Here we go…

I’ve been working on another post, but there is a news story that jumped out at me that I wanted to share. Often we critics of “transgender” are accused of alarmism for pointing out the very real danger of unbalanced individuals using trans- status in the furtherance of their misdeeds, and the backlash that will inevitably result. Now it seems we have a prime example.

Man sues University Hospital over cross-dressing worker’s amorous pursuit

Chad Thrasher was a nurse convicted of sexual assault against Dereco Evans, a patient, at a Cincinatti hospital in 2009. During the trial it was revealed that Thrasher had fondled the patient’s privates leading to Thrasher’s conviction on charges of gross sexual imposition. Dereco Evans is now suing the hospital because, as the filing reads, the hospital should have known from the outset that Thrasher was “incompetent, inappropriate, or defective, and that his employment while masquerading as a member of the female gender in a hospital environment involved an unreasonable risk of harm to others”.

According to the legal mind behind one blog the hospital stands a good chance to beat the lawsuit because of the recent Smith v Salem ruling.

The case appears to rest on the shakiest of foundations — not least because Thrasher’s choice to present himself as a woman was protected under a landmark 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision that says employers may be held liable for discriminating against transsexuals based on their gender nonconformity. Smith v. City of Salem, 378 F.3d 566 (2004)

Some of the other details, while not entirely germane, provide clues as to what really went on. According to Evan’s lawsuit, there was some additional hanky panky.

Despite that, his suit alleges, hospital officials didn’t provide adequate safety and allowed Thrasher, dressed as a woman, to move his bed out of sight of the nurses station, fondle him, put lip gloss on him and passionately kiss him. The agencies and businesses sued allowed Thrasher “to dress and present himself to patients and the general public as a female member of defendants’ nursing and/or phlebotomy staff,” the suit notes.

If nothing else, it should be clear that this is yet another example of how male sexuality imposes itself on the transsexual “narrative”. Two men had sexual contact, and through the magic of “transgender”, the status of “transsexual” is put at risk and smeared in the public eye. It’s a deplorable state brought on entirely by the transgender lie.

But things are not all bad. If indeed the hospital raises the “transsexual” defense, although this Thrasher person is clearly just a male sexual predator wearing women’s clothes, the net result out of the courtroom will be that “transsexual” status is solidified. It may seem counter-intuitive at first but legally the concept of transsexual vs transgender will be fleshed out. I know privately that certain “TG” individuals chuckle with a sinister sort of glee every time “transsexual” gets smeared, but the last laugh is coming and it won’t be they who are having it.

Reality and common sense dictate that you can’t just have any person at random claiming “minority” status, and with the purposefully vague definition of “transgender” the law will have no way of addressing it. By its very nature the law cannot recognize an undefined transgender, and will seek to define it despite the best efforts of those who have spent so long trying to remain unbound by our silly labels. Their quest has been futile from the beginning.

Similarly, the quest to remove themselves from the DSM will fail simply because they have attached themselves to “transsexual”. As has been pointed out by others that was a HUGE mistake on their part. Because “transsexual” requires medical help, it will always be in the medical realm. There is no way to separate us from medicine, and therefore no way for “transgender” people to escape the psychs as long as they claim to be us.

A third outcome of the transgender campaign is an end to the notion that “transgender” will ever have any kind of “rights” associated with it. If anyone can be transgender simply by donning a skirt, it is impossible for the courts to address it and the lawmakers now crafting ENDA know this. Whatever comes out of the US Congress at this point is unlikely to be favorable to the weekend gender warriors.

The drive to destroy the so-called binary has at this point failed and the sooner they recognize that the sooner we can all move on. It’s unfortunate that they used the rhetoric of freeing men and women from the bounds of sexism, because that is a worthy goal. Their effort was disingenuous from the outset, due to the attempt to hide their true intent, and this sort of dishonesty always comes back to haunt you in the end.

There will be a backlash against TG, as part of an overall societal tide away from such outlandish rhetoric. This will also fall on the sort of feminism from which TG sprang which told us there are no differences between men and women except what we imagine. As a result men and women will face even more restrictive gender roles in the near future.

The strategy of hiding the truth of “transgender” in a sea of swirling mists has completely backfired and the truth is coming into play against transgender supporters at long last. Each new case against these “transgender” criminals will only harm that concept and finally put it to rest. In the end, when it comes to this subject, it will be transsexual or nothing.

Advertisements

One Response to Here we go…

  1. catkisser says:

    http://www.vancouversun.com/news/dressed+woman+charged+after+Brooks+playground+incident/2909722/story.html

    Ayup, these things never happen among highly sexed men who are motivated by sexual deviance.

    It’s interesting to note that this perp in your blog was already convicted yet doesn’t show up in standard searches. Just how many of these crimes never make the search engines because the word transvestite, crossdresser or transgender aren’t in the new stories?