Another Example of Outrageous Behavior By Transgender Extremists

A while back, I wrote an article about a case here in San Francisco. Well, here is a follow-up, and well, it's pretty bad. To recap, back in April, I wrote about a 31 year-old male who goes by the by the name of Dana McCallum. He was arrested back on Jan. 26 of this year on suspicion of rape. Specifically, he has been charged with three counts of spousal rape, one count of false imprisonment and one count of domestic violence. Now, Mr. McCallum (oddly enough, his legal name is Dana Contreras) calls himself transgender "woman," and happens to be a programmer with Twitter, and was accused of raping his wife. He was just allowed to plead guilty to a couple of misdemeanor charges and got probation.

It is bad enough that he basically is getting away with rape, but what is even more outrageous is the response from other transgender "women."  They rallied to his support.  Here is someone, who is quite male, and who apparently has no desire to give up his penis, who claims to be a "woman," who raped a female, and a bunch of other men, who claim to identify as "women" tried to censor discussion about the case. 

Yes, the transgender extremists actually got GallusMag locked out of her blog, Gender Trender for over a week, apparently because they were afraid this case would publicize the fact that most transgender males do not have sex reassignment surgery, and would prefer to hang on to their penises.  Well, that and also the fact that transgender males commit sexual assaults at the same rate as other men.

And it should be noted that, again, the media reporting on this story, in an apparent attempt to pander to the transgender extremists, seems to be avoiding the detail that this person is still physically male, and intends to remain physically male.  This has led to more than a bit of confusion among people making comments on the case locally.

Yes, once again, the "men in dresses" club acts like, well, a bunch of men.  They are more concerned with protecting one of their own, than being outraged that a woman, who they claim to identify with, was raped.  Go figure.

I Can't Wait To See the Transgender Kooks Try To Spin This One

Ironically, right on the heels of another absurd article by Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen, in which he attacks Roseanne Barr for speaking out against certain behaviors by transgender males (just to be clear, I am talking about males who claim to be women), there comes a story that is going to be a real headache for those who try to claim that transgender males are not potentially a threat to women.  The award for most clueless headline has to go to the San Francisco Chronicle, which had:

S.F. women's rights advocate accused of raping wife

Okay, at first glance, you might assume that some man, who was known for advocating for women's rights, had been accused of raping his wife. But the lead paragraph is very confusing...

While attorneys for a women's rights advocate and prominent Twitter engineer accused of raping her estranged wife say the accuser is "out for revenge," a friend who says she was present after the incident said Friday that the wife just wants to teach her children that criminals must face justice.Now, this is where things start to get very strange...  You see, under California law, a woman cannot commit rape, which is defined on the basis of "sexual intercourse," and which later sections of the law make clear involves penetration by a penis...  The rapist is a transgender male, who has not had surgery (and presumably does not plan to have said surgery, as there should be little doubt that this dude could easily afford any SRS surgeon since he works in a very well paid position, and I would be surprised if Twitter does not cover SRS).  In California, you pretty much have to be a male (i.e. have a penis) to commit a rape (including spousal rape).  Otherwise, it is covered under a different statute. 

So, to be completely clear here, a 31 year-old male who goes by the by the name of Dana McCallum was arrested back on Jan. 26 on suspicion of rape. According to the San Francisco district attorney's office, he was charged with five felonies. Specifically, he has been charged with three counts of spousal rape, one count of false imprisonment and one count of domestic violence. As a curious aside, his legal name is given as "Dana Contreras"  In fact, two years ago, he was featured, under his legal name in an article, in The Advocate entitledThe Ten Most Innovative Companies and the LGBTs Who Got Them to the Top.  Sadly, you would not quite get that from the San Francisco Chronicle article, which goes out of its way to avoid mentioning that Contreas is transgender, or that he is a male.

Oh, and it should be noted that about a year ago, Contreas, in a speech he gave to at his high school, pulled the classic stunt of misleading people into thinking he had surgery.  Clearly, he has not, as if he had, it would impossible for him to be charged with rape.

Now, I will point out, in all fairness, at this point in time, Contreas has been charged, but not convicted.  On the other hand, it does not really look good for him.  His defense is a classic male tactic, of claiming it is all about "money," that his spouse, who he had served with divorce papers the day before, was hoping to cash in on his stock options.  Now, what that would have to do with "rape" is, of course, ignored by the attorneys.  California law would probably grant her a share in them anyway.  So, this so-called "women's rights activist" falls back on a classic dodge in an attempt to claim he didn't commit rape.  Sad...

It will be interesting to see how the likes of Mr. "Cristan" Williams and Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen deal with this embarrassment.  Of course, for the time being, I would not be surprised if they hammer the "not convicted" meme.  But, if this Contreas is convicted, and I would not be at all surprised if that occurs, it will be much harder for them to explain away.

Stay tuned...this could get very interesting.

It Is Really Getting Out of Hand

You know, up to a point, one can almost laugh at the silliness of the transgender kooks.  They flounce around, claiming to be women, when they clearly are not.  But it ceases to be funny when they start encroaching on the security of others.  It is bad enough that they believe they have an absolute entitlement to invade women's spaces, even those involving nudity, while waving their penises….excuse me, their big old "neoclits" in the women's faces. It gets worse when they think they have the right to expose themselves in front of young girls, as was he case with  "Colleen" Francis.  But more and more, they openly threaten actual violence against anyone who dares even disagree with their insane demands.
For example…there was this tweet…

Jessica Ottowell ‏@nekomusmue 

@pansgrrl @cecilia_c_chung @TransLawCenter I can do dialog in real life as long as I have something heavy to kill the #terf with

This sort of things is simply unacceptable. Now, to Cecilia Chung's credit, she did take the person to task…

Cecilia Chung ‏@cecilia_c_chung  

@nekomusmue violence is not helpful @pansgrrl @TransLawCenter

But this person, calling himself "Jessica" is clearly dangerous. He doesn't back down from his violence, but instead tries to excuse it…

Jessica Ottowell ‏@nekomusmue  

@cecilia_c_chung @pansgrrl @TransLawCenter these people want my friends not to exist and they don't think I exist.

I am not sure what he means by "they don't think I exist…." Clearly, he does exist…and I guess what he really means is, "They don't think I'm really a woman." And hey, I think they are right…he isn't. He is a violent, and dangerous man, who is threatening women because he is not getting his way.

It actually gets worse…(tweets quoted in the order they were apparently posted, not actually displayed on Twitter)

Jessica Ottowell ‏@nekomusmue  17h

@cecilia_c_chung @pansgrrl @TransLawCenter if they are not dealt with we run the risk of more violence or deaths.

Jessica Ottowell ‏@nekomusmue  

@cecilia_c_chung @pansgrrl @TransLawCenter This is not the time to debate with those so predisposed, it is long past time that they were

Jessica Ottowell ‏@nekomusmue  

@cecilia_c_chung @pansgrrl @TransLawCenter dealt with, be that via the law, as I am pushing for or by duct tape

Now, obviously what you have here is the classic, "over the top rhetoric of blaming someone for violence, simply because the don't "approve" of you. I am not aware of a single case of any of these women that Mr. Ottowell has such vitriol for ever committing a single act of violence. In fact, they have pointed out that the violence is committed by men.

In another bit display of male arrogance, Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen has apparently offered money (could it really be $10,000?) to anyone who will supply him with the identity of the person who posts as Gallus Mag. Seriously….

M. A. Melby ‏@MAMelby  Apr 3

@AutumnSandeen @_Plastic_Girl She's confusing someone putting a call out to discover Gallus Mag's identity with a "bounty" as in violence.

Autumn Sandeen ‏@AutumnSandeen  Apr 3

@MAMelby @_Plastic_Girl Well, true enuf. I live under my name, take the heat & past death threats under my name. Gallus doesn't; she should.

Now, Mr. Sandeen can't quite seem to grasp why this might be upsetting. Apparently, after a bit of research, it turns out that not only is Mr. Sandeen involved, but, not surprisingly, so is über kook Mr. "Dana Lane" Taylor. While they might only be hoping to embarrass and humiliate said person (uh, yeah…sure) even that is over the top. I have been on the receiving end of Mr. Sandeen's harassment, and I know he is supposed to be the person who blackmailed one blogger into leaving the Internet. This sort of thing is just sick.

I clearly do not agree with the goals of the "transgender" extremists, and I am not shy about stating that. I have been harassed more than once by them.

We Don't Want Special Rights….Except When We Want Special Rights

I've been wondering when one of the extremist transgender bloggers would take on the case of the transgender boy at a Bay Area high school who got himself in trouble for attacking a group of girls he claims were bullying him.  Of course, Mr. "Cristan" Williams decided to weigh in, and as might be expected, he is demanding "special rights" for this fellow….

The case is really a simple one.  A student, who claims to be a "girl" but who is male, and who is well known in his high school, claims he was bullied by female students for years.  (And here we have been led to believe that female students have no problems with boys invading the girl's room in school…whoops.)  The boy, who calls himself "Jewlyes" Gutierrez, physically assaulted the girls, leading to a rather nasty altercation that was caught on someone's cell phone.  And because Gutierrez decided to use violence in response to verbal harassment, he was charged with battery.

Those are the simple facts.  A male student, who claims to be transgender, is verbally harassed, and uses physical violence against the female students who object to his presence in their bathroom.  Pretty simple.  Now, of course, in the eyes of the extremist transgender crowd, the girls have no rights, and Gutierrez has all the rights.  He gets to force himself on them, and when they react, he gets to use violence to "correct" them.

But, he cry will go up, "No, we don't want special rights!  We just want to be treated like everyone else…."  But when push comes to shove, no, they want special rights.  When they are treated like everyone else, they cry foul.

No one should be bullied, but being bullied does not justify violence.  That is the real issue here.  A male (sorry, but he is) physically attacks females who are calling him names.  Sorry, but no, that is not excusable.  If he was defending himself from a physical assault, it would be different.  But they were not hitting him.  He is the one who resorted to violence.  And he was a male, hitting a female.  Reality may not suit the transgender extremists, but it is past time for them to be brought face to face with it.

Another Rather Blatant Lie From Transadvocate

Well, I guess it should not come as a surprise, but Mr. "Cristan" Williams has posted another blatant lie on Transadvocate.  And not also not surprising is that it is targeted at "TERFs," his favorite term for Trans Exclusive Radical Feminists.  This time around, it is the form of a cartoon that claims that they are blaming "transgender people" for any violence inflicted on them.

The cartoon shows a highly insulting caricature of a rather butch looking female pointing at the grave of Angie Zapata.  Ironically, that is the murder case that resulted in the former editor of Transadvocate exposing Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen's rather atrocious behavior during the coverage of the trial.  I should add, it appears that one of the articles linked to in Abernathy's article has been removed from Pam's House Blend, but that is why we can be thankful for the Internet Archive, also known as the Way Back Machine.

Anyway, the cartoon completely distorts what has been said, which is simply the truth.  When someone who is transgender is murdered, it is usually because of homophobia, not "transphobia."  In fact, with the possible example of Brandon Teena, I cannot think of a single case where such a claim would be valid.  And, as Mr. Williams, and the rather silly cartoonist, try to avoid, homophobia is pretty much male violence, and it is most certainly not something that can be validly referred to as "transphobia,"  

Not that Mr. Williams ever shows much regard for the truth.

Hypocrisy and Beyond....

Well, it was an interesting morning....

As I announced in my post yesterday, I decided to create a Twitter account for my blog.  I did this, in part, because Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen had been attacking me on Twitter, and I figured...I would fight fire, with fire.  Or in this case, tweets with tweets.  Actually, this story really starts a bit earlier...  Now, I have been on Twitter a bit longer...but under a different account, and no, I am not giving out that information.  This blog, and transsexual issues is actually a very small part of my life, and I keep things private.  

Now, anyone can look at someone's tweets simply by going to Twitter and putting in that person's user name if known.  You don't have to join Twitter unless you want to post.  In fact, you don't have to be logged in at all.  Sort of like reading a blog....  A person can mark their Tweets as private, but that prevents people who are not following them from reading them, and Sandeen actually took this approach for about a day after I published several of his more embarrassing statements.  But Sandeen is nothing, if not attention seeking, and he went back public

I had started looking at what Sandeen was saying, after seeing various reposts of some of his more obnoxious behavior against various women who have had the audacity to stand up to the jerk.  He can be very abusive, and has a nasty reputation for stalking radical feminist women in Twitter...

When I set my Twitter account up, I followed several people, including Mr. Sandeen.  Later, so I added him again.  Then, I got a message saying he had blocked me.  Okay, I figured...that is his right, and not really surprising.  I mean, he is a bit of a hypocritical jerk.  I am not going to lose sleep over it.  Which I didn't.  This morning, I woke up, and went online to check email and such, and a bit to my surprise, I discovered that I now had two followers... Mr. Sandeen, and more laughably, his cat.  Yes, Sandeen, apparently in a rather clueless attempt to hide, has an account in his cat's name.  So, I figured, okay, I don't censor people, and I followed him again.  I also had picked up another follower.   I then out up my earlier post today, tweeted about it, and added a couple of tweets mentioning that Sandeen...and his cat were no following me.

Well, I guess the world famous eunuch, @autumnsandeen decided to unblock me.I will give him that much.ROTFL!
— Just Jennifer (@_JustJennifer_) April 25, 2013

Talk about hypocrisy....after blocking me, noted eunuch, Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen is following me.ROTFL.
— Just Jennifer (@_JustJennifer_) April 25, 2013

About an hour or so later, I went to check Twitter again...and discovered that my account had been suspended for "abuse."  Now, this is where it gets interesting.  I am not sure how Sandeen managed to pull such a stunt off.  I had made all of four tweets.  My first was a retweet of something from Cathy Brennan, who I am disappointed to say also blocked me.  I am not sure why, as I have not attacked her, and in fact, have defended her. 

#radfem2013 bc if you need other ppl to tell you yr a woman, yr probs a man
— Cathy Brennan (@bugbrennan) April 24, 2013

 But hey, again, it is her right.  If I somehow offended her, I apologize.

Anyway,  had to go through checking off a couple of boxes promising not to do whatever it was I was accused of (which doesn't make any sense, since I looked at the Twitter rules and cannot see what, if anything I violated) and my account is back.  Sandeen has, again, blocked me, and was not "following me" but, as unbelievable as this might seem, his cat was still following me.  I mean really, is he THAT ignorant?  Does he REALLY think he is fooling anyone?  In any case, I filed a complaint against him, pointing out that he has attacked me as well (which does not actually appear to be against the rules) and pointing out that he appears to have somehow abused Twitter's abuse procedures.  Oh well...it is all very strange, but it is also very typical of Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen and the Transgender Kooks in general.  They think nothing of attacking people, insulting them, stalking them, etc...but they react in outrage when they are subjected to mere disagreement.

Yes, I admit, I take great delight in tweaking Mr. Sandeen's rather enormous ego.  But, he deserves it.  I have no sought to harm him in any way.  I do wish someone had filed with the court in San Diego to challenge his fraudulent birth certificate, but that is a bit different.  There, he was committing a crime and should have been stopped.  

If I ever met Mr. Sandeen in person, I would certain be a bit alarmed.  He has admitted to engaging in violence, I would certainly be on guard, and would consider taking steps to protect myself as necessary, just as I would with any man who is known to be violent.  But, I would take no steps to harm him unless absolutely necessary.

But one thing is for certain.  Sandeen is a hypocrite, and a kook.

Update:  Okay, I just got an email from Twitter informing me that "Transadvocate" (I assume that would be Mr. "Cristan" Williams himself, had mentioned me in a tweet.  He was complaining to Sandeen and Mr. "Monica" Roberts, the notorious "Trangriot" bigot, that I was "stalking" him.  So, now, he is trying to claim that following someone on Twitter is stalking them?   So, I guess that would mean that his comrade Mr. Sandeen was stalking me this morning?  As was his cat?  Well, actually, the cat thing was sort of stalking, but that is another matter....   Weird how the mind of these kooks works.  Well, I guess he blocked me...
ROTFL!

In The Middle....

Well, first off, this post marks the 300th on this blog! It was just over a year ago, I posted the 200th, and now we are up by another hundred. Hmmm, I wonder if Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen will want to make another smart remark about that....for those who don't know, he has been whining about the amount I post...not the first man to claim a woman has too much to say.

Another big announcement....this blog now has a presence on Twitter. I am there as @_JustJennifer_. Feel free to follow me. And I should note, Sandeen has blocked me from following him. Oh well....that is easily gotten around....

Now, on to the topic at hand... I have stated many times that I am a moderate politically. I often joke that I am a member of the Radical Middle, the Far Center....that I am a Extreme Moderate. But it is, in many ways, more than a joke. I do take a very moderate approach to most issues. And I am often amused by the more extremist views that others take.

To start with an easy example...there is Suzan Cooke. Her politics are pretty much off the deep end on the Left. She seems to want to relive her "glory days" as a hanger-on with the Weather Underground. When someone is that far out there, it is hard to take them seriously. On gender issues, Cooke used to be closer to the center, but has recently become almost as extreme as Mr. Sandeen.

Now, Mr. Sandeen may not be the craziest, or the most radical, but he is pretty much a kook among kooks. He is, quite frankly, is the gift that keeps on giving. I am still laughing at the bit about he pounding the table and telling Cathy Brennan that he wanted to carry "his balls around in a jar..." As she told him, that is not female. I guess we should all be thankful that the rules do not allow doctors to return such items to patients. The world is safe from Mr. Sandeen's testicles...though his penis is apparently still at large.

Over on a blog called "Gender Trender," there is a rather amusing exchange between Mr. Sandeen and someone who posts as "Gallus Mag." Basically, he is trying to get this person to reveal her name to him, and she is trying to get him to understand that a woman might not want certain people, including a kook like him, having that sort of information. Sandeen has repeated shown that he is incapable of comprehending how women feel, and this is a perfect example. Towards the end of the exchange, he refers to Gallus Mag as a "girl," and she objects. Instead of acting in a mature manner, Sandeen tries to defend this very male condescension...

I call women “women”. You’re not brave; you’re not a grown-up. You are a girl, “girl”, b/c you’re a hit and run coward. Seriously, not even brave enough to email me? Truly a height of effeminacy—a brave feminist you just ain’t. L and G done with us?

This, as much as anything, shows how male his brain is. What an incredible bit of drivel, from someone who is not only a man, but more than a bit of chauvinistic pig at that. Oh, and a clue for Mr. Sandeen....he should look up the definition of effeminate...

effeminate 
adjective

(of a man) having or showing characteristics regarded as typical of a woman; unmanly.

Hmmm, "of a man." And Sandeen is tossing that insult at a woman. Yeah, talk about completely clueless. I suppose one could call Sandeen, "effeminate," and technically, that is what he is, but only in the sense that he is a very bad caricature of a woman. Sort of in the vein of various comedians who have dressed up and minced around in what many women would consider to be a highly insulting parody. Except he thinks he is actually fooling people.

On the opposite side of the coin, you have this mostly excellent response to Mr. Sandeen from Marie-France Lease

You know what, Sandeen. If I had been born in the middle of an aboriginal forest — without so much as a pot to piss in or a window to throw it out of — everyone who met me in that forest would have NO DOUBT that I am a woman because I am, in fact, a woman.

I don’t need one or three or fifty sheets of gub’mint paper to “prove” I’m a woman. I AM a woman. For me and for half the human race, it really is just that simple.

While you’re bleating and foaming and tilting about demanding that everyone agree with you? Half the human race? We’re just going about our business trying to survive from cradle to grave as actual, authentic females.

If you were an actual, authentic female, you’d be nodding along with me and thinking, “Truth.” For us, it’s not a game. It’s not an achievement. It’s not a contest. It’s not “fake it till you make it.” It’s not a hobby, an avocation, an obsession, something we do to entertain ourselves — or get ourselves off.

We’re living it from the first sex-identifying ultrasound until we draw our last breath.

So to hell with you and the penis you road in on. We don’t care about your stupid little pieces of paper or your falsies or your pink eye-shades. We’re just trying to make it till the next payday, till retirement, till the Goddess draws us back into Mother Earth for our long sleep.

Go take up another hobby. We’re sick to death of being hounded by delusional dudes.

Most of this I can honestly relate to. I don't buy into the "Goddess" stuff, and shoot, when I was in my mother's womb, they didn't have ultrasound...but yes, I understand whshe is saying, and I know, just as well, that it is all lost on kooks like Sandeen.

Another,Becky Green had this to say....

Buffalo Sandeen,

You’re a man with a man’s height, body frame and a man’s rage. You have an imposing figure and no woman could physically beat you. Who’s to say you won’t start stalking Gallus in person or that you won’t show up at her door and pummel her unconscious? With your words alone, we can see you’re pushy, aggressive, fond of intimidation and all MALE. No woman should ever divulge her personal information to a delusion, emotionally unstable man-child such as yourself.

So take your big, lumbering, hulky body with fake tits and size 13 shoes down to your local strip club and get a beer with the bros while you ogle the gyrating women, because that’s what “real” wo-men, like you, enjoy doing.

A bit heavy handed, but in Mr. Sandeen's case, still dead on.  Granted, some women are tall, have a heavier frame, and can exhibit some serious rage.  But, given what has been said about Mr. Sandeen, by himself, and others, this is pretty dead-on.  He himself has bragged about having a fit of rage because he was called a man.  There is a lot of overlap between men in women in terms of size, so this is a bit extremist.

Then, into this argument, a voice of reason appears... Cassandraspeaks has this to say...

If anyone needs a piece of paper to prove their sex they certainly are NOT that sex. The men like Autumn Sandeen are an insult of the worst order. He is everything GM says he is and more. The list of those like him is as long as your arm. I’ve been fighting those like Sandeen in a verbal and philosophical war for over 25 years. They take advantage of the ignorance about what transsexuality really is in order to obtain their own perverted desires. Good luck in dealing with this freak.

Cassandra is a transsexual, and one would hope that this would add some balance to this discussion, but now we see the other side of the extremist coin rear its ugly head...  someone calling herself, Cynical Cynthia tosses this out...

Yes, Cassandra, your definitions of this arbitrary concept are the most correctest ever; menzes like Sandeen will never understand. You, because of the things you say and think about the arbitrary concept of transsexualism, are completely different to him.

Now, if she had only stopped there, we would have reached a good middle ground.  We could come together, shake hands, and join forces to defend women...  Sadly, she continues with this silliness...

*yawn* – Same shit, different day. Females have vaginas and give birth; males have penises and fertilise eggs which causes females to get pregnant and give birth. Your thoughts on arbitrary principles or identification with either sex will not make you a member of that sex no matter how different you supposedly are to Mr Sandeen. At least, I imagine that your supreme ideas have not given you ovaries, fallopian tubes and a uterus with which to give birth, but do correct me if I am wrong.

What a nasty thing to say, not just because of transsexuals, but because a small, but not non-zero group of women are born without uteruses, fallopian tubes, or ovaries.  They are still women, in many cases, of XX phenotype, but with some other condition.  I can understand that, and can certainly relate to them.  Other women lose these things to disease.  And they grieve for their loss.  Men like Sandeen could care less.  Some of use actually do feel a sense of real loss for what we, sadly, never had, and never will.  I have heard similar remarks from some transgender creeps, but hearing such a flippant remark, from a woman, is just nasty.  

But here we get into the realm of the more extreme of the radical feminists.  Here a person recognizes that someone actually gets it, but then, purely on ideological grounds, turns a deaf ear.  Cynical Cynthia effectively says, "Hey, your right, your different, but I am going to stop thinking because I have to stay true to a point of view that say I have to reject anything you say."  How absurd.

This is at the heart of the radical feminist's arguments with transsexuals.  While they are quite accurate in their assessment of the transgender crowd, which for the most part act like men, they have to fall back on ideology when faced with transsexuals.  Someone like Sandeen is easily dismissed as the man he is.  He makes it oh, so easy.  He waves his paperwork and say "I am a woman," and everyone pretty much laughs and says "Nope, you're not..."  He flounces around in a ridiculous outfit that no real women would wear and says, "Hey, don't you just love #girlslikeus," and everyone sort of snickers, and he gets mad and makes threats.  He chains himself to the White House fence, and says, "I am like Martin Luther King, Jr.," and every grimaces and says, "Well, only in the sense you both were men..."

But, they attack transsexuals on very theoretical basis, claiming that gender is a "social construct," and dismissing legitimate brain studies by lying about them...a tactic that has also been used by some transgender types who know that such studies expose them for the frauds they are.  They make claims like biology is destiny, while effectively denying the only basis on which such a claim can be made.

The radical feminist view is based on the notion that gender is all about socialization, which is, often the same idea claimed by feminists.  We are supposed to believe that it is all about how we are raised.  In the radical feminist view, children born with a penis are raised to be men, and told all the things that seem to come to men so naturally.  And yet, they ignore the fact that even when parents try to raise their children more neutrally, they still exhibit gender typical behavior.  Parents who try to raise their boys to be more gentle are shocked when things don't work out as they expect.  Try to raise a girl to be more masculine, and she might shock you.  And do they really think that they can just ignore situations like mine, where my father made very effort to "beat and/or shame the sissy out of me?"  Now, sure, someone like Sandeen, who spent twenty years in the military, proudly, and successfully serving, as a man, in a very male environment, before, as he neared the time he would retire, only then began to show some signs of what was to come.  Sandeen is a typical of the sort of man who hides a fetish for a long time, and then has it come out late in life.  He is able to easily assimilate as a male, before finally deciding he is going to enjoy his little hobby. 

 I, on the other hand, like many, never fit in as a man.  I always stood out.  I was seen, as I have said, as a "defective male."  I was like the classic comedy trope...the woman who dresses up as a man, to infiltrate some group of men, and who is either immediately spotted, and subjected to  playful torment, or for even more laughs, initially succeeds in her disguise, but keeps slipping up, creating more and more humor.  In short, I stuck out like a sore thumb, and often had people people comment on that fact.  I learned to laugh it off, but I knew people wondered what was going on.

On a website called Transgender Tropes, which sets out to refute said "tropes," there is this comment:

“Transgenderism is based on the idea that gender traits, characteristics, emotions and behaviors ARE inherently tied to one’s biological sex (Biology IS destiny), and they seek to reconcile their own diversity from gender norms by altering their biology to match the traits they view as incongruent with their physical sex. This is actually a REVERSAL of the idea that biology isn’t destiny. What they are saying is that gender IS biologically determined. And if they fail to conform to sex based gender norms they must alter their biology as much as possible to at least conform cosmetically to their gender essentialist beliefs. This is opposite to the idea of transgressing biological imperative (nature) with socialization and free will (nurture).”

Actually, this is rather odd, and quite inaccurate statement.  First off, it is not remotely accurate to attribute this to the transgender crowd.  They tend to claim that sex and what they call gender, are so separate as to be completely unrelated.  In fact, they often claim that gender is, effectively not only a choice, but is almost a mood.  That one can be a woman one day, and a man the next, and perhaps even none of the above on yet another day.  And that each whim must be accepted as totally and equally valid.

Ironically, even as the radical feminist reject the idea of "brain sex" (as, ironically do many of the more radical transgender extremists) they actually seem to adhere to exactly such an idea with a tenacity that matches that of some among the religious right.  And, in complete ignorance of scientific studies that show otherwise.

Of course, for the transgender crowd, it is really all about the trappings.  Like most women, I enjoy getting dressed up for certain occasions.  But, day to day, I dress like, well like what I am, a geeky woman.  Most days that means what I guess you would call "mom jeans," a t-shirt (unisex, since I kind of like them loose) with something clever on it (One of my favorites says "There are 10 kind of people in the world, those who understand binary, and those who don't.") , flats or sneakers, no jewelry, and no make up.  I don't need to dress like Barbara Billingsley in Leave it to Beaver in order to "feel like a woman."  Someone, who was quite transgender, once commented that I dressed like a house wife.  He meant it as a bit of a correction.  I took it as a complement.  Then again, one of my best friends, who is a born woman, is never seen in anything but a skirt.  I used to dress that way more, but I was also working in a an office.  BTW, I don't know if she knows my history or not, but she has never brought it up, and even if she does know, she treats me as a woman.  In fact, I had a doctor a few years ago, who would occasionally make some comment, and realize she had actually forgotten my history, catch herself, and then realize that oh, yeah, it really didn't matter.  

I have, or had, a cousin who well, I have often wondered if she was possibly transsexual.  She was very masculine, always preferred things like cars, and ham radio to the things her mother would have preferred.  She generally dressed in what certainly looked like men's clothes, and she never married.  I don't know if she was a closeted lesbian, or simply repressed her feelings.  She lived in a time, and place, where being a lesbian would not have been acceptable.  I have lost touch with her.  I imagine she has heard about me, and it would be interesting to find out her reaction.  Most of that part of my family has effectively disowned me.  At least as far as I know.  The last time I saw her was at the 70th anniversary of one an aunt and uncle of ours.  She was there, in a dress, looking quite odd.  At the 75th, I was told I would not be welcome after informing people of my transition.  Not long after than, both that aunt and uncle had died.  I haven't had contact with any of them since.  But, I digress...

What I honestly wish the radical feminist could accept is that, yes, one is born a woman, but that what makes one a woman really is in the brain, and it really is determined by hormone levels during development, and that yes, something can go wrong.  In a sense, they do accept transsexual women.  Many of us simply do not wish to be "out, loud, and proud."  We don't wear our histories on our sleeve, and we don't tell people our past, and, perhaps this might surprise some of the radical feminists, they would never guess.  The vast, overwhelming majority of my friends in the real world are what they would call "women born women."  I have friends who are straight, and I have friends who are lesbians.  Some know my past, most don't.  I interact with them, and I am accepted by them, as a woman.  I live as stealth as possible.  If I did not love San Francisco so much, and if I did not have such good friends here, I would possibly consider relocating somewhere and starting over...again.  I lived for a year in small town, where literally no one knew.  It was heaven, but it did not last for reasons that had nothing to do with being transsexual, and I wound up moving 2,000 miles to San Francisco.  To most people who know me, I am simply a very smart, very geeky, middle aged woman.  I have nothing to do with the transgender community.  I occasionally will see someone I know from when I did outreach work, a job I stumbled into somewhat by accident, but which paid reasonably well, and had good benefits.  As soon as possible, I moved to a position that had little to do with the transgender community.  It paid even better, but unfortunately, like a lot of government-funded research work, funding dries up, and you end up being cut.  So, shortly afterwards, was my boss.  I have moved on, and I am in a completely different field.  And no, it really isn't anyone's business.

My point in all this is, we need to find a middle ground.  There are people who actually do have a medical condition that is known, for want of a better term, as transsexualism.  They are rare.  Sandeen and that ilk, are not transsexuals.  They are a lot more people who get off on dressing up and pretending.  As long as they don't cause harm, who cares?  But they really need to learn their limits.  Invading women's space is causing harm, and they need to either voluntarily stop it, or they need to be stopped.  They have a choice.  Transsexuals don't.  They should not receive special rights, and yes, things like access to women's spaces, and being allowed to change their birth certificates while keeping their penises are special rights.

It is time to return some sanity to this whole mess.  It is not likely to happen easily, but I do suspect it will eventually happen.  They are pushing for too much, and the backlash is beginning.  And all the while, I will be here, in the middle, watching it all, and doing what I can to help restore a least some reason before it is too late.

Crowing Like Banty Roosters....Again

Well, the transgender kooks are beside themselves with joy at the prospect that a group of radical feminists may lose the venue in London, England where they plan to hold a conference called RadFem2013. Now, the article about this blames the problem on "men's rights activists." It is not clear if this actually refers to a group of men, who identify as men, and who object vehemently to feminism, or if this is a rather apt description of a bunch of transgender kooks, of the same ilk as Mr. "Autumn" Sandeen, and Mr. "Cristan" Williams who have been having a high old time, crowing about this on Twitter.

 Apparently these kook are just overjoyed at the threats, as well as the criminal acts that have been engaged in to stop this event from taking place. I think that says a lot about the real nature of so-called "trans women."

 To be clear, again, there is a lot of places where I disagree with the radical feminists, but one point where I do agree is that they should not be subjected to harassment, in particular, violent harassment, by a bunch of men.

 If you want to speak out against this outrageous behavior, there is a link at article site above. I sent a message, pointing out that while I have many disagreements with radical feminism, being neither radical, nor particularly feminist, that I do support their right to meet in peace, and to admit who they choose. And, for the record, I would support that same right for kooks like Williams and Sandeen.

Update: I just did a bit of research, and I found out something very interesting.... This year RadFem2013 is not limited to women born women. Of course, men are still not welcome. So, I guess that explains why Williams and Sandeen are still all bent out of shape.... And yes, there really are some rather nasty fellows, who are not trans, who have been harassing the radical feminists.

Another update:  Well, now the transgender banty roosters are crowing ever louder.  There is a claim, supposedly only verifiable by reading an article that is behind a paywall on an English paper's website, that the Irish Center has booted RadFem2013.  So, of course, Mr. "Cristian" Williams is strutting about like a proud rooster, even though the facts are still unclear.  Now, this is classic Williams.  Look at his article, and one would get the impression, which he deliberately gives, that he has a quote that he has obtain directly from David Barlow who is the Irish Center’s Director.  Instead, this is actually a quote that Mr. Williams has pulled from a web site by another transgender kook.  This whole mess is rather silly.  Again, I vehemently disagree with many, if not most of the views of the radical feminists.  But, I do share their disgust at the antics of men like Sandeen and Williams who delight in harassing women, even as they claim, quite falsely to be such.

Yet, Another update:

Mr. "Cristan" Williams remarked of this from Cathy Brennan:

Cathy Brennan ‏@bugbrennanAutumn, getting your balls cut off doesnt make you qualified to talk about feminism #radfem2013 @AutumnSandeen @transadvocate

RadFem 2013 organizer, Cathy Brennan responds to this post in a totally rational, non-hateful way.

Actually, given what Mr. Sandeen said to Cathy Brennan over coffee, about wanting to carry his balls around in a jar, so he could take them to meeting, I would say that yes, that is totally rational, and non-hateful. 

Manly, yes....

Occasionally, some TG type will ask me something like, "Why do you call (some transgender kook) a man?"  Well, here is a classic example...

On his blog today, after a rather silly and typically clueless diatribe about politics, Mr. "Cristan" Williams adds this comment...

Chances are you’re an H-BSer (Zing! Pow! Right in the kisser!)

Now, this is a classic example of a male expressing a fantasy about violence towards women.  I grew up with domestic violence, and quite frankly, it is not a joking matter.  But, as is often with the case of TG kooks, Mr. Williams' true nature, the "inner boy" you might say, pops out, and he is too clueless to even be aware of it.

As, I said..."Manly, yes...and no, I don't like it a bit."

Stick and Stones May Break My Bones....

We all grew up learning that rhyme...  We know the rest.  "But words will never hurt me...."  Well, most of us did, anyway.  The basic idea is that insults are not as harmful as actual, physical attacks.  Unless, of course, you live in the fantasy world of the transgender crazies.  There, you start talking about "violence of spirit."  Or, at least you do if you are "Autumn" Sandeen and you are trying to elevate yourself as the transgender Martin Luther King, Jr. again.  Yes, Mr. Sandeen is at it again.


In another example of his attempts to look saintly, he has taken on the issue of the transgender fellow who, to quote "Monica" Roberts, "opened a can of whoop ass."  Yes, the same Mr. Sandeen who just about a month and a "two-thirds full cup of an iced, decaffeinated hammerhead."  Do you ever get the feeling that Mr. Sandeen is a bit obsessed about coffee?  I mean, really, do we need that much detail?  Including, I might add, the link to the definition of a "hammerhead?"  And let me digress her, and ask why anyone would want a decaffeinated version of such a drink?  


Here is how Sandeen describes his assault:

I have no idea whether this young man “read” me as trans, or recognized me from my being publicly visible as trans in the local media; and it didn’t really matter which of the two it was. What mattered to me is the very fact that he used an anti-transgender pejorative toward me that’s on par with the anti-gay f-word pejorative.
At the moment I heard and felt the sting of those words, I flashed red. I took the lid off my iced coffee and threw it in his face. While doing that, I said, “That’s for calling me thing.” Then I walked past – having noticed the young man had a stunned look on his face as I turned my back on him. I guess he expected me to lower my head in shame, obviously not knowing that I identify myself as being “Trans and Proud.” I felt good about my behavior until I realized I’d given into aggression and retaliation. I did the man no real harm, and I didn’t engage in behavior that the young man didn’t on some level deserve … but that’s not the way I want to behave when confronted with hate.

…In each of those two situations, I saw that I’m not always the moral person I see myself as being, but instead am someone who, in flashes of anger, doesn’t live up to her own standards of tolerance, patience, love and understanding. For me, I need to stop weaponizing my coffee and start thinking before I act in anger. Darkness can’t drive out darkness – only light can do that. I want to be a light.

First off, given the details he provided, I have to wonder if Sandeen's real regret is that he lost his precious coffee.  Second, it apparently never occurs to Sandeen that he should be glad that the "young man" didn't open his own can of whoop ass.  Clearly, Sandeen acted like a male, and escalated the situation, because, after all, he is "Trans and Proud....and apparently not very bright."  In the original version of this, he included one other detail...there were three young men standing there.  Now, a woman would be more cognizant of her safety.  A man, and Sandeen is all man, wouldn't think about that.  He is lucky he didn't become a martyr for this years "Day of Remembrance."

Well, Mr. Sandeen has apparently seen the light!  He goes on to say:

Thinking through how I’ll respond when I’m intentionally misgendered or called a pejorative in the future — as I’m absolutely sure I’ll be intentionally misgendered or called a pejorative in the future — I’ve decided that I’ll turn to person who engages in violence of the spirit and say “May God bless you, and may your days be filled with peace.” 

Setting aside, for the moment, the fact that misgendering Sandeen would be to refer to him using female pronouns, I suppose this is an improvement over his previous actions, which included cyber-stalking me.  Funny how he has not owned up to that one.  I guess that wasn't bad enough to tarnish his "halo."


If you read the original article by Sandeen, entitled "I’ve got coffee; and I’m not afraid to use it," you will find that it reads less like a mea culpa, and more like a boast.  If nothing else, the title shows he really doesn't get it...


The simple bottom line is, no insult justifies violence, even if you are silly enough to call the insult "violence of spirit."  As I have said many times, I don't take responsibility for other people's bigotry.  Shoot, I am tired of men like Sandeen trying to co-opt the experience of true transsexuals.  I don't care to be referred to as transgender, and find it highly insulting....but I am not going to go out and "open a can of whoop ass" because someone calls me that.  And I have been actually misgendered, and almost every time it has been deliberate and malicious, it has been by a member of the "transgender" community.  The one exception?  A guy I had met, and broke up with.  When I told him I didn't want to see him again, he tossed that at me.  And?  And, I just walked away laughing.


Yes, there is one other point that needs to be made.  I am secure in my identity.  I am a woman, and like any woman who gets called a man, my response is to consider the source, and realize that the person is not worth bothering with.

 

My, How Butch!

The Huffington Post is all a twitter over a story out of New York about a "transwoman" beating up a man who call him a woman.  In another words, the dude goes ballistic and acts like a man because, well, some guy called him a man while he was decked out in his feminine finery.  Okay....


This is a perfect example of the bizarre transgender mindset that imagines that they are perfect examples of the finest examples of female behavior, while in reality they act just as they did as men.  It reminds me of the story I read once about some contractor in Texas who announced to his employees that he would be "transitioning" to become a woman.  The next day, he came in dressed as a woman, sat down at his desk, plopped his size 14 pumps up on the desk as he always did, and pulled out his usual cigar.


Of course, this criminal act has found considerable favor in the transgender community.  None other than "Monica" Roberts, of TransGriot is thrilled over this act of male bravado.  Yes, he of the massive "neoclit," his term for his penis, had this to say:

It's not a good idea to get someone pissed off at you who not only has a little more strength than the average cis female, but is an estrogen based lifeform to boot.

Roberts forgets to mention that this person also has the mind of a man.  The reference to estrogen shows Roberts' cluelessness.  In a true transsexual, estrogen has a calming effect.  In a man, it causes other effects, which may lead to problems like depression.

You see a male brain is wired for testosterone.  A female brain is wired for estrogen.  In a true transsexual, the brain reacts well to the estrogen.  In a male brain, the estrogen mostly causes depression.  It does not have as much of calming effect, though it is probably not going to cause aggression.  I am not sure what Roberts is trying to claim, but in any case, he is, as usual, blowing smoke.

And, it should be kept in mind that many transgender people adjust their hormone intake to avoid losing the ability to have an erection.  "Functional" transgender prostitutes are in high demand among men with a desire to be penetrated by a "woman."  Yes, it is all rather bizarre, and does not completely make sense.  But there are men who seek out men who crossdress who are willing to engage in active anal sex.  And a man willing to perform such a sex act would probably also be inclined to react violently to an insult.


Sadly, the LGBT community seems to be embracing this criminal act.  This will probably result in more such incidents.  We already had "Autumn" Sandeen bragging about throwing coffee at at someone who called him a man.  Well, it was supposed to be an apology because Sandeen was not acting like Martin Luther King, Jr.  but it was really more about bragging.  And now this.  One has to wonder, again, do these people think they are above the law?

Remembering Their Dead

Well, here we are...another November 20th, and another round of posts on all the transgender blogs about how this is the "Transgender Day of Remembrance."  Yes, it is time to celebrate all the honored dead, who sadly, in most cases, did something really stupid.


Now, don't get me wrong.  I am not engaging in blaming the victim.  No one deserves to die, but in most of the cases of those who are honored and even near worshipped each year the victim could have, and yes, should have, taken steps to avoid being murdered.  It is just common sense.


And every year, the transgender extremists seem to go out of their way to discourage people from showing said common sense.  After all, they believe it is their absolute right to act as they wish, and expect people to, well, suck it up.  Unfortunately, no matter how much they believe in such a right, and no matter how much such a right might exist, reality says if you are not careful, you may end up dead.


If you are a pre-op, or you are a crossdressing male who belongs to the "They Will Take My Penis When They Pry My Cold Dead Fingers From It" club, and you become involved with a man who does not know your situation, and you let him "discover" your little secret without warning, then you run a significant rise of violence.  It may be wrong, and hey, you may even live in a jurisdiction where the "trans panic" defense is not allowed, but what does that matter if you wind up seriously injured or dead?  But hey, you will be honored on the next Nov. 20th.  


I do wonder if some of those who die are not subconsciously looking for release.  I do wonder if they are suicidal.  I understand the temptation that one might feel to seek out companionship.  But one has to be careful.  Taking chances is stupid.  Letting a man discover your penis without warning is very likely to end badly.  He is probably not going to be delighted to discover you are a male, no matter how often you call it a "neo-clit."  He is likely, at best, to reject you, and at worst, to engage in violence.  


If you have to reveal, do it in a public place, but one where there is enough privacy that he is not going to be shamed.  Remember, no matter how "out, loud, and proud," you are, he may not share you beliefs.  


And also ask yourself, is it worth your life to engage in sex work?  There are other options.  It is NEVER your only option.  It may seem an appealing choice, but is it worth your life?  Most who engage in sex work wind up using drugs to dull the pain, and then they find that they have to do more sex work to afford the drugs, which leads to more pain, that requires more drugs....well, it just gets worse and worse.  Is it really what you want?


If you are truly transsexual, it is a matter of transition or die.  If you are transgender, if you want to hang on to your maleness while pretending to be a woman, you really need professional health, and you really need to consider if your little hobby is worth dying for.


But seriously, those who do die are not martyrs, and while they should be mourned, they don't deserve the near worship they receive.  They should be seen as tragic examples of what not to do.

A Busy Sunday...

Wow, so many issues, so little time...


No, seriously, there are some trivial things that all merit a response, but none of which are really so major as to warrant an individual post.  So, let's begin....


First, we have the silliness that has erupted around A. G. Casebeer's violent threats that were posted on uber-bigot "Monica" Robert's Facebook Page.  Mr. Roberts pulled the page as soon as the controversy began, but fortunately it was preserved for posterity by Dana Lane Taylor.  Well, "Autumn" Sandeen has now posted about how Casebeer and Mr. Roberts have apologized for the nasty remarks.  Well, actually, they appear to have posted some rather insincere sounding remarks that sound more like they are sorry they got caught.  But the real story is about how "Monica" Helms reacted to a comment from CathrynP, a transsexual who has long been a major thorn in the side of the transgender extremists.  Mr. Helms, as only he can do, goes off.

Yeah, right!

Whine, whine, whine.  You have hated Monica for as long as you have hated me, because she sees you for what you really are, and have pointed out your lies on several occasions.  You can't stand it when people see right through you.  You have even threaten her and Dawn Wilson to the point where they had to report YOU to the authorities.  You are the last person on the planet to call for stripping someone of anything.  You need only to look in the mirror to see the one person who has spread more hate then the other Cathy, Monica and AC could ever do together.  I may get called out for this comment, but someone has to point out your blatant hypocrisy.

I'm ready for my card, Autumn.

by: MonicaHelms @ Sun Aug 14, 2011 at 08:13:20 AM CDT

Now, CathrynP replied very calmly, pointing out that Mr. Helms is basically lying.  So, how does Mr. Sandeen react?  Well, as usual, he "drops a card," but warns both Mr. Helms (who regularly violates the rules at Pam's House Blend without any real fear of ever being booted, and CathrynP who didn't really violate any reasonable rule.  Another example of Mr. Sandeen's efforts to censor those he disagrees with, while allowing the worst sort of behavior from friends like Mr. Helms.  And of course, a later nasty remark by Mr. Roberts, who seems incapable of much else, doesn't even seem to warrant notice.

Our next minor issue is yet another hilarious post by "Cristan" Williams.  Mr. Williams is all upset because his silliness is being exposed and ridiculed both here and elsewhere...in spite of his stupid "facepalm" attacks.  I guess we are supposed to be so devastated by those that we just curl up and fade away.

Now, Mr. Williams claims he has never tried to force "separatists" to join the TG movement.  I suppose in his usual style of debate this claim can be supported, but an examination of his posts show just how silly that claim really is.  He has attacked what he calls "TS separatists," mocked them, and tried, desperately, to refute their positions.  Not really the actions of someone who doesn't "care if they don’t want to identify as being part of any specific community."  A simple suggestion....at least for those who haven't drank the same "Flavor-Aid" (it wasn't Kool-Aid they drank at Jonestown).  Read his remarks, and ask yourself where he is coming from.  If you don't agree with me, that is fine.  If you do...well, then join me in a good laugh at his absolute silliness.


This, of course, is typical of the semantical games that Mr. Williams engages in.  He thinks himself far more clever than he remotely is.


Then, having hit Dana with yet another "facepalm" (Dana, I feel your pain) he goes on to attack me again, accusing me of lying about his comments about bathrooms.  Apparently when he talked about how many women have attacked other women in the ladies room he wasn't really suggesting that women are just as much of a threat, if not more of a threat, as men...uh, I mean transgender "women."   


Let me make three points here in response to Mr. WIlliams' silliness:

1. I have made it clear that I think pre-op transsexuals should be allowed access to women's restrooms, provided that they actually are pursing surgery, taking hormones, and that they are sufficiently feminized that they can enter a women's bathroom without looking like a man in a dress.  And provided that they conduct themselves in a proper manner.  I would not extend this privilege to transvestites(both part-time and full-time), gender queers, drag queens, so-called non-ops, etc.  Put another way, unless you are actively pursuing the removal of your penis, and the creation of a vagina, stay out of the ladies room.
2. The real issue with men in women's space is not so much safety, as privacy.  Men, as in transvestites, are unwelcome.  The vast majority of women see the restroom as a place they can go and get away from men.  This is sort of ironic, since "privacy" is the basis for many arguments made by people like Mr. Williams.  The right to privacy is what prevents states from going after gays for engaging in sex, and it is the basis for abortion rights.  Personally, I agree with the first, but not the second.  Privacy is an important right, but life trumps privacy.
3. Mr. Williams tries the silly ploy of suggesting that "trans men" would be forced into the ladies room.  What a load of crap.  First off, after about six months of hormones the average FTM has no problem passing as a man.  Second, men do not have the issue with privacy that women do.  They are not likely to feel threatened by a sufficiently transitioned FTM.  In the relatively short period that they are changing, it is not too much to ask that they use reasonable discretion and try not to freak people out too much.

No, if Mr. Williams wasn't suggesting that women are as much of a threat as men, I would love to know what he was trying to suggest....  Oh, he does throw the 14th Amendment around a lot, clearly having absolutely no idea what it means.

The final issue this Sunday is the silliness out of Cuba.  In a very bizarre story, we are told that a gay man has married a transsexual woman.  Now, granted, there are some cultural differences with regard to sexuality between Anglo and Latino cultures.  Many passive gay males in such cultures can avoid some stigma by adopting a feminine persona and presentation, but it is extremely rare for them to actually go so far as surgery.  Now, it is possible that the "bride" in this case succumbed to pressure from society and had the surgery.   I knew one person who was clearly ambivalent about surgery, but who stated that her family wanted her to have it, so she was going to.  I recently heard that she had the operation. It will be interesting to see what comes of this.

It is also possible that the gay community in Cuba is simply using this as a ploy to get attention.  The "bride" arrived holding a gay pride flag.  And the groom has AIDS, so I suspect he does not expect it to be long before death.  

The simple bottom line is, gay men do not generally marry transsexuals, at least not for love.  I suppose if one felt pressured to marry that might be preferable to a natal woman, but this whole thing seems very questionable to me.