Exposé

Some of the transgender who attack us seem to think the women here and elsewhere who oppose the transgender lie are engaging in some kind of old-school activism. They want to believe that we are forming some competing movement, or other such nonsense. They like to apply labels like HBS or Taliban, create a faux fight between two arbitrary sides, shout and demean, and basically engage in the sort of politicking that they believe to have been responsible for their “success” in the 90’s. Of course they are wrong.

I basically have two aims with regard to the transgender business. One, I want to provide an alternative viewpoint to the TG dogma that confronts new transitioners as they begin their healing process. The sooner they clear that toxic mess, the sooner they can get through the process. The voice of real women who have come before you telling you that your senses are right about the TG and to stay away from them is a huge help.

In addition to speeding the process in the initial stages of transition, and assuaging guilt for believing your own senses about the sexual fetishists, by exposing the truth I hope to rob the transgender of new recruits. Not recruits from women like us, because we generally know the score and leave of our own accord. But recruits from “gender” philosophy such as the genderqueer who want to use it to challenge society’s rules. If they can see who their so-called allies really are, they may think twice about their priorities and allegiances. The truth is very ugly.

The vast majority of the traditional TG movement are transvestite men.  And transvestism is tied closely with other, possibly more troublesome sexual behavior. What sets the “full time” transvestite apart from the garden variety crossdresser is that the sexual fetish they both share gets completely out of control in the “transgender” transvestite. The reasons behind this are a subject that needs to be studied if these people are going to be helped.

In a past post I wrote about how I hoped for more research into GID, but not because I believe in “gender problems”. Nobody has “gender problems” as such. People like Ron Gold wrote his famous post on this, and indeed everyone in larger society understands this instinctively. So do the transgenders, in fact, and that is why they twist philosophy and turn logic on its head. Gender itself is merely shorthand for a variety of social phenomena; it can hardly be disordered.

The first myth that must be exposed is that surgery creates a transsexual. There are plenty of transvestites who get surgery, and in fact they make up the bulk of the “transsexuals” among the TG. The goal of this sleight-of-hand is to a) excuse their behavior and b) provide a path for the transvestite to live “full time as a woman”. In other words, ready access to their drug of choice. Getting surgery is how the “transgender transvestite” actualizes their fetish and makes it permanent and inescapable. I have to thank an anonymous source for explaining this aspect of the rather puzzling motivations of the “transgender transsexual”. I’m sure more detailed discoveries will be found as researchers delve into the mysteries surrounding fetish and exhibitionism in neurology.

I also believe it will be found that GID, at is called by puzzled researchers, is an amalgam of other already recognized problems, with the veneer of gender laid over the top. It has been suggested to me that the sexual high that transvestites receive from exposing themselves to the public in women’s clothing is like an addiction. And like any addict, they rage and fume when their drug is taken away, hence their attacks on women like us. It is not because we expose them for being men in dresses that they hate us. They do that to themselves all the time- but on their schedule. They want the control of where and when to do the “Gotcha!” moment and bask in the sexual glow, and anyone who would stand in the way of that must be destroyed.

That is why they rage against those who tell the truth about them. That is why they threaten to write an “expose”, their tried-and-true weapon against us- the threat to ruin our lives by trying to “out” us to our communities and destroy our womanhood.

The fact that they are willing to commit this act which, in their own parlance, puts us at risk for violence and death, simply for continued access to their sexual thrill is despicable. It illustrates perfectly just how unbalanced and aggressive they really are. How selfish. How male.

I and the other women here are no stranger to male violence. Cat has written quite a bit about her experiences with these people. And every woman who ever lived has felt the impact of male aggression in their lives, some with horrifying directness. That is why I write these things and put myself at risk in the face of these all too real threats against me. I care about women like me, who have gone through so much just to survive. We few who know the truth must stand up to the men who would abuse us.

We must tell them they cannot, they will not, silence our voices.

Advertisements

163 Responses to Exposé

  1. Zoë Suzanna says:

    My therapist likes to keep drilling into me that true transsexuals from his viewpoint are the ones who have had all the surgeries. I have not agreed with him, perhaps that is why he keeps it up.

    I like that you point out the desire to help those of us beginning transition. As I am relatively a beginner, I was initially taken up the the hoopla the TG people like to infect others with. It took yours and other blogs for me to finally step back and think for myself and see what’s going on. Thank you for your time and efforts…

    I’m blown away there are people who would like to out us…If I encounter one face to face that is attempting to out me, their face will be rearranged shortly there after.

  2. Leigh says:

    The truth will set you free zoe 🙂

  3. Zoe Brain says:

    In case anyone is interested in an actual dialogue with Ron Gold, there’s one at:
    http://aebrain.blogspot.com/2009/12/ron-gold-on-transgendered-dialogue.html

    There are many people on this site who I respect and who disagree strongly with me in some areas. I’d appreciate comments relevant to the issues from them.

  4. Your site is not safe to comment anymore, without being hounded by TG activists.

    You have ignored the last six emails i sent you.

    Your view, which i used to look forward to eagerly, has developed a strong, emotional-activist bent. Precisely that which turned me off to others.

    i know when to move on.

  5. Joanne says:

    Yeppers: went: looked: puked. Zoe Brain on gender politics 101.

    1. The more times you can fit gender identity into a paragraph the flatter the earth gets.

    2. Never question the gods of arts faculty science – discovering that they practice charlatanism is a burden too great to bear.

    3. The identity paradigm is a proven fact. Evolution is still a theory.

    4. The more times you can fit gender identity into a paragraph the flatter the earth gets.

  6. catkisser says:

    Zoe, when you stick to the science, you do a fine job. When you venture into fantasies that encourage the mentally ill to push their agendas, not so much.

    You also ignored my last attempts to email with you.

    Zoë Suzanna, outing is one of the things the TGs always engage in. There are exactly two different images of me pre-transition on the internet, both from the mid sixties when I was in high school overseas put up by others. If the TGs were able to find them, they’d put them all over the place. I was quite camera shy before I transitioned and all the other images from my childhood that exist are either in my direct possession or were lost during the Iran revolution (long story)

    Still, when I tried, for political reasons, to blog under this name, others outed my actual name. When I got my first decent post-transition job, I was outed by TGs and lost it. When I moved to upstate NY, TGs published my old name here.

    Joanne, I am struck more and more with the parallels behind creationist fundies and TGs when it comes to science and what is and isn’t fact v fiction. Arguing with either trying to reason with them is equally futile. It’s a belief system that defies any fact or challenge.

  7. Joanne says:

    Kiaora Cathryn 🙂

    I’ve drawn the same parallel. More like a fundie cult. The police actions undertaken to continually shore up their beliefs are echoed over and again during the start-up stages of sects. They can be seen in a certain pseudo-science ideology only recently invented by a science fiction author. Its adherents now screaming their outrage at any one who challenges it.

    Then, is it any different from the way Islamists behaved over the prophet cartoons?

    It just seems that the less substance there is, the greater the level of emotional heat. If people are so certain in their faith-based beliefs why do challenges to it bother them so much?

  8. Sara says:

    “It just seems that the less substance there is, the greater the level of emotional heat.’

    I couldn’t agree more Joanne. The recent Gold piece points out the truth of this observation perfectly. I’ve never seen so much hand-wringing, whining, anger, sadness, and child-like hurt than what came out of the “community” after his essay was published. Piece after piece followed: “You Hurt Us”, “What is Trans*”, “Transphobia in the Gay Community”. Bah. Who cares one whit about what the gay community thinks? Oh, that’s right, the tg’s do.

    When it comes to what the majority of gay men think about the “tg” part of the “lgbt”, I’m reminded of what Jack Nicholson said in response to Tom Cruise in “A Few Good Men”:

    Tom: “I want the truth!”
    Jack: “You can’t handle the truth!”

    Q.E.D.

    Sara …

  9. catkisser says:

    Ron Gold, Julie Bindle and even Janice Raymond all share the exact same philosophical underpinings as the TG movement…..universal gender deconstructism. Ron Gold’s delusional and mutilated were almost exactly the same things as many of us have been called by the TG activists.

    The “need” of the TGs for the medical legitimacy of classic transsexuality shows itself clearly when a Gold shows up, it’s about the only time the TGs defend the “insult” to surgical correction, the rest of the time they, themselves, are the one’s hurling the insults.

  10. catkisser says:

    Besides, when you call a bunch of macho type gay men “cissies” you shouldn’t be surprised some of them are going to react badly 🙂

  11. catkisser says:

    Speaking of TG insanity…..check this out!
    http://stopavatarmovie.blogspot.com/2009/12/december-18-2009-international-day-of.html

    I also just watched the “horrid and evil” portrayal of transgender in the Closer episode that aired last week. My reaction to the Beau Bridges didn’t do the research?…..sure looked to me like he did, looks in fact like he spent time with Helms, Abernathey and Sandeen! It was a spot on portrayal of the post op crossdressers I’ve known and the “offensive” comments by the series regulars I personally found funny and completely realistic… and rather than complaining, they should be grateful the treatment was pretty darn sympathetic overall. You can view it as of this morning at TNT’s website.

  12. anoldfriend says:

    Zoe S.
    You need to ask yourself why you are transitioning, if it is to live a normal life in the female half of society than corrective surgery is the natural route to take.

    Zoe B.
    I have to agree with others here, when you stick to the science you do a much better job than the folks over at TG-SI, who had a bigger audience before guzzling the Tee-Gee Kool-Aid.

    Zoe;
    you have to stay away from that Tee-Gee Kool-Aid it will give you brain damage by infecting you with the equivalent of a software virus. Underneath the cult like behavior they exhibit is a host of mind control tactics designed to isolate someone from the mainstream and make them feel marginalized. I have seen people including yours truly be thrown off lists for no reason than exposing the cult like behavior and the mind games played by the likes of Sandeen and Helms to name 2 of the dozen or so of the worst offenders.

    the Ron Gold flap was to test the waters in advance of dumping the Tee-Gees from the GLBQ. When ENDA does finally see debate time and it will be the last time it will be stripped of it’s gender identity provisions and the Tee-Gees will be told to kiss off. This will be done to keep peace within the homosexual community here in the states. Most likely late in 2011 ENDA will be approved by both houses and signed by B.O.

    The Tee-Gee movers and shakers have already positioned themselves as queer, they won’t be thrown under the buss, they will just stop blogging about Tee-Gee issues. One of them will become a “Queer Journalist”, and blog more about her Kat than tee-Gee issues.

    The handwriting is on the wall, all you have to do is look, and read it.

  13. Sibyl says:

    Zoe S,

    I second what was said, they will out you in a second! I dare say we have all had it happen and more than once

    At first, given that they are already out, and so seen by one and all as men in dresses. They will point to you and proudly and loudly say; “I’m exactly like her!” The intended pay off I assume is to reinforce their position they are not being men in dresses but you cannot un-ring a bell and you cannot remove the image of a man in a dress from the minds of the laity. So all that happens is you the unwitting victim get the unexpected pleasure of suddenly joining them in that category… Gee thanks!

    Later when you’ve had enough of this nonsense and pull back from your “friends” (with friends like this who needs enemies?) They WILL get vindictive! How dare she turn her back on us? Does she think she is better that us or something? (Better? No… just different…ohh thems fighting words bitch!) That’s when their outing shifts gears and becomes threatening and malevolent…

    The only way out of it if you are known to them is to slowly disengage and move!

    I know, I’ve been outted by several of them I met in the early days and in each case it was exactly the same plot. I’m just like her, how dare she!

    As for the therapist… Sadly it’s unlikely you will be able to change his mind. Men create their worlds to suit them and their needs are ever so loath to change them! Better you get from him what you need for you and your transition and let him have his fantasy. You know the difference which is the important part and if you know it now. As you grow you will see it ever more clearly!

    Aria,
    Wonderful and very insightful piece and you are so right we cannot and we WILL NOT let them silence our voices any longer! We have been drowned out in their cacophony for way too long and its past time for us to take back what was ours to begin with.

    But I would ask that in the doing we all make a concerted effort to do it as politely as possible. I know just how tempting, having lost my own temper more than once when baited again and again with the same old canards

    “Show me the science, Hater” and my favorite ”Elitist!” Its soooooooo tempting to jump right in there with them and let them have it with both barrels. Who among us easily suffers fools. Particularly when it’s the exact same stupid message over and over and over!

    They can make a Five-year-old with “the whys” look like a lark in the park by comparison. At least with a Five-year-old, their whys, though maddening make sense and can be answered if you have patience. The whys of the TG are not so simple because they don’t want an honest answer. They only want an answer that agrees with their skewed reality

    But no matter how tempting, theirs is a rigged game and the moment we play by their rules, they win and we loose! We only win when we keep to the high ground and calmly state our message and let it be.

    The Dys’s and Helm’s or any of that ilk we encounter so often feed on controversy and negative responses and so will worry the ever loving fool out of you until you’ve have had it and let em have it…both barrels point blank. That’s when they become their most gleeful and dance round chanting how we are haters elitists and transphobic. Still not really clear exactly what that one means when tossed at a woman with a transsexual past, but ill fitting or not, we still get it.

    The point being we have a legitimate message. It is strong, and stands well on its own two feet. All we need to is state it, state it often and let it be… repeating when need be and on occasion, letting the fools get in the last word. After all the words of a fool are still the words of

  14. Aria Blue says:

    So true Sibyl. I’ll have to think on this awhile.

  15. Joanne says:

    CatKisser 🙂

    You said:
    Ron Gold’s “delusional” and “mutilated” were almost exactly the same things as many of us have been called by the TG activists.

    They were the words Charles (Virginia) Prince was using on us sixty years ago.

    The reasons for schism between classical transsexualism and that whole raft of gender role transgressive behaviors that fall under the TG rubric isn’t hard to see.

    Once identity theory is discarded TS and TG are chalk and cheese.

    Problem is that once identity theory is discarded TG’s are toast …

  16. Sibyl says:

    OK, following up on my prior and knowing just how far I’m going out on a limb with all of you. I still gotta do it.

    While it is abundantly clear to me and anyone who has seen them side by side. TG and TS (by this I mean of course the True or Classic High Intensity transsexual) are two very different creatures. They have two very different motivations and therefore two very different results in their “transitions.” I for one cannot simply wave my hand and dismiss them as invalid fetishist per-say and then leave it at that. I think to do this demeans us not them

    How can I call them that when I for one do not in anyway understand them! Honestly do any of us really understand them? Yet they clearly exist, They are out there, They are legion and they are certainly riding our coat tails. Yet might it be they do this simply because they haven’t a clue what else to do! (or perhaps they are mean as snakes I don’t know!) So I ask, How can we draw the line betwixt them and we and say what is what if we do not know what are they?

    I mean what exactly is their origination? Where does this need and compunction of theirs come from. What is it that would drive a man to turn their and their families lives on their ears? What would be the best way for a TG to deal with their issues?

    It may very well be that this is as we have said nothing more than a simple fetish transformed into an obsession as Blanchard also postulates. Or it may be something as pernicious as that which created our female brains in a male body. It may be that they are all autogynophilc men whom must be humored to keep them from suicde. But even that simply begs the more obvious question. What causes it and why to such intensity?

    Come on ladies, all men are fetishists in one way or another. All you have to do is date a few times much less live with one and that becomes very VERY clear! Heck they even brag about it! “I’m an ass-man” one might say, or another, “I’m a tit-man.” “leg-man” “hand-man” “foot-man” and so on… The list of male fetishes about women goes from our head to our to feet, to what we wear or certain behaviors of ours and, well, pretty much thing you can think of that is part of what is woman, can and will be objectified by some man out there, and for him. That one thing really gets his motor running.

    But how many men would risk everything they have, well lots do, but…to sacrifice so much of what makes them men to live a fetish? As I said I do not understand the TG and perhaps I don’t understand men either!

    Blanchard from what I have seen, is the only one who has investigated the TG at all and unfortunately he comes at the entire subject of TG and TS with such a front loading it renders much (Most? All) of his work, while interesting, moot but even there, with his heavy hand, and all the Clark can toss at their targets, apparently psychotherapy does nothing more for them than it does for us.

    So they exist, they and we are as different as night and day, and they are not really helped with most if not all forms of therapy… I’m right back to what the heck are they and what do we do about them?

    Fact is, I am a rather compassionate woman and it bothers me that the TG are here in such numbers and yet in such a limbo. No matter what the cause, they do suffer for their issues and they suffer greatly. Come on ladies you know it’s gotta be harder than hard to be stuck in that nebulous limbo. One spiked heel in what they think is Girl City and the other still rooted deeply in Boy’s Town?

    We all passed through that place (albeit at a dead run like the hounds of hell were behind us) early in transition and from what I remember of it. I would not go back there for all the tea in China!

    So perhaps it is understandable if they are angry at life, society, each other, and us, They got the short end of a stick that only leads to a very raw deal. When I say this I am reminded of one TG I met in Thailand… Dead cat wig, male voice, body and mannerisms, but still, in all, a rather nice person. One whom my heart went out to when I realized this poor person was going back to a shabby basement apartment, no friends or family and worse, whom mon-fri. had to take off the dead cat and become a guy to keep body and soul together. This person’s time in Thailand was the best thing that had happened to him in years and likely, was the last good thing that ever would happen. He was in tears that it was ending while I was chomping at the bit to get out of there as fast as I could… Both of us had our surgeries. Mine so I could get the heck on with life. His so he could live out whatever demon was hounding him into this pathetic life he led. I guess when I read the letters from the TG I see this guy…. Stuck in some hell I cannot fathom and to which I for one can see no real way out.

    Don’t get me wrong! It is IMPERATIVE we draw a clear and distinct line betwixt them and us! Thailand gave me the rare chance to see the two groups side by side and you could not ask for a greater contrast! In that context, there are clearly women whom even when you know their history and why they are there. Your mind simply will not wrap round it. While on the other hand you have the rest, whom for all the world appear and act to be nothing more than sailors with boobs.

    I also fully accept that no one in this is can be a victim unless they choose to be. That those who spout off at us in anger and denial are playing a card that does not have to be played and it is not our place to fix them or make their lives less hard or to take their s**t just because they can dish it!

    The person in the basement apartment was there not by any force but by choices he made just as was his taking off the dead cat five days a week to work at a survival job as a choice. I too have paid dearly for what I’ve gotten and the piper still has not fully collected all his due either. This dance I’m on may mean I’m working to the day I die but if that is the case, I will die whole and sound and with an epithet that lists all the things I have done between now and then save one, as that’s just not important!

    To finish this trip round Robinhood’s Barn… I think we might want to be just a wee bit more compassionate towards them even when that same compassion is not shown to us, It does not serve us well when we toss them into a bucket of invective that may or may not be theirs as we really do not know… If we take the highroad out of this interaction and allow them all the rope in the world. It is they who will hang themselves from it, not us, and in the end, we will be vindicated and our hands will be as clean as the snow two feet deep outside my window!

  17. Leigh says:

    Been there done that sybil …

    in fact, give them an inch and they will take a mile.

    you cannot reason with the tg. Many have tried, hell WE have tried! .. you just as well go tell a gay man to try heterosexual sex. eh . yeah good luck with that.

  18. Zoë Suzanna says:

    @Zoe Brain

    Why do you feel the need to request comments? Is your ego needing a boost? Are you wanting us to congratulate you for engaging Ron Gold and attempt to educate him when it’s obvious in his own words he’s less than enthusiastic about reading your research?

    @Sibyl

    Thank you for your comments. It has made me think about my visibility on the net with regard to pictures.

    @anoldfriend

    I have pondered my need to transition nay correct my birth defect for some time. I’ve done my soul searching for years on end and wondered why I felt so wrong all the time even though the medical community said I was fine.

  19. Leigh says:

    wow!

    Quite a lot there I agree with but more to the point it’s not for me to agree or not. I think our friend here is very confused, not hardly surprising and I think that the attitude is positive except I see some tg think Creeping in there.

    Find out who you are and be careful not to fall into the tg-ghetto. I would recommend talking with aria and Annoymous T girl ..They are both great role models. Good luck and best wishes.

  20. Joanne says:

    Kiaora, GenderQuestioning

    http://www.intersexualite.org/Kerlin.html

    I think your post is courageous and honest. I wish you all the best. I hope you stay in touch. 🙂

  21. Zoe Brain says:

    Zoe – why do I request comments? Because I won’t learn anything from people who agree with me, will I?

    Having a cheering-squad is good for the ego, but does nothing to help me improve my views. For that, I need critics – people who don’t just argue for the sake of arguing, but who have something to say that’s cogent, well-reasoned, and backed up by evidence.

    And I can be utterly certain that some of the commenters here won’t hold back for fear of hurting my feelings.

  22. Zoe Brain says:

    For those who say I’m ignoring their e-mails – please re-post to zoe.brain@anu.edu.au, in case aebrain@webone.com.au doesn’t work.

  23. Stephanie says:

    You are in a quandary, GenderQuestioning, and it is one I recognise. Some of the confusion you feel and some of the things you say are things I felt and said around 3 years ago. And, I suspect, you are just as ensconced in TG-Land as I was back then. Luckily, I escaped. It was just good fortune in some ways – events in my life meant I kind of stumbled into transitioning more or less the classic way and discovered it made sense whereas the TG way was hopelessly nonsensical.

    That would be my advice – realise that what TSs mean by transition and what TGs mean are two entirely different things. For me, anyway, transition was an event. One day last year I signed a Deed Poll, changed my name and my documentation and that was it, from that day hence I started to live, in the eyes of the world, as a woman. Right now I’m jettisoning the past and adapting to a new life. Some time next year I’ll have SRS and that will be it. Transition over.

    For TGs, however, transition is a process, a long, gradual, never-ending process. Things like changing one’s legal status or having SRS become mere options to be considered somewhere along the line. You have surely noticed that TGs are always talking about “going further”. The main concentration is on one’s appearance. Literally anything you do to change your appearance somehow counts as “transitioning”. It’s not about living the normal life of a female, it’s about Becoming a Woman. It’s like they have an ideal image which they are forever approaching but never reach. They are condemned to frustration.

    If you are a woman you will have to transition and BE a woman sooner or later however scary the prospect right now. If you are a transgendered male then you have to learn to live with it, to find some equilibrium between your masculine and feminine sides. There’s nothing wrong with that. But if you want to stay confused and messed-up, if you want to be writing the same posts in 5 years time, embark on the TG type of transition.

  24. Sibyl says:

    Dear Questioning,

    You are a brave and thoughtful person and I do not envy you any of the things you’ve before you. I am truly touched by your sincerity and so wish I had the answers you seek or that I could spare you the heartaches, but I don’t. Most of these things you’ve asked can only be answered by you from within your own heart

    I suggest if after much soul searching, your heart still says this is what you must do… Seek the guidance of a competent therapist or the guidance of someone that has been there and succeeded to help you sound things out, before you act. Either way, do your homework first! This is not an easy row to how, and the price of admission, as you have realized is steep, VERY steep!

    No matter how this shakes out, as Leigh said, please do not fall into the TG trap. Despite all the TG rhetoric to the contrary, the binary is immutable! We are all constrained to live within its parameters no matter which side we are on. And TG or TS, it matters not in the end, if you must take the mantle of woman, then realize it is a package deal! One cannot pick and choose the things they like and discard the rest. As a woman you will have to abdicate all rights to male privilege and fully accept the rules of a woman’s world. Or, you will have to accept that you will experience life as, a man in a dress.

    I hope this did not come off harshly but it is better you know ahead of time what’s before you, than to accept the rosy words of those who have not gone the distance and find yourself trapped between worlds as they are.

    I wish you all the best Questioning!

    Sibyl

  25. anoldfriend says:

    Zoe i’ll keep your email address in my address book.
    When this Ron Gold crap is over with I’ll be reading your blog more often.

    As far as I am concerned Ron Gold and the homosexuals can all go jump in a lake. The biggest mistake the Tee-Gees and some TS have ever made was to think there was some sympathy for their cause amongst a bunch of sex obsessed men and man hating woman. I have found mainstream folk to be more tolerant and more respectful of our cause (TS folk) than the alphabet soup.

  26. Leigh says:

    Well said oldfriend! I echo that sentiment and have just posted something similar on zoe’s blog.

    Oh I can’t wait for the accustions of transphobia and bigotry and hatred to come rolling in … ah well, all in a days work eh! 🙂

  27. Leigh says:

    Backed up by what evidence Zoe ?

    What “evidence” can we possibly give you that you have not already heard a thousand times before. What evidence is there that someone elses “evidence” doesn’t simply refute as bias.

    Bugger the evidence. We are already the proof.

  28. Leigh says:

    You need to be VERY carefull with the baby steps approach. I have known more than a few gals that tried that and found it a dead end, and very frustrating for you and all those around you. You see, its just not being honest and thats a huge part of transition. If those around you percieve you to be “playing” at this they will treat you accordingly so my advice, be ABSOLUTLY sure you can handle this, do not jump into it as a test, do not jump in with no finances to back it up, and never ever give the impression that you are not TOTALLY commited.

    By the way .. tg think has it that you dont need to do anything like I just advised you .. just jump right in and you will be one of the “grrrrllllzzzzz” in no time .. er .. yeah but no, but yeah but no … no definatly NO.

    btw….CD’s ARE legitimatly transgendered .. just not transsexual.

  29. Sibyl says:

    Dear questioning

    I hear your fear and understand it, and you are not alone by having that feeling. Many of us had false starts when ere standing where you are, just as I did at 19 and of them were for the same reason.

    Fear…

    For me the fear was multiple faceted. There was the fear of being taken as a cross-dresser, having just discovered them at 19 and being utterly horrified. Fear of life on the streets and turning tricks, which is where I would have been at the time if I were successful in avoided my family’s intent to have me institutionalized. Fear of poverty, and the gut wrenching fear of being utterly alone

    Standing there, as you are on the precipice, Your gut feeling is telling you correctly. This is not a game and while you can make false starts you cannot really take it all back once you step off that cliff… So it is more than reasonable to have fear when facing such a thing. It is also reasonable to try to hold onto something such as doing this in stages in hopes of cushioning the fall if you do take that step.

    Unfortunately there is no such thing as security in this…

    The best analogy I can think of is skiing. It’s natural to fear the slope heck its icy cold and seemingly nothing but a darn cliff… So to resist turning those slick thing down that hill and more so resisting the obviously insane idea of leaning downhill with them into what seems certain death is very reasonable!

    The reality is, that is exactly what it takes to ski! The only way for you to control a ski is to be one with and to be so be matched perpendicular and calm so that no matter how insane the angle may seem. you can turn them to where you want to go.

    Transition it is the same thing… Fighting it will only cause frustration and a sense of being out of control. If this is truly your path, resisting it will also be the source and the reason behind your greatest fear, if I’m reading this right, and that is of not passing?

    If you do at some point take that step you are going to have to let go and let it happen if it is to happen at all. That said, I must return to what I said earlier. This is not a game! You need to be as sure as one can before taking that first step. You really should consider finding an experienced therapist, not as a gatekeeper at this point, rather as someone to simply talk over some very real fear issues with. He or she can help you discern for you, what is a real fear and what is a boogieman fear you’ve created. He or she can also help you to figure out what your feelings are about who you are and what you feel you need to do about them…

    Wishing you nothing but the best.
    Sibyl
    l

    Either it clicks, and you know it to be right so you cannot go back or you cannot without great personal devastation. Or you realize it is not who you are but you will still have to deal

  30. catkisser says:

    Questioning…..

    That first step can be terrifying and you are right about one thing, once transition begins, if it doesn’t fit you are pretty much screwed trying to go back unless you go off somewhere away from those you know and attempt to transition. Them’s the facts.

    The good news is, if you are actually a woman, transition, regardless of the personal life costs, is something you will never regret and is incredibly easy… and the big secret is simply you be yourself. If you try to “pass”, you won’t and it has actually very little to do with how feminine you look and almost everything to do with how you, for lack of a better term, vibe. You can look like the most feminine woman in the world but if you vibe male, that’s what most people will react to.

    Now me, it turns out I am intersexed, something that wasn’t confirmed until it literally was a moot point lifewise other than medical considerations. Have you tried hormones yet…..not massive doses but an androgen blocker and a mild doee. It may answer your questions for you, need not have any perm effects for at least several months but often tells someone right off the bat if they are full of it or not if they can be honest about how they react.

    My own reaction to even herbal estrogens was extreme, I’ve never encountered any transsexual who reacted the same way. It was more powerful than any drug I took in the 60’s and I literally felt my brain re-wiring itself for 48 hours……..in a good way. At the time I wrote down all I was feeling so I have a record of this and don’t have to rely on memory.

    My IQ, which was already low end genius, increased, my verbal skills increased overnight. But remember, it turns out I am intersexed too and like I said, I’ve never run across anyone else who had this extreme reaction. But it will tell you a lot absent that….if your mental clarity increases, if your body comfort gets somewhat better, if you are happy with the changes in your libedo.

    And for those who come here and call us monsters….please note that here and in another comment thread we do not reject someone who IDs as TG out of hand. As representatives of women who made the journey successfully, we are in a better position to understand the journey than anyone else.

  31. Marie says:

    @GenderQuestioning, regarding the fears, when I began to seriously plan my transition, I looked to “support” forums for advice and a looksee into my probable future.

    And most of the stories I read horrified me. The loss of my job, home, family and friends seemed almost guaranteed. It seemed everyone was experiencing persecution, discrimination and abuse.

    But I also noticed that their narratives seemed alien to me. All the talk about gender identity, being a “woman inside,” fulltime and part-time, “presentation,” “gender expression…” all these things made no sense to me. It actually made me feel terrible, as I figured I must not then be TS, but rather Something Else Entirely.

    And in the end, I ignored their “advice,” and transitioned my own way. It was actually very straight-forward and simple: I started hormones, and after a few months strangers started seeing me as a female. At that point, I started the name-change process, worked with my employer to to switch things there, and scheduled SRS. And to my surprise, nothing bad whatsoever happened.

    But there was no “fulltime” date, no “presentation” to perfect. The TG paradigm is so pervasive now, it’s just accepted as being the standard anymore. But IMHO, more often than not it leads to disasterous transitions. Transition becomes about perfecting a role, a “presentation.” Concepts of “part time” and “full time” make it sound like a role, a costume one can take off at will. And the public picks up on that, and treats it accordingly.

    So my advise is to take a deep breath, and step back from everything people are telling you (even us). Question the most basic ideas and principles you’ve been told on forums and elsewhere, and try to identify and isolate your direct feelings about what you need, what you want… and let what you “are” take care of itself.

  32. Hello, Gender Questioning.

    The following is a response i posted at Zoe Suzanna’s site (hiya, Zoe!). i hate resposts, and would phrase it differently, but Aria and i spent all day together with our boyfriends yesterday, and ended getting to bed waaay late. i’m tired and lazy.

    ————————————————

    It’s been my observation that the transgender community tends to actively ‘recruit’.

    They do this by encouragement (aggressively convincing all gender confused individuals to transition or reject the binary).

    They do it by fear (taking tragic, sometimes violent cases and wildly distorting the ‘danger’ of going it alone).

    And retention of members is a priority.

    Although most will deny it, simply transitioning into an ordinary woman and getting on with your life isn’t acceptabe with most acivists.

    They want you to remain highly visible and ‘othered’, as another public figurehead for a political construct of questionable, uncertain goals.

    Trans superstar on the internet and in public?

    Or another woman among a crowd of women?

    Keep that two-way decision in mind, and then look around the ‘community’.

    You’ll start to see the difference, if you haven’t already.

    The choice is up to each of us alone.

  33. Leigh says:

    “it turns out I was fired for my issues anyway”

    Thats exactly why a dual step approach hardly ever works and actually works against you. Do the time, but do it right. Under medical supervision thats the first step to doing it right. Fear is natural but it can bite you hard. Instead turn the fear into determination. Then one day you can grow old and become a miserable bitch like me 🙂

    Your mothers wishes are what I term “The Parent Trap”. You will never outlive your family in its entirity and you will likely never change their minds. It will always be, wait till next year.

    Again good luck and best wishes.

  34. catkisser says:

    gee Leigh, you mean full of internal transphobia, self loathing, vicious, deluded and mutilated?

    Somehow it doesn’t seem all that bad does it?

  35. catkisser says:

    When I was young I wanted to grow up to be the crazy old lady who lived in the big weird house with all the cats………be careful what you wish for!

    I live in a 150+ year old ex Catskill resort inn, we have a total of seven cats and TGs have been claiming I’m crazy for years and years………and against all odds I made it to sixty.

  36. i wish i had seven cats.

    Or at least surrounded by seven cats for one big group nap.

  37. catkisser says:

    Cheer up Anon, someday you’ll be an old lady too and have every right to be a crazy cat lady like me 🙂

  38. Joanne says:

    Marie wrote:

    So my advice is to take a deep breath, and step back from everything people are telling you (even us).

    The thing is, you don’t need to be taught, or to learn anything. You might have to “unlearn” some of the male conditioning you picked up along the way, but mostly if your correct about self analysis, you’ll find its all there inside you already.

    You just need to stop trying to cover it up. Self visualization can be an interesting experience at the beginning. When your out shopping or anywhere in a public setting self-visualize as a female.

    You’ll get some strange looks pretty quickly, because as you become lost in the self-visualization you’ll slip into your natural behaviors. If you’re anything like some of us, you’ll be at least half consciously self monitoring to stop that from happening.

    BTW – Catkisser’s moggies: they’re familiars. beware …

    Good luck! 😉

  39. Leigh says:

    We just got rid of our cat .. sure I woulda mailed it to one of you, but it was old and wasn’t house trained and that was never gonna work.

    Come to think of it that cat and I had a lot in common 😉

  40. joanne says:

    Re: Charles (Virginia) Prince. This recent comment left on Zagria’s Blogspot almost says it all.

    I saw her/him on the Alan Burke Show in 1968. Prince was billed as Charles Prince, author of ‘The Transvestite and His Wife.’ I recall a bulky, unattractive Jewish-looking guy in a black wig.

    http://zagria.blogspot.com/2008/04/virginia-prince-1912-pharmacologist.html

    That Jewish looking guy in a black wig served on the HBIGDA for several years, homophobic, fouled with CT hatred, laying down the denials and the understandings that WPATH still exhibit to this day!

    Personally I think he was one of the most evil and ignorant men who have ever been involved in this entire discourse.

    For the most part TG’s see him as some kind of messiah, arguing that he helped to set them free. In a way I suppose he did – by walking all over the lives and experiences of others!

  41. Aria Blue says:

    I don’t particularly care if someone is a real transsexual with regard to this argument we are having with the TG.

    To me, TG is purely a political phenomenon, and a bad one at that. It is no different than other groups fighting against stupid things going on in their name in the Democratic or Republican parties. For example, I have family members who are staunch union members and detest the sorts of things that have been done with their labor movement, and also very religious people who are angry with the kind of nuttery seen in the Republican party.

    It is a matter of stupid politics. Even if I wanted to be a part of the GLB-TG, I would protest the monumental idiocy of the way they pursue their goals, and the horrible backlash that will result. There is no moral imperative for any of us to subordinate our lives to the wants of TG politicians, and that includes those among them who push this silly dogma as a method of coping with their personal demons. The guilt and shame they try to levy on us is nothing more than a poor attempt at mind control, though it seems to be most effective on those who wear the TG label.

    I welcome anyone who wants to put an end to the rotten politics. I don’t care about someone’s background, whether they are gay or straight, “left wing” or “right wing”. Anyone who sees the truth of how destructive these identity politics are to us all, TG included, is a friend.

  42. Aria Blue says:

    As to who is a real transsexual… it becomes obvious in short order by simply reading what they say.

  43. zoesuzanna says:

    Debating who is or what is a CT is almost a waste of time for once we nail a definition of what a CT is – an exception is found.

    I happen to have two boys – raised them for a time as a typical “father” and now raising them as a human. They accept me as their parent regardless of TG,CT, ABC alphabet soup definitions. I am raising them the best I can to be what they want to be in life.

    To make an assumption that a CT or whatever would not want to detail cars and what not is amazing short sighted for that focus would be assuming a MTF would not want to do this while ignoring any FTM.

    I played drums before “transition” and I still like to do it. I liked to clean house before “transition” and I still do – not because it’s some “female work” but rather cuz it needs to get done.

    I am more than whatever fashionable pigeon hole people would want to stuff me into at any given moment. I have my own crap to work through (like overcoming being a miser or having no patience) and really we all do too.

    -GQ if you want to assume what a CT is – it’s your choice – don’t lump me in your group as you know nothing about me nor my interests… Your assumptions of gender specific behavior is a joke for what we assume a female should do in America is different than what is done in India and many other countries and cultures through time.

    I agree with Aria that being lumped into a letter of the alphabet or some fancy faddish label of the day is annoying and counter productive and I am not into being a part of it.

    Accept me or not – I don’t care.

  44. joanne says:

    Sillyoldme said:

    BTW, how does one actually know that any of the posters here is really “classic transsexual” and not TG in denial or disguise? Because, frankly, some of the posters don’t seem all that “classic” to me!

    Jan Wallander wrote:

    1. A sense of belonging to the opposite sex, of having been born into the wrong sex, of being one of nature’s extant errors.

    2. A sense of estrangement with one’s own body; all indications of sex differentiation are considered as afflictions and repugnant.

    3. A strong desire to resemble physically the opposite sex via therapy including surgery.

    4. A desire to be accepted in the community as belonging to the opposite sex.

    Wallander’s definition does it for me. Shorn of any attempt to attribute motive or sexual orientation, it simply states the basic attributes of the phenomenon once simply known as transsexualism.

    We now need to reclaim, as classical transsexualism, Wallander’s definition. That need is a result of an ongoing process of colonization and denial.

    Like Aria I welcome anyone who has the sense to see this colonizing process for the political ideology it fundamentally is

    I do not dislike TG’s per se.

    I do believe that transgenderism is largely an artificially constructed psychology that relies (for its validation) on constant reinforcement from sexologists, psychologists and gender theorists.

    Without that validation perhaps 2/3’s to 3/4’s of those who flourish under the TG umbrella would be back to being the transvestites they cannot bear to admit they are.

  45. joanne says:

    GQ Shared this with us:

    I thought about doing a little shopping but decided just to go back to my apartment after a woman noticed what I was wearing (which I know was not weather appropriate) and read me (I assume as who but a T-girl would be stupid enough to wear a very light weight dress with just a normal male jacket on it in the dead of winter.

    GQ – Honestly you are beginning to worry me! What’s all rubbish about clothes and makeup anyway? When you can walk down the street in jeans and a T top being accepted as female, your getting there.

    As to this ‘passing’ B/S. GQ, I have to tell you that New Zealand’s first elected female Prime Minister, Helen Clark had difficulty ‘passing’.

    In the 9 years she held office I don’t remember once seeing her in a dress – I’m not saying it didn’t happen – just that I’m a party member and I have attended many official party functions where she was in attendance. Never saw her in anything but trou.

    Actually, come to think of it, last time the Queen was in NZ Helen attended the official state banquet in a trouser suit. LOL – There was hell to pay from a lot of silly old women and gender fascists over that!

    Go figure, GQ! Go figure!

  46. leighspov says:

    Well thank god the real CT’s have arriived, it was getting awfully tiring listening to the wannabee CT’s all these months..

  47. zoesuzanna says:

    -GQ – It does seem your fear is making you obsessed about passing. Perhaps rather than worry about passing – look at your fear squarely and deal with that…if you dont address the root of your fear – even if you passed 1000000000% – you’d still be paralyzed that you wont pass…whatever that means.

    Everyone knows about my “situation” at work and once when my girlfriend drove me to work – my manager asked me if she was in transition. My girlfriend (who happens to be a genetic woman) responded “Transitioning from what to what?” And did it even matter if she was? who cares?

    It also seems to me like you are trying to get approval from people here and while there are a lot of great people here, you don’t need approval from anyone to be yourself.

    We cannot help you solve your issues of fear nor any other issue – you really need to do it – perhaps talking to a qualified therapist would be beneficial for you – maybe not.

  48. Aria Blue says:

    The problem is that the “two types” you are talking about are based on patently false criteria, leading us right back to the early 1970’s and the arms of psychiatrists. It should never be the case that transsexual is defined by effeminacy (as distinct from femininity) or sexual orientation. That takes us in the wrong direction.

    Further, it takes observations about people, which are mere opinions, and grants them authoritative status as final arbiter of reality. This happens all too often these days, even in science. The psychiatric standard being proffered in place of the actual standard (which has yet to be fleshed out) imputes motive, which then becomes the raison d’être for the existence of transsexuality. This obviates the need for the search for biological cause and I find this to be a negative outcome.

    I don’t see a real need to whip up yet another false construct while we wait for the actual, scientific verdict. I think most of us are rather content to let the science lead where it may and come up with tests designed to help people in their diagnosis. And by science I of course mean neurology, not that psychiatric claptrap. Let that rot in Vienna.

  49. leighspov says:

    Really cloudy? .. hmmmm

  50. joanne says:

    Hi AB 🙂

    That’s pretty much the way I see it too.

    I don’t think Blanchard’s AGP / homosexual transsexual model is terribly original personally. He should have properly attributed it to to Charlie (Virginia) Prince who first invented it as femiphillia / homosexual.

    The only difference I can see between Prince’s ‘femiphile’ and Blanchard’s AGP is that APP’s are femiphiles who have accessed SRS.

    Its actually unlikely they would have been able to do that prior to publication of the DSM-IV owing to the different definitions.

    Interestingly, as I showed in the TFF article, Bradley, Blanchard, and Zucker – all associated with CAMH – had a significant role in altering the definitions so as to allow femiphiles access to surgery.

    Arguably those three, along with the other members of the DSM-IV and IV-(TR) work groups are responsible for helping to create AGP’s.

    Its what happens when pseudo-science goes unchecked, and Its high time they were all held to account for it IMHO!

  51. leighspov says:

    “True transsexuals are likely to have biases like genetic females and a developmental history more like a female. They generally have pretty handwriting and early language development. They are likely to stay away from heavily technical focuses and be rule followers rather than risk takers. They are more likely to have worked in a traditionally female career if they could find one and they generally are not good navigators.”

    Where are you getting these generalizations from? This may have been true in the 50’s but not anymore. I personally know a high level engineer, an airline pilot, and more than one very successful entrepreneur. Females themselves now comprise a larger portion of the total workforce than men do, many of them in high level management and ownership positions. We have females flying navy jets in combat zones, doing high level work in our government, one is even the Secretary of State!

    Oh but then you were talking of “transsexual females” only .. well yes, we all want to stay home and raise babies.

  52. zoesuzanna says:

    @silly

    “Can you honestly not hear and see when lesbians are more butch than straight women… or when gay men are more like women then straight men?”

    That is quite an assumption! While there are some lesbians who appear and act “more butch” than “straight” women – not all are – there are plenty of femme lesbians too.

    There are also many so called “straight” butch women.

    As far as saying gay men are more like women is another far fetched assumption. I live in an area where there are many masculine acting gay men who abhor femmy gay partners… I also know some femmy acting “straight” men too…

    Here we go again making vast assumptions about a groups of people. Give me a break!

  53. leighspov says:

    “zoe said..
    Here we go again making assumptions about groups of people”

    …not to mention this group!

  54. genderquestioning says:

    I hope everyone here thinks I am being respectful. Disrespect is not my goal or what I am attempting. I think it is obvious from Cloudy’s comment that she does not disrespect you either.

    In defining who I am and figuring out how to move forward, I am sharing my worldview which might be bigoted and wrong but is my worldview.

    I do not mind people claiming that I am TG, etc. because at this point I am not a woman. From a societal point of view I am a man. So in fact, I am a feminine man trying to figure out whether he can survive forever in a male role and if he transitions whether he is feminine enough to survive in the world as a woman.

    Tomorrow, I think I am going out whether I pass or not.. I need to get over this stupid fear and find myself. I have wanted this so long but I am not sure why I am so scared of really having it.

  55. zoesuzanna says:

    @Silly
    “… and give me a break… those gay boys in the gym, so butch… so “straight looking, straight acting”… yeah… then why is that the most common request in gay male personals is, “no femmes”? Gee… if there were no femininity in the gay male population, would that line have to be used at all? And where did the common expression, “Butch on the streets, Femme in the Sheets” come from?”

    I don’t know – I never heard that phrase. In the neighboring town, every year, is a major gathering of “bears and cubs” – hundreds of very masculine men who like other masculine men…. And I never see your stereotypical femmy gay man hanging out during those gatherings…

    I don’t hang in the “gay” community – I don’t pretend to assume to know everything about gender nor do I make mass assumptions about anyone on the alphabet soup chain. I can only speak to what I have experienced and witnessed – you want to dismiss me – fine – I don’t care..

  56. leighspov says:

    The things you can learn from this blog.

    Never having read or had any interest in the gay male personals … I was not aware what the most common term was!

    Thankyou 😉

  57. leighspov says:

    Please … call me Leigh 🙂

    I would love to offer a well articulated and informed opinion but sadly, I am neither well articulated nor informed. I did manage to get through the transsexual phenomonen once but I had to continue after waking. Books and medical journals were never my strong suit.

    However, I am neither lurking nor offering snide remarks. I am a member of this group you seem to feel so attuned with. It’s a pity you also feel that many are below your particular level of experience and dedication. When you come down from the clouds, perhaps we and others here can communicate better. We hate having to look up at people you see.

    You wouldn’t happen to be a member of the CAMH/Northwestern by any chance are you ?

    – Leigh

  58. joanne says:

    I’m utterly at a loss here. On the one hand, I constantly hear you and the other bloggers posting here talking about those awful TG. But really, the world calls them “transsexuals”. Thus, they are “transsexuals” and must be discussed as such.

    Disagree: they are only able access SRS because the psychiatric/psychological definitions encourage them to do so.

    Even Anne Lawrence openly admits that the older definitions of transsexualism would have filtered her out of a surgical option.

    I shudder to think of how many families have been broken up, how many wives have lost husband’s and children fathers because of the way the definitions have encouraged individuals to believe they were transsexed, when they obviously were not.

    This issue was at the heart of my article on TFF:

    http://trans-fried-fluff.blogspot.com/

    Where I looked at the diagnosis creep that occurred, directly as a result of the identity paradigm!

    I invite anybody who hasn’t read Ian Hacking’s book,
    Rewriting the soul: multiple personality and the sciences of memory.

    Some chapters are available online, here:

    http://books.google.co.nz/books?id=3JiLe7dHODEC&pg=PA198&lpg=PA198&dq=Ian+hacking+the+science+of+memory&source=bl&ots=6YHFZu8cm2&sig=gq15wN0tUAf9wanTwJDYjbCvEkQ&hl=en&ei=cgQ3S_rPN5Lq7APR7rWQBg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6&ved=0CB8Q6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=Ian%20hacking%20the%20science%20of%20memory&f=false

    In this book Hacking explores the development and eventual demise of the multiple personality epidemic of the late 80’s and 90’s.

    Just change a few words here and there and you could be reading an article on the transgender epidemic that began around the same time.

    I cannot prove that a similar phenomenon is occurring. I strongly suspect that it is. And I believe the entire issue needs desperately, to be properly examined.

    It all fits with the false memory epidemic, the satanic ritual abuse epidemic and every other example you can find!

    Vulnerable patients, therapists obsessed with an artificial construct – bingo!

    Disorders to order!

    • joanne says:

      BTW Cloudy

      Personally, I am enjoying this exchange … You afford us a greater respect than Zoe Brain, who pontificates and runs. You do us the courtesy of pontificating and staying …

  59. Aria Blue says:

    “But really, the world calls them “transsexuals”. Thus, they are “transsexuals” and must be discussed as such.”

    I couldn’t disgree more strongly, and in fact this is the heart of the issue. As I said before, this is not a medical discussion, it is a political one. I will not grant my political enemy victory in this fashion before we even begin the fight. If we are to label them as transvestites as you say, then transvestites it will be. There is no need to call them “transsexual”, that’s just silly.

    And frankly, I’m surprised to hear such an argument from a woman of transsexual background. One thing we all seem to have in common is rejection of any label other than woman, and further we bristle at the notion of anyone impugning the nature of our condition as having anything to do with transvestite men. The latter goes right to the core of the former. That is why we protest so strongly when the definition of transsexual is changed.

    Frankly, I don’t care what psychiatrists have to say on this subject. They have no insight into the actual transsexual condition whatsoever, and they prove it every time they draw spurious correlations and write ridiculous studies based on them.

    Everything they write rings false; they are talking only about transvestites and gay men. Nowhere do they write about transsexual women, except to claim that the tranvestites and gay men are the same as transsexual. That hardly sounds like fertile ground for progress- they seem to think we don’t exist. They simply do not understand us, and they will not listen to reason.

    I find it extremely strange that a woman of your background wouldn’t find their conclusions laughable, as we all know that their two types are just caricatures of distinctly non-transsexual people. The fact is you simply cannot diagnose this biological condition by looking for “gay boy” behavior or by sexual orientation.

    Correlation does not imply causation. This is the fundamental flaw in all of Blanchard’s work, which makes it, and everything written back to Stoller and beyond, utterly worthless. Transsexual is a biological condition, not a psychological malady.

    I reject any label for my birth condition that involves transvestites. It begs belief that any woman would be happy with that state of affairs, much less actively encourage others down that path. If you can’t understand why this is so, I doubt we have much to say to each other.

  60. zoesuzanna says:

    Aria,

    Would you please remove this post by “cloudy” or silly that was left at 5:05 pm yesterday:

    *removed*

    I find it highly inappropriate in an open forum to be trying to narrow down where someone may live especially if the other party (in this case myself) had not invited such question. Whether or not I live in that area is a private matter and more appropriate for private conversation rather than a searchable open forum such as a blog.

    Motives aside, I find it disrespectful on the part of Cloudy to attempt such questioning. I wish to keep where I live a quiet matter except to those I consider close friends.

    Thank you for consideration.

  61. leighspov says:

    “BTW, impuning me with allogations that I look down on any of the people posting here is wrong. It’s just another snide remark, unneccessary and ugly. Had I actually felt that way, I wouldnt have bothered to write at such length, detail, and responsiveness to specific objections to my arguements. However, in your case I have only now begun to feel the antipathy you ascribed to me”

    Really cloudy ?

    Allow me to draw attention to your opening statement in this forum where you said

    “BTW, how does one actually know that any of the posters here is really ‘classic transsexual’ and not TG in denial or disguise? Because, frankly, some of the posters don’t seem all that ‘classic’; to me!”

    Nice way to introduce yourself.

    • Ishtar says:

      Hi Leigh 🙂

      It sort of has echoes of the Trea/Valesquez/Chase days when there were accusations of being an autogynephile flying all over the place.

      There was one occasion on an emailing list where Valesquez went around saying to various posters “Your writing style is that of a highly privileged male wearing a purple dress with a feather boa.” then the dreaded Denise Trea appeard and there was hushed silence as she posted with her great proclamations until I took the piss.

      To be honest (And I hope cloudy is reading this) I tire of all the Clarke northwestern trolling and bullshit. I could not give a stuff if they see me as a seven headed grumblewotsit from planet zod wearing a purple velvet gimp suit flying in a coca cola tin for a spaceship. As for the feigned deep south accent cloudy seems to come out with, well that sounds like a Chicago/Toronto Northerner trying to mock southern accents. I sense that and I am not even from the US.

      Cloudy does need to understand that since the Trea/Valesquez/Chase days people feel nervous by default about anyone who talks the way she is right now. and that is not a snip at her, but a natural and nervous sense of De Ja vous.

    • leighspov says:

      Hi Ishtar 🙂

      Spot on as usual. The blatent nerve of this person to join a conversation and attempt to set herself up as the dalai lama by flinging accusations of AGP at its regular members then drownding us all in academic postulations, was more than I could sit still for.

      I have no doubt of her credentials, but I am more than a bit miffed that she would try to set herself up as the fountain of wisdom on this blog. Totally overbearing, as though she is the only one here that had srs at an early age and made it though to marriage.

      Wake up call cloudy – many of us have and we don’t appreciate being preached at!

      -leigh

    • Aria Blue says:

      “Your writing style is that of a highly privileged male wearing a purple dress with a feather boa.”

      rofl!

  62. zoesuzanna says:

    @Cloudy – Yes I would say it is nefarious and a poor judgement call on your part. If it was so important to know, you could have invited to talk off line about it – I may have been more receptive at that point.

    Furthermore, are you certain that is the only place such an event is held? please…

    I think pontificate is the correct word Joanne used – you come in here on high and make sweeping grand proclamations.

  63. Aria Blue says:

    Although Cloudy has left the building, I do want to make something clear about this statement:

    “…though erotic cross-dressing was not always explicitely present, the underlying condition is one of autogynephilia, which transvestism is one manner in which it expresses.”

    I do not regard autogynephilia as anything other than transvestitism gone horribly wrong. An “autogynephile” is merely someone who has used the lax standards to indulge their addiction to an extreme. You cannot separate crossdressing/transvestitism from “autogynephilia”.

    The revision committee for the DSM will probably establish a diagnosis of AGP. This is likely an attempt to provide cover from lawsuits, much as GIDNOS and GID are being used to silence Intersex voices and prevent recompense for the injustice done to them.

    Just to be perfectly clear:

    Autogynephilia is a fictitious mental disorder; it’s just crossdressing by any other name. The psych industry has a lot to answer for in creating all these nutty disease categories.

  64. joanne says:

    Cloudy …

    Thank you for explaining what I meant by the word stereotype. With hind-sight I perhaps could have been a little more clear. In mitigation, this is a blog comments forum – not an academic exercise. That aside, my use of the word ‘stereotype’ was not too far removed from the concept you have described here:

    …when I say gay men were notably feminined as small children, I’m talking about them as a population, statistically, and that this is not an unfounded generalization, but one found and verified through statistically valid research.

    Let me give you a classic example of a medical stereotype, by which I mean a generalization entrenched in medical and psychological treatment paradigms and believed to be grounded and verified in statistical research.

    Beginning in the early 1970’s J. Imperato-McGinley and a group of coworkers
    released a series of reports on a group of males from the island of San Domingo, who were raised as females due to enzyme, 5-alpha reductase deficiency, (5-ARD)the lack of which prevents typical male genital development at birth

    According to Imperato-McGinley the great majority of such persons spontaneously and easily began living and functioning as male post-puberty when and if the genital development self corrected.

    (See for example, Imperato-McGinley, J., et al., 1974. Steroid 5a-reductase deficiency in man: an inherited form of pseudohermaphroditism. Science 186, 1213–1215)

    Imperato-McGinley’s findings were and still are consistently used: sexologists use them as evidence, to argue the case for organization-activation theory.

    See, Diamond, Milton. 1999. Clinical implications of the organizational and activational effects of hormones. Hormones and Behavior 55, 621–632. (p.623)

    And the findings are still used to provide a rational for surgical interventions in the form of phalloplasty on infants who are found to be 5-ARD deficient.

    Unfortunately roughly 40% of 5-ARD babies are psychosexually female.

    See, Swaab, D. 2007. Sexual differentiation of the brain and behavior. Best Practice & Research: Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism, Vol. 21, No. 3, pp. 431–444. (P. 435)

    In this case problems unnecessarily occur because a statistical stereotype created by 60% of a population is applied to the total population.

    I’ve no doubt that at least one other individual in this discussion will want to respond to this post. My point here is that indiscriminate use of statistical norms can have dire consequences and should be treated with scepticism until consistently proven otherwise.

    BTW – I chose the word ‘pontificate’ carefully. Pontification, I think is in the ear of the listener. Seldom is it in the mind of the pontificator.

    • Ishtar says:

      Hi Joanne 🙂

      Yep you have summed up very well why I have issues with sexologist quacks who use statistics to shove false identities on people.

    • joanne says:

      Hi Ishtar 😉

      I almost sent you that comment, just to have you ratify it.

      I decided that we both know enough about the way these statistical averages are used to construct artificial and grossly self-serving conclusions.

      Whoever ‘Cloudy’ is – Well, IMHO pontification is about right 🙂

    • Ishtar says:

      Hi Joanne 🙂

      I am waiting for the classic Clarke Northwestern tactic to be used. you know the one:

      “Now you have said who and what you are, you it proves you are what I say you are and you are an AGP liar!!”.

      But this is what is so interesting, they talk about proving that HSTS/AGP as some profound “Truth” and then use the same as an insult to level at their critics. If that taxonomy was so important as a “truth” they would not use it as a slur.

      I also notice when this one is cornered you get the stuff about her having to go and do her Nobel prize speech, get the Lear jet serviced, check the 2000 square mile ranch is tidied up and then be sure that the gentrification of Myrtle beach is going to plan and she may get to pick up her miss world prize when she has a few moments spare. (A Barbie doll narrative, complete with Falcon Crest shoulder pads)

      So magically we become rather a low priority in her overly busy schedule when we don’t agree with her. What a surprise.

      On a serious not I think I have seen someone like this before, who posted a link to some website with lots of men dressed up as Christmas tree fairies and the site was called something like “Pink_my_little_pony_in_a_dress_TG. com”

      I wonder if it’s the same person?

    • joanne says:

      Oh! Ishtar! … You old cynic! 🙂

  65. That was the most blatantly obvious, calculated, insertion-and-seperation ploy i have ever had the annoyance to witness.

    i don’t care how benign you pretend to be. i don’t care who you manage to convince by virtue of your age. i don’t care how many subtle, undermining shots you take.

    i have had enough of your non-sense. Keep hanging yourself with each new post.

    You know who you are.

  66. joanne says:

    This kind of B/S seriously annoys me!

    “…though erotic cross-dressing was not always explicitely present, the underlying condition is one of autogynephilia, which transvestism is one manner in which it expresses.”

    It is totally unprovable. The only possible way of obtaining information of that nature is by Q and A.

    Imagine the scenario.

    “A” has ratcheted his/her way along a typical CD trajectory for twenty years, slowly reorienting his/her sense of gender orientation in the process.

    At 45 the initial adrenaline rushes and sexual thrills are wearing down and A decides he’d like to go ‘full-time’.

    He goes to a therapist of some sort.

    “And do you experience sexual arousal or pleasure?” asks the therapist.

    “A” is no fool. He knows how to walk and chew gum at the same time. He also knows the right answer to that question if he wants hormones.

    “No”, he answers.

    “Don’t masturbate, have erections or erotic fantasies?” asks the therapist.

    “No, never.” Answers “A”

    Actally, by now “A” can repeat the meta-story without blinking. The one thing he’s not about to do is admit that he gets sexual pleasure from his male organ.

    Truly – you can trust “A” like you can trust a sailor with you sister …

    Not at all …

  67. Aria Blue says:

    I think you need to understand, Cloudy, that the people here have a problem with your ideology, not you as a person. You do seem, however, to have a pattern of trying to take things personally and turn that around as a kind of back-handed accusation. I find that behavior very troubling.

  68. leighspov says:

    There is nothing wrong in being proud of ones accomplishments and I have no reason to doubt that you are who and what you say you are.

    Personally, and for what it’s worth, I have no animosity toward you, I just think, as previously stated, that you came in this forum with an attitude that you were top dog. You started off on the wrong foot and severely miffed most of the regulars here and continued the “california” attitude even when it was plainly obvious that some of us were not buying what you had to sell.

    Most of us on this forum are not here to discuss the nuances of transsexual vs transgender academic findings. We are also not here to play the who’s more female than who game. We are here to say that we reject the transgender construct and transgender dogma. We are here because there are very few blogs that hold this view. We never asked for a lecture. We are made up of mostly post-op women, many of which are as long time corrected as yourself. Most of us have been there and done that, just as you have. Many of us are successful in our own private lives, some of us married, as you are, some are still in transition. We are friends. If you want to be a part of that then I think most here would welcome you. If you want to continue to try to one-up us, we probably won’t.

    It’s entirely your choice.

    -leigh

  69. joanne says:

    Cloudy …

    Importantly I am perhaps the only one here who hasn’t experienced trolling courtesy of this dogma you are arguing.

    Most of the women here have sat by and watched as Tree, Farmer, and a number of other individuals operating under various aliases routinely abused and ridiculed anybody who didn’t accept Blanchard’s ideas.

    A great deal of bitterness and distrust was created by those behaviors, the transkids debacle, and the unfortunate trolling that accompanied it.

    You have seen some references to that history reflected in earlier posts. I was not around at that time, was not involved in it, and possibly for that reason, I have been more willing to engage with you.

    That said, Cloudy – engaging with you does not mean being lectured by you. If I want to be lectured at I’ll go back to university and add another degree to the two I already hold.

    Please – engage in a constructive discourse, take some time to get to know us, and allow us to get to know you. Perhaps we can learn from each other – perhaps not. But Cloudy (whoever you are 😉 )don’t pontificate at us. You don’t know us, our academic or professional backgrounds, or our personal histories any more than we know yours.

    Title of this lecture? Make haste slowly!

  70. zoesuzanna says:

    Silly –

    My main problem with the method you chose is that you seem to be holier than though and then when we dont necessarily agree with you, you play the victim role.

    For me – I watch how someone says what they say…words alone don’t mean much.

  71. “..respectful and neutral…allogations (sic) that I “look down” on any of the people posting here is wrong…clearly, and consistently, I have been respectful..”

    ‘Frankly, some of the posters don’t seem all that “classic” to me!”

    Fail.

    Hypocrite flavored failure, even. Those are tangy.

    “What did I get for my pains?”

    Nobody asked you for anything. This would be your own ego misrepresenting the situation to you.

    “…doing a story on me, originally about me and my current success in my career…a “great transsexual pioneer”…transitioned as a teen in the ’70s and was now so successful as a career woman, wife, and (adoptive) mother…even in the ’70s, the TG types at the clinic, Stanford in my case…I pilot my own aircrafts (yes, plural), commuting between my company’s two offices…you would be shocked if you learned of my previous, rather well known and respected pen name…own two small airplanes…Kay Brown…Beth Elliott…Stanford Clinic in February 1976…”…personal observation during the year from 1975-78, when I was actively “in the program”, and got approval for SRS…a 20 year old secretary can afford Stanford Hospital and Dr. Laub?)”

    You are going through an *extraordinary* amount of gymnastic name-dropping, date-setting, and status-affirming that only grows with each new post.

    It’s very interesting.

    It must be driving you half-crazy to know that, despite the above impressive peacock display, your opinion doesn’t carry the slightest bit more weight than anyone else.

    “…dumping on psychaiatry is a simple and cheap emotional trick…”

    As is attempting to prey upon the self-esteem of others by sowing doubt about the ‘real’ and ‘valid’ status of others, so as to assert your own authority in promoting an agenda.

    It’s so transparent it’s almost hilarious. Almost.

    You’ll note that no one here is laughing.

    “I was one of the study group…and Dr. Joy told me that my MRI showed that I was one of the extreme points on the graph. You don’t need to ask which extreme.”

    That’s good.

    i wouldn’t have known what to do if you hadn’t assured me on your authority that *i* don’t need to question you.

    “…don’t be in denial.”

    Again, an ego out of control. If anyone here diagrees with you, they are in denial?

    “…could you offer an informed and well articulated opinion?”

    Leigh has been around here offering articulated opinions long before you showed up, and doesn’t need your implied invitation to do so.

    But that’s yet another nice side-ways attempt to project authority upon those here.

    “…Honestly, I haven’t attempted to dialog with transsexuals via the web in over ten years…”

    And we believe you. Honestly.

    “…If any of you are in fact secretly such, and I could prove it…”

    An implied threat and clear attempt to intimidate into silence through fear.

    Yeah, i’m familiar with that tactic. Men try to use it on me all the time.

    “…saying that outsider might have something to say…belittle the outsider…”

    ‘Outsider’ is one of many terms used to frame, isolate and divide.

    This isn’t our first rodeo. Ask Leigh.

    “…Suzie still hasn’t come home…will someone be razzing me for that too?”

    Nobody brought up the situation with your friend, and nobody will bother mentioning it now…because nobody cares.

    It’s just a clumsy attempt at emotional deflection.

    i’ve seen much better. For instance, you could have at least waited a while to develop more of an emotional rapport before attempting it.

    “I live in a nice older house…so do you want to make fun of that too?”

    You brought it up. Nobody cares. Nice emotional deflection. i get tired of re-runs.

    “…I’m mocked for saying it in different words?”

    Because words mean nothing to you.

    You are attempting to convince us to accept the label of homosexual transsexual.

    You initiated it on Cassandra’s site, and you are attempting to further your agenda here.

    i don’t need to say anything else.

    As for Gender Questioning.

    “…Welcome Cloudy :)”

    “I don’t think we do know all the posters are CT.”

    It seems a bit strange to see them ‘welcoming’ someone to a blog that they themselves just arrived at days ago, and ‘affirming’ doubt in the so-called ‘classic transsexual’ identities of those here.

    Something peculiar is going on here.

  72. leighspov says:

    Very well said ATG ! sums it all up in a nutshell.

    and cloudy .. it’s your choice as I said before.

  73. Ishtar says:

    Hello Cloudy.

    Personally I don’t feel any hostility towards you at all, I did post a response to your comment on statistics that was pefectly respectful and I belive Joanne very eloquently explained to you about clinical stereotypes. So it is not as if people have not tried to engage you in respectful discussion.

    I will be honest with you, there are many vulnerable people who read this blog and sometimes come in and talk. Not all of us are transsexual folks either, I am not, I am someone who has a huge gripe with the way gender politics, healthare and law are in the UK after a childhood of being surgically mucked about with.

    So you are not talking to some monolithic group of people. Secondly it is the way you talk to people.
    The whole anachronistic 1970’s routine does remind me of those TG folks I used to encounter as a teenager who didn’t have a clue talking about how I was “Lucky” for not having facial hair but my height, oh tut tut! And worse the “TG counsellor” who would spout peewee theories. They didn’t know what they were dealing with (A kid with 5 alpha).

    The way you talk just reminds me of those times. And that is an observation not a personal attack, you have said it yourself, not having appeared on these blogs for something like 10 years. You may be out of touch with the way discussion goes these days. Fair enough, I have done that myself once or twice.

    On the other issues, well there is a friend of mine who is an aviation buff, flies his own plane, if you are into flying I could have said “Hey I know someone who is into flying perhaps you can chat”.

    What you have done is come here and decribed people in one dimensional terms, using the Blanchard world view. I don’t know if this helps but there have been endless official complaints against many “clinicians” who spout his theories for abusing patients (Some as young as 8) In the last 10 years there has been a storm of controversy about that.

    You will only get a sympathetic ear with regards Blanchard in sites run by people tied to Blanchard.

    When it comes to all this “I have to think of my kids and husband etc” You know that will hurt some people so why bang on about it? along with the two planes and this big mystery about who you used to be known as. the implied threats “And I can prove it”.

    You lose me on all that.

    It may have just been badly worded (the “I can prove it” bit), I will give you the benefit of the doubt on that because I make some glaring grammatical mistakes like that myself.

    And no I am not politically correct, in fact I am sort of notorious for not being P.C. but it is interesting how only a month ago I was some right wing extremist and now I am a P.C. Liberal. If the truth be told I have had a gut full of gender politics because I suspect I could be talking until I am blue in the face and the powers that be will still define me as sub human.

    But rest assured I don’t have a persobnal gripe with you, I just wish you would listen to what people have to say and respect their views. This is all i would ask of you. And no my “foul mouthed” comments (I thought I was supposed to be P.C.) were in response to all this “who is real and who is not” routine you yourself initiated. To me that does smack of J Michael Baily and his trolls going on his little crusade, but then again in fairness to you you have been out of the loop for 10 years so you would not have seen that.

    the ball is in your court now.

  74. leighspov says:

    For someone that defines themselves as “Gender Questioning”, one has to wonder just who’s gender it is that you are questioning. You have recieved a warm welcome on this board mostly due to your sincere and honest approach. Many of us have attempted to answer your questions and help you in any way we can. We have offered advice and pitfalls from our lived experiences made you feel comfortable enough to speak your mind.

    In return, you bite the hand that feeds you. You took it upon yourself to feed the trolls such as DB, and Jessica and Christine in their attempts to belittle members of this board. I and others,(some of whome you have affirmed as being ct based on your huge knowledge of what constitutes one) have wondered if you in fact are as benign as you appear and not simply another troll with yet another angle.

    If you are not happy with the company on this board, if it doesn’t meet your high standards of purity, if you are here to question us about our gender, then may I repectfully suggest that you piss off somewhere else where you can be certain in your esteemed and vast knowledge of the subject, that everyone is who they say they are.

    -Leigh

  75. Ishtar says:

    Hi GQ

    I am going to add something here, because I do think it may help you to understand a few things. For me the problem with answering your posts GQ is the bit you say about “Passing” I will be honest that is a tough one for me, because as a teenager I was sexually abused almost purely because of the way I looked. And the abuser knew they could get away with it because my “Gender” or “Legal sex” was open to question. (While I was not male bodied and never will be, the confusion about my medical status resulted in this sort of stupidity, like I was obviously not male, the law decided different. It is the same with 5 alpha today in the UK by the way)

    The nonce had some pretty sick fantasies about some female musician of the time, and I was made a target because I supposedly reminded him of her. It took something like 20 years to see the bastard in jail. And I was left pretty traumatized.

    What some people seem to hold up as somehow good “Passing as a kid” being one example, was for me a fucking nightmare. And while I did end up female, (I discussed this earlier) I held back from mentioning this on another thread because I didn’t feel it would be helpful.

    This is my problem, my life does not conform to the narratives some like yourself often mention, so it is genuinely difficult for me to relate to them. but I am not a hostile sort of person, if I can be helpful to anyone I will try to be.

    I never “Questioned gender” I was forced to defend myself from it, all the time. the point is most people here in some way do not have the classical narratives either. And we are not all Classic Transsexual (I know I am not) either. But for some reason there is this assumption that we all have this narrative and we all can be described in demeaning terms that obviously stereotype (Or should I say slander) classic transsexual folks (Cloudy with those Blanchard theories for example). It feels like people are making and imposing assumptios on us simply by virtue of our being good friends and talking a lot on various blogs.

    Understanding and getting on with people is a two way process, and that does mean understanding where others are coming from. As for cloudy I do object to Cloudy coming here assuming that everyone here fits some categories and then then implying some people here can be “Exposed as autogynephiles”. I resent that because I was not even born with a dick. As Joanne pointed out with regards the way people with 5 alpha are treated clinical stereotyping is really bad news, worse is the fact that Zucker, one of Blanchard’s buddies was the one who published a lot based on Mc ginley’s work and regards people with 5 alpha as lower forms of life, and I despise the man.

    This is why there are both intersex and transsexual folks here talking about a very real common enemy. That being the Clarke Northwestern and to Cloudy I am going to say this. It is not an act of political correctness to defend yourself from abusive quacks with bizarre agendas. Their theorising was nothing more than a front to allow them to abuse patients with impunity. Oh and the nonce i mentioned from the 1970’s He seemed to know an awful lot about the CAMH and what they peddled even back then, (he justified what he did with that stuff) and this was in the UK not Canada.

    If cloudy wants me to say what the CAMH really are, …….and prove it…..
    then she can keep this up. We are all human beings here, not peewee theories.

  76. joanne says:

    Kiaora Ishtar – hi GQ

    Ishtar said:

    …with regards the way people with 5 alpha are treated clinical stereotyping is really bad news, worse is the fact that Zucker, one of Blanchard’s buddies was the one who published a lot based on Mc ginley’s work and regards people with 5 alpha as lower forms of life, and I despise the man.

    Can you see the problem here GQ, Cloudy?

    When I chose to use 5-ARD as my example of clinical (medical) stereotypes I already knew Ishtar’s back-story. I could have used other examples: Klinefelters XXY for instance, where the clinical assumption = male and the reality = 30% female.

    There are a raft of problems caused by the indiscriminate application of statistical models to the complexity of human biological variations.

    Most of the women who come together here, and in other fora, have been around the block more than once, have one way or another, been on the receiving end of the theories generated from the models, and don’t want a bar of any more!

    From transgenderism with its bizarre obsession with mutant identities, to Blanchard’s equally bizarre black and white HSTS/AGP either-or binary, if you can’t demonstrate that these theories have been validated by repeated applications of the scientific method, don’t present them as factual!

  77. joanne says:

    GQ said the folowing:

    ROFLMA

    Do I feel that a man who presents as feminine is more likely to be a CT woman? Yes, etc.

    Someone can fail to meet the classic (as in early or nearly original) definition of transsexual and still be a very real woman.

    If we absolutely have to label anyone, we should label them based on how they live their life and their facility in their current role.

    GQ – the foot is firmly in the mouth with this lot!

    I can hardly wait to see what happens when the other women read it.

  78. Ishtar says:

    Hello GQ

    I don’t find your words offensive to my ears 🙂 i was just trying to explain that ones meat can be another’s poison. Let’s look at this another way, 52% of the population take being female for granted. Many have been abused for being female. It’s why I find aspirational narratives a bit alien to me. Like what some take for granted others are made to feel like it would some super unattainable existence. In that sense for me it was only legally unattainable and as such when in care and being abused the unattainable seemed meaningless to me.

  79. Ishtar says:

    Hi GQ there is also the absurdity of it. Let me quote the absurd argument:

    “You cannot be a woman even thought 52% of the human population take that status for granted, we must keep the natural order”

    When you see the logical flaws in the absurdity’s argument you begin to see how petty minded and trivial the two sex system can get. they try to make it feel so “Remote” and Special” (52% of the human race remember) in order to make you feel guilty if you are fundamentally female but not defined as such by society. This is why cloudy quoting a dogma that labors the point of defining non males as male irritates me so much. When you look at it the way i do there is nothing precious or special about being one of 52% of the population, just the satisfaction of existing in a physical state of being where you have some chance of mental survival.

    And the theorizing Blanchard came out with, laboring the pointless machobrand for the sake of petty minded cruelty clearly proves that Blanchard is a mental abuser and should be regarded as such.

  80. Ishtar says:

    Hmm Let’s GQ

    I am reading this at face value so if I misread it please feel free to correct me on this. 🙂

    “I think my point in commenting was more in the nature of figuring out what is sound reasons to determine or question where you fit so that real people can make the best decisions.”

    Well if you mean “Real men” and “Real women” who “Make decisions about who is what”, I suspect you may have an inkling of what I think of such people.
    When they butcher intersex kids while spouting the dogma “Surgery doth not make a man or a woman” then I am not exactly going to feel all that sympathetic towards such “Real people”. (Capricious norm born bastards is my usual response).

    I have to be honest I am unsure about what you mean by “real people”, if you could clarify this it would help because my interpretation is quite negative. And i am sure you probably meant this another way.

    “There are obviously people out there who should have never transitioned.”

    Well it is not something I am all that attuned to, I have heard of macho brikkies becoming female supermodels, I mean how can anyone judge stuff like that? I mean what is the expectation? Or are you talking about a mental state of being? Like how some people go through all that stuff and end up regretting it? The only answer I can give is Well they signed a consent form as adults knowing the consequences, it’s a choice I never had. This is what I mean when I say that part of this discourse is a little alien to me.

    • Ishtar says:

      Hello GQ 🙂

      Thanks for clarifying that. I didn’t think you meant it the way I misread it.

      On the transition thing, one thing I have seen very often are these TG folks trying to convince TS folks that surgery makes no difference. Or there should be other options besides “Transition”. the thing is many have had surgery and are happy with the result, and happy with the way they now are, in fact that does seem to be the majority. There are regretters but the small number of them appearing over and over in the press seem intent on blaming others for their own decisions. I have a problem with this because even though

      I have had surgery which I did eventually consent to (Basically so I did not have to live with the mess I was left in and actually be able to piss rather than have tubes running from my body so it may be an unfair comparison). From what I have read there are more suicides when reassignment surgery is denied.

      Regretters strike me as people who are easily misled by their own lack of self confidence. But I know they are certainly not representative of everyone who undergoes sex reassignment or any other form of genital surgery.

  81. joanne says:

    GQ said:

    “I think my point in commenting was more in the nature of figuring out what is sound reasons to determine or question where you fit so that real people can make the best decisions.”

    Ishtar said:

    When they butcher intersex kids while spouting the dogma “Surgery doth not make a man or a woman” then I am not exactly going to feel all that sympathetic towards such “Real people”.

    Exactly so, Ishtar. But you are (as usual) cutting GQ more slack than I’m prepared to. To my mind GQ has just demonstrated his willingness to exercise nonce privilege in a situation he is perfectly of as being highly delicate.

    I think that says it all about GQ. He has been cut a great deal of slack in this space. He, and his issues, have been accepted prima facie and every one of us have wished him well and tried to help him in (what we all presumed) was his journey of discovery.

    GQ: My statement:

    GQ – the foot is firmly in the mouth with this lot!

    was not an attack!

    Read this post as such if you will. But I’d read your earlier comment as merely clumsy. I am becoming less forgiving as the day goes on.

    Your “real people” comment is downright conceited.
    You owe Ishtar, at least, an apology.

    If the comment was directed at the wider group, you owe us all one!

    • Ishtar says:

      Hi Joanne 🙂

      I have to admit feeling slightly at a loss as to how GQ words things. I just don’t understand this anti transition business because I do know that most the transsexual folks I know are much better off than they were.

    • leighspov says:

      I agree with you Joanne. I am getting just a bit tired of the feigned insults myself.

  82. joanne says:

    🙂 Ishtar 🙂

    As long as we have known each other, you have been more forgiving than I. Usually I take my queue from you apropos a willingness to be understanding and flexible.

    I cannot see the real people comment as anything other than an automatic reflex exercise of nonce privilege and entitlement over variant embodiment.

    In the circumstances it was and remains grossly insensitive. The more so because GQ knows at least something of your situation. He’d read my post on clinical stereotypes and how it affected 5-ARD people.

    He’d seen enough of your responses to know that you were one of the affected people I was writing about.

    At the very least, to make such a statement in the light of these issues, is a stunning exercise in bad judgment. Too stunning IMHO to manufacture a valid excuse from.

    But…This is AB’s blog. I guess the only opinion that matters in the end is hers.

    • Ishtar says:

      Hi Joanne 🙂

      Well I do have my own personal suspicions about the “Real people” remark. When I initially read it, it did seem as you describe it, the thing is, the way it came across was so outlandish I found it hard to believe it was written in that context.

      As you know 🙂 when I deal with some people I wait and wait and then if they are less than genuine and start dictating, well you know what I can be like 😉

  83. Aria Blue says:

    I’d like to share some observations I’ve made on this sorting people into bins business. The things I’ve seen the psych industry say about (classic) transsexuality are dead wrong. And this is probably going to put me at odds with some of my friends.

    It doesn’t have anything to do with childhood “femininity”, it isn’t about thinking you are a girl until you start having erections, and it has nothing to do with playing little Suzy homemaker. All of the assumptions made by non-CT types of people about us are false on their face- and I am not about to start enlightening people about the truth.

    I see kids who transitioned in their late teens and early 20’s these days sharing every gory detail of their surgery and sex life on internet boards like Reddit and Facebook. I think this is a monumental mistake. For one, we don’t benefit one bit by titillating the prurient interests of young males. We just end up confirming our freak status. Who in their right mind talks about things like this so openly?

    Secondly, I don’t want to give the fakes any more information to take to the psychs. When I hear their narratives, which they think they’ve stolen from real transsexual women, I have to laugh. The current generation of psychs may believe those to be the truth, but I think if you dig you’ll realize most of those stories are just transvestites fantasizing about what they think we are all about. And knowing this, a good therapist should be able to use it as a means of weeding out the phonies. I’d rather not tell the transvestites any different.

    There may be a spectrum of crossdressery which stretches from private weekender to post-op pseudotranssexual. But there is no spectrum of transsexuality itself. It’s one of these things where you have it or you don’t.

    I just want to reiterate that the things I’m seeing GQ use to judge everyone by are patently wrongheaded, and completely off base. There is no such scale with “real woman” being sacrosanct and above it all, while all the “men” must accept provisional woman status. That is actually a transgender philosophy, shared by Blanchard strangely, that I think we can all do without.

    • joanne says:

      It won’t put you at odds with this friend, AB. You and most others already know my views on this one.

      Personally I place #1 responsibility right on the shoulders of the psycho-babblers and sexologists. I asked cloud how many families had been broken up, how many wives had lost their husbands, how many children had lost their fathers, because of this B/S.

      In another post I said:

      “…converting everything to the reductio ad absurdum of identity effectively bleaches the colors from the rainbow of human biology…”

      Well it also creates a cultural milieu which absolutely encourages the construction of mutant identities to order!

      No CT or IS experience is an identity issue. They get turned into that – its a neat trick that denies their biological reality and returns them to the Adam and Eve binary – solely for the comfort of nonces.

    • Aria Blue says:

      Thanks Joanne 🙂

  84. lisalee18wheeler says:

    I earlier suggested that GQ either “shit or get off the pot”. After reading all the non-sense he’s uttered, I now suggest he (thank you, Susan) go sit in the corner and STFU!

  85. Aria Blue says:

    There is one other thing that needs to be pointed out. GQ said:

    “joanne, leigh, I would like to respect you as women but personally I find these attacks tiring.”

    This is unacceptable. Our womanhood is not up for debate or granted by a third party based on their opinion of our behavior. It is not for you, GQ, or anyone else to mete out our lives as treats to a pet. Your dialogue is rapidly going downhill towards condescension and I hope you can straighten it up. I doubt it though, because you seem to have unchanging opinions on all of this. You don’t seem to be “questioning” at all.

  86. leighspov says:

    Actually aria he is .. as I said in an earlier post, he is “questioning” us.

  87. Ishtar says:

    Hmm

    “joanne, leigh, I would like to respect you as women but personally I find these attacks tiring.”

    I didn’t see that.

    GQ had better explain this because my patience is going now.

    • joanne says:

      Kiaora everyone 🙂

      If GQ has any sense he’ll take himself off and sit at the feet of cloud and/or Zoe B.

      If he was genuinely looking for answers he’ll construct a more appropriate for himself from their pontifications.

      He could have ended up making a serious mistake if he’d constructed one from our experiences.

      The only thing that annoys me is that he’ll likely blame us for dissing him when no such thing happened.

      In the end he just kept tripping himself up — right out the door!

    • joanne says:

      OOPS 😦

      This:
      If he was genuinely looking for answers he’ll construct a more appropriate for himself from their pontifications.

      Should read:

      If he was genuinely looking for answers he’ll construct a more appropriate narrative for himself from their pontifications.

      Sorry.

  88. zoesuzanna says:

    Cloudy has been busy: *edit*

    edited by blog owner – Sorry Zoe, I don’t really want to give that one a platform. I find those ideas antithetical to what we are trying to accomplish here. Good catch though 🙂

    • joanne says:

      Not me ZoeS.

      I’ll not grace Cloud with my presence. The situation that developed her was largely of her own making. She doesn’t have a case.

      You can’t, even accidentally, point a loaded gun at your foot, pull the trigger then sue the firm that made the rifle for the damage that it caused.

      Too much contributory negligence.

    • zoesuzanna says:

      I didn’t mention that cloudy was busy as a manner of promotion but rather as a FYI – it’s always good to keep an eye on the enemy.

  89. zoesuzanna says:

    Ok Aria, Sorry about that. I was quite appalled at what I read there… so I understand. 🙂

  90. lisalee18wheeler says:

    I get the impression that it’s a certain “Doctor” (not so) secretly pushing their agenda. The timing leaves me scratching my head. And I’ll leave it at that.

    • joanne says:

      You needn’t scratch to hard, Lisa – Don’t even Rev.

      The DSM-V GID committee will be putting out their new diagnostic criteria for field testing in the new year!

      These are likely Public relations exercises attempting to persuade us all how wonderfully correct and perfectly clever they are!

  91. Ishtar says:

    Seems we have been hit by a Clark Nothwestern troll the sort that has a multiple personality disorder with a comorbid surgery fetish and peeweetheoryophilia.

    • Ishtar says:

      Another way of putting this:

      “Oh Portlandia, take my hand Portlandia, let the phenylethylamine oops wrong attraction flow and the blood from me as I take the hand of you oh Portlandia, let me fiddle in the Sweedish Portlandia, ah the sweet smell of anaesthetic and forced resignation, sorry feminization oh Portlandia Take take take my hand!”

      In other words Barking mad!

  92. lisalee18wheeler says:

    O_O! Ouch!

  93. leighspov says:

    GQ would never hold WBW to the same standards he holds us because he knows that WBW would reject his attempt to do so and in so doing make him feel rejected. When we reject it, it becomes our fault for not being feminine enough for his taste, and one where he would “like to” treat us as women but….

    typical tranny chaser mentality..

  94. lisalee18wheeler says:

    “We all come from different parts of the community and we are not all going to disagree. When I said that compared to the people here I am a man, I meant that I am currently living as a male and unless I transition and society accepts me as female, I have right to know other title. Ultimately, society decides my sex. I only get to choose how I present.”

    This is such BS! There is NO community aside from the one of all women. And we really don’t care about your adventures. If you’re looking for sympathy, try “pinkessence”. And because this is Aria’s house, I’ll refrain from letting you know EXACTLY how I feel.

  95. You are tiresome.

    You seem to respond everywhere, to everyone, at great length to everything. Your responses must have a ten-to-one word ratio, when compared to the original post.

    And you do it without saying *anything* substantial at all.

    You claim you are trying to ‘find yourself’, and talk at exhausting length about your situation. But you never ask any actual questions.

    You instead carefully maneuver yourself through all the dialogue, and seem to either deliberately set up word play to make yourself the victim, or establish sudden hard opinions seemingly overnight.

    And you glue it all together with ‘ah shucks, i’m nobody, just curious and greatful’ modesty that false apart as false with…

    ‘I would like to respect you as women…’

    ‘…you as women…’

    ‘…as…’

    As opposed to what?

    This is hostile phrasing from page one of the LGBT playbook. This phrase illuminates you. It blows your cover. Ishtar’s presence gave you the slight wiggling room you needed to escape your ‘not everyone here’ comment, but this demonstrates what you really think.

    As for your outing.

    Stop trying to insert it into the substance of the dialogue. If that is the focus of your existence, and you are looking for a pat on the back, go to a crossdresser site.

    Your real or imagined ability to ‘pass’ has nothing to do with what’s being discussed, and will give you no magical acceptance in this mythical ‘clique’ you think exists.

    It’s possible that you don’t have some hidden TG-driven agenda. It’s theoretically possible that you’re just ignorant, don’t know when to stop running your mouth, and have allowed it to trip and fall painfully down the stairs.

    If that is the case, and you were innocent, you would retreat into a lurking mode and just quietly read and learn all that you could in the future.

    But if that were not the case, and you did have some motive beyond what you state, what would you do?

    Throw around accusations of being treated poorly would be one. Firing up your own blog to capitalize on the attention you’ve generated by this would be another.

    Those actions would be pretty revealing.

    Let’s wait and see what happens, and then decide.

  96. Aria Blue says:

    Our usual attack mode? I suppose you feel we should just take all the nonsense and smile? People get what they give, and everything we say is richly deserved by those who attack us. No fun when the shoe’s on the other foot for the TG I suppose.

  97. joanne says:

    HI All

    Isbtar, this tactic is becoming common across the internet. It was employed in one recent encounter I had with an individual called Margaret McGhee. This except will give the general flavor of the encounter.

    McGhee’s commented:

    It’s inevitable that gender politics and law will become part of what all gender-variant persons must deal with in their lives. I suggest we avoid making enemies of each other in our attempts to secure the expanding benefits of this legal system for ourselves and that we try not to gain those benefits at the expense of others who subscribe to different flavors of gender variance.

    I responded:

    The fundamental clash of perspective and lived experience is clear. MargaretM has attempted to apply a gender variant narrative to a situation that (a) is not a gender variant issue and (b) post corrected women such as the author have put behind them.

    It would be a fine thing were women like Lisa and myself not constantly forced to reclaim our lives because we are faced with a constant onslaught of gender variant narratives. A narrative, it must be observed, largely predicated on self-indulgence and one, I suspect, about due to disappear beneath the weight of its own scientific inadequacy.

    McGhee replied:

    I can assure you that most non-trans people who are willing to accept an MtF transsexual’s claim that they are a women – do not see that as a scientifically objective fact – but as a social narrative that they are willing to accept out of courtesy and respect for that person. Even if such “womanhood” is affirmed by law it is still not a scientific fact. It is a legal accommodation to a particular form of gender variance.

    The sex chromosomes that exist in every cell of one’s body (and that can not be changed as far as anyone knows) is the only scientifically objective determinant of biological sex in humans.

    I answered (in part)

    can point you in the direction of peer reviewed papers detailing individuals with xy chromosomes, conceiving by natural means, and giving normal vaginal birth if you wish.

    And was met with this from McGhee:

    I think I have read enough here to see that this is a place where political agendas and beliefs are at stake – defended by militant defenders of the faith. I am not interested in ideological debates but thanks for engaging me in discussion on these interesting issues to this point. I doubt that any additional discussion between us would be productive.

    http://www.ts-si.org/global-warning/21557-image-management.html

    There is but one ideology in operation here. Its called transgenderism!

    It appears to all be part of the widening delusion of the TG-osphere. Males wearing the gender coded clothing of the opposite sex, still sexually attracted to females – who call themselves lesbians and refer to their male organs as a clitoris. (see bilerco)

    These bizarre fantasies that the rest of us are expected to accept on demand. Are abused when we refuse: are called out for being ideological elitists
    when we reject the madness!

    No! This will stop when the mass of ordinary humanity put their collective foot down, and say enough!

  98. Ishtar says:

    Hi Joanne 🙂

    McGhee sounds like a brain dead single axoned sheep. As it happens the whole XX-XY argument these people come out with, even though it has now roundly been disproven seems to be used by them as a stick to beat people with. I seem to find this a lot. Remember the Angels forum? They attacked me in such a manner that what they said didn’t even refer to what I had written. And then they accused me of doing exactly that to them. And I could not have been more diplomatic.

  99. catkisser says:

    Hell, those people just about have their heads explode confronted with someone like me who has mixed tissue groups, some XX, some XY

  100. joanne says:

    Hey Catkisser 🙂

    Ishtar called them:

    brain dead single axoned sheep

    Hard to argue with that.

    Lesbian with an enlarged clitoris and cojones indeed! Jeesh!

    Oops – I think I just turned myself into a trans-doubting mysogynist for expressing my gender expressing expression of dismissal.

    Bugger!

  101. Aria Blue says:

    If you have some intelligent discourse to offer I am sure we can accommodate you. So far I have yet to hear anything from the TG but the usual put downs disguised as invitations, like your post here. This has to be one of the slicker propaganda pieces that has been proffered lately, I have to give you credit for that.

    By the way Ishtar, I am so glad to have you here as someone higher than myself or the other posters on Annie’s TG scale. If not for the appeals to you, I am afraid this would automatically descend into fighting and stridency, as we little pseudo-women simply can’t be relied upon for “intelligent discourse”.

    I somehow doubt that you, Annie, are happy with allowing us all to go our separate ways. If you can stop insulting us long enough to speak in a civil manner, unlike your bold-faced attack piece in the post right above this one, I’m sure you’ll find a receptive audience.

    What I see instead is an attempt to paint this political argument in a personal tone, in order to smear the critics of the “Transgender” forced inclusion policy.

    *I reiterate that I have no issue with people themselves and how they live their lives. I take issue with the horrible, failed politics of the “transgender” construct and its leadership. It has been nothing short of awful for those who suffer from the transsexual condition. It is merely a cynical attack on our status done for the express purpose of benefiting men and others who fly the TG banner.*

  102. In a never-ending parade of painfully obvious TG trollers, i can’t help but become skeptical.

    “Why are you so afraid or unable…”

    Oh yeah, for sure. i’m so scared and incapable of having a reasonable dialogue, that i actually hide in the closet when someone new shows up.

    Pro-tip.

    Trying to hide an insult within an excessive use of four-dollar words will not convince people of your ‘superior’ and ‘evolved’ intent.

    How many does this make, Aria? Five?

  103. lisalee18wheeler says:

    Not counting “GQ”, who was basically a shill.

  104. joanne says:

    Hi annierose55

    You posted a URL, then made the following statement:

    Please try to not fall into your usual attack mode. TRY to respond in the intelligent respectful manner you all so loudly espouse.

    This intrigues me, though I have withheld any comment until now.

    Why didn’t you just post the URL and invite us to go visit whatever it was you wanted us to read?

    Just curious – but if you’re going to set up the conditions for negative responses then you really need to accept your own contribution to the end result.

  105. Aria Blue says:

    “Take a hint from Ishtar or cloudy and respond rationally or intelligently or give up all hope of intelligent discourse.”

    Do I really have to go into more detail? Either say what you have to say without the pomp and circumstance, or take your leave. This little TG dance isn’t my cup of tea.

  106. joanne says:

    Hello annierose55

    With respect, your reply did not address my question.

    I asked:
    Why didn’t you just post the URL and invite us to go visit whatever it was you wanted us to read?

    Why didn’t you just post the URL without this addendum:

    Please try to not fall into your usual attack mode. TRY to respond in the intelligent respectful manner you all so loudly espouse.

    You answered:

    Joanne,,,,,,Why did I post the URL? I was inviting comment, not personal attacks.

    That doesn’t explain why you added the addendum, which, as I have already explained, seems almost guaranteed to provoke a knee-jerk counter response.

    So that’s my problem annierose55. You could have posted the URL and invited comment and no personal attack would have been forthcoming – were it not for the addendum.

    So why the addendum?

  107. “Please try to not fall into your usual attack mode. TRY to respond in the intelligent respectful manner you all so loudly espouse.”

    Trolling.

    “…respond rationally or intelligently or give up all hope of intelligent discourse.”

    Trolling.

    “…spare me the cheap shots and ad hominum attacks.”

    Trolling.

    Joanne called it out, and is still waiting for an explanation.

    Why waste anymore time with this non-sense?

  108. Aria Blue says:

    To Annie-

    How many times do I have to tell you to knock it off with the pre-accusations of cheap shots and ad-hominems? I swear, people on the internet don’t even know what ad hominem means. If you are afraid of having your opinion critiqued, just say so and ask people to be mellow. It isn’t that hard.

    Though you’ve been pretty aggressive so far I’ll indulge you a bit. Yes, some of what you wrote plays into what people term “transition”, but that has almost nothing to do with the point of this blog.

    As I have stated before, my only concern is for the TG and their construct to stop claiming dominion over everyone’s lives as if we owe them fealty by accident of our birth. The TG royalty act as though noblesse oblige requires them to speak on behalf of everyone on the planet. I reject their grandstanding foolishness.

    Everyone is free to choose how they live their lives; they are not free to “choose” how others live theirs. If they could simply acknowledge that there is no a priori assumption that transsexual is part of transgender there would be opportunity for dialogue. To put it another way, they need to allow people to speak for themselves, and have a modicum of respect for people who are different from them. Until we see some efforts of rehabilitation of their behavior on their part it is unlikely we have much to discuss with them.

  109. joanne says:

    If you disagree tell why but spare me the cheap shots and ad hominum attacks.

    Personally I doubt you will find many women in this space who would disagree with the bulk of that statement.

    So why the hell are you looking for a fight Anne?

    This spare me the cheap shots and ad hominum attacks. is what will start it.

    Like it wasn’t the URL you posted earlier that caused problems, it was the addendum. Please try to not fall into your usual attack mode. TRY to respond in the intelligent respectful manner you all so loudly espouse.

    So knock it off with the accusations Anne, and have the discussion!

  110. Aria Blue says:

    No, none. First, people have to understand that while there are quite a few TG “frontmen” who carry the banner, there really is no central authority or conspiracy, of course. It is more a cult of various personalities.

    Second, because this is a matter of the conscience of a disparate group rather than a unified organization, the effort takes on the dimensions of raising people’s consciousness with the truth. Present people with the truth that they have options and freedom, and the truth that they don’t have to bow down to what surely strikes us all as false, if we are honest with ourselves.

    Over time, there will be a growing number of voices calling for individual liberty. That’s all there is to it.

    Each person is their own “expert”, with some occupying more conspicuous positions than others. Taken as a whole, the self-identified “transgender” supporters either recognize the independence of everyone as individuals, or they continue to insist they know better than the rest of us.

    There is no such thing as partial independence, and therefore no middle ground. Anything short of a recognition of the truth on the part of the TG is not progress, but represents an effort to contain the rising tide of discontent they are surely feeling from recent events. Gay men are angry at them. Lesbian women are angry at them. And of course women like us are angry at them. We all have been colonized by queer theory and the needs of a very few “heterosexual males” in womens clothes.

  111. joanne says:

    Anne 🙂

    You ask:

    any ideas for opening a meaningful dialogue with the “Royalty”ofthe TG’ers? Is there no middle ground from wence to initiate dialogue?

    There was a time, Anne, when I truly believed that the issues could simply be resolved by people just learning to respect each others differences.

    I quickly learned otherwise. I learned that I wasn’t dealing with people who were actually interested in entering into a rational discussion on what those differences were, or why they needed to be clarified.

    I was, instead, dealing with individuals whose thinking was deeply and profoundly dominated by a body of dogma, almost to the point of religious fundamentalism.

    And I learned that, as with all fundamentalism, that a discourse as only possible provided I were to accept the over-arching correctness of the TG dogma first.

    That I cannot do. I do not believe that my birth condition is or ever was an identity issue. It makes little sense to me that I should believe a bundle of B/S about gender roles and gender role expression when, actually, I couldn’t care less about those things.

    They neither enter into my everyday thinking, nor regulate the way I live my life. I believe the other women who come together here on Aria’s blog, and elsewhere, feel the same way. But I do not purport to speak on their behalf.

    My own experience is this: that middle ground is just another beach-head to be colonized and controlled.

    I shall be interested to hear some other perspectives.

    • joanne says:

      Just as an interesting addendum – respecting each others different experiences has worked very well as between intersex and transsexed individuals

      Witness Ishtar’s and Catkisser’s presence in these discussions. Or the position I have on the board of OII. I’m not saying it all works perfectly all the time as between every person.

      But on the whole nobody tries to colonize each others experience, we support each other where necessary and everybody rubs along.

      It only turns to custard when transgender dogma enters the equation and tries to dictate the terms of our existence. Something we never do among ourselves!

      Just worth pointing out 🙂

  112. joanne says:

    Kiaora Annierose

    There are no commonly agreed definitions as between Classical Transsexuals and those who follow the transgender belief system.

    Tg’s will commonly apply whatever most recent B/S definition is served up by WPATH or the DSM and insist that we accept it because its the highest available authority on our experience.

    Actually WPATH and DSM are the highest authority of TG’ism and are pretty much the bibles by which most TG’s live their lives, and from which their very legitimacy is derived.

    Professor Jan Wålinder gave us this definition of transsexualism in 1969.

    1. A sense of belonging to the opposite sex, of having been born into the wrong sex, of being one of nature’s extant errors.

    2. A sense of estrangement with one’s own body; all indications of sex differentiation are considered as afflictions and repugnant.

    3. A strong desire to resemble physically the opposite sex via therapy including surgery.

    4. A desire to be accepted in the community as belonging to the opposite sex.

    This is probably the most accurate depiction of classical transsexualism ever given. These four things form the basis of our earliest experiences. They shape our sense of difference long before we have any knowledge of sexuality or sexual orientation.

    No part of them is partial: each is felt and lived 100%! I cannot do better.

  113. Ishtar says:

    Hello Annie

    I think Cloudy was an example of the problem here, she appeared on this blog talking in way that implied she was speaking from the gospel according to Blanchard. Having since read her blog, she was.

    Basically people here (Myself included) do not agree with the social pathology models that Blanchard came out with, which seems to rest on the false premise that all male to female transsexual folks are “Men”.

    Blanchard’s view can be summed up by saying that he regards everyone as either “homosexual males” or “Fetishistic males” he just presents it by using terminology that is as ill informed and clumsy as his theories.

    No one here is going to ever accept this because it impacts on their lives in a very negative way and does describe them as things they are not. To make matters worse Blanchard’s followers (Bailey, Cantor, Zucker etc) have become somewhat evangelical about this “Truth” (As they describe it) knowing full well that the majority of transsexual folks do find it demeaning, abusive and offensive. I mean Blanchard has a huge following in NARTH which speaks volumes.

    They have also imposed themselves on my own area of concern, Intersex. WPATH put Kenneth Zucker in charge of the “Intersex committee” We didn’t ask for WPATH do inlude us, and we certainly had objections to Zucker because he is a huge advocate of Dr John money’s “Butcher and brainwash” approach.”

    We also find Anne Lawrence sat on some of these committees as well, this is someone who is known to have an unhealthy sexual interest in infant genital surgery.

    As Joanne points out, WPATH and the DSM are regarded as the prime source of clinical information so as Blanchard’s following have got their fingers in all the pies there.

    OK Back to cloudy she did present some argument about statistics but failed to answer my question about the validity of going from loose correlation and a working model. Her statement about this was lacking to put it mildly. Most of what she posted seemed to be antagonistic.

    It is difficult to hold an intelligent conversation with someone like cloudy because she simply appeared made her statements and then ignored various points that people had made.

    I do get the feeling that some come onto these forums with the sole intention of telling everyone else “This is how it will be accept it!”

    This is why people feel like they have to be more cautious with infrequent or new posters.

    In the TG issue, well when I was posting to the Bilerico comments section there were a number of people who were again evangelical about “TG” being applied as a universal label. One poster kept trying to find new ways of inserting an umbrella definition into the debate, to the point I just gave up trying to explain things to them. I mean yes let them be who they are, but the problem is they often want to control the wider discussion and impose their ideas on others.

  114. marie931 says:

    I understand and share everyone’s frustration here, but in the end I always find myself selfishly asking, “How does this affect me?”

    Yes, I know the TGs are making a mess by demanding “rights” to everything in a woman’s world without actually earning access: ENDA, IDs based on the clothes one wears rather than actual sex, etc.

    But as someone who DID go through the whole process, who’s played by society’s rules and expectations and earned my assimilation as an ordinary female, I’m just not sure why I should actively fight against these people?

    To do so almost feels like I’d be taking the TGs bait and “outing” myself as a “TS activist,” when my goal has always been to transition, blend in, and forget all this stuff.

    What IS the actual threat then, in practical terms? If left unchecked, how will the TG paradigm harm me?

  115. catkisser says:

    Depending on how long ago you transitioned, you could enter a normal heterosexual marriage and expect that to be legally respected. No longer. If you are outed in some fashion, and in today’s security conscious, no privacy world it will happen occasionally, instead of the old default of post op assumption, today it’s “chick with a dick”. Shall I go on? TGs have done real life harm, undid a couple of decades of understanding and accommodations for a normal life that had been true and destroyed it and are still doing so. Eventually it will be worse, much much worse if they are not stopped.

    Pay attention to the legal backlashes because eventually it will impact you negatively.

  116. marie931 says:

    Do you think we’re actually at risk of losing our legal, postop “F” status with the SSA and state governments?

    That’s what worries me most. That the TG push for “rights” based on the clothes one wears, rather than the sex one physically IS, will create a backlash that hurts postops as well.

  117. marie931 says:

    In many people’s minds you will be equated with the TGs so if you fail to pass or in someway it comes out that you were born “male”, you will just become a TV on steroids.

    I’ve mostly found that out to be a lie or misdirection spread by the TG community itself.

    Why they do it, I don’t know, though I suspect it’s a projection of their own experiences of persecution when they fail to assimilate themselves into mainstream society. They assume it’s the “bigoted world” being discriminatory, rather than realizing it’s a pushback to their arrogance in demanding rights, rather than earning them.

    I read all the horror stories on TG forums when I first started my own transition, and yes, I was scared to death. I resent them terribly now for scaring the heck out of me. If you strip away the fear they continuously encouraged, transition was actually a complete non-event.

    The public generally doesn’t react badly to people who transition, assimilate, and move on with their lives. If you keep quiet about it, they’re willing to as well.

    What the public doesn’t like are people who refuse to blend in, yet who demand legal and social recognition as the opposite sex. Right or wrong, society makes the rules. If you play by them, making an honest effort to fit into them, society will embrace you. But when people come into transition with an attitude of “I’m a woman because I SAY I am, give me the privileges I demand!” there’s going to be pushback.

  118. zoesuzanna says:

    To demand something will automatically produce some form of resistance. It really doesn’t matter what the topic is. Fight and someone will fight back. Case in point, the TG crowd fighting for the sake of fighting and not really concerned about the consequences it will have on real transsexuals.

    GQ, your question ventures into the area of personal ethics and life philosophy. How do you want to live your life? Do you believe you need to fight for what your mind deems it needs respect for? What is it you need to be respected for?

    Does that object you deem worthy of respect exist in reality at all or is it only in your mind and in the minds others as something socially acceptable?

    Respect cannot be earned by demands.