Simply put, it is a tragedy whenever any person reaches a point, for any reason, where they feel that they must take their own life. In the case of the person who is generally referred to as "Leelah" Alcorn (his legal name was Joshua Ryan Alcorn) this tragedy has been compounded by the hateful, and outrageous attempts by transgender extremists to use this case to further their absurd agenda.
Alcorn is presented as a "trans girl," though the evidence is pretty clear that he was more likely a deeply ego dystonic gay male. Worse, the fact that he clearly had a number of mental health issues that lead to his death have been swept aside in the effort to promote him as a martyr to the cause.
First off, in his "suicide note," he uses language that shows his confusion, referring to himself as "gay," and making a big issue out of having to wait less than a year to begin transition because he thinks he will be too late to have an appropriate appearance. That, of course, is absurd. He also talks about how he "lied" to his therapist and claimed to be straight.
Alcorn's parents reacted according to their beliefs, and did what they thought best for their son. There was nothing criminal in their actions, and it is clear from Alcorn's postings that he was not physically abused. He was simply not allowed to behave in a manner that his parent's felt was wrong. And given his reference to himself as the "transgender queen of hell," and "Satan's wifey" show that he was in a serious rebellion against his parents. I, personally, cannot blame them for trying to reign him in.
His parents, who stated that they told him that they loved him unconditionally, have been portrayed as monsters. Of course, the truth is rarely, if ever, presented by transgender extremists who attempt to make his parent's statement look far different than what they are.
And it is also telling that his death was a typical male suicide. Females rarely kill themselves in such a violent manner. Alcorn was a deeply disturbed person, and his death truly is a tragedy, but using him to attack those who do not share the radical agenda of the transgender extremists is also a real tragedy. Hopefully his promotion as a martyr will not lead to other suicides.
Showing posts with label hatred. Show all posts
Showing posts with label hatred. Show all posts
Monday, January 12, 2015
Friday, December 12, 2014
Lask Ups His Game
Well, my long term cyber-stalker, "Diane" Lask has upped his game. He sent me another anonymous message, this time including a more overt threat. I guess it will have to have a talk with the San Francisco Police Department sooner, rather than later. Apparently Lask has taken complete leave of his senses. His first message was enough to qualify as threatening, and will like result in his being investigated for stalking. This one, well it will cinch such a case. He really must be aching to be some hunky prisoner's date. Remember, Lask is apparently non-op, and thus would end up in with men, not women. I'm sure he will be very popular.
Wednesday, December 10, 2014
A Somewhat Scary Email
Well, it appears that David Lask, who calls himself Diane Lask, the obsessive stalker who has been harassing me for years, is up to his old tricks. Now, he has sent me an email in which he makes it clear that he knows my current address, claims he knows my phone number (he mentions my carrier), and then proceeds, in his typical style, to make his usual round of lies. He has little idea of what he is talking about.
I am pretty sure it is Lask, because he again makes the claim of having a Corvette (he claimed this before, and it turned out to be a lie).
Sorry, but my relationships with my daughter is just fine...unlike some people who are writing about how they are so depressed this time of the year. I am considering a trip back to visit my daughter and grandchildren next year, so the claim that "you will never see your grandchildren" is also bogus. And, as he should be aware, I am clearly not homeless.
Oh, and as to my relation with God, well he is wrong about that as well.
Of course, this could be someone impersonating Lask, but given the nature of the message, I think contacting the police, and filing charges will be appropriate. A message such as this carries implied threats, and would certainly fall under laws against stalking. I do believe he has gone a bit too far. And, well, depending on the anonymous server he used, he may, or may not, be easy to trace.
Oh, and for those who may not remember, or who may be new to this blog, Mr. Lask is the kook who terrorized people on alt.support.srs for years. He harassed anyone he considered unworthy. The ironic part was, Lask turned out to be a classic transgender, non-op, having had a history of being a member of a group that was pretty much a local variant of the Tri-Ess type cross dresser's club in San Francisco. His best friend, who died at his keyboard was a guy who called himself "Cheryl Mullins." That person, who also lied about being a post-op, turned out to be an intact male.
I am pretty sure it is Lask, because he again makes the claim of having a Corvette (he claimed this before, and it turned out to be a lie).
Sorry, but my relationships with my daughter is just fine...unlike some people who are writing about how they are so depressed this time of the year. I am considering a trip back to visit my daughter and grandchildren next year, so the claim that "you will never see your grandchildren" is also bogus. And, as he should be aware, I am clearly not homeless.
Oh, and as to my relation with God, well he is wrong about that as well.
Of course, this could be someone impersonating Lask, but given the nature of the message, I think contacting the police, and filing charges will be appropriate. A message such as this carries implied threats, and would certainly fall under laws against stalking. I do believe he has gone a bit too far. And, well, depending on the anonymous server he used, he may, or may not, be easy to trace.
Oh, and for those who may not remember, or who may be new to this blog, Mr. Lask is the kook who terrorized people on alt.support.srs for years. He harassed anyone he considered unworthy. The ironic part was, Lask turned out to be a classic transgender, non-op, having had a history of being a member of a group that was pretty much a local variant of the Tri-Ess type cross dresser's club in San Francisco. His best friend, who died at his keyboard was a guy who called himself "Cheryl Mullins." That person, who also lied about being a post-op, turned out to be an intact male.
Friday, October 24, 2014
The Stalking of GallusMag
One of the blogs I regularly read is Gendertrender. It is edited by a person who goes by the pseudonym of "GallusMag" which was the nickname of a 6-foot-tall female bouncer at a New York City Water Street bar called The Hole in the Wall in the early 19th century, who figures prominently in New York City folklore. Her real name is not known
Herbert Asbury, in his book The Gangs of New York wrote:
Recently, Mr. Williams, among others, thought they had reached their goal. He even bragged about it on Twitter.
GallusMag was supposedly identified as a particular woman, who I will not name, but once again, a denial was quickly issued. Ironically, Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen, Mr. William's faithful lapdog, published the claim that this time they had GallusMag, for sure, including the claim that no denial had been made, thus proving that this was the one, true name of their sworn enemy. Of course, facts are not really the friend of kooks like Mr. Sandeen and Mr. Williams.
The sad thing is, this sort of behavior is common among the transgender kooks. GallusMag, contrary to Mr. Sandeen's claims, does not "doxx" transgender men. No, I am not going to use Mr. Sandeen's term, and refer to them as "trans women," because, quite frankly, the people GallusMag tends to expose are most assuredly not women.
I don't agree with everything that GallusMag says, and I am sure we would have much to disagree about, but I do respect her right to both freedom of speech, and privacy. In his article, Mr. Sandeen, who likes to style himself as the transgender "Martin Luther King, Jr." goes into a spiel about how no one should threaten violence against GallusMag. Perhaps he is sincere, or perhaps he is hoping to be ignored. I do know that such threats are a regular tactic by some of the nastier of the men-in-dresses crowd.
Nevertheless, this sort of behavior is nothing short of sick. Posting the name of someone who wishes to remain private is inexcusable. Some, like Mr. Sandeen are extremist in their believe that everyone should be "out, loud, and proud," to the point that Mr. Sandeen has zero respect for privacy rights. Of course, Mr. Sandeen has no real desire to be a woman, and certainly not female. He just wishes to force people to accept his false claims, and pretend he is both. And he wants to force his rather bizarre situation on others.
Herbert Asbury, in his book The Gangs of New York wrote:
"It was her custom, after she’d felled an obstreperous customer with her club, to clutch his ear between her teeth and so drag him to the door, amid the frenzied cheers of the onlookers. If her victim protested she bit his ear off, and having cast the fellow into the street she carefully deposited the detached member in a jar of alcohol behind the bar…. She was one of the most feared denizens on the waterfront and the police of the period shudderingly described her as the most savage female they’d ever encountered."The modern day GallusMag, who's real name is also unknown, is a radical feminist who is giving the transgender kooks fits because she regularly exposes some of their sillier moments. On her blog, she writes about many of the same issues that I cover here. And because she has done so well at it, her real name is highly sought after by the nastier of the transgender extremists, especially Mr. "Cristan" Williams, who has a long history of attempting to harass anyone who dares disagree with his extremist views.
Recently, Mr. Williams, among others, thought they had reached their goal. He even bragged about it on Twitter.
GallusMag was supposedly identified as a particular woman, who I will not name, but once again, a denial was quickly issued. Ironically, Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen, Mr. William's faithful lapdog, published the claim that this time they had GallusMag, for sure, including the claim that no denial had been made, thus proving that this was the one, true name of their sworn enemy. Of course, facts are not really the friend of kooks like Mr. Sandeen and Mr. Williams.
The sad thing is, this sort of behavior is common among the transgender kooks. GallusMag, contrary to Mr. Sandeen's claims, does not "doxx" transgender men. No, I am not going to use Mr. Sandeen's term, and refer to them as "trans women," because, quite frankly, the people GallusMag tends to expose are most assuredly not women.
I don't agree with everything that GallusMag says, and I am sure we would have much to disagree about, but I do respect her right to both freedom of speech, and privacy. In his article, Mr. Sandeen, who likes to style himself as the transgender "Martin Luther King, Jr." goes into a spiel about how no one should threaten violence against GallusMag. Perhaps he is sincere, or perhaps he is hoping to be ignored. I do know that such threats are a regular tactic by some of the nastier of the men-in-dresses crowd.
Nevertheless, this sort of behavior is nothing short of sick. Posting the name of someone who wishes to remain private is inexcusable. Some, like Mr. Sandeen are extremist in their believe that everyone should be "out, loud, and proud," to the point that Mr. Sandeen has zero respect for privacy rights. Of course, Mr. Sandeen has no real desire to be a woman, and certainly not female. He just wishes to force people to accept his false claims, and pretend he is both. And he wants to force his rather bizarre situation on others.
Monday, March 31, 2014
Fred Who?
Well, it has been a less than stellar week for me. A week ago, my computer suffered a hard drive failure, and well, I just didn't really feel like messing with my back-up PC that much. Besides, I had the week off, and I figured, might as well rest up a bit... But, as my vacation draws to a close, and my Mac is back among the living, I am ready to get back to posting.
Of course, by now everyone knows that a certain infamous person died. Fred Phelps, the leader of Westboro Baptist Church in Topeka, Kansas died on March 19, 2014. Phelps, and his, uh, "church" (it was more like a compound where his family lived, as most, if not all of the members were his immediate family) were known for traveling about, protesting against various groups they considered sinful, in particular gays and lesbians. I first heard of Phelps when he started picketing the funerals of AIDS victims back in the 1990's, and quite frankly I was appalled at the idea that someone would do such a thing. Over time, the protests increased, and eventually included those of military personnel killed in the line of duty, which, it was claimed, was part of God's judgement on the United States for allowing homosexual behavior.
Phelps and his cult have spent a number of years spewing what can only be called hatred. They have misrepresented Biblical teachings, and have, behave like those the Apostle Peter described as "the untaught and unstable (who) distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction." Phelps probably did more, in the long run, to further gay rights than to hinder them, but he still caused a lot of pain for the loved ones of those whose funerals he, and his followers, picketed.
There was briefly some talk of having protests at his funeral, but thankfully enough people were smart enough to point out how counter productive such an act would be. When it became obvious that his death would not result in people lowering themselves to his level, it was quickly announced that there would be no funeral. I rather suspect that no one showing up would have been an embarrassment.
In the end, Fred went out with more of a whimper than a bang. His death resulted in a brief flurry of attention, and then quickly faded. Many publications didn't even mention his death. And I was somewhat surprised that there was not some sort of celebration in the Castro District. In short, this rather nasty little man got the attention he deserved.
Of course, by now everyone knows that a certain infamous person died. Fred Phelps, the leader of Westboro Baptist Church in Topeka, Kansas died on March 19, 2014. Phelps, and his, uh, "church" (it was more like a compound where his family lived, as most, if not all of the members were his immediate family) were known for traveling about, protesting against various groups they considered sinful, in particular gays and lesbians. I first heard of Phelps when he started picketing the funerals of AIDS victims back in the 1990's, and quite frankly I was appalled at the idea that someone would do such a thing. Over time, the protests increased, and eventually included those of military personnel killed in the line of duty, which, it was claimed, was part of God's judgement on the United States for allowing homosexual behavior.
Phelps and his cult have spent a number of years spewing what can only be called hatred. They have misrepresented Biblical teachings, and have, behave like those the Apostle Peter described as "the untaught and unstable (who) distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction." Phelps probably did more, in the long run, to further gay rights than to hinder them, but he still caused a lot of pain for the loved ones of those whose funerals he, and his followers, picketed.
There was briefly some talk of having protests at his funeral, but thankfully enough people were smart enough to point out how counter productive such an act would be. When it became obvious that his death would not result in people lowering themselves to his level, it was quickly announced that there would be no funeral. I rather suspect that no one showing up would have been an embarrassment.
In the end, Fred went out with more of a whimper than a bang. His death resulted in a brief flurry of attention, and then quickly faded. Many publications didn't even mention his death. And I was somewhat surprised that there was not some sort of celebration in the Castro District. In short, this rather nasty little man got the attention he deserved.
Monday, March 10, 2014
The Real Agenda
Yesterday, during her obsessive round of commenting on my blog, Ms. "Mark" Cummings posted one comment that contained a violation of the single rule I have, and so got deleted. But I wanted to share the bulk of that content with you, because it reveals, quite clearly, the real nature of this person…
The second line is laughable, and well, typical of Ms. Cummings' writing style. She claims six years of college…obviously not one that had very high standards for grammatical skills. As to whether or not I am "ugly," well that is a matter of individual taste, but I know more than a few who would disagree…
But it is that last line that I wanted to focus on. It's meaning is quite clear. This comes from a person who tries, quite desperately at times, to present a facade of being a leader in the all too imaginary transgender community. She pontificates regularly on what she perceives as the various faults of support groups, and individuals. The current header on their joke of a blog states…
What this favor is, of course, is suicide. Yes, this sick person is actually suggesting that I take my own life. He has engaged in an ongoing campaign of harassment (which fortunately is laughably lame…) in an attempt, quite obviously, to push me into a suicidal depression. Now, I don't know if this is entirely a creation of his own disturbed psyche, or if he has been urged in that direction by Mr. "Diane" Lask, who has engaged in similar behavior towards those he disagrees with in the past.
But Ms. Cummings should be exposed for the sick person she is...
Learn this everyone hates you including your own family. You are a delusional low life tranny an ugly one at that. Do the world a favor.Now, the first line is not remotely true. It is based on something my daughter wrote on what was intended to be a very private online journal she shares with her friends. And it was written during a very difficult time for both of us, that is long past. I am not going to share the details of that time, because I am not going to violate my daughter's privacy. But, since then, we talk regularly, and have spent time together on a number of occasions. I also have three lovely grandchildren, who love me very much. So, Ms. Cummings can lie all she wants, as I have reality.
The second line is laughable, and well, typical of Ms. Cummings' writing style. She claims six years of college…obviously not one that had very high standards for grammatical skills. As to whether or not I am "ugly," well that is a matter of individual taste, but I know more than a few who would disagree…
But it is that last line that I wanted to focus on. It's meaning is quite clear. This comes from a person who tries, quite desperately at times, to present a facade of being a leader in the all too imaginary transgender community. She pontificates regularly on what she perceives as the various faults of support groups, and individuals. The current header on their joke of a blog states…
We are a collaboration of bloggers exposing shameful events, topics, and people that are affecting the entire LGBT Community. Stay up to date with the latest shameful news reports by following us.Not only is this more than a bit presumptuous, it could certainly be argued that much of he shame is their own behavior… Ms. Cummings has this to say concerning herself…
What we say may not always be the popular consensus, but we speak from our hearts and shed light. Sometimes the light can be bright and not always welcoming. You may not like me, But as I have always said at the end of every video, I love you but remember to love yourself too.I suppose she should append, "Unless, of course, you have the audacity to disagree with me…in which case, you should just do the world a favor and…"
What this favor is, of course, is suicide. Yes, this sick person is actually suggesting that I take my own life. He has engaged in an ongoing campaign of harassment (which fortunately is laughably lame…) in an attempt, quite obviously, to push me into a suicidal depression. Now, I don't know if this is entirely a creation of his own disturbed psyche, or if he has been urged in that direction by Mr. "Diane" Lask, who has engaged in similar behavior towards those he disagrees with in the past.
But Ms. Cummings should be exposed for the sick person she is...
Friday, March 7, 2014
Disagreement is NOT Hatred
One of the classic tactics of the transgender extremist kooks is to scream "hate" if someone so much as even slightly disagrees with them. It happens all, the time, and yesterday, it popped up in a comment that got blocked for a violation of the one rule I have about commenting on this blog. But I did want to address the foolishness expressed by Mr. "Jacqueline" Waters.
He starts off with an incredibly stupid bit of drivel…
Now, quite frankly, Mr. Waters might be harassed because he looks a bit effeminate, but that is another matter. No one is going to mistake him for a woman in either the men's room, or the women's room. Of course, I realize he does face a dilemma and is going to cause problems in either. Of course, causing problems is one of the thrills that transgender kooks seek.
Now, I don't appreciate garbage like what Mr. Waters spewed. I had a dear friend who was a Holocaust survivor, and I don't like it when people toss around comments like that. Besides, I honestly don't hate anyone. I don't wish anyone to suffer harm, including rape. But if one is engaged in deviant behavior, and pretending to be a member of the wrong gender, which is at the heart of the transgender lifestyle (i.e. men pretending to be women, or women pretending to be men) one does risk upsetting the wrong people.
He then goes on to make the false claim that I am "an advocate for rape of transgender people," and that I am one who "applauds for every name read on TDOR you now since you find we are not 'real women'…" Uh, all I can say is, "Wow, talk about delusional…" Actually, again, I don't delight in anyone's death. And I have never advocated anyone getting raped. People who are close to me have been victims of rape, and I find such comments highly offensive. Mr. Waters is simply one sick fool to even suggest such a thing, but this does show the silliness of the transgender mindset.
And finally, he shows his complete ignorance, and blind believe in the rants of Mr. "Diane" Lask when he makes a comment about "the so called surgery you claim you have had with no break in posting for long enough to ever have a surgery like that and recover." I would suggest he pop over to Google Groups, take a look at the newsgroup postings for February of 2006, and he might notice that I talked about my surgery coming up, and that I didn't post for some time. I was in the hospital for a week, without Internet access (I asked before I went in…) and then because I had moved to a new unit in the building where I lived at the time on the day before I went in for surgery, it was another couple of weeks before my Internet was back up. I got some support, and more than a bit of crap from the usual trolls at that time. Oh well…it was something I did for myself, and no one else. It is kind of amusing to go back and read some of the crap posted back then. According to the trolls, I died (several times apparently), was on suicide watch, and "jumped the gurney." It is kind of ironic that it is now claimed that I was posting the whole time people were asking where I was…
Actually, having SRS is a very profound experience. I took a while before I felt up to dealing with both hooking up my Internet connection, and reading the crap I knew some would post. When I was ready, I found it all quite laughable, then, and even more so now.
My advice to Mr. Waters, and the rest of the kooks at Shame On You Transgender Edition is to simply face the fact that you are not transsexuals, you are not "women," you will never be transsexual, you will always be transvestites (at best), and be proud of what you are, and stop trying to force your silliness on others.
And a footnote: This is the 400th article on my blog… A minor milestone, I suppose, but one worth a brief mention...
He starts off with an incredibly stupid bit of drivel…
If you look like a woman and you go in the mens room you are going to get harrassed and possibly abused and raped. I realize you hate transgender people just like many Jews hate jews.Let's see… Stupidity, mixed with lies, tossed with a nice Godwin's Law violation. Yes, we have a classic bit of transgender silliness here. Actually, you are going to get some shocked looks, and possibly someone trying to be helpful and tell you "Ma'am, you are in the wrong rest room." Maybe in a bit of panic on the part of some poor guy who wonders just which of you made the mistake. I know, from personal experience. The last time I visited a men's room before I began living as myself full time, some poor gentleman looked absolutely aghast that a woman was in the men's room. Not too long before that incident, I had a helpful employee on another occasion stop me and say, "Ma'am, your going into the wrong restroom…" Fun times…
Now, quite frankly, Mr. Waters might be harassed because he looks a bit effeminate, but that is another matter. No one is going to mistake him for a woman in either the men's room, or the women's room. Of course, I realize he does face a dilemma and is going to cause problems in either. Of course, causing problems is one of the thrills that transgender kooks seek.
Now, I don't appreciate garbage like what Mr. Waters spewed. I had a dear friend who was a Holocaust survivor, and I don't like it when people toss around comments like that. Besides, I honestly don't hate anyone. I don't wish anyone to suffer harm, including rape. But if one is engaged in deviant behavior, and pretending to be a member of the wrong gender, which is at the heart of the transgender lifestyle (i.e. men pretending to be women, or women pretending to be men) one does risk upsetting the wrong people.
He then goes on to make the false claim that I am "an advocate for rape of transgender people," and that I am one who "applauds for every name read on TDOR you now since you find we are not 'real women'…" Uh, all I can say is, "Wow, talk about delusional…" Actually, again, I don't delight in anyone's death. And I have never advocated anyone getting raped. People who are close to me have been victims of rape, and I find such comments highly offensive. Mr. Waters is simply one sick fool to even suggest such a thing, but this does show the silliness of the transgender mindset.
And finally, he shows his complete ignorance, and blind believe in the rants of Mr. "Diane" Lask when he makes a comment about "the so called surgery you claim you have had with no break in posting for long enough to ever have a surgery like that and recover." I would suggest he pop over to Google Groups, take a look at the newsgroup postings for February of 2006, and he might notice that I talked about my surgery coming up, and that I didn't post for some time. I was in the hospital for a week, without Internet access (I asked before I went in…) and then because I had moved to a new unit in the building where I lived at the time on the day before I went in for surgery, it was another couple of weeks before my Internet was back up. I got some support, and more than a bit of crap from the usual trolls at that time. Oh well…it was something I did for myself, and no one else. It is kind of amusing to go back and read some of the crap posted back then. According to the trolls, I died (several times apparently), was on suicide watch, and "jumped the gurney." It is kind of ironic that it is now claimed that I was posting the whole time people were asking where I was…
Actually, having SRS is a very profound experience. I took a while before I felt up to dealing with both hooking up my Internet connection, and reading the crap I knew some would post. When I was ready, I found it all quite laughable, then, and even more so now.
My advice to Mr. Waters, and the rest of the kooks at Shame On You Transgender Edition is to simply face the fact that you are not transsexuals, you are not "women," you will never be transsexual, you will always be transvestites (at best), and be proud of what you are, and stop trying to force your silliness on others.
And a footnote: This is the 400th article on my blog… A minor milestone, I suppose, but one worth a brief mention...
Wednesday, September 25, 2013
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.
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.
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:
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:
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.
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.
Wednesday, August 21, 2013
Fifteen Years of Cyberstalking
Note: This is probably going to be an evolving article. The purpose is to document the behavior of someone who is engaged in harassment against me. I have added to it several times already. If you are interested, check back regularly. If not, well, just ignore it.
About fifteen years ago, I was recovering from my first failed attempt at transition. I am not going to go into a lot of detail, but I made several mistakes, mainly rushing into transition, and I had a very poor excuse for a therapist who failed to pick up on a number of issues I was struggling with. When, as some call them, external pressures got to be too much, I fled back to, as I have put it, "the devil I knew."
It took me seven years to work through it all. During that time, I discovered a newsgroup with the ironic name alt.support.srs. I say ironic because it was anything but supportive. The group was largely terrorized by a group of bullies that included a person who used the name Cheryl, and another who posted as Diane. They were commonly referred to as "The Sisters of Transsexual Purity" because they would attack anyone who was not, in their judgement, 100% committed to SRS, and progressing at a pace that met their rather stringent standards.
The really ironic part was, neither was post-op, as they claimed. The truth about Cheryl came out after that person was found dead in front of their computer. Someone from the sheriff's department used instant messaging in an attempt to get information, and the person contacted let the newsgroup know that this person had died.
Diane, aka Diane Arons, whose real name is Diane Arons Lask had a rather long history of bullying and cyberstalking that began on FidoNet, if not earlier. For those too young to remember, FidoNet is a network of computer bulletin board systems that was sort of a predecessor of the Internet. It is not very popular in the United States these days, but is still in existence, and is more commonly used in Russia and former republics of the USSR. FidoNet was primarily through the phone system. A BBS would call an uplink hub and exchange outgoing messages for incoming ones. It might take a few days for a posting in forum to reach everyone. It was one of several such "echo net" programs available.
One of the features of FidoNet is forums, which were sort of like mailing lists or Usenet groups. And one of the forums on FidoNet was for the discussion of gender issues and Lask was very much a presence there. And was certainly one of the reasons FidoNet was jokingly called Fight-o-Net.
I didn't access the gender forum on FidoNet because I had not transitioned, and did not want friends to know my medical situation. If you were on a BBS, it was very easy for the sysop to tell what forums you participated in.
FidoNet was where Lask first encountered a person who called himself Laura Masters (later Laura Blake). Blake was a transgender extremist from Canada who developed quite a reputation for opposing SRS, and claiming to have "jumped the gurney" on the way to having it. How much of this was true was never really certain, but Lask developed an major obsession with Blake that would be a driving force in his life for many years.
Now, there is no question that Blake contributed to the whole mess. Shoot, I will admit to taking more than a few potshots at Blake, who spent a great deal of time attacking transsexuals and trying to pressure people into being "woman-males" to use his term. Of course, now, the drivel pushed by Blake has become a large part of the transgender dogma, and ironically, Lask seems to have adopted this view as well.
Actually, to be honest, it is never really clear exactly what Lask believes. Over the years, Lask has attacked, and then sided with, a number of people. For example, he viciously attacked "Willow" Arune, a notorious online kook, and then took to defending him. The same was true of a several others.
The weird thing with Lask is I actually have met this person. Several years ago, after he stopped harassing me, he contacted me and explained that he had been homeless for some time. He had been staying in Nevada, and wanted to return to San Francisco and wanted to know if he could sleep on my floor for a period. Now, I tend to be a forgiving, and compassionate person, and I agreed. Lask stayed for several days, before moving in with a post-op who, ironically, had responded to a person ad I had placed, even though I an a straight woman. This person was apparently some sort of trans fan, who preferred transsexuals as partners. I was not interested, but did seek to interest that person in the research project where I was volunteering at the time.
When I met Lask, one of the more bizarre facts I learned was that this supposed paragon of transsexualism actually had a history with a group originally known as Educational TV Channel (EDTVC) in San Francisco. It is now known as TransGender SF or TGSF.
Lask turned on me when he decided, rather suddenly, that the alt.support.srs group should be abandoned to the kooks like Arune. I declined to agree to that idea, and Lask disappeared for a while. Then there were suddenly someone appeared posting through an anonymous remailer and attacking me. Those postings seemed to be Lask's styles, but at first I was not completely sure it was him. Finally, he made reference to some things that only Lask could have known, and it was obvious that Lask had adopted me as a replacement for Blake.
Lask became increasingly abusive, and it was about this time that he suddenly began to defend Arune, and at least one other person he had rather viciously attacked. I became the sole object of his attention, though he did occasionally check up on Blake (who had withdrawn from the Internet entirely to escape Lask) and provided "updates."
BTW, at one time, Blake was posting claims about Lask's harassment that many took at either fiction, or delusional. Now, I wonder, as i have been the victim of similar attacks.
A few years ago, Lask mounted a massive cyberbullying attack on me. He sent anonymous emails to several transgender activists urging them to contact my employer in an effort to cause me grief. He basically bragged about this on alt.support.srs.
One of Lask's main tactics is to do extensive online research on a target. He will scour Google looking for anything he can exploit. I have learned to be very circumspect about what I allow to be posted online, and, thankfully, Lask does not know a lot about my current life. Of course, it can be a constant battle. Changes in Facebook security allowed him to find my daughter, for example. He then found a blog post she had written about ten years ago, at a time when we were estranged. As I have said elsewhere, I will not do what Lask did, and invade my daughter's privacy by revealing details, but suffice to say, we are no longer estranged and are very close. She was very upset at being used as a weapon against me, and was furious that Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen tried to contact her.
After finding a mention about me on my church's website, he made a similar effort to attack me through my church, mistakenly thinking I was then employed there. I found out about this when Suzan Cooke wrote about having received one, and to Cooke's credit, declined to participate. On the other hand, Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen was chose to take up Lask's suggestion and I wrote about it here.
Lask has always had a tendency to come and go. Even when he is active, there is an odd pattern of several days of almost continuous attacks, almost around the clock, followed by a period when he falls silent. Well, he had disappeared for some time...until recently.
The first sign that Lask was back was, as is often the case, not completely obvious. A person started posting in the comments section of Mr. Sandeen's column on LGBT Weekly under the name "Jenna." At first this person seemed to be a "radical feminist," and even seemed to be disagreeing with Mr. Sandeen. Then, after I made a comment in support of something he said, he attacked me. The person's statements were very inconsistent. Then, over time, it became obvious that this was not only a troll, but was Lask.
The person calling himself "Jenna" repeatedly denied being Lask, but then suddenly, every message where I mentioned "Diane Lask" was deleted. Yeah, sure it wasn't Lask. Uh huh, yeah.... Oh, and he is back at it again, trying to imply that he is another troll from Usenet. No one ever said Lask was very bright...
Since that time, Lask has used the name "Jenna Smith" to access my LinkedIn profile, and has impersonated me on several web sites, as well as using the names of my ex, and my daughter. He has also apparently created a twitter account using my photo.
This person is a a seriously mentally ill person, and to be honest, there obsession makes me feel rather threatened. While he has been careful to never say anything that could be taken as a physical threat, a person who is this obsessed can easily turn violent. So, I am taking this opportunity, knowing that he reads this blog to say to the person using the name Diane Arons Lask, that I am demanding that he cease his harassment.
I realize this is an unusual post, but the primary purpose is to go on the record concerning this person, to comply with a provision of California state law requiring that I inform the person to cease harassing me, and to insure that anyone doing a Google search for Diane Lask will see this information.
About fifteen years ago, I was recovering from my first failed attempt at transition. I am not going to go into a lot of detail, but I made several mistakes, mainly rushing into transition, and I had a very poor excuse for a therapist who failed to pick up on a number of issues I was struggling with. When, as some call them, external pressures got to be too much, I fled back to, as I have put it, "the devil I knew."
It took me seven years to work through it all. During that time, I discovered a newsgroup with the ironic name alt.support.srs. I say ironic because it was anything but supportive. The group was largely terrorized by a group of bullies that included a person who used the name Cheryl, and another who posted as Diane. They were commonly referred to as "The Sisters of Transsexual Purity" because they would attack anyone who was not, in their judgement, 100% committed to SRS, and progressing at a pace that met their rather stringent standards.
The really ironic part was, neither was post-op, as they claimed. The truth about Cheryl came out after that person was found dead in front of their computer. Someone from the sheriff's department used instant messaging in an attempt to get information, and the person contacted let the newsgroup know that this person had died.
Diane, aka Diane Arons, whose real name is Diane Arons Lask had a rather long history of bullying and cyberstalking that began on FidoNet, if not earlier. For those too young to remember, FidoNet is a network of computer bulletin board systems that was sort of a predecessor of the Internet. It is not very popular in the United States these days, but is still in existence, and is more commonly used in Russia and former republics of the USSR. FidoNet was primarily through the phone system. A BBS would call an uplink hub and exchange outgoing messages for incoming ones. It might take a few days for a posting in forum to reach everyone. It was one of several such "echo net" programs available.
One of the features of FidoNet is forums, which were sort of like mailing lists or Usenet groups. And one of the forums on FidoNet was for the discussion of gender issues and Lask was very much a presence there. And was certainly one of the reasons FidoNet was jokingly called Fight-o-Net.
I didn't access the gender forum on FidoNet because I had not transitioned, and did not want friends to know my medical situation. If you were on a BBS, it was very easy for the sysop to tell what forums you participated in.
FidoNet was where Lask first encountered a person who called himself Laura Masters (later Laura Blake). Blake was a transgender extremist from Canada who developed quite a reputation for opposing SRS, and claiming to have "jumped the gurney" on the way to having it. How much of this was true was never really certain, but Lask developed an major obsession with Blake that would be a driving force in his life for many years.
Now, there is no question that Blake contributed to the whole mess. Shoot, I will admit to taking more than a few potshots at Blake, who spent a great deal of time attacking transsexuals and trying to pressure people into being "woman-males" to use his term. Of course, now, the drivel pushed by Blake has become a large part of the transgender dogma, and ironically, Lask seems to have adopted this view as well.
Actually, to be honest, it is never really clear exactly what Lask believes. Over the years, Lask has attacked, and then sided with, a number of people. For example, he viciously attacked "Willow" Arune, a notorious online kook, and then took to defending him. The same was true of a several others.
The weird thing with Lask is I actually have met this person. Several years ago, after he stopped harassing me, he contacted me and explained that he had been homeless for some time. He had been staying in Nevada, and wanted to return to San Francisco and wanted to know if he could sleep on my floor for a period. Now, I tend to be a forgiving, and compassionate person, and I agreed. Lask stayed for several days, before moving in with a post-op who, ironically, had responded to a person ad I had placed, even though I an a straight woman. This person was apparently some sort of trans fan, who preferred transsexuals as partners. I was not interested, but did seek to interest that person in the research project where I was volunteering at the time.
When I met Lask, one of the more bizarre facts I learned was that this supposed paragon of transsexualism actually had a history with a group originally known as Educational TV Channel (EDTVC) in San Francisco. It is now known as TransGender SF or TGSF.
Lask turned on me when he decided, rather suddenly, that the alt.support.srs group should be abandoned to the kooks like Arune. I declined to agree to that idea, and Lask disappeared for a while. Then there were suddenly someone appeared posting through an anonymous remailer and attacking me. Those postings seemed to be Lask's styles, but at first I was not completely sure it was him. Finally, he made reference to some things that only Lask could have known, and it was obvious that Lask had adopted me as a replacement for Blake.
Lask became increasingly abusive, and it was about this time that he suddenly began to defend Arune, and at least one other person he had rather viciously attacked. I became the sole object of his attention, though he did occasionally check up on Blake (who had withdrawn from the Internet entirely to escape Lask) and provided "updates."
BTW, at one time, Blake was posting claims about Lask's harassment that many took at either fiction, or delusional. Now, I wonder, as i have been the victim of similar attacks.
A few years ago, Lask mounted a massive cyberbullying attack on me. He sent anonymous emails to several transgender activists urging them to contact my employer in an effort to cause me grief. He basically bragged about this on alt.support.srs.
One of Lask's main tactics is to do extensive online research on a target. He will scour Google looking for anything he can exploit. I have learned to be very circumspect about what I allow to be posted online, and, thankfully, Lask does not know a lot about my current life. Of course, it can be a constant battle. Changes in Facebook security allowed him to find my daughter, for example. He then found a blog post she had written about ten years ago, at a time when we were estranged. As I have said elsewhere, I will not do what Lask did, and invade my daughter's privacy by revealing details, but suffice to say, we are no longer estranged and are very close. She was very upset at being used as a weapon against me, and was furious that Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen tried to contact her.
After finding a mention about me on my church's website, he made a similar effort to attack me through my church, mistakenly thinking I was then employed there. I found out about this when Suzan Cooke wrote about having received one, and to Cooke's credit, declined to participate. On the other hand, Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen was chose to take up Lask's suggestion and I wrote about it here.
Lask has always had a tendency to come and go. Even when he is active, there is an odd pattern of several days of almost continuous attacks, almost around the clock, followed by a period when he falls silent. Well, he had disappeared for some time...until recently.
The first sign that Lask was back was, as is often the case, not completely obvious. A person started posting in the comments section of Mr. Sandeen's column on LGBT Weekly under the name "Jenna." At first this person seemed to be a "radical feminist," and even seemed to be disagreeing with Mr. Sandeen. Then, after I made a comment in support of something he said, he attacked me. The person's statements were very inconsistent. Then, over time, it became obvious that this was not only a troll, but was Lask.
The person calling himself "Jenna" repeatedly denied being Lask, but then suddenly, every message where I mentioned "Diane Lask" was deleted. Yeah, sure it wasn't Lask. Uh huh, yeah.... Oh, and he is back at it again, trying to imply that he is another troll from Usenet. No one ever said Lask was very bright...
Since that time, Lask has used the name "Jenna Smith" to access my LinkedIn profile, and has impersonated me on several web sites, as well as using the names of my ex, and my daughter. He has also apparently created a twitter account using my photo.
This person is a a seriously mentally ill person, and to be honest, there obsession makes me feel rather threatened. While he has been careful to never say anything that could be taken as a physical threat, a person who is this obsessed can easily turn violent. So, I am taking this opportunity, knowing that he reads this blog to say to the person using the name Diane Arons Lask, that I am demanding that he cease his harassment.
I realize this is an unusual post, but the primary purpose is to go on the record concerning this person, to comply with a provision of California state law requiring that I inform the person to cease harassing me, and to insure that anyone doing a Google search for Diane Lask will see this information.
Tuesday, April 23, 2013
Aw, Poor Suzy Must Be Jealous She Hasn't Gotten Any Attention Lately
Even though I haven't had much to say about kooky Suzan Cooke lately, she has decided to go after me, and Ben Girl (who did tear into Cooke quite justifiably about her outrageously hateful post after Rick Warren's son took his own life...establish Cooke as a true bigot of the worst sort) in her latest post. And it is a really twisted piece of work, even by Cooke's standards. Actually, I have largely ignored Cooke for the simple reason that Cooke rarely publishes anything original anymore. Most of Cooke's blog is simply rehashing stuff from the looney Left press, and from the Transgender News mailing list. In fact, a few weeks ago, when Transgender News did not post for a few days, Cooke's blog went silent as well. Unlike Cooke, I prefer quality over quantity. Granted, I had planned to speak out about Cooke's piece on Rick Warren, but Ben Girl did such an excellent job, I saw no need to. Which I guess has been eating at Cooke for a while....
Now, in Cooke's latest bit of insanity, she makes this assertion:
Of course, Cooke, who has an ego as big as her adopted state of Texas, is not really ranting about me speaking out against her. She is rallying to the defense of her compadres, and fellow transgender kooks, Mr. "Cristan" Williams, and Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen. Somewhere along the line, Cooke went over the deep end, and decided to become a major port of what she used to label the "Transgender Borg." Shoot, Cooke is now the "Borg Queen." Sandeen is upset because he can't censor me. And, ironically, because I am doing the very thing he calls Cathy Brennan a coward for, he claims, not doing...answering his crap. He attacks Brennan for not emailing him, which would supply him with an email address he can use to harass her. Or, worse, supply to others for the same purpose.
Now, some might get the impression that Cathy Brennan is some virulent hater of men, by reading some of the crap Sandeen has written about her. It turns out that a) she actually worked with Sandeen to try to get the Maryland transgender bill passed, and b) had met with Sandeen where she had the unfortunate experience of finding out, first hand, just how totally insane Sandeen is.... Here is a quote from a comment that Cathy Brennan made to Sandeen on Pretendbians...
I have to say, I knew Sandeen was a kook, but I had no idea that Sandeen was THAT big of a kook. No, that is NOT female, those are not the words of a woman...shoot, those are not the words of sane person. They are, however the words of someone Cooke apparently wishes to align herself with.
Cooke's post is really just bizarre. In it, Cooke tries to compare me and Ben Girl to house slaves, like some character in a movie. In it, Cooke, again, attacks me for having been a part of the move to adopt the term "Harry Benjamin Syndrome." Ironically, in the early days of her blog, Cooke herself embrace the term. I don't know if Cooke's objection was based on my involvement (Cooke has had a bitter hatred for me since I made a suggestion on her blog that she did not agree with, and her partner Tina somehow decided I was a threat) or because she realized it was competition for her own label, "Women Born Transsexual." Oh, BTW, that suggestion I made was relatively innocuous. It was simply that transsexuals might consider getting a born female to serve as a spokesperson, the idea being that it would allow us to better advance our case while protecting our privacy. Unlike Cooke and the rest of the Transgender Borg, some of us don't wish to be seen as anything other than women.
The simple fact is, what has Cooke in such a state is the that I, and Ben Girl, are not interested in being transgender but prefer just being women. Cooke, like the rest of her kind, seem to thrive on that identification as "other." They would, simply put, but transgender than be women. Cooke, again, exhibits what I am now labeling, in a sort of "ha, ha only serious" manner, cisphobia...the fear of, or animosity towards, being normal. In fact, Cooke actually has the audacity, and the hypocrisy, to try to force the label "transgender" on us, when we have clearly rejected it. I should note, by the way, that Cooke has effectively embraced it, so no, I am not forcing it on her.
Ultimately, that is what HBS was all about. Interestingly enough, the cisphobic crowd seems more married to the term than those of us who advanced it. While it has been used on occasion, it probably won't catch on. I can live with the term transsexual, as it appears, thankfully, that its use as a label for a particularly nasty form of pornography has faded. In fact, that had a lot to do with the development of the term. We did not want to be labeled as transgender, which had become associated with kooks like Sandeen who want to play dress up and pretend...and with the term "transsexual" being linked to pornography, we felt that a new term was needed. And Harry Benjamin Syndrome was chosen, not because of the fact that Benjamin Syndrome would be abbreviated as BS, as Cooke claims to have pointed out, but instead because Benjamin Syndrome is already used to refer to a a type of multiple congenital anomaly/mental retardation (MCA/MR) syndrome.
I honestly don't know what emotional trauma haunts Cooke so badly, and drives her to such bizarre extremes. I do know Cooke had a long history of substance abuse, and emotional problems. I know that Cooke has long exhibited bizarre and unstable behavior. I know that Cooke has some serious emotional needs that she cannot seem to satisfy. One of these obviously is rooted in the fact that some lesbians do not accept transsexual as actually being women. This is illustrated by this remark...
Cooke is one of those people who is truly invincibly ignorant. No matter what is said, Cooke has this bizarre idea that she knows, and everyone else is wrong. She says...
Oh, and one one bit of information for Cooke. I generally don't refer to myself as a "girl." I leave that bit of silliness for the "men in dresses" crowd. It has always struck me as a silly affectation. And the term was Harry Benjamin Syndrome to honor him for his pioneering work, not to identify anyone as one of his "girls." In fact, because of harassment from a cyberstalker, I thought it wise to not reveal my surgeon as I suspect he would have been harassed as well. Seriously, Cooke need to get a clue...and a life.
Put simply, well, I guess my view of Cooke is the same as my view of any other bigot. I'm not going to take responsibility for her ignorance and hatred. But I will go on speaking out against transgender stupidity, whether from Cooke, or her comrades Mr. Sandeen, Mr. Williams, and others. And if Cooke doesn't like that...tough.
Update: Cooke has posted another disjointed, and rather bizarre rant about HBS (a term which has largely fallen out of use). It really doesn't warrant much of a response. I honestly hope Cooke will either realize the need, or someone else will care enough to push her into seeking the serious mental health treatment she so clearly needs. Oh well... She rants about others living in a fantasy, while posting an edited version of her own history.... Sad, really, but not all that unexpected.
And a thought....if I am such a fraud, or self-loathing, then why do I allow anyone to comment here, and say pretty much whatever they want, provided they don't violate the privacy rule, while Cooke censors with a heavy hand, and blocks pretty much any post that disagrees with her extremely narrow viewpoints? Why shoot, even Cooke herself would be welcome...
Now, in Cooke's latest bit of insanity, she makes this assertion:
I do know I have a couple of people who make slamming me and a number of other TS/TG folks the main focus of their blogs. Jennifer ***** and Ben Girl to name names.As I have said many times, I prefer to not use my name here. Even though a lot of people know it, and jerks like Cooke have no morals, I stand by my policy... Now, that said, I would point out that Ben Girl has posted about Cooke all of 4 time out of 213 posts. On this blog, Cooke has been a significant enough topic to rate a label in 60 out of 299 posts (including this one). She is certainly not the "main focus" of either of our blogs. Of course, Cooke is one of those people who simply cannot abide disagreement.
Of course, Cooke, who has an ego as big as her adopted state of Texas, is not really ranting about me speaking out against her. She is rallying to the defense of her compadres, and fellow transgender kooks, Mr. "Cristan" Williams, and Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen. Somewhere along the line, Cooke went over the deep end, and decided to become a major port of what she used to label the "Transgender Borg." Shoot, Cooke is now the "Borg Queen." Sandeen is upset because he can't censor me. And, ironically, because I am doing the very thing he calls Cathy Brennan a coward for, he claims, not doing...answering his crap. He attacks Brennan for not emailing him, which would supply him with an email address he can use to harass her. Or, worse, supply to others for the same purpose.
Now, some might get the impression that Cathy Brennan is some virulent hater of men, by reading some of the crap Sandeen has written about her. It turns out that a) she actually worked with Sandeen to try to get the Maryland transgender bill passed, and b) had met with Sandeen where she had the unfortunate experience of finding out, first hand, just how totally insane Sandeen is.... Here is a quote from a comment that Cathy Brennan made to Sandeen on Pretendbians...
You are not female. You might be legal status female, but you are not female. Remember when my ex gf and I met you for coffee? You pounded the table and told us how you wanted to put your balls in a jar after you got them cut off so you could bring them to meetings and say you brought your balls with you. You also asked my ex gf if she would cast your balls for you.
That’s not female.
BTW, I thought you were disgusting then, but I was working on HB 235 because I have trans friends I care about, so I held my nose and worked with you. But please do not ever state that we were friends. I would never be friends with someone so crass that they talk about their balls for 45 minutes at a political meeting.
I have to say, I knew Sandeen was a kook, but I had no idea that Sandeen was THAT big of a kook. No, that is NOT female, those are not the words of a woman...shoot, those are not the words of sane person. They are, however the words of someone Cooke apparently wishes to align herself with.
Cooke's post is really just bizarre. In it, Cooke tries to compare me and Ben Girl to house slaves, like some character in a movie. In it, Cooke, again, attacks me for having been a part of the move to adopt the term "Harry Benjamin Syndrome." Ironically, in the early days of her blog, Cooke herself embrace the term. I don't know if Cooke's objection was based on my involvement (Cooke has had a bitter hatred for me since I made a suggestion on her blog that she did not agree with, and her partner Tina somehow decided I was a threat) or because she realized it was competition for her own label, "Women Born Transsexual." Oh, BTW, that suggestion I made was relatively innocuous. It was simply that transsexuals might consider getting a born female to serve as a spokesperson, the idea being that it would allow us to better advance our case while protecting our privacy. Unlike Cooke and the rest of the Transgender Borg, some of us don't wish to be seen as anything other than women.
The simple fact is, what has Cooke in such a state is the that I, and Ben Girl, are not interested in being transgender but prefer just being women. Cooke, like the rest of her kind, seem to thrive on that identification as "other." They would, simply put, but transgender than be women. Cooke, again, exhibits what I am now labeling, in a sort of "ha, ha only serious" manner, cisphobia...the fear of, or animosity towards, being normal. In fact, Cooke actually has the audacity, and the hypocrisy, to try to force the label "transgender" on us, when we have clearly rejected it. I should note, by the way, that Cooke has effectively embraced it, so no, I am not forcing it on her.
Ultimately, that is what HBS was all about. Interestingly enough, the cisphobic crowd seems more married to the term than those of us who advanced it. While it has been used on occasion, it probably won't catch on. I can live with the term transsexual, as it appears, thankfully, that its use as a label for a particularly nasty form of pornography has faded. In fact, that had a lot to do with the development of the term. We did not want to be labeled as transgender, which had become associated with kooks like Sandeen who want to play dress up and pretend...and with the term "transsexual" being linked to pornography, we felt that a new term was needed. And Harry Benjamin Syndrome was chosen, not because of the fact that Benjamin Syndrome would be abbreviated as BS, as Cooke claims to have pointed out, but instead because Benjamin Syndrome is already used to refer to a a type of multiple congenital anomaly/mental retardation (MCA/MR) syndrome.
I honestly don't know what emotional trauma haunts Cooke so badly, and drives her to such bizarre extremes. I do know Cooke had a long history of substance abuse, and emotional problems. I know that Cooke has long exhibited bizarre and unstable behavior. I know that Cooke has some serious emotional needs that she cannot seem to satisfy. One of these obviously is rooted in the fact that some lesbians do not accept transsexual as actually being women. This is illustrated by this remark...
No matter how far up the bigots assholes you have your tongue in the end you are still a transsexual/transgender person. You can play the role of an extermination camp Sonder Commando, but all it does is postpone the inevitable.I have three things to say to this. First, back early on in my transition, when some of my relatives exhibited problems with my situation, my reaction, "That is there problem. I will not take responsibility for their ignorance and bigotry." I feel the same way now. If someone has a problem with transsexuals. that is their problem, not mine. Second, I find that life is a whole lot easier if you don't spend all your time shoving the fact that you are a transsexual in other people's faces. And third, that brings me back to a point I have already made. I am not transgender because I don't have that need to shove my history in people's faces. Cooke clearly does.
Cooke is one of those people who is truly invincibly ignorant. No matter what is said, Cooke has this bizarre idea that she knows, and everyone else is wrong. She says...
I’ve pissed off the HBS holes because I don’t buy their purity crap. I also don’t buy their hatred of every transsexual/transgender person who stands up for their rights and by extension for the rights of all.My problem with Cooke is the same problem I have with every other transgender extremist kook. It has nothing to do with "purity." I realize that Cooke picked that term up back in the days of Usenet, when there were some who tried to define transsexuals based on a very narrow standard. Cooke even harks back to that by bringing up my unfortunate remark about being "more than a transvestite, less than a transsexual." When I first began transition I hit some rough spots. Many do, and I did what many do, and I reverted. According to the real purists, and Cooke I should add, was one of them, that marked me as "not pure." I struggled. I tried to find a middle ground. I found there was not one. And I moved on with my transition again.
Oh, and one one bit of information for Cooke. I generally don't refer to myself as a "girl." I leave that bit of silliness for the "men in dresses" crowd. It has always struck me as a silly affectation. And the term was Harry Benjamin Syndrome to honor him for his pioneering work, not to identify anyone as one of his "girls." In fact, because of harassment from a cyberstalker, I thought it wise to not reveal my surgeon as I suspect he would have been harassed as well. Seriously, Cooke need to get a clue...and a life.
Put simply, well, I guess my view of Cooke is the same as my view of any other bigot. I'm not going to take responsibility for her ignorance and hatred. But I will go on speaking out against transgender stupidity, whether from Cooke, or her comrades Mr. Sandeen, Mr. Williams, and others. And if Cooke doesn't like that...tough.
Update: Cooke has posted another disjointed, and rather bizarre rant about HBS (a term which has largely fallen out of use). It really doesn't warrant much of a response. I honestly hope Cooke will either realize the need, or someone else will care enough to push her into seeking the serious mental health treatment she so clearly needs. Oh well... She rants about others living in a fantasy, while posting an edited version of her own history.... Sad, really, but not all that unexpected.
And a thought....if I am such a fraud, or self-loathing, then why do I allow anyone to comment here, and say pretty much whatever they want, provided they don't violate the privacy rule, while Cooke censors with a heavy hand, and blocks pretty much any post that disagrees with her extremely narrow viewpoints? Why shoot, even Cooke herself would be welcome...
Friday, March 1, 2013
Some People Are Just TOO Ignorant to Not Be Funny
I always get a kick out of people who are so bigoted that they can't see just how bigoted they are, and therefore think everyone else is bigoted and they are, well, sane.
From Suzan Cooke, who is almost always good for a laugh...
Funny...and sad, but really, just absolutely amazingly ignorant. But that is what true bigotry is, absolute, amazing ignorance. What is truly ironic...I would still defend Cooke's right to be an absolutely, amazingly ignorant bigot....
From Suzan Cooke, who is almost always good for a laugh...
What the hell is wrong with these sick evil f**king Christians? The world would be a much better place without their hatred in the name of some imaginary invisible magic sky daddy.Let's see... You have a group of people who hold a view that is different from the one Cooke holds, but who are motivated by honest concern for the well-being of someone they sincerely believe is on the wrong path, and who are acting in a manner that does not actually harm the person in question...versus a profane and hateful bigot who would deny them the basic right to exist, and who uses what basically amounts to outright lies to attack them.
Funny...and sad, but really, just absolutely amazingly ignorant. But that is what true bigotry is, absolute, amazing ignorance. What is truly ironic...I would still defend Cooke's right to be an absolutely, amazingly ignorant bigot....
Friday, August 26, 2011
Hate?
A while back, I wrote a post where I coined the term "club words" to describe things that transgender activists use to beat up on their opponents. Well, there was a very important one I missed, though it was implied in some of the others...hate.
In a response to "Cristan" Williams' post about what he termed "The Jennifer Shuffle," which could basically be described as me out-arguing him (he got mad because I would not let him limit the terms of the discussion) someone posted this in reference to me:
Beyond that, it just gets worse. First off, I certainly don't hate myself. I got over my self-hatred when I began transition. Of course, when someone, such as the person here, Kalina Isato, is a full time cross dresser (even though the person claims to be a transsexual, it is clear that they are not) I would imagine they would not really understand this. And that brings us to the heart of the matter.
This person accuses me of hating others. Now, let me say, I don't hate anyone. I may dislike some people, but I don't hate them. I tend to view "hate" in a very specific manner. If you hate someone, you, at the very least, wish them undeserved harm, and at the most extreme wish them to be destroyed. Now, I say undeserved harm. I don't believe it is necessarily hate to desire for someone to be punished for a crime, or denied something they are not legally entitled to. For example, I do not wish for "Autumn" Sandeen to be denied his desired change to his birth certificate out of hatred, but simply because he is seeking to engage in a legal fraud.
I don't wish anyone undeserved harm. I do not, for example, want to see someone get bashed by someone. I do not wish to see anyone murdered, or such. I also do not wish anyone to be persecuted by their employer. I would not out someone who stealth, just because I disagree with them, On the other hand, I have been the victim of some who have sought such things. And yet, I am the one who is accused of hatred.
So, what do transgender extremists mean when they say "hate." What is so horrible that it warrants this term? What does a group have to do to earn the label "hate group" from these people? That's simple...you just have to disagree with their extremist views. It can be as simple as saying "I am not transgender." Or it may be expressing disdain for "men in dresses."
It is really that simple. If you don't buy into their silliness... If you don't totally agree with even the most extreme demands of the transgender activists... If you don't believe that a man becomes a woman simply because he says, "I am a woman now"... If you don't believe that the simple act of cross dressing allows one to invade women's space... If you don't pander to their delusions... Well, then you must be a hater.
So, no, I don't hate anyone, though I am no doubt hated by some. And that is really the bottom line. They have to accuse others of hatred, so they can excuse their own hatred.
In a response to "Cristan" Williams' post about what he termed "The Jennifer Shuffle," which could basically be described as me out-arguing him (he got mad because I would not let him limit the terms of the discussion) someone posted this in reference to me:
Isn't it funny how so many people in the trans community have mental and emotional issues? Self-hatred is the root cause of why those people hate others.Well, I do have to agree with the first statement, to a point. Yes, there are some seriously mentally ill people in the "trans community." Of course, this person completely ignores the fact that I am not a member of that community. But that is just typical transgender. In their view, you will be forced under the umbrella whether you like it, or not.
Beyond that, it just gets worse. First off, I certainly don't hate myself. I got over my self-hatred when I began transition. Of course, when someone, such as the person here, Kalina Isato, is a full time cross dresser (even though the person claims to be a transsexual, it is clear that they are not) I would imagine they would not really understand this. And that brings us to the heart of the matter.
This person accuses me of hating others. Now, let me say, I don't hate anyone. I may dislike some people, but I don't hate them. I tend to view "hate" in a very specific manner. If you hate someone, you, at the very least, wish them undeserved harm, and at the most extreme wish them to be destroyed. Now, I say undeserved harm. I don't believe it is necessarily hate to desire for someone to be punished for a crime, or denied something they are not legally entitled to. For example, I do not wish for "Autumn" Sandeen to be denied his desired change to his birth certificate out of hatred, but simply because he is seeking to engage in a legal fraud.
I don't wish anyone undeserved harm. I do not, for example, want to see someone get bashed by someone. I do not wish to see anyone murdered, or such. I also do not wish anyone to be persecuted by their employer. I would not out someone who stealth, just because I disagree with them, On the other hand, I have been the victim of some who have sought such things. And yet, I am the one who is accused of hatred.
So, what do transgender extremists mean when they say "hate." What is so horrible that it warrants this term? What does a group have to do to earn the label "hate group" from these people? That's simple...you just have to disagree with their extremist views. It can be as simple as saying "I am not transgender." Or it may be expressing disdain for "men in dresses."
It is really that simple. If you don't buy into their silliness... If you don't totally agree with even the most extreme demands of the transgender activists... If you don't believe that a man becomes a woman simply because he says, "I am a woman now"... If you don't believe that the simple act of cross dressing allows one to invade women's space... If you don't pander to their delusions... Well, then you must be a hater.
So, no, I don't hate anyone, though I am no doubt hated by some. And that is really the bottom line. They have to accuse others of hatred, so they can excuse their own hatred.
Saturday, June 20, 2009
Sickening....
The story spread quickly... Another hate crime, the death of a young post-op.... It was first reported on the transgender site Laura's Playground:
I am having a very difficult time right now. I am a moderator on another site and we have a Forum and we have a Chat. Raychel ‘Roo’ was 18 in March. She died in intensive care last night. One of our teen Moderators, she lived in New York and was a post op teenage girl, and a dancer. She was headed to the Juliette School in the Fall. Now she is dead.
Her father was killed and her mother lost her arm in a terrible car crash last month. At one of the trials on this, one of the lawyers outed her. Her town had a very negative reaction.
She had life threats, she and her mother. The police had them under protective surveillance. The police left at noon yesterday. By two o’clock she was assulted. Last night she died.
She rode her bike to go to the store. She never came home. They found her bike in a dumpster. Late that evening they found her. She had been assaulted with a sledge hammer, they think, judging from the bruises all over her body. Her knee caps had been broken. She had been gang raped. They buried her alive.
She worked her way out of the almost grave and crawled for three hours to get help. She was put in the ICU and given little chance to survive. Last night she died.
The facts are skimpy, speculation reigns. Supposedly kids from a nearby school came after her in a van. There were no fingerprints. She had no semen after the rapes so it shows premeditation as they used condoms. She was so beat-up her organs just went into shock and she died.
Our whole group is sick and horrified. I am having a difficult time just writing this. I need to for two reasons, to tell her story and to say ‘please be careful!’ Last night we lost a sister, and one of our own.
I first saw the story on Bilerico and I immediately suspected that something was amiss. For one thing, there was the fact that the story had not appeared in any news reports. In spite of the suggestion by Tobi Hill-Meyer that the media migh ignore such a story, that was the first problem I had with the the report. Second, was the suggestion that an 18 year old might be a post-op. That is possible, but somewhat unlikely. Then finally, there was the over the top part about her digging her way out of her "almost grave" and crawling for three hours. The whole thing just did not ring true.
Well, apparently it isn't. Laura's Playground has pulled the story, admitting that it is almost certainly a hoax. Other transgender sites, including Woman Born Transsexual have also admitted to being duped. Tobi Hill-Meyer seems to be the lone hold-out, admitting that there are questions, but refusing to admit that it is a hoax, reasserting the silly claim that such a story might be deliberately ignored by the media.
If, by some chance, any part of the story is true, it would, of course, be a complete tragedy. On the other hand, if as appears to be very likely, it is a hoax, then it is a truly sick one. In any case, this is an example of the sort of problems that can arise. A hoax can be spread quickly. People can easily be sucked in by the most outrageous of stories. Anytime you see something like this, you need to stop and question it.
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Once more with feeling....
Well, once more, the gender fascists show that they are afraid of any view that is not in lockstep with theirs. I responded to a rather nasty post by lead gender fascist on Pam's House Blend. Now, I stayed within the rules, and made no attacks. I only presented my views calmly, and rationally, in spite of some rather nasty remarks by Sandeen and others.
So, what happened? Sandeen threw me off. Not surprising....this is standard behavior. Her only rationale was things I had said here not there. I did not violate the terms of service there. I just presented a very simple position...that if the transgender crowd does not wish to be attacked by those who do not identify as "transgender," then simply stop forcing that label and acknowledge that "transgender" is a subjective identity and not something that someone should be referred to as unless that is how they identify.
Of course, such a reasonable request is never going to be allowed by the gender fascists, and so I had to go.
After all, it is ultimately the only way they can ever win a debate.
So, what happened? Sandeen threw me off. Not surprising....this is standard behavior. Her only rationale was things I had said here not there. I did not violate the terms of service there. I just presented a very simple position...that if the transgender crowd does not wish to be attacked by those who do not identify as "transgender," then simply stop forcing that label and acknowledge that "transgender" is a subjective identity and not something that someone should be referred to as unless that is how they identify.
Of course, such a reasonable request is never going to be allowed by the gender fascists, and so I had to go.
After all, it is ultimately the only way they can ever win a debate.
Saturday, April 25, 2009
The Tragedy of Angie Zapata
Well, it is pretty much official...Angie Zapata has become the latest martyr for the transgender activist crowd. Her murder was horrible. It is good that the man who killed her has been brought to justice. But some of what is being written about her is becoming downright silly.
Marti Abernathy, who I would normally disagree with did a surprisingly good piece on how some bloggers, well one in particular, have tried to use this sad event to puff themselves up. Angie's death was an outrage. It was clearly not, as claimed by the defendant, a crime of passion. And, contrary to what some want to claim, this was not really a test of the "trans panic" defense. The facts showed that the murderer had plenty of time to think about what he was doing.
But as I say, some of what has been said in this case has reached the point of being absurd. In a recent post, Autumn Sandeen has gone to a ridiculous extreme in an effort to portray Angie as some sort of bastion of purity.
Sandeen objects to a statement on the Huffington Post that explains that "Angie and Allen Ray Andrade first met on the Internet, and that they had arranged a sexual encounter." Now, Sandeen is just outraged at the very suggestion that Angie had actually made a date to
The sad fact is, Angie did what a lot of pre-ops have done, and made arrangements to meet someone for sex. Unfortunately, like a lot of pre-ops, it is also possible that she did not consider what might happen.
Now, it is never, never, NEVER okay for someone to be harmed or murdered because someone suddenly discovers that they are not what they appear to be. The only correct thing in such a case is to leave. But, it is also extremely foolish to put oneself in such a situation to begin with. I was once a pre-op, and I dated a few men, and yes, I took some chances. In almost every case, I made sure we were in a relatively public place before I told them my situation. I can remember a couple of exceptions, and in both of those cases, I was probably more lucky than anything else.
No, the murder was no Angie's fault, but it is criminal for some of the more idiotic of transgender activists to not only fail to point out that taking chances is stupid, but to also even go so far as to actually attack those who do point this out.
I can understand why someone would want to date a man who is not an "admirer." The ones I have met tend to see us as sex objects rather than people. I suppose there may be exceptions, but they are rare. Oh, they may say the right things, and even fool one for a short period, but in the end, the object of their desire is interchangable. Simply put, the relationship is not going to go anywhere, no matter how badly one wants to believe it will.
The bottom line is, Angie did nothing other than meet the wrong man. Making her into some sort of virginal saint is silly. Her death should serve as a warning to those who would take chances. And her murderer's conviction should serve as a warning to those who would treat human life as worth so little. Unfortunately, I doubt either is really paying any attention.
Marti Abernathy, who I would normally disagree with did a surprisingly good piece on how some bloggers, well one in particular, have tried to use this sad event to puff themselves up. Angie's death was an outrage. It was clearly not, as claimed by the defendant, a crime of passion. And, contrary to what some want to claim, this was not really a test of the "trans panic" defense. The facts showed that the murderer had plenty of time to think about what he was doing.
But as I say, some of what has been said in this case has reached the point of being absurd. In a recent post, Autumn Sandeen has gone to a ridiculous extreme in an effort to portray Angie as some sort of bastion of purity.
Sandeen objects to a statement on the Huffington Post that explains that "Angie and Allen Ray Andrade first met on the Internet, and that they had arranged a sexual encounter." Now, Sandeen is just outraged at the very suggestion that Angie had actually made a date to
The sad fact is, Angie did what a lot of pre-ops have done, and made arrangements to meet someone for sex. Unfortunately, like a lot of pre-ops, it is also possible that she did not consider what might happen.
Now, it is never, never, NEVER okay for someone to be harmed or murdered because someone suddenly discovers that they are not what they appear to be. The only correct thing in such a case is to leave. But, it is also extremely foolish to put oneself in such a situation to begin with. I was once a pre-op, and I dated a few men, and yes, I took some chances. In almost every case, I made sure we were in a relatively public place before I told them my situation. I can remember a couple of exceptions, and in both of those cases, I was probably more lucky than anything else.
No, the murder was no Angie's fault, but it is criminal for some of the more idiotic of transgender activists to not only fail to point out that taking chances is stupid, but to also even go so far as to actually attack those who do point this out.
I can understand why someone would want to date a man who is not an "admirer." The ones I have met tend to see us as sex objects rather than people. I suppose there may be exceptions, but they are rare. Oh, they may say the right things, and even fool one for a short period, but in the end, the object of their desire is interchangable. Simply put, the relationship is not going to go anywhere, no matter how badly one wants to believe it will.
The bottom line is, Angie did nothing other than meet the wrong man. Making her into some sort of virginal saint is silly. Her death should serve as a warning to those who would take chances. And her murderer's conviction should serve as a warning to those who would treat human life as worth so little. Unfortunately, I doubt either is really paying any attention.
Saturday, April 4, 2009
This one must have left Roberts dizzy for hours...
TransGriot: Intersex Separatists, Transpeople Aren't Your Enemy
I've written about Monica Roberts before. As have others. But in this article, Roberts performs a set of mental gynastics that much have left her quite dizzy. In a bizarre attempt to reach out to those who are intersex, Roberts makes an argument based on the evidence that transsexuals have a medical condition not a mental one. Now, of course this complete ignores several facts.
I've written about Monica Roberts before. As have others. But in this article, Roberts performs a set of mental gynastics that much have left her quite dizzy. In a bizarre attempt to reach out to those who are intersex, Roberts makes an argument based on the evidence that transsexuals have a medical condition not a mental one. Now, of course this complete ignores several facts.
- First it ignores the fact that the "transgender" community that Roberts embraces is most made up of non-transsexuals. So, even if one includes "true transsexuals" (i.e. the ones with a medical basis) it would represent a very small minority of a larger whole.
- Second, Roberts has made extremely hateful and bigoted remarks about "true transsexuals." Worse, these remarks tend to be extremely racist. So, it seems extremely ironic that she now wants to claim us for some purpose.
- Finally, I rather suspect that anyone who actually bothers to read the rest of Roberts' drivel would be more repulsed by his arguments than persuaded.
And no, in spite of what Roberts will claim, I don't hate her at all. Of course, this is Roberts classic pattern. Anyone who disagrees with her, or who dares to stand up to her, is accused of hatred. I guess when one is as filled with hatred as Roberts is, tends to see everything in those terms. Ironically, I have seen the same sort of behavior from members of the Klan.
No I simply pity Roberts. A person that filled with hatred must be very miserable. One can only hope that she gets help before she completely self-destructs.
Monday, March 30, 2009
The Insanity that is the "Transgender Community."
Recently, we have seen a few more examples of the silliness that regularly erupts from the so-called "Transgender Community." The first such example is the ongoing mess about restrooms. Every chance it gets, the Religious Right trots out the "bathroom issue" and every time, transgender activists go ballistic and start raising their usual howl of protest. And everytime, the transgender activists simply ignore the fact that, in many cases, the Religious Right is raising perfectly legitimate issues.
This has happened twice in the past two weeks, with two different outcomes. In the first case, an attempt was made to put an end to a gay rights bill in Gainesville, FL by using the "bathroom issue" as a reason to do away with the current law. And, sadly, the Religious Right has a perfectly good point that was totally ignored by the transgender activists as they ranted against the effort.
Now, this could have been a perfect opportunity for the "transgender community" (which in truth is pretty much an illusion) to show some common sense, and the disarm the Religious Right. Instead, they acted in their usual silly way, and pretty much confirmed that they really don't care if men invade the womens rooms.
The way the law is currently written, prettty much any man (or woman) can enter pretty much any bathroom, and, if confronted, simply claim that, at that moment, their gender identity is at odds with their physical sex. Now, they may be a perfectly normal man (or woman) one second before they walk into the wrong bathroom, and they may be a perfectly normal man (or woman) one second after they walk out, and quite frankly, they may be a perfectly normal man (or woman) the whole time they are in the wrong bathroom, but as long as they claim that their gender identity "matches" the bathroom that they have entered, they are off the hook. They don't even have to be "crossdressed."
This is, of course, totally absurd, but it is what the law effectively allows. And it could easily be rectified by simply providing that anyone entering a restroom that does not match their physical sex has to be in the process of changing their physical sex and be undergoing the RLT. This could be shown by having a "carry letter" as used to be the normal procedure, or even by having therapists issue small ID cards that would serve the same purpose. Yes, this leaves the crossdressers and the so-called non-ops out in the cold, so to speak, but that is really where they belong.
Further, any such law should make provisions dealing with so-called "unavoidable nudity." That is, in areas where there is a very real chance of someone being seen in the nude, pre-ops would either be banned, or if it is not unreasonable, privacy would need to be provided. This would mean in areas like showers and changing rooms. Either they would need to provide individual shower stalls and changing areas (if the cost would not be too great) or pre-ops would just have to wait until after surgery to go into them.
Of course, such a law would never be acceptable to most transgender activists...which shows that their agenda is not what they claim it to be.
And it should be noted that while the amendment that would have rolled back protections in Gainesville was defeated, an attempt to pass "transgender" protections was defeated in New Hampshire.
Another area where some have shown their true silliness has been the issue of "disclosure." Or at least, the issue of "disclosure as it relates to dating." Now, some of the more extreme gender fascists want to insist that everyone be "out, loud, and proud." They shove their transgender state in people's faces. They rant against the idea of stealth, and attack anyone who prefers to live their life normally. They tend to think that disclosure should be made by all, including post-ops.
Another extreme are those who want to ignore the fact that a pre-op (or a so-called non-op) who does not disclose is, unfortunately, at risk of serious bodily harm when a sudden discovery is made. Now, let me state, up front, that I do not believe that such a discovery is EVER an excuse for someone to do anything violent to another person. If a man discovers that his date is, as some like to put it, "a girl with something extra," then he should walk away...period, end of story! That said, I am also a realist that knows that this is rarely going to happen.
The simple, sad fact is, if a pre-op does not disclose, she is risking her life. That does not mean that this is the way it should be, or that she is "asking for it," or that she "gets what she deserves." But it does mean that she needs to use some common sense. Now, I think the men who killed Gwen Arajuao should have all been convicted of murder, and that they all should have been given life sentences. But, I also wish Gwen had of avoided the entire situation to begin with. I would much prefer that she be alive.
Simply put, the victim is not to blame, but we all need to use good sense. Yes, I played with fire a few times. And I was lucky. I never got burned. But, that was pretty much dumb luck and nothing more.
The problem is, many of the more extreme "transgender activists" are telling people that they should be able to expect people to act in a certain way, when, unfortunately, that is not how people are going to act. In another words, they are encouraging pre-ops (and non-ops) to engage in risky behavior, and are in effect setting them up to become possible martyrs. Even if the laws are changed, as they should be, and the so-called trans-panic defense is banned, people will still get killed. The only thing that will change is that the law will be able to deal with them without them finding that one, lone idiot on a jury who will vote not guilty, resulting in another hung jury, and a mistrial, and some prosecutor deciding to play it safe and allow for some ridiculous plea bargain that lets them get away with murder.
In an ideal world, this would not be a problem. But when the idiot chorus starts accusing people of "blaming the victim" because they try to warn people to avoid dangerous situations, the ultimate result is going to be someone getting hurt.
Pointing out simple truths is not "blaiming the victim." It is trying, desperately, and perhaps a bit in vain, to avoid someone becoming a victim. I am sure some welcome martyrs like Gwen Arajuao. Shoot, there is a day set aside every year when they honor them (the Day of Remembrance). And for all of the noble speeches about how it would be great if we could stop having that day each year, the simple truth is, many are probably secretly glad for increased numbers.
If you want some idea of this, just go to the web page for the event and look at the rather horrid bit of drivel that old Phil Frye of Texas came up with. It is song, to be sung to the tune of "Danny Boy" that glorifies those who had the misfortune to be murdered. I must say, I am thankful I have never actually had to hear this one performed. I think the song can be summed up in the line that goes "And come next year when fall’s again up- on us, if more are killed and killed, more well may be. We’ll honor them and the places they are lying. and loudly say, 'We will re- member you'. And you will hear as we pro- claim a- bove you, and your spirits will warmer, sweeter be."
No, this is typical of transgender silliness. I am sure there are those who get all choked up from such. But really, this is the sort of idiocy that gets people killed. Those who die should be mourned, but they are not really martyrs, nor have they done anything to be honored for. They were simply in the wrong place, at the wrong time, and in many cases doing the wrong thing.
This has happened twice in the past two weeks, with two different outcomes. In the first case, an attempt was made to put an end to a gay rights bill in Gainesville, FL by using the "bathroom issue" as a reason to do away with the current law. And, sadly, the Religious Right has a perfectly good point that was totally ignored by the transgender activists as they ranted against the effort.
Now, this could have been a perfect opportunity for the "transgender community" (which in truth is pretty much an illusion) to show some common sense, and the disarm the Religious Right. Instead, they acted in their usual silly way, and pretty much confirmed that they really don't care if men invade the womens rooms.
The way the law is currently written, prettty much any man (or woman) can enter pretty much any bathroom, and, if confronted, simply claim that, at that moment, their gender identity is at odds with their physical sex. Now, they may be a perfectly normal man (or woman) one second before they walk into the wrong bathroom, and they may be a perfectly normal man (or woman) one second after they walk out, and quite frankly, they may be a perfectly normal man (or woman) the whole time they are in the wrong bathroom, but as long as they claim that their gender identity "matches" the bathroom that they have entered, they are off the hook. They don't even have to be "crossdressed."
This is, of course, totally absurd, but it is what the law effectively allows. And it could easily be rectified by simply providing that anyone entering a restroom that does not match their physical sex has to be in the process of changing their physical sex and be undergoing the RLT. This could be shown by having a "carry letter" as used to be the normal procedure, or even by having therapists issue small ID cards that would serve the same purpose. Yes, this leaves the crossdressers and the so-called non-ops out in the cold, so to speak, but that is really where they belong.
Further, any such law should make provisions dealing with so-called "unavoidable nudity." That is, in areas where there is a very real chance of someone being seen in the nude, pre-ops would either be banned, or if it is not unreasonable, privacy would need to be provided. This would mean in areas like showers and changing rooms. Either they would need to provide individual shower stalls and changing areas (if the cost would not be too great) or pre-ops would just have to wait until after surgery to go into them.
Of course, such a law would never be acceptable to most transgender activists...which shows that their agenda is not what they claim it to be.
And it should be noted that while the amendment that would have rolled back protections in Gainesville was defeated, an attempt to pass "transgender" protections was defeated in New Hampshire.
Another area where some have shown their true silliness has been the issue of "disclosure." Or at least, the issue of "disclosure as it relates to dating." Now, some of the more extreme gender fascists want to insist that everyone be "out, loud, and proud." They shove their transgender state in people's faces. They rant against the idea of stealth, and attack anyone who prefers to live their life normally. They tend to think that disclosure should be made by all, including post-ops.
Another extreme are those who want to ignore the fact that a pre-op (or a so-called non-op) who does not disclose is, unfortunately, at risk of serious bodily harm when a sudden discovery is made. Now, let me state, up front, that I do not believe that such a discovery is EVER an excuse for someone to do anything violent to another person. If a man discovers that his date is, as some like to put it, "a girl with something extra," then he should walk away...period, end of story! That said, I am also a realist that knows that this is rarely going to happen.
The simple, sad fact is, if a pre-op does not disclose, she is risking her life. That does not mean that this is the way it should be, or that she is "asking for it," or that she "gets what she deserves." But it does mean that she needs to use some common sense. Now, I think the men who killed Gwen Arajuao should have all been convicted of murder, and that they all should have been given life sentences. But, I also wish Gwen had of avoided the entire situation to begin with. I would much prefer that she be alive.
Simply put, the victim is not to blame, but we all need to use good sense. Yes, I played with fire a few times. And I was lucky. I never got burned. But, that was pretty much dumb luck and nothing more.
The problem is, many of the more extreme "transgender activists" are telling people that they should be able to expect people to act in a certain way, when, unfortunately, that is not how people are going to act. In another words, they are encouraging pre-ops (and non-ops) to engage in risky behavior, and are in effect setting them up to become possible martyrs. Even if the laws are changed, as they should be, and the so-called trans-panic defense is banned, people will still get killed. The only thing that will change is that the law will be able to deal with them without them finding that one, lone idiot on a jury who will vote not guilty, resulting in another hung jury, and a mistrial, and some prosecutor deciding to play it safe and allow for some ridiculous plea bargain that lets them get away with murder.
In an ideal world, this would not be a problem. But when the idiot chorus starts accusing people of "blaming the victim" because they try to warn people to avoid dangerous situations, the ultimate result is going to be someone getting hurt.
Pointing out simple truths is not "blaiming the victim." It is trying, desperately, and perhaps a bit in vain, to avoid someone becoming a victim. I am sure some welcome martyrs like Gwen Arajuao. Shoot, there is a day set aside every year when they honor them (the Day of Remembrance). And for all of the noble speeches about how it would be great if we could stop having that day each year, the simple truth is, many are probably secretly glad for increased numbers.
If you want some idea of this, just go to the web page for the event and look at the rather horrid bit of drivel that old Phil Frye of Texas came up with. It is song, to be sung to the tune of "Danny Boy" that glorifies those who had the misfortune to be murdered. I must say, I am thankful I have never actually had to hear this one performed. I think the song can be summed up in the line that goes "And come next year when fall’s again up- on us, if more are killed and killed, more well may be. We’ll honor them and the places they are lying. and loudly say, 'We will re- member you'. And you will hear as we pro- claim a- bove you, and your spirits will warmer, sweeter be."
No, this is typical of transgender silliness. I am sure there are those who get all choked up from such. But really, this is the sort of idiocy that gets people killed. Those who die should be mourned, but they are not really martyrs, nor have they done anything to be honored for. They were simply in the wrong place, at the wrong time, and in many cases doing the wrong thing.
Saturday, January 31, 2009
Oh the irony!
The Illinois Family Institute decided to weigh in on the rather bizarre situation in Illinois where those who have had sex reassignment surgery are allowed to change their birth certificates only if the surgery was performed in the United States, thus preventing those who go to place like Thailand or Canada that privilege. Here is a section from their article:
In the Jan. 28, 2009 edition of the Chicago Tribune, there is a story about the two sexual amputees who are suing the state over the refusal of the state to change the "gender" designation on their birthcertificates from "male" to "female." Several important points must be made. First, it's utterly reprehensible that anyone in the medical community would be complicit in facilitating a psychological disorder by amputating healthy body parts. There is a condition known as either apotemnophilia or Body Integrity Identity Disorder (BIID) that is characterized by the desire to amputate a healthy limb. It is useful for comparison in that it is thought by many to be closely related to Gender Identity Disorder (i.e., transsexualism), which society is increasingly accepting as a valid identity that emerges from biological influences and whose behavioral manifestations are morally legitimate. Apotemnophiles, as they are referred to in some circles, identify with amputees and seek to align their bodies with their psychological identities through amputation of healthy body parts. Dr. Anne Lawrence explains the condition:
Desire for amputation of a healthy limb has usually been regarded as a paraphilia (apotemnophilia), but some researchers propose that it may be a disorder of identity, similar to Gender Identity Disorder (GID) or transsexualism. Similarities between the desire for limb amputation and nonhomosexual male-to-female (MtF) transsexualism include profound dissatisfaction with embodiment.
She further explores the similarities between Male-to-Female (MtF)transsexuals and those who seek limb amputation:
Persons who want to undergo limb amputation typically experience an intense desire or overwhelming compulsion to change their bodies to match their idealized images of themselves as amputees. . . . They usually describe their feelings as developing early in life, often before puberty. . . . most emphasize that they are primarily seeking a sense of wholeness or completeness or are attempting to correct a mismatch between their bodies and their identities.
In the Jan. 28, 2009 edition of the Chicago Tribune, there is a story about the two sexual amputees who are suing the state over the refusal of the state to change the "gender" designation on their birthcertificates from "male" to "female." Several important points must be made. First, it's utterly reprehensible that anyone in the medical community would be complicit in facilitating a psychological disorder by amputating healthy body parts. There is a condition known as either apotemnophilia or Body Integrity Identity Disorder (BIID) that is characterized by the desire to amputate a healthy limb. It is useful for comparison in that it is thought by many to be closely related to Gender Identity Disorder (i.e., transsexualism), which society is increasingly accepting as a valid identity that emerges from biological influences and whose behavioral manifestations are morally legitimate. Apotemnophiles, as they are referred to in some circles, identify with amputees and seek to align their bodies with their psychological identities through amputation of healthy body parts. Dr. Anne Lawrence explains the condition:
Desire for amputation of a healthy limb has usually been regarded as a paraphilia (apotemnophilia), but some researchers propose that it may be a disorder of identity, similar to Gender Identity Disorder (GID) or transsexualism. Similarities between the desire for limb amputation and nonhomosexual male-to-female (MtF) transsexualism include profound dissatisfaction with embodiment.
She further explores the similarities between Male-to-Female (MtF)transsexuals and those who seek limb amputation:
Persons who want to undergo limb amputation typically experience an intense desire or overwhelming compulsion to change their bodies to match their idealized images of themselves as amputees. . . . They usually describe their feelings as developing early in life, often before puberty. . . . most emphasize that they are primarily seeking a sense of wholeness or completeness or are attempting to correct a mismatch between their bodies and their identities.
Now, the irony here is that Dr. Anne Lawrence is what the Illinois Family Institue would describe as a "sexual amputee." And yet, while citing this rather questionable source, they refer to Lawrence as "she." Anne Lawrence is well known as part of the infamous "Blanchard, Bailey, and Lawrence" often abbreviated as "BB&L" who have built their careers around attacking HBS women. Even more ironic is the fact that Lawrence self-identifies as a sexual fetishist, claiming to be an autogynephile, which BB&L define as "a man with a fetishtic desire to be feminized."
Ah yes, irony at its best. Once again, BB&L are the darlings of the religious right, who contradict their own erroneous beliefs in an effort to attack those with HBS.
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
A Sad Situation...
I grew up in Alabama during the Sixties. I saw a lot of things first hand that many have only read about in history books or seen in old documentaries. When I took my daughter to the Civil Rights Museum, the first thing you see on entering the exhibits is a recreation of a segregated water fountain. One side is marked Whites, and the other side is marked Colored. As we approached, I was thinking how thankful I was those days were past. My daughter, on the other hand, turned to me in absolute shock, and asked "You mean they really had things like that?" I was thankful it was something she could see with such horror.
Recently, I have encountered some things that remind me of those days. I have seen something that shows the same sort of hatred expressed by the worst villains of those days. A place that is dominated by the same desire to control those who would dissent as shown by Bull Connor, when he turned fire hoses on young demonstrators.
And the saddest part is, all of this is from someone who wishes to be seen as speaking in the spirit of Martin Luther King, Jr.
The place I am referring to, is another blog, run by one of the gender fascists, Monica Roberts. The following quotes are used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
Here is a nice sample of Roberts' prose.
If you follow the link, which is in the original article, you find even more examples of this:
Again, one finds race as a central theme, along with the rather odd use of ebonics. But it gets worse:
But, you haven't seen anything yet...
Again, white people who are post-op are portrayed as villans. And reality is ignored. The simple fact is, there are virtually zero cases where medical issues are a permanent bar to sex affirmation surgery. This excuse is used a lot, but it is fraudulent. It is probably rooted in the past, when such issues were real. At one time, anything from something as serious as being HIV positive, to something as trivial as being diabetic, could prevent one from having surgery. But, as medical professionals have recognized that SAS is not simply a cosmetic procedure that can be held back without problems, they have been more willing to operate on those with medical issues.
But, as Roberts gets warmed up, things from bad to worse, to so downright bad that it actually becomes comical...
Let me offer one final quote from this particular set as an example of Roberts' viewpoint:
Here Roberts is self-contradicting. After ranting about how wrong it is to point out that it is relatively easy to get surgery if you really want it, and that those who don't have it, don't want it, Roberts seems to confirm this point. This leads me to suspect that Roberts has had surgery, but has serious regrets. But the comments about how femininty is learned, and is constantly evolving journey, shows that Roberts has no real experience of having been born with a female mind in a male body. No doubt, this is at the heart of the attacks on successful transsexual women. This sort of thing is reminiscent of other such people, like "Willow Arune," who is notorious as a staunch defender of Michael Bailey and Ray Blanchard. Arune has not met anyone who hates transsexuals that Arune does not dearly love.
This article could go on for far longer, just quoting Roberts's hateful remarks, but I will offer one final one to sum up:
Roberts, in many ways, reminds me of a member of the Klan I was introduced to once. The man was filled with hatred to the point that he could not think rationally. When any of his positions were challenged, he would either launch off into a rant, or make an assertion that the Bible backed him up. If you asked him to tell you where, he would begin stalling, and then say something to the effect of "I can't remember the exact chapter and verse, but it's in there...in the Psalms I believe." Just out of curiosity, I tried to find anything remotely like what he claimed to be citing, and couldn't. Like Roberts apparently does, he simply made up stuff to suit his own hateful view.
Recently, I have encountered some things that remind me of those days. I have seen something that shows the same sort of hatred expressed by the worst villains of those days. A place that is dominated by the same desire to control those who would dissent as shown by Bull Connor, when he turned fire hoses on young demonstrators.And the saddest part is, all of this is from someone who wishes to be seen as speaking in the spirit of Martin Luther King, Jr.
The place I am referring to, is another blog, run by one of the gender fascists, Monica Roberts. The following quotes are used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
Here is a nice sample of Roberts' prose.
Now the above shows several characteristics of Roberts' style of writing. The first is the obsession with race. Everything for Roberts, revolves around race. A very confrontational style that includes personal attacks on anyone who has the "audacity" to disagree. A bitter hatred of anyone who is successful in their transiton. And a tendency to write in ebonics.I've since discovered that Sue Robins is one of those white transsexual separatists that I've been tangling with in various online transgender groups since the late 90's. Before I
start the fun and festivities taking this e-mail apart and rebutting her WBT azz
(and in this case the WBT stands for weak-minded belligerent transsexual) enjoy
this music video from Jill Scott for her hit song 'Hate on Me'.
If you follow the link, which is in the original article, you find even more examples of this:
One of the things that's been a contentious issue ever since I transitioned in 1994 and have been around the transgender community is this ongoing battle between the pre-ops/non-ops and post-ops.
Frankly, that's more of a white transwoman thang that I try to stay out of, but here's my take on this asinine mess.
Again, one finds race as a central theme, along with the rather odd use of ebonics. But it gets worse:
Much of the sniping between the two groups has several elements to it. But the major bone of contention between the pre and post-ops is over the word 'transgender'.Again, we see the bitter hatred of post-ops. But this is relatively mild, compared to what comes next:
The reason a majority of people in the community use it is because it's an inclusive umbrella term for the entire diverse community of gender variant people.
The post-ops usual argument is that the pre/non-ops haven't worked hard enough to save money like 'they' did to have GRS (genital reconfiguration surgery), so don't hate on them. They can't (or won't) understand why any transsexual would want to keep that 'ugh' male organ.
Post -ops also assert that they are being lumped in with the transgender community 'against their will' and it keeps 'them' from being accepted by natal females as women. They claim that one day the 'silent majority' of post-ops will revolt against this 'oppressive' situation and not only start their own movement, but push for laws that give rights only to transgender people who have completed surgery.Here Roberts begins attacking post women in earnest. Funny, in a way, that a person who displays so much male arrogance would attack some for "White Male Privilelge." Again, we see Roberts' two favorite themes, the evils of white people and the evils of post-ops.
Yo, did y'all consider the fact that the reason y'all have problems being accepted as women is because of all that WMP that you're still clutching on to like a wino holding his last bottle of MD 20/20?
But, you haven't seen anything yet...
On the flip side, the pre/non-op argument is that the post ops are not only wrong, but are selfish, arrogant and bitter people who have not only turned their backs on their less fortunate sisters, but have forgotten where they came from. The pre/non-ops also assert that ignoring the fact that many peeps can't have GRS for medical reasons is callous, and the 'just work hard and save for GRS' argument, while I agree with it in principle, the fact that this line is almost always spouted by white post-ops and ignores the reality that transpeople of color live with. We don't have the access to the financial resources that many of these former white males did.
Again, white people who are post-op are portrayed as villans. And reality is ignored. The simple fact is, there are virtually zero cases where medical issues are a permanent bar to sex affirmation surgery. This excuse is used a lot, but it is fraudulent. It is probably rooted in the past, when such issues were real. At one time, anything from something as serious as being HIV positive, to something as trivial as being diabetic, could prevent one from having surgery. But, as medical professionals have recognized that SAS is not simply a cosmetic procedure that can be held back without problems, they have been more willing to operate on those with medical issues.
But, as Roberts gets warmed up, things from bad to worse, to so downright bad that it actually becomes comical...
One pattern I continue to see with some white post ops is that they blitz through the real life test and go straight to the table for surgery. They they wonder why and get mad because they spent $10K for a neocoochie and got 'sirred', while a non-op with five incles of neoclit in her lace panites gets treated as a female.Again, we see race as an issue. One wonders about African-American HBS women who "blitz through the real life test." Would the same be true for them? But what is really telling is Roberts' disdainful references to "neocoochie" and getting sirred and non-ops getting treated as a female. Again, Roberts either lives a very protected life, or is totally delusional. While it is true that some people rush into surgery, and have regrets, few transgenders who have an aversion to surgery are likely to be treated as females, at least outside of their own social circles. One only has to spend some time in San Francisco's Tenderloin and Polk Gulch areas to put that silliness to rest.
A major reason is that because GRS for some pre/non-ops will happen about the same time George W. Bush gets nominated for a Nobel Peace prize and they know it, the pre/non-op spends more time focusing and perfecting the internal and spiritual aspects of femininity.
Let me offer one final quote from this particular set as an example of Roberts' viewpoint:
Anybody with positive cash flow can get an improved female
body, but femininty is a learned, spiritual, constantly evolving journey. You
aren't going to master it (if you ever do) if you're more concerned about
getting the earliest possible surgery date or stressing because you didn't get
the day you wanted for your facial feminization surgery consultation.
Here Roberts is self-contradicting. After ranting about how wrong it is to point out that it is relatively easy to get surgery if you really want it, and that those who don't have it, don't want it, Roberts seems to confirm this point. This leads me to suspect that Roberts has had surgery, but has serious regrets. But the comments about how femininty is learned, and is constantly evolving journey, shows that Roberts has no real experience of having been born with a female mind in a male body. No doubt, this is at the heart of the attacks on successful transsexual women. This sort of thing is reminiscent of other such people, like "Willow Arune," who is notorious as a staunch defender of Michael Bailey and Ray Blanchard. Arune has not met anyone who hates transsexuals that Arune does not dearly love.
This article could go on for far longer, just quoting Roberts's hateful remarks, but I will offer one final one to sum up:
Actually, Roberts needs no help in looking bad, and would do well to practice, rather than preach. Roberts is filled with pride, but fears criticism. Like so many of the gender facists, Roberts will delete anything that is remotely well written. It is not the vitrolic crap that gets deleted, but well written challenges to Robert's rhetoric.I chuckle because every time these peeps post their vitriolic crap (which I delete) in a vain attempt to quote unquote 'try to make me look bad', they're missing the mark. They need to look in the mirror (if it doesn't break first) to ascertain who this is really hurting. You're making yourselves look like the peeps that not only need Jesus, but need straitjackets and prescription medication as well.
Roberts, in many ways, reminds me of a member of the Klan I was introduced to once. The man was filled with hatred to the point that he could not think rationally. When any of his positions were challenged, he would either launch off into a rant, or make an assertion that the Bible backed him up. If you asked him to tell you where, he would begin stalling, and then say something to the effect of "I can't remember the exact chapter and verse, but it's in there...in the Psalms I believe." Just out of curiosity, I tried to find anything remotely like what he claimed to be citing, and couldn't. Like Roberts apparently does, he simply made up stuff to suit his own hateful view.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.jpg)
