The Creation of a Trans-Martyr's Mythology

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.

A Few Thoughts On Suicide

A couple of recent developments have led me to say a few words on this rather touchy subject.  The first is the rather silly claim by Mr. "Michelle" Spicer on Shame On You Transgender Edition that I have threatened suicide.  I don't know exactly where he got that silly idea.  It is possible that he is just lying, or it is possible that he is trying, rather desperately, to stretch my pointing out that his cult leader, Ms. "Mark" Cummings tried to nudge me in that direction.  I made it quite clear that Ms. Cummings' lame attempt was not remotely going to work.  Suicide is not remotely something I would consider.  But it was, quite obviously, what Ms. Cummings was suggesting.

In fact, I seem to recall some of the, uh, "investigative reporters" (it's hard to type that without laughing) at Shame On You Transgender Edition suggesting that my shining the harsh light of reality might "trigger" someone towards suicide.

And, of course, there is the kerfuffle about Mr. "Dana Lane" Taylor threatening suicide, and then getting bent out of shape when it was brought to the attention of his employer.  Apparently this has resulted in him being put on "disability" by his employer.  He was harassing various women online, and they called him on it.

Well, a lot is made about how so many transgender people supposedly attempt suicide.  Now, I can understand how a person who is a transsexual might be tempted towards suicide if they are thwarted in their need to transition.  But if a person has transitioned, and is facing issues that cause them to consider suicide, then perhaps they need to rethink their decision to transition.  Perhaps they need to consider if transition is working for them.  If transitioning does not make your life better, and it does not give you the ability to handle problems, then you are probably headed for disaster.

And if you are feeling suicidal, get help!

Why Are Some Early Transitioners So Insecure?

I noticed that Elizabeth is still puffing up her claim of an early transition. In all honesty, I am happy for anyone who was lucky enough to have escaped the literal Hell that I went through, but I have to ask...Why do some have to be such insufferable jerks about it?  As I have said, the classic example is Suzan Cooke, but I am seeing that same sort of silliness from Elizabeth, and it is really sad.

First off, I have taken a, shall we say, agnostic stance on the Colorado case. I have not said that the person involved is, or is not, transsexual. Now, I don't know if Elizabeth has problems with reading comprehension, or if she just wants to pick a fight, but I have not denied that this person is a transsexual. I have said, repeatedly, that I honestly don't know. And unless Elizabeth has information from a reliable  source, I.e. one that is not Mr."Cristan" Williams, I would assert that she does not know either, though clearly she thinks she does.  

Am I blinded?  No, I am just engaging in critical thinking. In fact, just the opposite. I am not blindly accepting something I do not know is fact, simply because I want it to be true.  I don't hate Mr. Williams.  I don't care for his extremism, and I think he does a lot of harm.  I think he believes he can pretty much claim whatever he wishes, and fool people into buying into it.  So, excuse me if I choose not to accept what he claims as the truth without question.

To be honest, I get very much disgusted by people who choose to sit on others when they do not know all the facts. Elizabeth knows a little of what I went through, but only a very little. And that is how it will remain because I am not going to share stuff that is, quite simply any of her business. 

Elizabeth claims to have faced the same issues I did. Sorry, but that is pure and complete POPPYCOCK. She has no way of knowing what issues I faced. Nor do I have any way of knowing what issues she faced.  She throws out a few straw men, like therapists or money (yes, I have talked about a "bad therapist" thought that is a very simplistic version of a story that I am not about to share the details of.  There was a lot of pain involved, and there I other people's privacy that I will not violate. Elizabeth seems to think she has some right to know more than is her business.  Or perhaps she simply doesn't care that some would desire to us that to harass me. 

There are things I shared with my therapist who did not share Elizabeth's skepticism. She will just have to accept that I think they as having a lot more validity than her opinions.  The simple fact, and it may be more than she can deal with, but I really don't need her approval or validation. 

The really sad thing is, Elizabeth is simply doing a bad imitation of the same crap that Bailey and Blanchard spew. No, I did not transition as early as I would have liked.  Yes, I made choices that caused me problems. I suffered a lot of pain, but hey, I have daughter and three lovely grandchildren. I have wondered...what if my life had taken a different path?  I can't say that I would change things if I could. I certainly wouldn't just to please someone like Elizabeth. 

What Elizabeth should realize is that it's not  just when you transitioned, it is what your life was life before you transitioned.  People like Lask, and Mr. Sandeen, and quite a few others had rather nice careers as men.  They often showed no sign of any real dysphoria before they finally decided to transition instead.  Yeah, I got delayed along the path, and I suffered quite a bit because of it.  But, I also learned a lot, and I have some people in my life I would not trade for anything.  I may not have "transitioned" at an age that Elizabeth deems acceptable, but I also did not have a successful life as a male.  But, some people can't see beyond their own insecurities.

Yes, it's funny how things work out.  I am quite secure in my womanhood, and I have a lovely daughter, and three lovely grandchildren, one of whom turned six yesterday.  Elizabeth transitioned early, and seems to have so much insecurity, she feels the need to surround herself with sycophants who try to gain her imprimatur as being good transsexuals.  Oh well, life if funny that way.

Oh, and I love how Lask tries to play dumb in his attempt to cover his tracks. He knows I have not claimed he is from Canada, but if he thinks that fools anyone, well he is pretty foolish...

A Few Minor Points...

I screwed up yesterday...

After noticing Elizabeth's post on Notes From the T Side I made the mistake of thinking she had gotten over her little snit fit, and might be willing to put stuff behind us.  Not even close.  I don't know what it is, but some early transitioning transsexuals, at least ones who transitioned back in the Sixties, seem to have some major insecurities.  The classic example, of course, is Suzan Cooke.  Granted Cooke has gone full tilt as a transgender apologist, apparently deciding the ego strokes she gets from the men in dresses bunch is worth it.

I can understand having some identification with a possible early transitioning transsexual such as might be the case in Colorado.  Now, I say might be simply because we really have pretty much zero valid information.  Almost everything published has been filtered through either the Pacific Justice Institute, or Mr. "Cristan" Williams.  Simply put, this means it is highly probable that the facts have been lost in their attempts to "spin" the story to fit their extremist agendas.  

I tried to explain this to Elizabeth, but she is the sort of person who sees things as you either totally accept her extremely rigid viewpoint, or well, you can expect a vicious and rather nasty attack.  

And yes, I know some of the extremists would accuse me of the same thing, but well, they would be wrong.  I don't have a lot of patience when others do such things, and when they do, I will generally give them a full dose of reality.  But if someone is willing to engage in a rational, and reasonable discussion, I can be quite pleasant about it.  I have a lot of friends with whom I may disagree on some points.  We are able to discuss this, and if necessary, agree to disagree, without resorting to accusations of bigotry, hatred, and intolerance, or the need to toss insults, profanity, or profane insults.

I'm sorry, but I won't be bullied into agreeing to something I don't believe.  And if that causes someone to resort to ridiculous attacks in an attempt to do so, I will generally either confront them with their own failures, or, possibly just walk away if the area of disagreement is relatively narrow.  In the case of extremist kooks like Mr. Williams, or Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen, I will generally expose their lies, and take apart their illogical arguments.  In the case of Elizabeth, I am more disappointed than anything else.

I mean seriously...  She seems to have some need to act like a character out of some bad teen flick.  She seems to want to play the "mean girl."  Between impugning my intelligence, and questioning my validity as a transsexual, she pretty much went off on some ridiculous tangents.

Her principle argument that the person who has been labeled "Jane Doe" by Mr. Williams must be a transsexual amounted to "no kid that age would subject themselves to the abuse and ridicule" unless they really were.  Well, I obviously did not agree with that position, and a recent situation here in the Bay Area, where a teenage boy who has chosen to act out by claiming to be "agender" and wearing skirts, was set on fire when he fell asleep on a bus.  I was a little surprised that the trans kooks were a bit slow picking up on the story, but they seem to have finally discovered it.  But, as horrible as this crime is (NO ONE SHOULD EVER BE SET ON FIRE FOR ANY REASON) it does expose the fact that, well, Elizabeth was simply wrong.  

Instead of saying, "Okay, I don't agree, but I can see your point," she slings more insults and tries to claim it is two different things.  Well, I agree, clearly claiming to be "agender" is not exactly the same as claiming to be transgender, or perhaps transsexual, but it is also not really that much different in terms of possible stigma, and in fact, claiming to be "agender" is probably going to invite even more stigma.

Bottom line, the argument that no teenager would claim to be a transsexual, who is not actually one, is totally without merit.  So, without more accurate information, I am going to withhold judgement.

The other area where Elizabeth showed extremely poor reasoning was first off, adding to something I said in a comment so she could attack me (i.e. a straw man argument), and then using a "No True Scotsman" fallacy based on that.

I mentioned a very personal, and largely private period in my life.  There is a lot about that time I simply am not going to talk about publicly, and which I have only discussed, in detail with a few very close and trusted friends.  I usually some it up, in a very over-simplified manner, by saying it was triggered, in part. because of a very poor therapist.  The bottom line is, I went through an emotional crisis, and detransitioned for about seven years.  Elizabeth seized on that small bit of information, and claimed I had "failed at transition."  That is not even remotely accurate.  I delayed my transition because I decided, for deeply personal reasons that are really not any of her business, to attempt to find a lesser path. 

Now, some might argue that I should reveal all, but I am not going to do so for several reasons.  First, doing so would invade the privacy of other people.  Second, there was a lot of pain involved in that period of my life.  And third, as I have discussed here before, there are people who spend a lot of time online stalking others, and I am not going to give them information they would gladly abuse.  

If Elizabeth really needs to look down on others to feel better, that is her failing, not mine.  If she wants to imagine things, based on a small amount of knowledge, and a large amount of insecurity, well...that is her problem.  I really don't need her permission or her imprimatur to be a woman.  If she wants to set some absurd criteria to judge someone's validity, she can join the kooks like Bailey and Blanchard who have made a career of doing such.  

Again, I have pointed out that some, such as Mr. Williams and Mr. Sandeen, are neither transsexuals, or women.  This is  based on arguable facts, not whether or not they followed the exact same path I did, or whether or not they adhere to some political viewpoint.

Breaking New Ground For Gender Fascism

First off, let me state up front, I am not interested in debating whether Manning is a hero or not.  As to whether Manning is a transsexual, transgender, or just a deeply disturbed gay man, that remains an open question.  I want to deal with something a bit more concrete.

Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen, the man for whom I first coined the term "Gender Fascist" has gone to a new extreme.  In posts in several locations, he has attacked Manning because Manning did not transition in a manner that Sandeen has declared necessary.  Seriously.

In the article, which is posted on Transadvocate, Mr. Sandeen makes it clear that he disapproves of Manning's conduct with regards to to giving secret documents to WikiLeaks.  He begins by making a rather self-aggrandizing statement about how he is going to respect Manning's desire to be referred to as "Chelsea" based on teachings he "learned as Pentecostal youth," even though he has apparently embraced atheism as an adult.  This is apparently part of his ongoing harassment and stalking of me.

Having puffed himself up in this manner, the then begins his attack on Manning:

But as I respect her name and identified gender, I’m cognizant that Chelsea didn’t respect the trans community — the trans community of which I am a part — in how she came out.

So, apparently Sandeen has appointed himself arbiter of how someone must come out, and of course Mr. Sandeen does think they have to come out.  But, apparently, he expects to be consulted first:

As I read Chelsea’s announcement, I was struck that the thrust of her statement was about her wants and needs, and that there was no mention or consideration of the impact of her statement on other trans people. For example, Chelsea mad her announcement without warning to LGB and especially T community leaders even as she put LGBT community leaders the in the position of defending her gender identity. What she did was put the responsibility of defending her chosen name and preferred pronouns on LGBT non-profits and trans community activists who weren’t fully aware of if, when, or how she was going to publicly announce she has a female gender identity.

One of my biggest problems with Mr. Sandeen, and a number of other transgender extremists, is how they show no regard for how their positions might affect transsexuals who are not interested in being linked with their perversions.  But here is Mr. Sandeen, apparently upset that he was inconvenienced by Manning's announcement.

Part of the irony here is how Mr. Sandeen has no regard for the very real problems will Manning will face if Manning really is transsexual.  Granted, Mr. Sandeen has no personal experience of such issues, but still, his arrogance is amazing.

But Mr. Sandeen goes on to make an even more outrageous statement:

To me, it’s notable that Chelsea made her announcement that she was a woman without publicly using the terms trans, trans*, transgender, or transsexual to describe herself, or acknowledge she was part of a community that were going to be defending her gender identity.

I don't know, but perhaps Manning has the good sense to not want to be associated with extremists like Mr. Sandeen.  Of course, to him, and his ilk, that is the unpardonable sin.  One must be willing to be a part of the "community."  

And the arrogance continues:

There is no honor in harming the community to which you are entering.

And, there is no honor is announcing the new name Chelsea wishes to be addressed by and her gender identity without considering how the timing of her announcement may impact efforts for open military service for trans people in the service. 

I don’t know about anyone else, but I see a pattern of behavior where she doesn’t consider the consequences of her actions…to include the impact her behavior has had and is having on others.

Finally, Mr. Sandeen goes on to attack Manning's actions in revealing having a gender identity issue prior to being arrested:

And, of course, there is the courage and commitment thing. Prior to being arrested, she reached out for help to her immediate supervisor, essentially outing herself as trans with the “My Problem” email and inclusion of a photo of her presenting as female. Courage and commitment to further identify as trans to the Army with intent to receive treatment for her gender dysphoria and a discharge could have included going to the next and the next and the next supervisor in her chain of command, or could have included contacting a military psychologist or psychiatrist — contacting anyone with the power to help her until someone in the Army acted or what she described as her problem. (I do believe there was a failure of leadership by her immediate supervisor for not passing on the information up the chain of command when it was a clear call for help, but that’s another issue.) It seems to me that she demonstrated a lack of courage and commitment in how she reached out for help…from the military and discharged from to be treated and discharged by the Army for what was then referred to under DSM-IV TR as gender identity disorder.

Simply put, it is really none of Mr. Sandeen's business when, or how, Manning chose to come out.  Mr. Sandeen should really just butt out of this one, and stop acting like he thinks he is some sort of "alpha tranny" or something.

I knew he was arrogant, but this one takes the cake.  

Transition Versus Transgression

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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