Well, duh!

I am always amused by some of the silliness of the transgender extremists, but sometimes the best stuff comes when they miss a simple point.  For example, in a rant about a professor who objects to male crossdressers in the women's room, "Autumn" Sandeen makes the following comment:

This is Prof. Stark stating that trans women aren't really women, and that she approves of discriminating against trans women because she is afraid of people she calls "men who dress as women." This too is Prof. Stark publicly stating that trans women are all potential restroom predators, and that she wants to limit the civil rights of trans people because of her unfounded fears.

I have news for Mr. Sandeen, "trans women" are NOT really women.  Women are women, if you feel the need to qualify it with a word like "trans" then no, you are not talking about women.  Mr. Sandeen is one of those who thinks that sex is meaningless, and that gender is determined by a whim.  Put on a dress, and you become a "woman," albeit a "trans woman," but in Sandeen's fantasy world, entitled to all the privileges of full womanhood, including the right to demand that women put up with your presence in the women's room and even to be able to expect people to overlook the fact that you have a penis if you are in a space where nudity is the norm.

Now, like any survivor of HBS, I went through the period of being pre-op, and yes, I had to use the women's room while still physically a male.  But, unlike the Sandeens of the world, I did not just force my way in, demanding acceptance.  At first, I would try to find a place that was the least likely to be in use by anyone else.  Then, as I became increasingly aware that I was fully accepted as a female, I started using more public facilities.  But, for a time, I was keenly aware of the feelings of other women.  The last thing I wanted was to cause a scene, both for my sake, and more importantly the sake of other women.

Sandeen shows no such sensitivity.  He only cares about his rights and those of other transgender people.  The feelings of women are of no concern to him.  They are expected to smile, and welcome men into their world.


It is completely lost on Sandeen, and his fellow men, that they are not, and will never be, women.  He is joined in his delusions by "Monica" Helms and the kook who calls himself "Dyssonance."  All three are a major cause of the problems that currently affect transsexual and HBS women.  Of course, when this is pointed out to them, they resort to denials, distortions, and insults.  Heaven help anyone who dares challenge them.  They are, after all, not only women with penises, but women with penises who are in no hurry to be rid of said organ.  I know that Sandeen and Helms have claimed to be surgery tracked, but they seem to be more excuse tracked.  They will have surgery when it is handed to them on a platter...maybe...


But in the meantime, they will be coming to a women's room near you.

Bullied to Death?

Recently, the hot topic on the LGBT blogs has been the shocking number of teenagers who have committed suicide as a result of bullying.  Of course, the focus has been on attempting to portray this as something caused by the "right wing."  But there is a problem with that.  Bullying is nothing new.  I was bullied as a child, as I imagine almost every transsexual was.  And I have been bullied as an adult.  The biggest difference is that the bullies today are "cyber-bullies" and are easily ignored.  A kill file is a wonderful thing.  They continue to rant, and I never see them.  On the rare occasion someone responds to them, and quotes them, I have learned that they want to imagine that I am really still reading their hatred, which only shows just how disturbed they really are.  But I digress.

There is no denying that there has been a rash of suicides linked to bullying.  And as I said above, the LGBT blogs have been largely trying to make it sound like this is the fault of the Right...that nebulous bogey man that includes anyone who dares disagree with even the most radical of the LGBT.  But what is really going on?  

I will be the first to admit, I don't know the specific reason for all of this.  I will start by pointing out that it is not limited to LGBT youth.  Suicides related to bullying have increased overall.  It is not an LGBT problem.  And I don't believe it is caused by an increase in bullying.  Bullying has always existed, probably as long as humans have been around.  So, why is there this increase in suicides?

It is something that needs to be studied.  It is a well established fact that suicides often seem to happen in clusters.  It can become something of, dare I say it, a fad.  I remember reading of a rash of suicides in one institution that began with someone hanging their self on a certain coat hook.  After a number of men followed suit, the hook was removed, and the suicides stopped.  In a similar manner, as teenage suicides resulting from bullying become publicized, other teenagers will feel the need to follow suit.  And the more it happens, the more it is likely to happen.

And that is scary,  What is worse, is that the LGBT blogs will probably continue to fuel this phenomena, if only because they will see this as a means to attack those they oppose.  I fear that things will get far worse before they get better...and that is only if they get better.  There have been a few attempts to fight back, but they have been rather weak.  The scary thing is, the victims become martyrs for a cause, and this may even encourage others to see suicide as not only the answer, but as sort of honorable act.  It isn't.  The honorable act would be to stand up to the bullies and refuse to give in,  And worse, the bullies don't seem to be shamed by causing someone's death.  There have been cases where they even showed up at funerals to gloat.

Something very disturbing is going on.  The most extreme of the LGBT blogs are trying to use the deaths of teenagers by suicide as a club to beat up anyone who disagrees with them.  Somewhat predictably, Suzan Cooke has attempted to rewrite the past and claim that when she started her blog she "laid down the law to the 'HBS/Classic Transsexual; that their name calling wouldn’t be permitted on this blog."  Never mind that we started her blog she tried to identify with the "HBS/Classic Transsexual."  It was only after it became obvious that Cooke had become an apologist for the worst of the gender fascists that the "HBS/Classic Transsexual" began to reject her extremist positions and that she suddenly turned on those she used to align with.

Oh, and never mind that Cooke as been known to bully people quite a bit.  I recall her attacking one post-op as a "skin transvestite" because that person stayed with her wife.  That, apparently, was before Cooke took up with another post-op and was reborn as a long-time lesbian.  But again, I digress.

Bullying happens on both sides of the political spectrum.  And the term "bully" is often used as a club word.  If they don't like it when someone speaks the truth, they just call that person a "bully."  That way they can avoid dealing with facts.  And sometimes the people quickest to call another a bully are the true bullies.  I know of one well known net-kook, who has threatened me with being "outed," and who has even made actual attempts to cause me real harm off the Internet, who loves to scream bully when I stand up to him.  And this same kook has gone after a number of others.

No, something is going on.  And it is probably going to get worse.  Part of the reason it will get worse is because others will try to take advantage of it.  Part of the reason is because there are some real problems that need to be addressed. And part of the reason is simply that these things have to run their course.  

I don't really have the answer.  I do know it will have to involve teaching kids that suicide is not the answer.  I know it will have to do with changing values.    And I know that the answer, strange as it may seem, will not be to, to silence the bullies.  First off, that won't work...and any attempt might make things worse, and second, as I said, there have always been bullies.  Something else is going on.

Finding a Problem Where None Exists...

You have to love the kooks over at Bilerico.  They tend to be one of the worst sites for censorship, but now they have a whiney article about how Google Instant is censoring certain words...

• Bilerico - Allowed (damn right)
• Gay - Allowed
• Homosexual - Allowed
• Queer - Allowed
• Dyke - Allowed
• Lesbian - blocked from Google Instant
• Transexual - blocked from Google Instant
• Transvestite - Allowed
• Tranny - blocked from Google Instant
• Faggot - blocked from Google Instant
• Fag - Allowed
• Bisexual - blocked from Google Instant

The problem is, none of those words are actually censored.  They may not show up as an "instant result," but you can still search for them.

Now, for those who don't understand how Google Instant works, it "suggests" terms you might be searching for.  For example, if you type in a T, the first word that is suggested, at least when I tried, was "target."  Add an R, and it goes to another list, etc.  The closer you get to the word you actually want, the greater the chance it will show up.  If you are searching for "tranny," it won't suggest that word, but it will allow you to search for it.  So, it is not remotely censored, it is just not a suggested word.

I mean really, are the people at Bilerico really that stupid?  There is no actual censorship at all.  Unlike, of course, Bilerico

Oh, and by the way, "transexual" is an incorrect spelling, used by some for political purposes, but technically incorrect.  You can search for it, but you mostly get links to articles on transsexualism, and a few where that particular spelling is used.

Almost, but not quite...

Suzanne Cooke, who has become a major apologist for the more extreme elements of the transgender movement sometimes comes close to having a clue, but then misses it completely. In a post yesterday she had one of those moments.  At the end of an article by Thomas Hammarberg, Commissioner for Human Rights for the Council of Europe, Cooke makes the following comment:

I swear sometimes it seems as though transgender folks are opposed to sex reassignment surgery and want to end it the same way they insist on erasing Transsexual in the name of some imagined unity of identity under the rubric of “Transgender as Umbrella”.

This is bad form and discourages people with transsexualism from acting as part of a coalition on issues that concern all.

It is a denial of our needs and has been one of the major causes of the TS/TG War that has gone on for some 20 years now.

Sometimes, I swear I would be better off devoting energy to tree hugging and general worker’s rights issues.

Class War, not just for the rich anymore.

So close, and yet so very far.  No, it is not really "sometimes" and no, it is not a matter of "seems like."  There are some major leaders of the transgender movement who have publicly spoken out against SRS and who have made very negative comments about those who seek it.  Some of these same people are good friends of Cooke.  True, some who have made such remarks now claim to be surgery-tracked, but they also never make progress towards SRS, and always have an excuse why they have not had surgery and why there is no clear plan for them to have it any time soon.

The simple fact is, transgender is not remotely the same as transsexual, but the transgender crowd wants to use transsexuals to further their own radical agenda of deconstructing gender.  This is exactly why many of us continue to openly, and loudly oppose anything remotely connected to the transgender model.  And yet, Cooke still seems torn between that agenda and her rather bizarre ideas about transsexualism.

Cooke is so determined to be a stereotypical radical that she is more comical than anything else.  It becomes really impossible to take her remotely seriously, but sadly, some still think her some oracle of transsexual truth.

Hopefully, they will eventually get a clue...

The Truth Finally Comes Out

I have written several times about the Mike Penner/Christine Daniels case, usually in response to some drivel from "Autumn Sandeen."  And Sandeen has usually written in response to an article about Penner.  But a new article in the L.A. Weekly has come out that sheds new light on what led Penner to take his life.  And yet, Sandeen is oddly quiet.  Why, all of a sudden, are we not subjected to another round of hand wringing by Sandeen.  Why is he not telling us what wonderful friend Christine Daniel was, and how sad he is over the loss of this dear friend?


Perhaps because the truth is out, and it turns out that we now know some new facts about what drove Penner to suicide.


The primary factor was one that I can understand.  Penner de-transitioned because he missed his wife.  He could not deal with the end of his marriage.  Years ago, I went through a similar time.  There were two differences.  In my case, my ex-spouse and I stayed together and I had time to work through my issues and realize that being true to myself was more important.  In the end, we remain friends.  Penner's marriage was beyond repair, and even after he returned to being "Mike" his marriage could not survive.


But the secondary factors are why I am not surprised that Sandeen has ignored this new insight into what happened.  There are some interesting quotes from Penner, made at the time he was still living as Christine.  For example, there is this one, sent to Susan Stanton who had complained about Christine's comments in a blog:

"I think what I'm doing is correct. If you've got a problem with it, it's your problem. ... I'm a real woman who loves makeup and clothes, shoes. A woman, not a trans-anything who needs to quote-unquote represent some undefined community. For the first time in my life, I'm being true to myself, and my true self loves makeup, clothes, shoes."

That is a very telling comment.  Especially in light of another comment where she said that she was:

"overwhelmed by everything and everyone. I feel as if I am being used as a pawn by the trans community (and maybe theTimes as well). I have been close to tears many times. ... I am flat-out exhausted."

This confirms what I long suspected.  Penner was used, and to a large extent abused, by the transgender crowd.  But Penner was not remotely transgender.  Penner was a late transitioning true transsexual.  He had fought his feelings as long as he could, but when he finally gave in, he had to face the loss of his wife.  That was too much for him to deal with.


In this article, we also learn, for I believe the first time anywhere, that Penner had scheduled surgery with Marcie Bowers.  In fact, the event that triggered his decline was when Bower's office contacted him about delaying his surgery for a week.  


I found Bower's comment that having surgery would have saved Penner's life to be highly questionable.  Penner needed to work things out with his ex-wife.  He needed to reach closure over the loss, or he needed to decide that his marriage was more important.  If he had reached the first, he would have moved on to surgery.  If he had decided the second, then it would indicate he was not a transsexual after all.  But until this was worked out surgery should have been out of the question.  

You Can't Have it Both Ways

It has been a while since I posted here.  LIfe has been busy.  I have someone new in my life, and that has taken up some of my time.  I also have other things going on, and besides that, there has not been much worth writing about.  Then, yesterday, I saw a post by notorious transgender activist Suzan Cooke and decided I had to say something.


Yes, I know, Cooke is adamant that she is not transgender.  She insists that she is not under the umbrella.  But, the simple fact is, Cooke has, as they say, been guzzling the Kool-Aid for sometime, and is transgender in all but name.


The latest silliness is Cooke's adamant assertion that "gender is a social construct."  That, of course, is straight out of the radical transgender playbook.  The bottom line is that it means that gender is essentially a choice, that transsexuals are not really what they say they are, and that, given enough "social construction," transsexuals can be "cured" (i.e. be beaten into accepting their birth "gender."  Of course, Cooke would probably deny all of this, but hey, facts are facts.


What we call "gender" is actually inherent, and immutable.  It is the sexual differentiation of the brain.  It is well established by science, a fact that is denied vehemently by some in the same way that religious fundamentalists deny proven science about other issues.  Of course, the more radical transgender activists don't want gender to be inherent.  They adamantly claim that gender is a choice, and not inherent.  One's sex is what one says one sex is.  


I did not choose to be a transsexual.  I chose to deal with something that as present from birth.  If one thinks that gender is a choice, they must either be blind, or have a very odd definition of gender.  Anyone who has been around a group of transgender people, observing those who are clearly men in dresses, pretending both poorly and cluelessly, to be women, would have no illusion that "choice" is involved in true transsexualism.


It is not about stereotypes.  It is about something inherent, and not easily defined.  There are obvious differences in males and females that are not affected by socialization.  Some behavior can be modified, but there are things that cannot be.  And those things are what are truly gender.  And since Cooke denies this, she sides with the transgender crowd, as well, ironically with both radical feminists who hate transsexuals and the religious right who wish to deny our reality.

Failure to Learn

Once again, the sad and tragic story of Mike Penner, aka Christine Daniels has resurfaced.  The June issue of GQ has an analysis of what happened, and why.  And, of course, "Autumn" Sandeen has engaged in a self-indulgent story about the whole thing.

Much has been written about Penner, his transition to Christine, his return to presenting as a male, and his suicide.  I have written on it myself.  But the question of what happened remains. 

The more I have read about Penner, the more I have come to wonder if, perhaps, he was the extremely rare example of a true transsexual that manages to hold out for almost fifty years with no real outward signs of gender issues.  I don't know much about his life prior to transition.

He claimed to have made the decision in order to survive.  That makes me wonder if he was legitimate.  On the other hand, he seems to have had a very successful career up to that point, which raises doubts.  If one is truly transsexual, the chances of having a successful life as a male or pretty much nil.  You might be able to fake it for short periods, but to be successful in a male dominated field like sports writing without facing serious problems seems highly unlikely.

But, if Penner was truly transsexual, then there is less question as to what happened.  If he was a true transsexual, then his death can be laid at the feet of the transgender activists who tried to use him.

Penner made a very public transition.  If he was truly transsexual, this would have been torture.  He would have wanted nothing more than to simply be a woman.  But instead, he had to face being publicly paraded about as a trophy for the transgender activists who claimed to be his friend.  They could use him, without considering the effects their use had on him.

For most transsexuals, the improvements in their life are the proof that they are transsexual.  But most transsexuals do not make public transitions.  Transgender types embrace the public.  They get what they really seek, to be "women with penises," or "women who were once men," or even "men pretending to be women."  Most have no desire to give up their penis, and none have any desire to fully give up their maleness.

So, what if Penner was a true transsexual?  If so, he should have been counseled to consider starting over.  It would not have been easy.  He might have had to walk away from a successful career.  At the very least, he might have had to move to another state, to a smaller place, and start over writing something other than sports.  It would not have been perfect.  He would be taking a risk, and it would require that someone would have to know, but it could have been done.

Or he could have simply left his old life completely behind.  He could have done what I did.  He could have found an entry level job, downsized his life, and slipped quietly into his new life.  But, of course, the transgender community would have none of that.  Penner would be their poster child.  Unfortunately, he couldn't take it.  It was not the life he wanted, even though I am sure they told him it was the only way.

But, of course, the activists and their dupes won't learn.  In truth, I doubt they even understand what they should learn.  When the next chance comes, they will do it all again.  And if that person dies as well?  Well, there is nothing the transgender community loves as much as a good martyr. 

They just refuse to learn, no matter what the damage.