens, but they are not remotely transsexuals.  Not judging by the insanity that followed….

Right off the bat, Mr. Cummings went full-blown gender fascist, telling me that I am not allowed to not identify as transgender.  Worse, as things went on, they basically let it be known that transsexualism (remember, they claim to be transsexuals themselves) is not legitimate.  Their rhetoric sounded more like the sort of crap spewed by Blanchard, Bailey, and Lawrence (and yes, Lawrence also claims to be transsexual) than anything else.

Things went down hill from there…I'm not exaggerating when I say this bunch is seriously insane.  All told, there are six members of this bizarre little cult.  The more I went back and forth with this bunch, the stranger it got.  Apparently Mr. Cummings and his wife (not remember, Mr. Cummings is "Jessica" and the wife is "Mark") fancy themselves some sort of transgender messiahs, who are going to "take their show on the road."  Or, to put it a bit more accurately, they have bought a motorhome, and are going to become traveling grifters.  It appears that neither is employed, though Mrs. Cummings claims to be an "Occupational Therapist, Nutritional Consultant and Master Personal Trainer."

I'm really not completely sure what is going on with this bunch.  On the one hand, a lot of their stuff, including the attacks on transsexuals, is straight out of the classic transgender playbook.  It sounds a lot like old school Arnold Lowman (you may know him better as "Virginia" Prince), or classic Phil Frye (aka, "Phyllis," Mr. "Cristan" Williams' role model), but there is also almost a hardline, right wing tone to it.  It makes me wonder if Mrs. Cummings, who on at least one of her numerous websites, speaks of her "faith" might be trying to balance involvement with fundamentalism with his lifestyle?  She would not be the first person to have issues with this.

Her attitude almost comes across as, "You can be a transgender, but don't think there is any real legitimacy to your identity.  You're not "really" a woman, (or a man in her case) but as long as you accept that, and identify as a transgender, it's okay.  But if you get uppity, and think you're really a "woman," or really a "man," then you are delusional.  It would also be consistent with her being married to a man in a dress.  That way, she can be the "husband" but not have to deal with being in what would be, in the eyes of some religious people, a "same sex" marriage.  On the other hand, they can let lose with profanity that rivals that of most sailors, so I don't know.

Whatever the source of their beliefs…fundamentalism, or just extreme transgender, they are clearly some of the most insane transgender kooks I have run across in some time.  They spend a lot of time accusing anyone who disagrees with them of "self-hatred," "shame." "arrogance," "transphobia," etc.  But that seems to be exactly what they are suffering from.  They are clearly dealing with some serious mental issues, and are taking them out on anyone, and everyone who dares question their views.  But, they also spend a lot of time parroting the same tired crap you get from the usual mindless transgender types.

In any case, the whole thing deteriorated into them posting a series of articles attacking me, and violating the copyright on this blog site.  I have contacted Google to complain (they also use blogger) with them threatening me with the "Streisand Effect."  I am sure this isn't over, especially when they see this article…but, I admit, I don't suffer fools, and especially bigoted fools well.  Sometimes it is fun to see just how badly they will get when they fall apart.

Another Example of Transgender Extremists Just NOT Getting It

Recently, I learned about the suicide of someone named Essay Anne Vanderbilt.  Vanderbilt was the developer of a rather bizarre looking putter that was apparently quite revolutionary.  It could help golfers sink putts, and it had attracted the attention of a golfing writer who became someone obsessed with tracking down the inventor.

As he investigated the story, he found more and more inconsistencies.  Suspecting some sort of possible fraud, he dug deeper, but what he eventually found was that Vanderbilt was a post-op transsexual who was quite stealth.  When he made it clear that he planned to expose her, she committed suicide.  Naturally, a few transgender kooks have jumped on this to cluelessly blather about how rough it is for transgender people…mostly completely missing the simple fact that she was almost certainly not one of their ilk.

Another author, again completely missing the point, has taken a slightly different approach…but still misses the point entirely.  "Dana" Beyer, one of several transgender extremists who have found a home at the Huffington Post, has written an article whining about  Vanderbilt being in the closet.  Of course, Mr. Beyer is quick to point out that Vanderbilt had a history of being suicidal, and had a history of "emotional struggles."  He also makes the obvious error of referring to her as a "trans woman."  Vanderbilt was nothing like Mr. Beyer and the rest of the cadre of kooks who pontificate at the Huffington Post.  Vanderbilt clearly had no desire to be anything other than simply a woman…something the transgender crowd blanches at the thought of.

This is one several things that are lost on the transgender crowd in their rush to force transsexuals under their umbrella.  We are not the same.  Transsexuals have an absolute need to correct their bodies, and an equally absolute need to simply live as the women (or men, in the case of FTM transsexuals) that we really are.  Transgender people have a need to be, well, "transgender."  For them, the idea of not being "out, loud, and proud" is as equally offensive as the idea of being such is to a true transsexual.  They want people to know their history.  It is central to their identity, just as being simply a woman is to mine.

And that brings us to the core of what this article is about….Mr. Beyer's clueless drivel…  For example, he utters this ridiculous bit:

When any life is lost, it is a tragedy. When it is lost because of unbearable social pressures, it is an unnecessary tragedy. Her story is, unfortunately, still way too common.

Obviously, this poor woman killed herself because she feared something kooks like Mr. Beyer embrace with total enthusiasm.  While I believe that Vanderbilt overreacted to the situation, I can understand what she felt.  She would have been outed in, at least from her view, a very public manner.  Now, in truth, the situation might well have been ultimately manageable, it would have been difficult.  She no doubt had a lot invested in the product she had invented, and her future income probably depended on building on that success.  Simply picking up and moving somewhere she was not known would not have been an option.  

How one deals with being outed depends, in part, on the nature of the outing, and on where one lives.  For some, it can be hard to escape public scrutiny.  For others, it can be as simple as packing up and moving to a new town, or even a new part of town.  What she was threatened with (as best I can tell, she was not actually outed until after her death, but she should have been assured that her private life would remain private.  And, it is possible, if she had simply explained her situation to the person planning the article, that would have been respected.

But, I suspect that kooks like Mr. Beyer, and a long litany of others I won't bother naming, contributed to her death by pushing the concept that "transgender" people have no problem being "outed."  After all, I suspect some of them should probably be more likely to be suicidal if people didn't know their history.  After all, where is the fun in bullying people into ignoring reality and referring to you as a woman, if they are not fully, and unquestioningly aware that you were, and in many cases, still are, a male.

Some of the crap spewed by Mr. Beyer is just incredible…  For example, he exhibits both the cluelessness of a man, and a complete disregard for the safety, perhaps, of those who don't share his love of the spotlight:

Leaving the closet of her pre-transition male life, she created a new closet, with a narrative that clearly was flawed when she presented as a highly successful engineer and inventor. I'm amazed that her story didn't immediately raise eyebrows, as she was a middle-aged 6-foot-3 woman with a low-pitched voice, degrees from MIT and Penn, and a résumé of work on the stealth bomber and Bluetooth technology. Maybe we've progressed sufficiently that many are no longer aware of the profound sexism that infected the realm of science and technology back in the '70s and '80s. Few women received those degrees and worked on those projects. The ignorance evinced by the author and his editor tell me we still have a long way to go.

First off, Mr. Beyer would have kicked Vanderbilt right back into that first closet, where he still resides.  Mr. Beyer continues to, effectively exist as a man.  He may demand, and even force people to "acknowledge" him as a female, but they do it only by suspending reality.  He continues to exist as, in effect, a man.

Second, he ignores the fact that, yes, some women, not many, but some, did manage to have careers in those fields.  But he also makes sure to emphasize things that might clue his readers in on how to play "spot the tranny."  Yes, folks, that tall woman, with a voice that is perhaps not quite as high pitched as you think it should be…she just might be a man, so don't hesitate to make that assumption.  Especially if she has the "wrong" degree…  Talk about ignorance…Mr. Beyer exhibits it in bulk.

Worse, Mr. Beyer goes on to not only absolve the author of any guilt, but to actually suggest that he was justified in what he put Vanderbilt through…

The LGBT community pounced on the writer and his editor, blaming them for causing her death, even though she had killed herself before the story had been published. There were complaints that she should never have been outed, even though her gender history was clearly pertinent to the mystery that was her life. It was implied that there was no compassion for her, a claim we have no way of evaluating. Causation was implied where there was only correlation, and the trans community lashed out at what it saw as a miscarriage of justice and vicious cyber bullying.

After all, how dare she choose stealth.  She must join behind those like Mr. Beyer, in transgender lockstep.  Anything else is unacceptable.  Besides, what Vanderbilt was subjected to was not unlike what many, including myself, have been subjected to by transgender extremists seeking to punish those who refuse to be assimilated.  One blogger was literally driven into hiding because she dared speak out.

The question that haunts me is how we, as trans persons, can become full and equal citizens as long as we keep our true selves from our friends and neighbors. How can we overcome the need to reinvent ourselves in a manner others might consider deceptive when those others create such pressures that some trans persons see no way out? How can we be free as long as we stay in the closet or create new closets?

What Mr. Beyer really wants to do is force people into the closet of being what they are not, because, quite frankly, he can never be what they are. Mr. Beyer would deny to those who are truly transsexual the life they seek, because he finds it "deceptive."  What he actually demands is deception, not the other way around.  What he really means is, if the truth gets out that transsexuals are not transgender, and that the idiocy spewed by the extremists is, well, idiocy, then he might not be able to successfully bully people into ignoring reality.

My answer is that we simply must come out. The risks may be great, and the act of coming out may be fraught with peril, but as our gay allies have learned, the only way to acceptance and affirmation is to first accept and affirm yourself.

Mr. Beyer is a classic "gender fascist."  He thinks he has a right to dictate what is right for me, and those like me.  I do accept and affirm myself…as the woman I am, not a man in a dress like Mr. Beyer would have me be.

The REAL Transgender Agenda

Well, Mr. "Cristan" Williams is at it again...  

This time, he has gone so far as to defend "Colleen" Francis, who exposed himself to a group of teenage girls at Evergreen College in Washington State.  Perhaps defend is not the proper term.  As is typical with Mr. Williams, he has confabulated a rather fanciful tale in a desperate attempt to deny what actually happened.

Mr. Williams is trying to claim that the whole affair is really all an "urban legend," by, well, trying to cook up an urban legend.  I find it kind of interesting that Mr. Williams has waited over a year to come up with the bit of drivel.  Apparently he thinks it has been long enough that people might actually believe his lies.

But the real question is why?  Is it because, well, the "Colleen" Francis affair is so far-fetched that we should all believe that such a thing could never happen?  Or is it because, well, if the transgender extremists like Mr. Williams have their way, things like this will become routine?

If you guessed the former, sorry, but you are wrong.  If you guessed the latter, congratulations!

You see, very central to the REAL transgender agenda is an effort to force women to accept, shall we say, nude intact males in areas where there is an expectation of privacy.  Put a bit less delicately, these, uh, "women" are supposed to be free to wave their, uh, neo-clits around.  And if you don't like it?  TOUGH!  Just ask Transadvocate contributor Mr. "Zinnia" Jones:

"Cis people’s bathroom fears do not matter"

And then there is this outright lie from Mr. "Mara" Kiesling, in which he actually admits to the fact that part of the agenda is forcing women to accept nude men in the showers and dressing rooms:

The most significant change for transgender people is that we fought for and won removal of language that clarified use of showers and locker rooms "where being seen unclothed would be unavoidable." None of the states that have passed and successfully implemented a gender identity anti-discrimination law includes such a provision, and neither should ENDA.

This is not true, as 11 of the 17 states with such laws have separate provisions that protect privacy in such areas.  And as I showed in my previous post, this is a part of those schools policies that Mr. Williams has been lying and saying were "identical" to the new transgender school law that is currently being challenged in California.  That law specifically leaves out any provision that would allow for such protections.  It is important to remember that an omission can be as significant as an inclusion.

No, bottom line, this is the real transgender agenda.  Mr. Williams wants you to believe that what happened at Evergreen College is a myth.  He wants you to not demand protections until it is too late...

And I do appreciate Elizabeth at Notes From the T Side having the decency to acknowledge that I was right when I predicted that this would happen.  As I said, I was not interested in attacking a young transsexual.  I'm simply opposed to Mr. Williams and his ilk using a child to push their agenda. 

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.

Who Really Hates Who?

I'm sure many, if not most are familiar with the ongoing conflict between Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen and me.  Or, for that matter, between Mr. "Cristan" Williams and those he labels as "TERFs," or between any transsexual who dares challenge transgender dogma and various transgender extremists.  The one common thread among all of these things is accusations of hatred.

For example, Mr. Sandeen has accused me of hatred because I have mentioned him, according to his claims, over 130 times.  Now, let's consider this.  I write a blog dealing with issues of interest primarily to those who identify as true or classic transsexuals.  Mr. Sandeen has largely positioned himself as a major blogger among a faction that pretty much opposes the concept of true or classic transsexualism.  So, it is natural that I would comment on much of what he writes.  What he is objecting to is the analysis and refutation of the positions he, and others, take on those issues.

One of the factors that led me to start this blog was the often heavy handed censorship I found on "transgender" blogs.  Simply disagreeing with transgender dogma could get a person quickly banned, especially if they were effective in making their points.  Mr. Sandeen in particular became well known for his severe censorship on Pam's House Blend.  You didn't even have to violate the rules there.  I was banned because of stuff I wrote on my blog here.  

Now, I don't tell Mr. Sandeen what he can, and cannot write.  I have never censored his comments here, and I have not tried to dictate to him what he can write, but he has done that to me, repeatedly...and has begun resorting to threats in his attempts to make me submit to his will.

As I said, if keep up your behavior you should be prepared for escalation. The status quo is not acceptable to me now. I'm done with you being comfortable in your bigotry and hate.

So, exercising my free speech and responding to what he says, while exercising his free speech rights, is bigotry and hated?

Sandeen has a history of violence.  He has admitted to harassing women online.  Here is a link to what he was forced to apologize for.  And yet, he has the audacity to question why I would object to meet him in person?  He has a history of cyberstalking me, and has escalated the efforts over time.  I don't think my reaction to his demand to meet face-to-face is at all unreasonable.  And when I made it clear that such would not be tolerated, he tried to suggest, with no basis, that I was the one threatening violence because I said I would take legal steps if he tried to make contact.

You, Jennifer, can threaten me all you want. Does your threat mean that if I attended a service at your church you'd hit me? Is violence what you're threatening?

I found this just a bit disingenuous, as I have repeatedly pointed out to Mr. Sandeen that my purpose was not to threaten, but simply to avoid personal contact, and that I would take only take legal steps if he tried to approach me.  I suspect he knows better, but is trying to make himself look like a martyr.

Mr. Sandeen takes great umbrage at what he calls "misgendering" (the transgender kooks do love their neologisms) but he has no problem at all with people forcing the label "transgender" on people who reject it.  As I have pointed out, I refuse to call someone "female" who clearly is not.  I do not buy into the magical, "name it, and claim it" approach that the transgender extremists push.  But, at the same time, I do not demand that anyone refer to their self in any particular manner, or that they refrain from referring to their self in any particular manner.  I may not see Mr. Sandeen as a woman, and I may firmly make this clear, but I have never insisted that Mr. Sandeen must call himself a "man."  Or that he can't refer to himself as "transgender."  I have called him on the fact that he falsely claims to be a transsexual, but I would never insist that he refrain from using that term.  But, Mr. Sandeen is closely aligned with those who try to insist that people must accept the label "transgender," even if they find it offensive to be called such.  And he continues to impose such a label on people against their will.

For example, in spite of my disdain, for being linked with "transgender" Mr. Sandeen, in an effort at self-promotion still insists on "including" me in a group I want no part of.  Has blogged:

@terfherder @danaequality @transadvocate I'm with you on community. But we fail when we eat our own -- & irritatingly JJ is one or our own.

Personally, I find it extremely insulting for him to claim that I am part of a community with these three men.  I strongly suspect that @terfherder is none other than long time stalker "Diane" Lask.  He would appear, at first glance, to just be a creepy "admirer," that is a man who is obsessed with "trans women" as sex objects, but the style of his writing is that of Lask, who has a history of "sockpuppeting" (hiding behind fake names).  Same tired insults, same basic style.  If it is not Lask, it is someone closely linked to Lask.

I  can present objective arguments as to why Mr. Sandeen is both male, and a man.  He cannot, however, present objective arguments as to why anyone is "transgender" unless the person in question has unequivocally stated that this is how they identity, and how they wish to be referred to.  I have. repeatedly, done just the opposite, and yet he insists on calling me a member of his imaginary community.

I have also made it abundantly clear that I value my privacy.  Unfortunately, that is not always  possible to maintain on the Internet.  For example, my name was linked to this blog simply because I was not aware that WordPress allows bloggers to see information about the email addresses of people posting comments.  Blogger, which I use, does not allow this.  Early on, I posted a comment on Suzan Cooke's blog, and Cooke "outed" me, linking my "pen name" to my legal name.

In spite of this, I have made it clear that I would prefer that my privacy be respected as much as possible.  But transgender extremists will have no part of this.  For example, Mr. Sandeen has repeatedly used my legal name in commenting about things I have written here.  In fact, he repeatedly attacks transsexuals who wish to maintain their privacy, attacking them as cowards.

There are two, quite legitimate, reasons we wish to retain our privacy.  The first, is that many transgender extremists have shown a very real bent towards violence.  Numerous women, both those born women, and those of a transsexual history, have been subjected to calls for violence by these kooks.

The second reason, is simple.  The vast majority of those who truly are transsexual have no desire to be "out, loud, and proud."  We prefer to keep our history private, for the simple purpose of being able to live our lives as women, not as "former men," that is, as "trans women," transwomen," "women of the second kind," or whatever other term becomes in vogue.  Put in other words, we simply don't desire to be "other."  This, of course, is the driving motivation of the transponder extremists.

I find it ironic that, Mr. "Cristan" Williams, in one of his more recent diatribes, "You might be a TERF if…" includes:

2.) Out transpeople to employers.

Now, I am not a "transperson" but then neither is the person who Mr. Williams uses in his example, but the irony here is, Mr. Sandeen has engaged in just such behavior.  As I documented in my article, "Sandeen Goes Cyberstalking" I documented how Mr. Sandeen mistakenly believed I was employed by my church, and attempted to out me.  Now, some in my church are aware of my history, and others are not.  Mr. Sandeen, in his classic male arrogance, showed no regard for my privacy, but was concerned only with his petty attempts at revenge.

And he engaged in exactly the behavior that Mr. Williams finds so "reprehensible" if done by someone he would label a "TERF."

So, in spite of Mr. Sandeen's claims, it is just as arguable that he is the one guilty of hatred.

Thank You Mr. Taylor

Seriously, I want to thank Mr. "Dana Lane" Taylor for his article on Transadvocate entitled "On 'Passing' As A Woman."  In this article, you have made very clear the difference between transgender and transsexual.  Even though you have turned against "transsexual separatism" you have made the case for it beyond question.

Of course, this is not what was intended.  The article rather cluelessly expresses what transgender is REALLY about.  Or, perhaps, more to the point, what it clearly isn't.  

Now, Mr. Taylor bases the article on the term "passing," which I also disdain, but for very different reasons.  I have said, more than once, "I don't pass."  I don't mean, as they say, that "get clocked," or that "I get read," quite the opposite in fact.  I simply mean that I am accepted as what I am, simply a woman.  What Mr. Taylor means is, in fact, just the opposite.  Like many transgender males (and yes, he is a male), he does not wish to be seen as a woman, because if he is seen as a woman, he cannot force to acknowledge him as a "woman."  And forcing people to accept him as what he is not, and never will be, is what it is all about for men like him.  And yes, Mr. Taylor is also really a man...socially, and emotionally.

For a transsexual, this is all about being who, and what, we really are....women.  For transgender males, it is about forcing people to abandon reality and acknowledge them as "woman," even though their personalities are clearly masculine, and they retain their penises.

Mr. Taylor tries to dress his garbage up in a false patina of pseudo-feminism, talking about defying "stereotypes."  But, stereotypes exist, quite simply, because they reflect reality.  But the issue here is not about how people dress...when I was approaching beginning my real life test, I could not "pass" as a male.  I had some very bizarre experiences, including being told I was going into the wrong restroom when trying to use the men's room.  I avoided going to lunch with my boss for fear of being called "ma'am" by wait staff.

Mr. Taylor talks about the "harm" that encouraging passing might cause to someone, like him, who is never really going to be accepted as a woman (I suspect that the "male" characteristics he speaks of are not so much appearance as his personality...) but I want to present the other side of the coin, so to speak.

The transgender community has been all aflutter over the fact that a "transgender teenager" has been elected homecoming queen in Southern California.  Great news?  Nope.  This poor child, no doubt influenced by men like Mr. Taylor, Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen, and Mr. "Christan" Williams, has been "out, loud, and proud."  Cassidy Lynn Campbell was even featured in a photo spread, including shots that gave the impression more of someone who still appears very male with a wig, and quite a bit of make-up.  Now, I realize that this person has just begun attending school as a "girl" this school year, and it is still very early.  Presumably, this person was presenting as a male most of the time, until very recently.  But, what really happens when someone tries to take this path?  

Well, here is a link to what this person posted on You Tube after being brought face to face with reality.  Compare this to other videos where this person self-identifies as a "teenage drag queen."  The video might be a bit of theater, or it may be the honest heartbreak of a transsexual who could have avoided this by actually making an effort to be a female, rather than trying to be a "transgender."  I am certainly leaning towards sincere, but I honestly can't say for sure.

Gee, Mr. Taylor, Mr. Sandeen, Mr. Williams, if it is real, I bet you can feel real proud of what your crap really results in.  Sure, for you, and many others, it is really all a game.  But your game, and your trying to force it on others, has real world consequences.  But you don't care about that, as long as you have your "thrills." If you REALLY cared, you would be working to help young transsexuals assimilate, but that does not fit your agenda, does it?